Elroy, You have no credibility to analyze different viewpoints, your political view starts your thought process, and your conclusions are derived from whatever supports your view.
This is true of a lot of people, not just Ted.
Perhaps, but it deserves to be pointed out occassionally. And it may be true of people that don't think about issues that much (they just answer with the "gut"), but I don't know if I agree it is true for people that do think about issues a lot. If you do put more time into thinking about things one should realize that sometimes their conclusion matches their political views, and then surprisingly other times it doesn't. However, if you start with the political view and then just look for supporting "evidence" (Ted's thought process, as far as I can tell), then you're never going to have that type of realization. And it's disappointing to watch/read.
Unforunately, the IGNORE function doesn't work too well on SI, so even though I skip 90% of his posts, I do read a bit of the drivel, and then feel compelled to point out his fallacies. Fortunately he has me on IGNORE so we don't have to correspond much.
At least Ted admits to being a liberal, so you know how to interpret most of his remarks. Many on this thread claim to be a "centrist" or a "moderate," but turn out to be anything but one.
Frankly, I don't see the point of branding yourself either way. Most people have some liberal views and some conservative views, so trying to fit into someone else's bucket category usually doesn't work.
And on a final note, have you seen OVTI lately?! :-) |
