[peritonlogon]

[ QUOTE ]

Wait, you're the one being dogmatic and obtuse. When you make a claim (e.g. I have a "vested interest" in your activities) the burden of proof is on YOU to prove this.

[/ QUOTE ] I am not independant of this country. This is so much more evident then any point I have seen you make. If this country falls into a depression it affects me, if this country's laws change it affects me. The big things affect me, the little things do, that's why Americans take interest in politics. If you would like to define away reality you are welcomed to.[ QUOTE ]
Those who are skeptical do not have to meet any burden of proof.

[/ QUOTE ] First off, we are discussing, we are not in a court of law or a laboratory, as such certain things are assumed, and the rules are a bit different since we don't have rules for evidence or a method of peer review. Basic literacy is assumed though, for instance, if I say something like [ QUOTE ]
Vested interest? What does that mean?

[/ QUOTE ] that might be considered doubt, that might might be considered skepticism. But if I add [ QUOTE ]
Other than, "I want to tell other people what to do"?

[/ QUOTE ] there is nothing skeptical or doubtful about this phrase, it is simply a turn of phrase that attempts to obscure an issue. I have no reason to consider myself as having the burden of proof, since, the basic phrase indicates you don't actually care whether or not it is true. You instead seek to throw mud, point fingers and make up definitions.
[ QUOTE ]
By refusing to demonstrate why you actually do have a legitimate interest, and just insisting that you *do* have one, you are being (gasp) dogmatic and obtuse. That's practically the textbook example of dogma: Just do it because I say so.

[/ QUOTE ]I don't vote? I don't have the right to vote in this country? That alone gives me a legitimate interest. Look up legitimate.

As for everything else you posted, it really doesn't merrit a response.