Good thing you let it speak for itself. You never make a compelling case.
As for the video, the narrator is old. If he's in Canada, he'll soon be living off of my paycheque and while filling diapers. His views are thus moot. If he's not living in Canada, then who cares?
To sum up: old, bitter fart whitewashes a complex issue so his simple, pension-supported mind can feel like it still contributes to society. Television was created so these people would know when to stop bugging the rest of us.
These people? Those people who worked hard, built this country and paid their taxes while you were filling your diapers? Those to whom you can thank for your standard of living and free education? Those people?
I think Mr Condell makes a well reasoned, well structured, very well expressed argument. Your rebuttal, on the other hand, is nothing but a juvenile personal attack which doesn't even come anywhere near addressing any of the actual issues he raises. Props for sneaking in two poop references though, that really raises the level of the debate.
Anon-y-mouse troll (11:27). I have nothing against anonymous posters, that's everyone's right, that's why I allow them on this blog.
Why is it that trolls feel they must read and comment on blogs that "don't make compelling cases"? Don't like the video, don't watch it. Don't like what I have to say, ignore my blog, don't read it.
Oh well, on a certain level they are entertaining, it gives us a look into how they think, or the lack of thinking, that's why they attack the person, not the message.
5 comments:
Good thing you let it speak for itself. You never make a compelling case.
As for the video, the narrator is old. If he's in Canada, he'll soon be living off of my paycheque and while filling diapers. His views are thus moot. If he's not living in Canada, then who cares?
To sum up: old, bitter fart whitewashes a complex issue so his simple, pension-supported mind can feel like it still contributes to society. Television was created so these people would know when to stop bugging the rest of us.
In what way is his age or the the likelihood of his receiving a pension related to the topic at hand?
Here's a bit of advice, attack the argument, not the person. It will do wonders for your credibility.
These people? Those people who worked hard, built this country and paid their taxes while you were filling your diapers? Those to whom you can thank for your standard of living and free education? Those people?
anonymous at 11:27,
I think Mr Condell makes a well reasoned, well structured, very well expressed argument. Your rebuttal, on the other hand, is nothing but a juvenile personal attack which doesn't even come anywhere near addressing any of the actual issues he raises. Props for sneaking in two poop references though, that really raises the level of the debate.
Anon-y-mouse troll (11:27). I have nothing against anonymous posters, that's everyone's right, that's why I allow them on this blog.
Why is it that trolls feel they must read and comment on blogs that "don't make compelling cases"? Don't like the video, don't watch it. Don't like what I have to say, ignore my blog, don't read it.
Oh well, on a certain level they are entertaining, it gives us a look into how they think, or the lack of thinking, that's why they attack the person, not the message.
Post a Comment