Still, by using derogatory terms to describe people who disagree with you, you close off rational discussion, add heat without adding light, and give ammunition to those opposite you who can point out that if you had a better argument to make you wouldn't resort to ad hominems. IMHO, people deserve respect and courtesy as human beings, regardless of how mistaken their opinions might be (or appear to be). I've read some of your postings in other threads here and you seem smart and well-informed to me. But you'll never cut through with arguments if you present them in a mixture with personal attacks, because the arguments will be ignored in favour of retaliating to the personal attacks with further personal attacks. Ultimately, politeness in discussion (or argument) is to your own benefit; regardless of whether your interlocutors choose to take advantage of it, you should.

I basically agree with you Brad, but I couldn't help but notice the irony of you referring to environmentalists in your most recent post as "treehuggers". It's certainly not at the same level of incivility, but it is pretty dismissive, wouldn't you say?

Nor am I really interested in mining the multitude of threads on this forum whose sole intent is the denigration of the left for a suitable example. Not because no such example exists because there are countless such examples but because of the double standard there is no way I could possibly win any such argument because the judge, jury and gallery in this case are the very folks exhibiting the double standard in the first place.

I've seen it so many times. A comment from the left is obnoxious whereas the similar comment from the right is merely funny or if it really does go too far then it was just kidding and it's my own fault for being so thin skinned.

Given that you're convinced that you're the epitome of tolerance you simply can't see what's so obvious to the other side and that is that every single criticism that you apply to the left is something that you pretty much all exhibit on a regular basis.

You sit there pontificating about the other side where every word out of your mouth applies directly to yourself. It's the old syndrome that whenever you point a finger at someone else you have three fingers pointing back at you. And the funniest part is you can't even see it.

I guess if you say so.

The environmentalist Web site he was referring to and is participating on is called "Treehugger.com". The "Treehuggers" he referred to were the members of that site. (I assume that's why he used an upper-case "T".)

Yeah many environmentalists call themselves "treehuggers", so I would believe that mitigates anything derogatory. Also, the name in and of itself does not mean what some may consider a "vulgar" act.

Ditto.

OIC!  So you just made an assinine statement, without any hint of evidence, or proof, and then expect everyone to take you at your word.  because you would never lie, right?  regardless of the dozen lies you have told around the forums already, right?

So for the left, it is not the evidence that is important, just the charges.  Way to go MF!  Your level of incompetance is rapidly approaching your level of irrelevance.  This is not the MSM, so while I am sure you think you can get away with stupid statements not supported by facts, the reality is you just got busted.

Ah, good point. I withdraw my comment.

Ah, the loaded question now!  So what other slanders and lies are you going to tell?  Backed up by only your worthless word no doubt.

But I have to ask, did a brain come with the deal you made to sell your ethics?

BTW:  You still have produced no evidence of your false and libelous allegations.  We are waiting for you to weasel some more.

The superior are not required to justify themselves to the inferior, Dr. Guy.  Just ask the superior.

Look at your reply #142 and every word you said could easily apply to yourself.

The only difference between us is that my feelings of self worth are not all tied into a forum presence of the "great and all-powerful Oz" whereas that's *all* you are is a puffed up buffoon of a caricature of a person.

But I tire of you and since I know how insistent you are about having the last word feel free to rant on unopposed for as long as you wish. It is the only argument you can win (i.e. the unopposed argument), and we all know how important winning on the internet is to you.

See what I mean?

As others pointed out, the site in question is called TreeHugger.com.  We (the community on that site) refer to ourselves as Treehuggers.

Getting back to Mumble, if you can refer me to posts on our forums where users are referring to other people as scrotum suckers (tea baggers) feel free to let me know.