Comments on: Interesting http://www.randomfate.net/MT/2005/07/02/interesting/ One more roll of the dice... Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:45:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Jeff G http://www.randomfate.net/MT/2005/07/02/interesting/#comment-1715 Jeff G Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.randomfate.net/WP/2005/07/02/interesting/#comment-1715 Let's see...I respond to a critique of MY post by asking a series of hypotheticals that pressure the logic of YOUR post, and for my troubles I'm told to be civil by one who follows that up with the accusation that I don't care about the poor, the disenfranchized, civil liberties, this country, the founding fathers, my would-be comrades in arms, etc. Leaving aside the astounding cognitive dissonance in that sanctimonious rant from someone who can't even be bothered to follow the original link back to my site -- where I make a plea, in the linked post, for civil discourse -- the real irony comes from David, who THANKS said ranter for leveling those accusations at me -- me, a person he has never met and whose site he has obviously never visited -- then HIMSELF makes a blanket statement that because I and others "on the Right" haven't commented on ANOTHER of his posts, we somehow don't <i>really</i> support the war -- all this, even as he pretends to be so above the fray! My goodness! The PROJECTION! Bottom line: David is a fraud. He tries to play the hurt deep thinker looking for an honest debate, but what he supports are those rhetorical tropes that aim to attack the character of those he engages rather than to address their points. In that regard, he's fairly typical of his online brethren. Let’s see…I respond to a critique of MY post by asking a series of hypotheticals that pressure the logic of YOUR post, and for my troubles I’m told to be civil by one who follows that up with the accusation that I don’t care about the poor, the disenfranchized, civil liberties, this country, the founding fathers, my would-be comrades in arms, etc.

Leaving aside the astounding cognitive dissonance in that sanctimonious rant from someone who can’t even be bothered to follow the original link back to my site — where I make a plea, in the linked post, for civil discourse — the real irony comes from David, who THANKS said ranter for leveling those accusations at me — me, a person he has never met and whose site he has obviously never visited — then HIMSELF makes a blanket statement that because I and others “on the Right” haven’t commented on ANOTHER of his posts, we somehow don’t really support the war — all this, even as he pretends to be so above the fray!

My goodness! The PROJECTION!

Bottom line: David is a fraud. He tries to play the hurt deep thinker looking for an honest debate, but what he supports are those rhetorical tropes that aim to attack the character of those he engages rather than to address their points.

In that regard, he’s fairly typical of his online brethren.

]]>