Reply #274: usually those who equate criticism and bashing

[hfojvt]

are the bashers who are trying to claim that they just criticize.

Clearly, bashing IS nothing new here at DU. One line or one word of snark is par for the course in many, many, threads.

The very person I replied to seemed to say that Cindy should somehow be exempt from the treatment that almost anybody else would get. "I'm talking about the nasty, direct attacks on a very outspoken liberal. And one who lost her son in an illegal war, no less. Disgusting."

As for the rejoinder that "you are crazy" or "she is crazy", typically that is not a serious diagnosis of mental illness, and it is often a response to ideas or statements that are well outside the norm.

Especially if one throws the verbal equivalent of a rotten tomato, they are likely to get it back in kind. Cindy didn't try to persuade, she chose to insult as well.

That tends to make persuasion more difficult, although it often earns huzzahs from the people who already agree with you.

I also speak against this notion everywhere - that there are two kinds of people in the world, people who agree with me, and people who are morally and/or intellectually defective.

Granted, in this case, it may seem that it is critics of Sheehan who are saying she is defective for disagreeing with them, but no, from the tone of her piece, as she mocks those who disagree with her as idiots or hypocrites, the "I am right, you are defective" theme is the heart of her message.

Since it seems to me that she drew first blood, I am not gonna chastise the children who hit back.

Is that honest enough for you?