[quote]vroom wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
He’d never admit that. He’s Ted Kennedy’s bitch. See where he’s from?
HH
He’s right though, you generally do use the same tactics as morons, preferring to play little games than actually make a coherent argument of your own.
Yes, I’m checking my watch to see how long it takes for this comment to be used against me…[/quote]
Vroomie,
I’ll always debate you. You at least have an IQ somewhat larger than the circumference of your flexed bicep (but never bigger than your ego).
HH
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
lothario1132 wrote:
NP:
That antiwar.com’s tagline is, word for word:
“Your best source for antiwar news, viewpoints, and activities”
So maybe it’s a valid conclusion to say that there is a bit of a slant in regards to the treatment of the Iraq occupation issue… among other things?
Why yes, that would certainly be a valid conclusion to draw from reading the tagline. However, it is contradicted by the evidence I presented in the form of the article.
…[/quote]
You seem to talk yourself into many things that the evidence does not support.
You’re only neutral when your tag-line is “fair and balanced” and just shout “war war war” every chance you get.
Isn’t that right Zap?
If I were you, I wouldn’t use the word “evidence” too much. It might lead to nasty questions.
[quote]Wreckless wrote:
You’re only neutral when your tag-line is “fair and balanced” and just shout “war war war” every chance you get.
Isn’t that right Zap?
If I were you, I wouldn’t use the word “evidence” too much. It might lead to nasty questions.[/quote]
As usual you have nothing to add to the discussion.
Troll.