Quote:
Originally Posted by donquixote99
And my point from before is validated. You would never say a thing like that, if you argued honestly. You know damn well I read and analyze with fine comprehension.
And it's your position that opinion can always be disregarded, if you wish? That there's no such thing as opinion that is insightful and truthful? That is so odd a notion that I likewise can't believe you are arguing honestly in advancing it.
It strikes me that you never consider any argument we offer to you on it's merits. It will always be attacked, because, after all, it's our argument. And you have no respect for our opinions, at all.
Which mainly goes both ways, of course, and I don't see that changing ever. Which limits my interest in conversing with you to 'occasional.'
|
More babbling BS.
What's dishonest is treating an opinion piece like it contains "truth", which is the word that John used and the context within you suggested that I was being dishonest because I didn't regarding the opinion piece as an "accurate reflection of reality." Sorry, but its an opinion piece. At best, it contains half the facts, and presents those facts from a particular perspective.
No one else here is required to regard an opinion piece as an "accurate presentation of reality" to carry on a discussion here. Watch what happens if I start posting content from Brietbart or the Wall Street Journal.
What a whiner you can be sometimes.