Signs of Z's stupidity, duplicity, insanity and intellectual dishonesty. A quote from Z. But just one hour later Z has spun a 180 on Reagan: Get on some meds.
zzz...I cannot (don't want to) believe that you are really this stupid. This whole article is 100% pure propaganda. If you can't see that...then your critical edge has been dulled to flat. One could easily take this article, substitute the word "liberal" for "conservative" where they occur...substitute the liberal think tank names with conservative think tank names, where they occur...and you would have the very same piece of propaganda, aimed in the opposite direction. How boring can it get...this obsession of yours?? MAKE AN END...will ya! Think about it....you are really demanding more than your fair share of time and attention lately. (like...for the last couple of YEARS.) It really borders on...well...PATHOLOGICAL. saxon
nonsense. liberals tend to be breathtakingly monolithic! from your article: "What is wrong with people who disagree with the mainstream of American academic social scientists?" like disagreeing with liberals automatically means there is something 'wrong'. YOU ARE NOT OF THE BODY. YOU ARE NOT ONE WITH LANDRU.
Backed into a corner, Pabst reverts back to what comes most naturally. Personal attacks... Yawn. It is what I expect from you Pabst. Sadly, nothing more.... p.s. I could have edited out the comments you plucked from the article, but as I don't speak for the author....why should I edit his comments? You really make this much too easy.....
You can assume....that would be nothing new, i.e. you making an incorrect assumption, rather par for the course actually.
Ahhh, so then the correct assumption is that you don't admit defeat.... So that means there was no 180..... Interesting interpretation of reality....
Oh yes, I am consistently amazed at the way Pabst sees things, how he takes the opinions of others, and would attribute them to be the same as my own. What can you do? I generally try to provide sufficient fodder to allow people to reach their preconceived ideas....makes them feel like they are actually winning, that sort of thing....
Oh, noooow I see. First you called Reagan a 'centrist', and then called him and William Buckley right wingers. And you made that 180 proving your point...... And you did it on purpose to 'provide sufficent fodder' to allow people to reach their preconceived notions...... BWAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAA.....