A man named "JB" at Phil Johnson's blog posted the following astute analysis:

"Post-Modernism considers all previous knowledge as flawed. This is the basis from which the adherants of Post-Modernist thought begin from on any argument.

However they encounter a serious problem when they begin to debate those who hold to absolute truth, they find out that Post-Modernism and its offshoot relativism is so shot full of contradictions that it can never be defended using a logical argument, as Logic depends on there being absolutes.

But this does not stop the adherants of Post Modernism and Relatvism.

The tactic I have seen being utilized in this Information overload age. Is they think if they just keep repeating the same argument over an over an over, that the absolute weight or volume of their arguments will: drown out the glaring problems with ther premises, they will wear down their oponents to a point where their oponents will eventually give up. or the actual weight or volume of their opinions will transform reality to fit their "Truth"

Much of this constant repeating of their tired and false ideology stems from the fact that people now have the power to utilize their Computer to day after day after day hammer their message at people. Its almost as if by having a computer and access to the world via the internet has somehow made what they believe as being just as valid and somehow as true or more true than that which they disagree with.

In this internet age, factual truth has somehow lost its validity. Absolutes are no longer valid. The mantra now is: I have a blog, I have an opinion and I am going to make that opnion Truth no matter what evidence exists to refute it. Because today all evidence is somehow "subjective"

This tactic is now being used in arguments for practically everything."

I couldn't have said it better myself.