Reply #29: This is my favorite post EVER on DU [View All]

[pollo poco]

I would add three things:

1. It's a victory for the right every time we use their verbal assault tactics.
They have redefined the term "reasonable discourse". We have accepted their terms.

It is tiresome to listen to concerned citizens being called "whiners", no matter who is doing it.

This is such a great post!

2. I call this the "president in wartime" argument. You know, the one where dissent is actually considered dangerous, because it "strengthens the enemy and undermines the troops"?

Here, it becomes the "candidate in generalelectiontime" argument. Perhaps it is a subgroup of the "loyalty test".

3. I wish your post could be used as a reference, so that these arguments could be rebutted by all posters, using your number system.

Thus, when someone posts something to the effect that all of us whiners should STFU or leave the party, downstream posters could save a lot of time by simply typing:

"Hey, OP- 1& 5. Get your shit together! We're here to debate." What a time saver this would be!



BTW, my favorite "research and sources rejection" (thanks Phoebe!) moment was when a regular poster here asked if I could supply links to support my "unsupported theory" of gender discrimination! Oh sure- but where shall I begin among the millions of such links. Right- like I'm supposed to fill the obvious lifelong knowledge gap caused by your own negligence of a subject you find uncomfortable.

He followed the post with several "I'm waiting..." messages, and later claimed that no one had ever come forward to answer his challenge-thus proving his point once and for all, of course!

Why not ask for links proving that WWII actually took place? I mean- I never saw it happen! How many thousands of links would it take to convince someone to open a book before they consider themselves qualified to comment? I mean, at what point are people supposed to know something about a subject before offering a rebuttal? Or worse- a flat out attack from a position of shameful ignorance. This is a big question from people I encounter when I'm out of the country. It seems to be a unique interpretation of the meaning of free speech. The right to abuse others while loudly proclaiming one's sad ignorance on a subject.

Thanks again-this post, and the replies to it, renew my faith in this forum.