chalk it up to frustration. justin may not be an expert on H, but he's read some, on his account. if so, then how he would reach the above conclusion or even that conclusion based on what ken wrote just seemed totally bizarre to me.
but here's one for you. both of our statements above are statements that are not "ideal" but which in fact invoke the ideal speech situation.
my statement translated: jeez justin, can't you read, you moron?
your statement translated: jeez, kelley, you moron, just claiming justin's a moron doesn't prove he's a moron.
we have both accused or criticized our interlocutor for not being serious enough about trying to understand and trying to be understood. we have criticized each other for failing to live up to the demands of the Ideal Speech Situation. We have invoked the ISS whether we think it can be achieved all the time or not. Whether we think Habermas is a turd or not.