Re: Short-term-results-oriented thinking
 

When looking at the words of the politician it is always interesting to see whether the words are designed to create a gulf between people of differeing opinions. If they are designed to do so, IMO, the underlying argument is weak.

When someone says that a poster is a hater of America, his underlying argument is likely week. Or if he says that a poster is a heil bushing fascists the same is likely true.

I ofcourse am totally exempt from bias, inappropriate name calling etc. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Short-term-results-oriented thinking
 

"When looking at the words of the politician it is always interesting to see whether the words are designed to create a gulf between people of differeing opinions. If they are designed to do so, IMO, the underlying argument is weak."

That's why it's so important to have a uniter, not a divider. (shameless GWB campaign reference [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img])

BTW, I agree with you about the strength of arguments litmus test. I find, though, that really strong arguments are typically drowned out by a chacophony of everyone serving their own agendas. It is always easier to reinforce division than it is to unite. This is the achilles heal of Democracy, and always will be. I may live it before it is all over.