I learned 2 careers ago that a "loser" will always shift the blame to someone else, and accept the credit for himself when thing go well. On the other hand, A "winner" will stand up and say, "I messed this up, it will never happen again!'. And of course, When accepting accolades he extends the credit to everyone else in the organization. These traits combine to make all of the 8 things happen in degrees.

All the stuff about logical fallacies is true, but to assign it to one ideology is nonsense. These are common logical fallacies that crop up everywhere.

I liked the very last line the best...although you are a smelly pirate hooker was pretty good... (Oh...pirate hooker Barbie!!)

Every child is born a socialist. The child receives all his needs from others, gives nothing back and one of the first conscious words that a child utters and then continuously repeats is - "mine!" As a child grows up and is given tasks to perform, takes risks and learns about responsibility, he matures into an adult who appreciates individual liberties, which are based on the pride of individual achievements. But what if that child is never really given any responsibilities and has no achievements and no pride? What if that child stays a child? The government schools today do not teach responsibility, individual achievement is spread across the group and pride of achievement does not exist because there is no real achievement. So a socialist, who has never grown up, solidifies and expects the society to continue to nourish him. Worse, by not trusting himself to achieve anything, he does not trust his fellow men to be capable of individual achievement either. That is why the socialists' "arguments" are not really logical arguments, but more resemble childish discourses and that is why logic cannot possibly work with them - they are not mature enough to understand logic. They understand and respond to emotions, exaggerations, threats and force, just like any child.

Good.
Caution when reading- do not confuse the Nobel Peace Prize with the Nobel Prize.
Many winners are undoubtedly worthy. Maybe I am getting old and grumpy but to me the standard has dropped from around 1979.
I found item 5 useful - the list of political contributors. Kock v. labor unions. I'd like to see the other big private sources listed.
What I'd like to see is suggested responses to each of the 8, one liners on the level of the
pseudo-point made.

They are missing one very important tactic, the appeal to self-sacrifice and "Duty to others". This is particularly important to remember in light of objectivist theory and thought. Liberals place YOUR self-sacrifice to others above everything else. In liberal intelligentsia the most noble of things one can do is to place another above one’s self....the problem with these liberals is that they are not usually willing to sacrifice themselves, just others, for the sake of the downtrodden.

The article did not mention the non-thinking liberals, who argue in circles and without end, but not with their own thoughts, rather with "talking points". It is so frustration to try to engage in a discussion, someone who has no thoughts and can only repeat what they have been told to say, when it it clear they have done no thinking of their own. Then there are the liberals, who use the Delphi Technique or the Alinsky Technique to try to control rather than discuss any topic. If they can but make the other person feel alone in a belief, they can control him. I have seen both types of liberals as guests on FOX News many times, as well as those in each community, whom we encounter daily.

Get a life, the RINO's do the same thing: you heard it on CNN, it is all Clinton's fault and the list goes on

fun. and moving pictures too