cool.
Quote:
Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky
no wonder the politics arena split off from the lounge. The next step is to integrate it with an ultra-conservative forum on another site.
|
a right-wing conspricy theory . . .
Quote:
|
If conservatives were put under the same scrutiny, it would be obvious that we could find single, fringe individuals who are bad with words and then we could vilify them as the craziness of the conservative ideology. The logic is way off and that is what you are doing here.
|
an accusation without follow-through (find some fringe for balance, then). . .
Quote:
|
Not only that you are attempting to create an emotional rather than a rational response to the issue which makes debate impossible, you are making the issue dangerously oversimplified. That scares me out of my wits as someone who has studied politics, history and philosophy.
|
an emotional reply as an accusation of emotional pandering
along with the "I'm so smart" side of intellectual elitism . . .
Quote:
|
That is not only abusive, it is moronic to believe that the issues are that simple. Debate is the fuel for dialectic and democracy. Vilifying a position as outside the realm of debate detroys all intelligible debate and weakens our democracy.
|
more hypocritic definitionalism (uh, vilifying vilification, while defending a position that threatens to kill US troops)
Quote:
|
I know the issues in the Middle East are more complex than most people understand and I did not support the war in Iraq on the grounds that Bush provided. Call me unamerican. I dare you.
|
the "others are so dumb" side of intellectual elitism, and attempted self-martyrdom. . . .
and you call Reeds the lone voice of liberalism on this forum. Come on, Erica - give yourself a little more credit. You summed up a good portion of the liberal approach right here.