May 19, 2006

The priorities of Democrats

Sadly, I have asked to be removed from their mailing list. I understood when I first contributed that I would receive more requests for donations--that's what charities do. But the request I received last week was the deal breaker: a cardboard mailing tube with an American flag and a small tag enclosed. I was asked to sign the little tag, enclose it with the flag and a donation, and return the whole thing in the mailing tube using their pre-paid address label. The flag (just slightly bigger than 4x6, on a wooden stick) was to be carried in a demonstration in Washington "showing all our troops how much we support them and their mission."* The flag was accompanied by a letter in which Ms. Patton-Bader railed against all those liberals who "rejoice . . . with every American death" and who desperately want America "to lose this war."


People can support Soldier's Angels or not, I don't really care a fig for that. What I do point out, because it is important, is how the logic English Professor uses lays out. We have the thesis, obviously, that Bader is attacking liberals, because EP says she is attacking liberals, and that this offends EProfessor because it offended EProfessor. Aside from the circular logic argument, the more important thing is the comments section.

Here you have people agreeing with EP, notably because they want to treat soldiers as soldiers, instead of political props, which they say demeans their sacrifice.

Given these beliefs, I would have expected EP to write out the entire text she received from Baden. She doesn't do that, even presuming she signed the flag and sent it out, EP does not even paraphrase the great majority of the text she received. Since she does not do that, we are asked to believe her portrayal as the accurate portrayal. Most Republicans I know, could never get away with that, so it became a Republican habit not to do that anymore.

I do wonder whether Murtha's recent comments will be portrayed in the same light. Meaning, an anecdote about hearing it, and then the conclusion, then the comments section agreeing that the Democrats should not treat soldiers as political props, using them to gain political power. I would like to see people who prioritize things they get offended over from Republicans, also prioritize the things from their own party. That's not too much to ask, given that EP was the one who first brought up the subject.

But even if EP doesn't write about Murtha, as it is her blog, the question still remains why Democrats prioritize offensive things from Soldier's Angels but not the more important, in my view, actions of Murtha.

See, most of the problems with Democrats is their priorities. They'll get a problem and talk about it, but then they ignore anything else related to it for various reasons. If that's too vague, then look at Democrats when they talk about Osama. To Hear Democrats talk, if you just get rid of Osama, then the War on Terror would end because every other terroist organization is not gunning for Americans. Is that not a difference in priorities?

And of course anyone who asserts that liberals "rejoice" when American soldiers are killed has zero credibility with me.


This might be valid, if EP had quoted the majority or even paraphrased accurately a portion of the subject she is refering. EP didn't do that. So the only person we have to trust for the accuracy of the information is EP's memory. Which tends to act with opinion first. Why do I say that? Because if it was an opinion that it is wrong to say that liberals rejoice, because liberals like her don't rejoice, that is one thing. But that's not what EP chose to emphasis in their priorities. She said that anyone saying liberals like Murtha would rejoice in soldier's deaths, as Murtha rejoiced when the Marines were accused of slaughtering innocent civilians in Haditha, has no possibility of being right.

It's tribalistic in the extreme. Any attack on the party liberals, is on an attack on every liberal. Any attack on the family or my own, is a direct attack on me. That kind of mentality. There might be some benefits to that of course, but it is not apparent of what worth when the protective instincts are towards fake liberals in the party of so called liberalism.

Here's my take on things, with no research just gut instinct. I don't pretend to have proper and exact methodology, I don't pretend that what I'm saying is an accurate portrayal of other people's positions. I will say that it is far more probable that the flag is separate from the donations, that the donations go to one thing, but the flag will go to another. This is of course, entirely devoid of any details other than the ones provided by EP, but I suppose if that is good for EP and her audience, it is good for my prediction methodology.

Some stuff I got through Research cause I was just curious.

Soldiers' Angels

Holly Aho

Blackfive's someone you should know, Ms Patton-Bader.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home