The no-true-Roman fallacy

The Latest Hays tactic / ruse, is to cynically try to turn my words back upon me.

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2011/07/is-dinesh-dsouza-high-profile-fallen.html

Ah, yes. It’s “cynical,” nay, a “cynical ruse” (twice as bad!) to hold a man to his own words.

I’m not perfect. I can admit when I am wrong; I have no problem with that.

That would be a mighty long list. I don’t know if his blog has the bandwidth to accommodate the sheer volume of necessary retractions. But better late than never. I look forward to the installments.

On second thought, wouldn’t it be more efficient if he just deleted his blog?

This is not rocket science, folks.  At that time, I had not looked into D'Souza's Catholicism in any depth. I understood that he was a Catholic (and that was all that was relevant to my particular argument in that paper). I didn't know that he was not actually a "devout" one, and so that constituted my momentous, earth-shaking mistake (an unverified description).

Translation: D’Souza was a real, honest-ta-goodness Catholic as long as he was a feather in our cap, but when he defected, he retroactively ceased to have ever been a real, honest-ta-goodness Catholic. Kinda like the Grandfather paradox.