[NorthMountain]

Your last two sentences are a fine example of "poisoning the well", an illogical and dishonest debate technique employed by those who know (or suspect) that they may be wrong. It serves as an attempt to shut down debate, rather than engaging the merits of an argument.

You lose.

[Milton Miteybad]

Not at all. I wasn't attempting to advance some cockamamie conspiracy theory in an attempt to explain why an 86-year old man might want to retire. Anybody who wants to make that allegation, quite frankly, has no place in the debate in the first place.

Not only were you (and at least one other correspondent) lurking about, trying to insinuate some grand conspiracy surrounding Benedict's resignation when the reasons therefor were plain for all to see, you didn't even have the intellectual courage to describe this conspiracy to which you were apparently referring. ("It couldn't have been that Benedict was an old, sick man who wanted to finally retire after having postponed retirement for 20 years. No...it had to be some big conspiracy!") Then, incredibly, you failed to delineate or describe this alleged conspiracy at all. You offered no proof whatsoever of your assertion of the existence of this alleged "conspiracy." You merely hinted (rather clumsily, we must observe) that there must have been a conspiracy, and then quite laughably, you proceeded to offer absolutely no evidence or reasoning in support of your ludicrous assertion whatsoever.

That's where you lost the debate, Smedley. I merely called your glaring omissions to your attention.

Checkmate. Better luck next time, Ace.