>>No - you're completely misstating what I said - and you know it. I have not called you or anyone else on this forum names.

It's not limited to the forum: you regularly call American and Alabama voters idiots and just yesterday you labeled me stupid and/or a bigot over an outrageous straw man list you pretended I might disagree with. 2 examples from yesterday's batch:

VA>>The idiots in Alabama would rather have an homophobic racist alleged sexual predator that's been thrown off the bench not once but twice, not to mention a slew of other issues, than a ...OMG...a democrat! What a bunch of looser buffoons.

My contention was that your explanation for events is that others are idiots or deficient human beings. Voila.

Yesterday, in response to questions about grounds for the personal attacks on Moore:

VA>>Let me lay it out for you one last time:
VA>>1. Racism is bad
VA>>2. Racists should not be elected officials.
VA>>3. Prejudices against homosexuals is bad.
VA>>4. Prejudicial people should not be elected officials.
VA>>5. Sexual predators are bad.
VA>>6. Sexual predators should not be elected officials.

VA>>7. If you don't understand of believe 1 though 6 then you are either stupid and/or a bigot of some sort. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with winning or loosing an election or the DNC or anything else --- that is my point.

I don't want to belabor the obvious, but many would find this domineering diction offensive and derogatory. It's outrageous to pretend people might disagree with those truisms and it's a totally transparent vehicle for the name calling that follows. No doubt it can be loudly protested that it's only true if people don't "understand of believe" the list- but it's a personal attack to even suggest anytbody here might not understand or agree with such a list. There's nothing new or clever about this sort of tactic that is intended to put somebody on the defensive rather than responding to their point. As a debating style it's absolutely disgraceful, but it collapses if the target remains calm and insists on arguing the point, not the man.