Coming in at the bottom are those bloggers that I read but will usually disagree with, hobbled in their intellectual journeys by their faulty logic. Back Seat Drivers seem to have the back seat of a Dublin bus, so sound views of Jon Ihle are ever-more diluted amoung a growing number of incorrect opinions.
“Incorrect opinions” is certainly new on me. I would have thought that by their nature opinions could not be correct or incorrect – that they are subjective affairs. Perhaps Peter believes in his “correct” opinions, and believes my opinions to be “incorrect”. But then again, perhaps in my own opinon, Peter’s opinions are “incorrect”. What a tangled web we weave.
“Hobbled in their intellectual journeys by their faulty logic” is a curious one too. Is his logic always perfect, and mine always faulty? Or is it that I am always wrong, and Peter is always right?
Oh to have the same self-belief.
An example of Peter’s opinions:
The fact you forget is that the world is a violent and dangerous place and would be even more so in the event of an American withdrawal. Saddam gassed the Kurds and used tanks against the Shiites, Assad flattened a city, the Taliban massacred thousands, the Chechens are wiped off the map, the Tibetans and Uighirs face destruction through colonisation, Kim Jong-Il starves millions and tests poison gas on humans.
Is there a logical flow in there somewhere that I can’t detect? How does all this relate to Bush, and when Saddam was gassing the Kurds who was in office at the Whitehouse, and what did they do about it? And Kim Jong Il starves millions and tests poisons gas on humans while the Bush administration sits idly by? Please claify your exact logic here, maybe I am not educated enough to see it.
As you say:
Among the interesting facts are that Bushs test scores and academic qualifications clearly show him to be smarter than Kerry.
Do the right really believe Bush is smart, not to mention smarter than Kerry? And do academic qualifictions always make someone smarter than someone who lacks them?