Language

Sigh. My Kingdom for a Serious Debate

Submitted August 29, 2004 - 2:55 pm by Al Giordano
Three up, three down.
  1. You had to go all the way back more than two months, to June 27th, to find a post on the Daily Kos that mentioned the term "fisking." What of the thousands upon thousands of posts since then? I think, in this case, your exception proves the rule that the term is not used by most (and using the neocon Samizdata as a source hardly bolsters your claim).
  2. Your quote from Fox does not indicate his opposition to the war. Again, very weak comeback.
  3. It's very clear you didn't read carefully my analysis of why the U.S. can't invade Mexico. I spoke of national public opinion inside the United States, and said absolutely nothing about "world opinion" or whether Bush cares about that (of course he doesn't).
Instead, you offer a Canadian analogy, saying, "If Bush can threaten Canada, it can do worse to Mexico." First of all, "threatening" is not "invading." Do you think Bush could invade Canada without a huge domestic backlash from the U.S. public? If so you've been watching too many South Park movies.

Additionally, you don't explain why "it can do even worse to Mexico." You don't answer to any of the substantive reasons I gave as to why not.

You're shrinking from the debate, man. Little driveby shootings from a keypad do not constitute a substantive debate. I hope you can get back on your game here, because I really mean it when I say that I would value a worthy debater on the other side of this. But it seems to me you are just going through the motions and don't really have the passion of your own convictions behind your own claims.

Where is your defense of the "one true libertarian religion" and its so-called marvels for the end of drug prohibition?

Where is the beef?

Then again, maybe what is not said, what can't be defended, is the best indicator of the paucity of your original claims.

Reply

Our Policy on Comment Submissions: Co-publishers of Narco News (which includes The Narcosphere and The Field) may post comments without moderation. All co-publishers comment under their real name, have contributed resources or volunteer labor to this project, have filled out this application and agreed to some simple guidelines about commenting.

Narco News has recently opened its comments section for submissions to moderated comments (that’s this box, here) by everybody else. More than 95 percent of all submitted comments are typically approved, because they are on-topic, coherent, don’t spread false claims or rumors, don’t gratuitously insult other commenters, and don’t engage in commerce, spam or otherwise hijack the thread. Narco News reserves the right to reject any comment for any reason, so, especially if you choose to comment anonymously, the burden is on you to make your comment interesting and relevant. That said, as you can see, hundreds of comments are approved each week here. Good luck in your comment submission!

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

User login