[Psudo]

Scape wrote:

What was he doing but throwing red meat to the lions? All he did was toss the odd ad hominem attack so there is nothing to debate just him yammering away. Now if he cited examples to back his claims then perhaps but that wasn't something MM was going to ask him now was it? There is plenty to discuss to verify the house of Saud is a deck of cards but he didn't go there and the interviewer was not asking follow up. So what was there to dispute in his assertions?

They were discussing the assertions of his book. Advertising the existence of the argument is not the same as having no argument.

I'd rather have had a powerful debate, but it was a book tour stop. For what it was, though, it was interesting.

[Scape]

So much for this being your last post on the subject.

Quote:

This interview seemed especially sensible and engaging to me.

Quote:

I'd rather have had a powerful debate, but it was a book tour stop.

Incongruous.

[Psudo]

Scape wrote:

So much for this being your last post on the subject.

You're right. That second time, I was feeling a lot more merciful, ignoring all but your single good point like that. I shouldn't have made a promise based on my mood at the time, and I shouldn't have broken it fickly either. You have my apologies, especially for the former post which allowed temper to overcome reason.

Scape wrote:

Quote:

This interview seemed especially sensible and engaging to me.

Quote:

I'd rather have had a powerful debate, but it was a book tour stop.

Incongruous.

Not at all. An interview is not a debate, and the kinds of conclusions he voiced in the interview engaged my interest. It was an interesting perspective from which to advocate US conservatism, and seemed based on popular sense rather than formal logic. They discussed the author's motivations and views more than his analysis and defense because it was a book tour stop rather than a confrontation between opposing ideologies. I'd like to see an Intelligence Squared debate over his views, but my googling for videos didn't find one. Both of my sentences you quoted express parts of this paragraph, and this paragraph does not contradict itself.

[JJ]

Psudo wrote:

Wow, JJ, Mark Steyn is great! I'm cutting into my sleeping time to google for videos of him. Granted, I'm mostly looking for political analysis rather than comedy, but he reminds me of when I first started listening to Rush Limbaugh and kept thinking "Yeah! That's exactly the argument I'd have given if I were a little smarter!" Keep in mind I was 14 then.

This interview seemed especially sensible and engaging to me.

How is it that I haven't heard of this guy before?

It's odd that you haven't, as he's been in the news quite a lot recently. He was recently sued for spreading anti-Islamic hate in a magazine article he authored, which triggered a worldwide debate on free speech and hate-speech laws.

His book "America Alone" is also probably also one of the most influential and widely read conservative books of the last few years.

[RafaelShinji]

Somehow I thought I'd share this; pretty funny if you like to lean to the right on certain issues; also it hits home with me as a fan of the games.