On the lack of courtesy in public debate

This entire thread is standing proof that what passes for political debate is a pissing match between faux "deep thinkers."

And there are plenty of knee-jerk idiots on both sides of the needle to fill out the teams.

 

I don't think there's a pissing match going on here at all.

Peggy Noonan has written a column that defies all empirical evidence. There's nothing to substantiate her premise whatsoever. I mean, not a shred of evidence.

 

And without reading it at all -- I repeat, WITHOUT reading it at all -- the mere fact that a stance can be taken without any allowance for different interpretations is proof of what I was saying.

This place is notorious for that. Your way is the way, and screw any other ways.

I mean, if we're going to have a thread on lack of courtesy in public debate, let's get down to brass tacks. This is it.

 

What the hell are brass tacks anyway?
Are they under the un-brass tacks?
And how big and thick does the damn carpet have to be?

 

Sorry...haven't been able to post. After all, I've got a life and a job...

Produce one post I've made (which is possible) that indicates in any way that I even know who Rush Limbaugh is. I have a job and I have a life, and that doesn't include listening to AM talk radio in the afternoon. I arrive at my political convictions after reading Time, Newsweek, the New York Times, WaPo, National Review and watching CNN, Fox and network news.

That said, what does Rush Limbaugh or whether I listen to him or not have anything to do with the Noonan column. I agree that she left out the transgressions of the right (such as Hannity, who I hate with a passion because the guy wouldn't know how to be polite in a funeral home), but that doesn't mean the incidents she mentioned from the left didn't happen.

 

On another thread, you said Rush Limbaugh was more qualified to comment on the NFL than 90 percent of the people doing it.

But I have a job, a life, and a memory, so I can spend time better than looking for your post.

 

OK, I'll make it simple.

Noonan's column is, by any objective standard, incorrect. Like, in wrong. There are no allowances for interpretation for an opinon that is categorically nonsensical.

Not by any Democrat/Republican standard but by, "let's check it against what's actually going on in the real world" kind of check.

Hondo's comments that she "left out the transgressions of the right" are well, idiotic and sorta non-reality based.

But nice try, Hondo.

Maybe the sun in the deep south is getting to you.

 

Fat cows have always had problems with empirical evidence.

 

Yeah, FB, Greenwald's great. His best point:

That's why Jeff Jacoby's annual "Left Hate Speech" piece (I'm not even sure if he does it anymore) is a joke.

So was this Noonan column.