Reply #143: now you are taking me out of context

[hfojvt]

I only said 'you are a stubborn idiot' to get you to see how something would be considered hate speech if it was directed at yourself. I tried to make that clear when I later said 'this is for illustration'.

As for your crowd of sychophants, most of them accept my framing that 'Nance hates birthers and tea-baggers and those proud of their wilfull ignorance.' The place where we part company is not on that frame, it is on the question of whether that hate is a good thing. They think it is good, and I think it is bad.

Ironically, or not, today's Daily Howler seems to agree with me.

"Translating: Citizens have believed the things they hear from Rush and Sean (and the like) for decades. Yet on our side, we still seem surprised by this fact! We have formulated no real attempt to push back against these public idiots—to warn those citizens that they’re being played by these big stupid hacks. Instead, we tend to call those citizens names. Then, we wonder why they won’t accept our own views about such matters!

“Conservatives will be better off if reform becomes law,” the e-mailer said—thus stating his own view of this highly complex matter. He then wondered why the “wing-nuts” refuse to accept his wisdom! In part, the answer is fairly obvious: By and large, people don’t take advice from other people who keep calling them names. But this has been the dominant “liberal” approach to this phenomenon for the past twenty years."

http://www.dailyhowler.com/