|
Typical liberal or libertarian response: Fill in the blanks
* Just because its < blanks > doesn't mean < blanks >
* Even if it is < blanks >, it's not necessary < blanks >
* When you found some damning evidence, they will argue the contrary using anything they can dig it no matter how remote.
example from post #66 "yeah, but < blanks > too."
example from post #68 Various references to Catholic priest sex
(what's the point in bringing that up ? Is it your point to say
muslim terrorists are not so bad, look we have funny priests too ?
I've studied them in depth now. It's always variation of this theme. They try to win argument everytime using above technique. With this they try to excuse the inexcusable. With this they apologize for everything.
I said it before and will say again: Real truths are really not all that complicated.
Only the liberals and the likes mucked it up.
|