You were addressing this point: "I believe MOST of the anti-reform protesters are speaking spontaneously without some kind of organizing influence..."
Yes, I was. I addressed the above point by replying it was irrelevant, which is the same response I made to you. What I wrote to i-node in response was:
"I think what MOST do or don't do is irrelevant. My point is that the same tactics are used by some segment of all sets of partisans on all issues. "
You proceeded to compare the protesters on both sides of the debate as if they are equal.
I wrote they are alike in that they use the same tactics. I didn't address their motives, which are a separate factor on which they may be compared, one I chose not to engage. I did not say or suggest that they are alike in any way other than that they use the same tactics. That was entirely your inference.
If you walked up to a stranger and said to them "You are just like HItler" they would not initially react, "you are right because were were both born of a mother".
Of course not. But if I walked up to that stranger and said that you and Hitler are alike in that you were both born of a mother, I would commend him if he had the listening skills, logic, and composure to respond, "yes, that's true, but that's where the similarity ends" rather than jump on me for calling him a Jew-killer.
This was the context and extent of the exchange.
You: "Caught on Video: ObamaCare Organizer Explains How to Shout Down Opponents"
Me: "SOP. Both sides [shout down opponents]."
i-node: "I believe MOST of the anti-reform protesters are speaking spontaneously without some kind of organizing influence as was alleged by the Left."
Me: "I think what MOST do or don't do is irrelevant. My point is that the same tactics are used by some segment of all sets of partisans on all issues. "
You: "The problem with your logic is that most anti government takeover of healthcare protests is spontaneous grass roots effort....To equate the two is ludicrous."
Me: "It's not ludicrous. They are alike in the kind of tactics they use."
You: "You proceeded to compare the protesters on both sides of the debate as if they are equal. Most of the people who initially showed up at town hall meetings were expressing heartfelt fear that ObamaCare would be more disastrous than Obamanomics. "
So, you see, you are challenging a strawman. I never said or suggested that they were alike in any regard other than that they both shout down opponents. The problem is not my logic but your injecting a strawman based on your inference and then arguing with me about it. I ignored your point of comparison, staged protests vs heartfelt fear. I can see that you find it important but it is 1) not relevant to my point and 2) not an issue I had any interest in engaging. I apologize for my lack of interest, but not my logic.
If you disagree that both sides use the tactic of shouting the other side down, then we can debate it. Otherwise, over and out. |
