[quote]orion wrote:
Oh no there was an appeal to authority in there too!
All legitimate historians agree with you and those who don´t are not legitimate.
Excellent![/quote]
I’d be remiss if I didn’t grab this low hanging fruit. I almost feel sorry for Orion at this point. Well, almost.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
orion wrote:
That must be like the crystal castle where you keep your reasons for denigrating all those mind washed Paulites that disagree with you on Lincoln and the civil war even though Judge Napolitano, and that is were they get it from, knows the history of your constitution and the civil war far better than you.
Yawn.
There is little to respond to in this childish tantrum, save for the plain “appeal to authority” fallacy w/r/t Napolitano.
On the exact same principle, Paul Krugman - eminent economist from Princeton who is essentially a European Social Democrat on economics and writes for the NY Times - knows “economics and the history of American political economy” far better than you, therefore your Austrian economics must be toast, and he is right and you must yield to his opinion on the matter…solely because of his public resume. As such, I never want to hear you try and defend laissez-faire economics again - his public resume is better than yours, so you necessarily are wrong in the matter.
Next time you mention the advantages of a freer private economy, I will post an article by Krugman, and by your own set of rules, you lose.
Just stupid.
This is no fun when you are this dumb. It takes the sport out of it.[/quote]
And yet again not a single point why Napolitanos ideas are somehow wrong.
Aren´t you getting tired of pretending to sit on a high horse when everybody knows its a pony?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
orion wrote:
Oh no there was an appeal to authority in there too!
All legitimate historians agree with you and those who don´t are not legitimate.
Excellent!
I’d be remiss if I didn’t grab this low hanging fruit. I almost feel sorry for Orion at this point. Well, almost.
[/quote]
That wasn´t an appeal to authority on my part, but an invitation to finally reveal to us mere mortals the deadly flaw in Napolitanos description of events.
You fail to do so for the umpteenth time.
Maybe you´d appear taller if you got of the little horsy horse and streeeeetch really hard to debate the issue you soooo onviously know soooo much more than aaaaanybody else ever.
[quote]orion wrote:
…
And yet again not a single point why Napolitanos ideas are somehow wrong.
…
[/quote]
That shit has been covered to death in these forums. This is also a lame tactic.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
…
And yet again not a single point why Napolitanos ideas are somehow wrong.
…
That shit has been covered to death in these forums. This is also a lame tactic. [/quote]
I agree that it is, that is why it is infuriating.
And no, he has not covered it once.
Called everyone a kook that thinks Napolitanos point of view has merit.
Yes-
Insisted that his superior knowledge of the American constitution practically ensures the outcome of the debate.
Yes-
Explained to libertarians what their actual, real, hidden motives are.
Sure.-
Actually debated the issue?
Hell no!
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
…
And yet again not a single point why Napolitanos ideas are somehow wrong.
…
That shit has been covered to death in these forums. This is also a lame tactic.
I agree that it is, that is why it is infuriating.
And no, he has not covered it once.
Called everyone a kook that thinks Napolitanos point of view has merit.
Yes-
Insisted that his superior knowledge of the American constitution practically ensures the outcome of the debate.
Yes-
Explained to libertarians what their actual, real, hidden motives are.
Sure.-
Actually debated the issue?
Hell no!
[/quote]
You must have PTSD and be blocking out all the beatings T-bolt has given you.
You are seriously off your game lately. Problems with the missus?
[quote]orion wrote:
That shit has been covered to death in these forums. This is also a lame tactic.
I agree that it is, that is why it is infuriating.
And no, he has not covered it once.[/quote]
Oh no? Not once have I covered it? Never? Not once?
http://www.T-Nation.com/tmagnum/readTopic.do?id=1634780
http://www.T-Nation.com/tmagnum/readTopic.do?id=1479104
http://www.T-Nation.com/tmagnum/readTopic.do?id=1865260
Old thread: “Define a Liberal” (looks gone)
You’re right, Zap - this is a lame tactic.
[quote]Actually debated the issue?
Hell no![/quote]
No debate, aye? Hell no? Happy reading.
ADDENDUM: in the “Lincoln vs. Jefferson” thread, Orion actually has an exchange with me over some of the issues of secession. The shame.
Orion? Are you there?