snowbear37 wrote:
Usually, when a post starts with insults and name-calling, the "credence factor" is lowered substantially. Why would anyone start off like that when what they are trying to convey is something they agree with? Guess they don't really believe what they're trying to convey.
What do you call posts that start absent of credible facts. Just debunked ,wild bigotted rants about things you can do zero about?