"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 22:32:22 GMT, "Maxprop" wrote:


"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
. ..
On 3 Nov 2006 10:19:44 -0800, "Dak" wrote:

He didn't apologoze for what he said. He apologized to anyone who was
stupid
enough to misstake what he said as an affront to the troops. In other
words,
"I'm sorry you are an idiot".

So if I write: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, if
you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be
smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck as a
Democrat," it shouldn't offend dems at all because I was insulting the
fact they ask you to register under a party in order to vote. -- And
according to the statement above, if a dem is offended, he could be an
idiot!

Based on the above, you are an idiot.

Liberal debating technique at its finest.

Max


Is that the best you can come up with? I made a point, and it was
obviously
correct to any honest person. That may exclude you.

Referring to Dak (whomever that may be) as an idiot is what I was referring
to. You lash out with ad hominem attacks whenever someone disagrees with
your argument. You've done so from the inception of your time in this NG,
so nothing is particularly surprising about it. As a debating technique,
however, it lacks credibility, but is a commonplace technique used by the
left when their opponents fail to see things 'their way,' so I've noticed.

Your assessment of Kerry's comment is spot on, actually. He was attacking
Bush, not the troops. But he stupidly opened mouth and inserted foot, as he
is wont to do, by not thinking about how such a comment would be removed
from context and misinterpreted by the spinmeisters on the other side. I do
believe he maintains continuing antipathy toward things military, but that
had nothing to do with this comment.

Max