Oh my goodness - do they ever stop and look at themselves? Can they stop and truly examine themselves?
Now seriously, let's look at Pelosi.
Right, she's the speaker of the house.
Right, she noticed that Carter weighed in with an entirely unnecessary attempted connect between Wilson calling out the non-President for lying and somehow that being related to the old chestnut "racism".
Why make an argument when you can just throw in a single weasel word to make your argument for you? With absolute incredulity, I then watched certain bloggers actually try to defend Carter - unbelievable stuff.
Now, in the light of that and even seeing how her Prez, himself, has tried to extricate himself from this unnecessary irrelevancy, Pelosi weighs in with the gay card:
"Pelosi likens healthcare protests to anti-gay rhetoric."
Why?
Why bring in completely irrelevant but highly emotive issues to a debate ostensibly connected with health? What has racism to do with health? Or being gay? Why not bring in ageism or feminism while they're there?
About the only label they don't bring in [whilst they turn around, amusingly, have fits of victimhood and get angry about labels applied to them] is political correctness. I wonder where these people learnt to debate - who taught them the rules of debate? If they were to join debating societies - they'd be called out and marked down for each irrelevancy and for not arguing to the topic.
In the public arena, with no shame it seems, they just throw in any old buzzword which springs to mind or which appears to be currently stirring up trouble. It's the same technique as a marital discussion where one side suddenly brings in issues form yesteryear to somehow bolster the case.
They're all at it, from Segolene Royale to Carter to anyone you like in Nu-Labour. They always try to swamp debate, true debate, in a flood of emotion which is meant to beat into submission any attempt by the wider world, the ordinary men and women, to debate the facts and figures.
I did a blog post once on immigration [shows how central to my heart it is that I rarely blog on it]. Wham - in came Paul Kingsnorth, having never been to my blog before, accusing me of racism, which Tiberius promptly put him straight on.
It's this flood of emotion, accusing me of "putting someone down" and all sorts of things, except for the actual facts at issue, which blur and curtail any meaningful discussion. On a blog where meaningful discussion is the aim, as it is with many of your blogs and fora, then that obfuscation just gets in the way.
Notice I said "they" and didn't use any labels? :)
The reason they do it is because its tried, tested and proven to work.
ReplyDeleteMost people don't want to be around for mud throwing as it sticks and nobody wants to be seen to be racist or homophobic etc. At the moment though people seem to be standing up and taking the mud. That is how we feel at the moment.
It will only really stop when the world stops rotating and all lefties are dead.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJames- this is standard political tactics. If you are having an argument pretend to be offended- its what say the right does on America when it accused people of being unpatriotic over hte war in Iraq or over Isreal when Benjamin Netanayhu accused leftwing Jews of being self hating. Its a distraction tactic- the key thing is not to get excited about it- the real issue is in this case healthcare (in those the war in Iraq or Gaza or whatever) and that's the thing to be discussed.
ReplyDeleteThis is just the froth of politics not its substance and I'm afraid will happen whenever you have a society that has a free debate and disagreements.