Ever hear the same tired claim or objection that makes little to no point, over and over again? For example a couple of mine are: "That's a generalization." So what? There is nothing wrong with generalizations....in general. This is probably my number one pet peeve in "intellectual" discussion. We all make generalizations, in fact, you can't glean any useful information without generalizing. How can you make sense of the world on the fly without lumping together large samples? "Not ALL people/things/xyz is like 'so-and-so'" Of course a generalization doesn't mean every single one. By its very definition it doesn't mean everyone. You'd be better off not attacking the use of generalizations, but finding out if the generalization is more or less true or false. That's where you attack generalizations, not generalizations in and of themselves. Here's another one I have a problem with. Diluting Nazism. Everyone's a Nazi now. Don't agree with a certain figure or institution? Brand them as Nazis. Can't come up with a cogent and intellectually honest criticism of an opponent? Accuse him or her of simply being a Nazi. This is a sickening tactic that sadly is becoming more and more of a trend, probably due to the electronic media, but you'll so often hear it from very seemingly intelligent people, even high officials with cache. Just because you don't like something does not make it Nazism. Please refrain from this comparison when not appropriate which is in 99% of the time, you diminish the very claim. (also applies to "fascist"). Another one is that the media can't possibly be liberal because it's owned by big corporations. And? This seems like a non-sequitur to me. Do you have any personal ones you can add?