Especially given the original comment to the start of the thread does
absolutely nothing to touch on any point of discussion - it simply verbalizes
personal attacks as a means of saying the article is (putting it nicely)
meaningless.
Examples include:
It will be of exactly ZERO
use
You do such a great job of making simple nuances
complicated
such obfuscatory drivel comes
naturally
My My... given Mr. Quinn's reaction to the Supreme's in
the last couple rulings - I'd definitely have to agree that this has struck a
nerve. Not as large a nerve (yet) that the Supreme's struck - but we're
apparently making ground.
You know our side of the discussion is winning
when we present such clear and convincing arguments that the other side resorts
to attacks on the delivery of the message and is avoiding speaking to the
message itself.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|