[lisarea]

Originally Posted by Cool Hand

Read my post immediately above again. I'm referring to the parts from the OP that I quoted in bold. How those kind of playground insults can be based on a foundation of reasoned and educated opinion is beyond me. Perhaps I should repeat the third grade.

Well. No insults there, eh?

The text you quoted, I have already granted, does not cite a reasoned and educated opinion, but it very much reflects one. It's not that fine a distinction, really, but you seem to be missing it.

And I really fail to understand what's so noble about avoiding vitriol, overall. I could fill volumes with reasons to hate this administration. Yes, hate. Really, really hate. In many cases, I'd argue that hatred, insults, and vitriol are the appropriate response. To discuss such things in a reasonable tone implies that they're reasonable.

In fact, in many cases, the only reasonable and excusable response is outrage. You accused godfry of hating America earlier. Now, I don't know where that whole meme got coopted, but this administration is absolutely doing its level best to destroy this country, and those who defend the administration do so to the detriment of the principles on which it was founded.

So: Why do YOU hate America?

I sense bias. Outrage is appropriate under certain circumstances. It isn't here. We are talking about a gaffe. At most, in the light most favorable to the critics of Ms. Hughes, we are talking about an appointed government official without much power pushing her religious agenda and misrepresenting what the Constitution says to the press. If that is the case, should you be upset with her? Sure. Outraged? No. Save that for more egregious behavior from someone more influential.

Bias? Hell, yes. I do it all for the booty. Never claimed otherwise.

And I'm really not sure where you draw the line as far as who is responsible for their actions and who isn't. Hughes is. And let's be clear about this: I do not accept your explanation that it was a simple gaffe. A gaffe, sure. But one based either on an egregious misunderstanding of what this country is supposed to stand for, or on a barely concealed desire to destroy it. Yes, destroy it.

Is she just following orders? A powerless minion? To some extent, sure. She's a grownup all the same, she is responsible for her actions, and while certainly there are others in positions of greater power than her, she is still accountable for herself and her own actions. And if she's just saying and doing as she's told, she's still responsible.

And frankly, I would expect better from a grade-schooler. I'm pissed that the woman has some a cushy appointed position in which she speaks for the nation. You know what her job is? To make us all look good. That's her whole job. She sucks at it, and those of us she's appointed to respresent should be pissed.

Please, please, please explain to me why it should be acceptable that this woman, who is tasked with representing the United States, is saying crap like this. Whether you believe it was an innocent slip of the tongue, a more sinister Freudian slip, or evidence of a fundamental misunderstanding of the principles the nation she officially represents, how do you excuse her saying something so stupid, so ignorant, and/or so profoundly Unamerican, in her official capacity, no less?

And briefly: Do you care to actually address any points? You started out actually talking about the content, but you've very quickly lapsed into some kind of meta-discussion of what you perceive others' motivations, personalities, and intelligence, and tone.

If you want to tell me I'm wrong, tell me what is wrong with the arguments I've made, not what's wrong with me personally. Why do you seem to be making such an effort to refocus attention onto the motivations and tone of the arguments, rather than the substance?

You cheapen righteous indignation and outrage by effusing it so indiscriminantly. Wolf!

Yeah? Before this post, show me where I was so effusive with my outrage.

Or are you actually just conflating a whole bunch of other people who disagree with you?

Wolf, indeed.