I've thoughts on the topic -- people upthread have, for the most-part, already said it, however… that is also assuming I could get it past my utter loathing of Romney and the Party That Pushed [Him].
My attack
(as you call it) was more in jest — you present yourself as morally superior, taking any disagreement as reason to attack and/or insult whomever does so, and rather self-righteous. Moreover, you are utterly unwilling to allow for someone sticking by some principal if it disagrees with you (a good example is when someone brings up some function that they believe is not a legitimate function of the [federal] government that you espouse). All this leads me to believe that nobody can legitimately disagree with you… hence the allusion to tungsten being too soft/malleable for a good comparison.
Actually I don’t do that at all,I deal with political disagreements and questions for sources, etc. but a personal attack is just a personal attack, and it is creepy to know that someone has deep personal feelings about you that they carry around to different threads.
I can’t believe that both of your posts to me on this thread have been about your personal baggage and have no relevance to this thread or my posts on it, at all.
When I made post 4, I am perfectly willing to substantiate every claim made in it.