Explaining R****m To R****ts (Page 7): At this point, the point is pointless. However, you will find that if you are fair in a debate with me, I am the most polite opponent that you...

son of witless

Sew_What wrote:

My response had nothing to do with name calling, it's your definition of debating that is all wrong.

At this point, the point is pointless. However, you will find that if you are fair in a debate with me, I am the most polite opponent that you will find on OPP. I will attack your ideas, and find any factual mistakes in your postings, but I respect your right to defend your ideas.

Sew_What

son of witless wrote:

At this point, the point is pointless. However, you will find that if you are fair in a debate with me, I am the most polite opponent that you will find on OPP. I will attack your ideas, and find any factual mistakes in your postings, but I respect your right to defend your ideas.

Sew What

son of witless

Sew_What wrote:

Sew What

If you choose to not defend your ideas, then that is your choice.

Sew_What

son of witless wrote:

If you choose to not defend your ideas, then that is your choice.

I choose to critique, which is a way offending bad ideas.

son of witless

Sew_What wrote:

I choose to critique, which is a way offending bad ideas.

That is fine with me. Just be on notice. I actually read what liberals write. Many of them are amazingly sloppy with their rhetoric. If you challenge me on crap I write, I will either ADMIT MY MISTAKE or present evidence. I expect the same from those on your side. I don't get it very much.

Smedley_buzkill

son of witless wrote:

That is fine with me. Just be on notice. I actually read what liberals write. Many of them are amazingly sloppy with their rhetoric. If you challenge me on crap I write, I will either ADMIT MY MISTAKE or present evidence. I expect the same from those on your side. I don't get it very much.

You won't, either.

son of witless

Smedley_buzk**l wrote:

You won't, either.

But he sounds so sincere.