I am being ad-bombed by the religious right

[Samuel L. Jizzle]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize we were debating. So far you've made an unsupported (and demonstrably false) claim and said "pur-lease". You must forgive me if I'm not rethinking my whole world view at this point.

If you want me to prove to you that global warming skepticism was mainstream well before Barry O., then I could point you here: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear

Yawn. Next challenge.

[TomViolenz]

-

[LoopStationZebra]

Well, when TomV talks about brainwashing and propaganda or whatever it's always from the classic Lefty position that everyone loves Big Government and if you don't you've been brainwashed.

[Samuel L. Jizzle]

And if something was demonstrably false in my argumentation, then why don't you go ahead and demonstrate that it was?!

I just did.

You: I could buy, that a lot of Libertarians are debatting radical market based solutions. But doubting the science?

Me: "Science", right Here's an example: Michael Crichton.

You: Blablabla

But all of this is beside the point. That you don't like some of the people backing the tea party doesn't in any way invalidate the movement or discredit their claims. Typical lefty tactics—substituting ad hominems for sound reasoning.

[Samuel L. Jizzle]

Well, when TomV talks about brainwashing and propaganda or whatever it's always from the classic Lefty position that everyone loves Big Government and if you don't you've been brainwashed.

[H20nly]

is that why myrnova accused yankees of being brainwashed?

[regretfullySaid]

No no no that was all mistranslated; he didn't like hankies that were stonewashed.

[TomViolenz]

-

[TomViolenz]

-

[re:dream]

Exactly, if you weren't a tree-hugging hippy, you'd see the folly of your beliefs.

You are not debatting a position now, just feeling good in your bubble.
Please be a stronger opponent!

A stronger opponent would have arguments. Sam does not have arguments. His posts three parts straw person to one part argumentum ad hominem. With a bit of poisoning the well and shifting the burden of proof thrown in for good measure. Personally, I think you are wasting your time.

[Samuel L. Jizzle]

I would say it does, especially if the funder has so much say towards what the movement wants.
I extend that position to any cause btw.

You do realise that by saying this you are effectively attempting to justify your ad hominem position? Seriously, you're behaving like a right-wing parody of the left.

[LoopStationZebra]

No no no that was all mistranslated; he didn't like hankies that were stonewashed.

[Samuel L. Jizzle]

A stronger opponent would have arguments. Sam does not have arguments. His posts three parts straw person to one part argumentum ad hominem. With a bit of poisoning the well and shifting the burden of proof thrown in for good measure. Personally, I think you are wasting your time.

If you failed to see the arguments, explaining them to you further would be a waste of time. I'd be like trying to explain colour to a blind man. Or vagina to Chris Colfer.

[TomViolenz]

-

[re:dream]

Me, I am tweaking a DJ set while listening to my girlfriend talk about her day. Vastly more entertaining than listening to Sam L recirculate his cultural resentments. I might even watch some white working class American girls talking about Jesus.