Steve Lamb ha scritto: >Paul Johnson wrote: > > >>I think it speaks volumes about how indefensible your position is that you >>resort to ad hominems. >> >> > > You know, I never understood this rational. It seems to me that it >provides a simple way for the idiotic and crazy to "win" an argument. They >can keep spewing their inanities, ignoring the facts (as Arnt has here if >you've read the thread) and when the rational person gets tired of dealing >with someone who is clearly not playing the same game much less with a full >deck and rightly says so, they've "lost". > > Sometimes calling a kook a kook and an idiot and idiot is the only >statement you've got. If it's accurate it's not ad hominem. > > > so if Arnt had reason (as he has)
the only statement we've got. would be calling you an idiot kook. Ac-cu-ra-te-ly sai-d i-di-ot koo-oo-k Luigi P.s. obviously nothing personal ... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
