Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403
See this is my point. Why should I listen to your arguments as if they're informed opinions when you can't make it through a post without making it abundantly clear that you have a pre-existing agenda.
I'm not really convinced that it's either the right or wrong idea, but I do know that between the 2 sides presenting arguments one has done so in a fashion that I much more apt to listen to and see as reasonable.
BTW, I'm completely disconnected from Canadian politics and have no idea who Kenney even is, lest you think I have an agenda of my own.
|
If I had an "agenda" I wouldn't be trying to advance it on a Calgary Flames discussion board. What I have is called an "opinion." I never pretended to be an unbiased observer. Are you sure you aren't predisposed to disagree with what I'm saying because of something else? It's pretty easy to sort the bias from the argument here. It goes like this:
1. Jason Kenney did A
2. Here's why A is dumb.
3. Jason Kenney is dumb!
Point 3 reflects (I freely admit) my own bias. However, that doesn't stop you from presenting counterarguments to 1 and 2 if you choose to do so. I note that you haven't. You seem more interested in identifying the biases that I have not even really bothered to conceal.