Knowing a little bit about some of the more common personality traits in so-called "right-wing authoritarians" which are the target audience of conservative talk shows etc., the basis for the dismissal isn't an unwillingness to elaborate.mr_rubino said:This guy, for instance, takes the tired and true argument of "I laugh derisively at your statement, because anything else would require me to elaborate, upon which I would only go into an emotional tizzy and make a fool of myself. Conversation frightens me."
As with America-hating Euros, this is tolerated and even encouraged at The Escapist, because every opinion is valid and everyone deserves a trophy. Else someone's feelings might get hurt.
More than anything else it's because the speaker being mocked is not a member of the in-group of the person doing the mocking. People of that personality type are extremely ethnocentric, they absolutely hate anyone and everyone who is not very similar to them, and anyone who isn't a member of the same cliques. To them, simply being an outsider makes you wrong about everything, and a lower class of animal than they are. So, naturally, of course you're wrong when you disagree with them. You're a stupid one of (group x) to them.
Now, this is a very broad generalization and describes the group as a whole rather than individual members. Normally, it's not fair to project the trends of a group as a whole onto individual members, but applying it to an individual seems appropriate enough when they've gone to such lengths to be condescending in ways that fit the pattern.