No one is interested in your analysis of OWK's debating skills. We're interested only in where you stand on the issues.
That it is a favorite dodge of the left in defense of the indefensible makes the use of the tactic even more grating. Got a position, state it. Don't play sophomoric "what if" games.
The only people I see dodging are you and others who keep analysing and criticising the way in which people debate in order to avoid having to defend your positions. I never dodge questions and to the best of my recollection neither does OWK. In fact, we've both spent a great deal of time aswering them.
..."challenges others to think" sums up the Libertarian attitude. Pure snobbery. The height of arrogance.
If your positions are defensible and your logic impeccable then you wouldn't have the need to dodge challenges and call Libertarians arrogant. Make the best, most compelling case you can for your side and let others make their own decisions.
If you've ever read my FR bio page you'll see that I was once an active Republican. I contributed MANY hours to Republican causes. I even used to believe in prayer in school and the WOD. But, a tenacious Libertarian made a far more compelling case to me for freedom and limited government.
Libertarians wonder why they have not be able to connect with even a fraction of the public.
Actually, most people I talk to agree with most of what Libertarians stand for. In fact, often times they agree more with Libertarians than Republicans. But, they're afraid to support Libertarians for a number of reasons. They think they'll be helping to elect Democrats or they support the government safety-net. At any rate, they manage to find at least one reason not to support Libertarians. Since Libertarians do not promise to use government to redistribute wealth, and half of Americans receive some kind of handout from the government, it makes our job all that much more difficult.