🚀 go-pugleaf

Rudy Canoza wrote:
> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Rudy Canoza wrote:
> >> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
> >>>> still unable to contribute anything meaningful
> >>>> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
> >>>>>> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> First Thoughts Toward Homeless Resistance
> >>>>>>> [incoherent rant]
> >>>>>> Here you are back again, still working against the
> >>>>>> interests of homeless people, still unable to
> >>>>>> articulate your belief in your own words as to how
> >>>>>> helping to keep homeless people homeless is good for them.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You really are a tunnel-vision shitbag.
> >>>>> Why don't you address the authors of the postings that you disagree
> >>>>> with?
> >>>> I already did, once, the first time you posted one of
> >>>> the moron's crap.  But I'm not interested in arguing
> >>>> with some guy who posts through a cat's paw.  You agree
> >>>> with the moron, so you should defend the point of view.
> >>>>
> >>>> Why are you serving as the dummy's cat's paw instead of
> >>>> actually arguing the point?
> >>> That is a fair question.  But your syllogism is faulty.
> >> There's no "syllogism"; you've misused the word.
> >>
> >> If you think a debate is worth having, why aren't you
> >> participating in it?  Why are you merely acting as some
> >> other twit's cat's paw?
> >>
> >> You seem clearly unable to articulate any independent
> >> thoughts about homelessness or any other topic.  You
> >> are all style and no substance.
> >
> > When you jump to conclusions as you have done, a corresponding
> > syllogism can be inferred.
>
> You're still whiffing off - that means gutlessly
> avoiding the issue.  The issue is not syllogisms, of
> which *none* can legitimately be inferred.  The issue
> is homelessness, and your inability to articulate any
> of your own thoughts on it.
>
> Answer the question:  why do you allow your childlike
> sympathy for homeless people to cloud your judgment
> into making you work against their interests?  They are
> not well served by things that perpetuate their
> homelessness, but that's what you're doing.

So where did you acquire your own thoughts on homelessness?