[Kevmo]

Nahh, that couldn’t be it. USSC has to be corrupt.
***They just lack courage, that’s all. When you argue against the “they have to be corrupt” statement, that’s a classic fallacy known as straw argumentation. You built up the argument yourself so you could argue against it. Why are you resorting to troll like behaviour and provacateur tactics if your intellectual position is so secure?

[LS]

“They lack courage” is always a nice fallback. Never can be that there is no substance to a charge. “Lacking courage” is corruption, BTW.

[drjimmy]

When you argue against the “they have to be corrupt” statement, that’s a classic fallacy known as straw argumentation. You built up the argument yourself so you could argue against it. Why are you resorting to troll like behaviour and provacateur tactics if your intellectual position is so secure?

It isn't a straw man if the man actually exists. To deny that plenty of Freepers have said the Supreme Court is corrupt is to be blind to the many comments that have been posted every time this issue comes up. Talk about not being secure, you resort to name-calling when someone points out the truth.