- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 122,824
- Reaction score
- 4,063
- Points
- 113
He consistently presents the latter as unequivocal fact completely closed to discussion, debate, or variance in interpretation. Thus he doesn't need to "give an opinion" because he's already arranged the goalposts and the rules of the discussion in such a way that there is only one conclusion, which just so happens to be the one he agrees with.
It's just a tactic, nothing more. And not a particularly clever one.
Fill pages of the rest of the discussion with calling us liars, cowards and everything else for refusing to accept his premise.
I merely pass on what the Founding Fathers and the Framers said they meant, and what the militia concept was about.
And no, I point out that you are lying because you read words right in front of you and then claim I said something else.
Finally, you don't know whether I agree with it or not, in the sense that I think that's how the system ought to operate.


















