Liberal partisans and their non-arguments.

This blog has been innundated with several new classes of readers lately. This always seems to happen when the reprehensible, vicious partisan Atrios links to Altmouse in a desparate attempt to pump up his artificially inflated hit count. According to SiteMeter, Atrios only gets 10 hits a day from a single user in the Phillipines. I have far more readers then he does!

I run an open forum where all comments are welcome, even critical ones, though these will be deleted. However, I am sick and tired of the non-arguments of posters such as the egregious Nim and his "side-kick" Phila, to whom I refuse to link because they are reprehensible, vicious partisans and I refuse to link to sites like that, ever.

Some of these people should learn what a non-argument is. Of course, it is difficult to explain this difficult concept in a brief blog post or even a law review article. I read many law review articles in Starbucks while I grade last semester's blue books. However, by merely shifting a vowel, it is possible to quickly illustrate the concept of a "nun-argument."



No more need be said. The "arguments" of partisans like Phila and Nim are "lighter than air" and very weak because they emanate from their "habit" of partisan thinking. You can't have a conversation with them!

I hope this settles the issue.

UPDATE: Is it possible I am misunderstanding how SiteMeter works? Somehow, I doubt it.