National Review Online

[Memnoch]

What a joke!! [img]graemlins/wow.gif[/img]

[Memnoch]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: As well, any NRO article you read does one very important thing: throw enough issues, problems, policies, and unfounded propoganda diatribe at the reader that a general haze floats through the reader's mind, confusing all issues. This is their goal, you see: obfuscation. Don't take it to heart. It's what you do when you can't really justify your position in the long run.

LOL You're cracking me up, Timber - you've been gnawing on this bone for about three months now, haven't you, mate!!

It's annoying how other people just WON'T argue and debate quite exactly the way we want them to, isn't it. Unfortunately, everyone has their own personal debating style, I guess.

[ 03-22-2003, 05:34 AM: Message edited by: Memnoch ]

[Timber Loftis]

I know Memnoch. It sucks. Everyone, take note. In the future please see me for pre-approval of any non-traditional debating styles, as well as pre-approval for all debating styles that are not applicable to the specific issue at hand.

I will be issuing detention for those who do not comply. If you don't like writing "I will not obfuscate issues and generally be a troll" 10,000 times on the blackboard with the squeekiest chalk I can find, take heed.

[Sir Taliesin]

NRO talks out their ass about 90% of the time! TL's Right!