2022Follow

So you cared enough about the topic to post your opinion out of the blue, and enough about my response to post a reply, but not enough to address that response, just enough to make it clear that you "don't care" about what I wrote?

Hmmm.... It's amazing to me how many people translate an inability to respond to an argument with a claim to not care to respond to said argument. Classic avoidance technique. Which should prompt one to self introspect as to why that is the case. It's one thing to want others to believe in something you know isn't true and can't stand up to scrutiny, but it's quite another to continue to believe something yourself when you know it isn't true and can't stand up to scrutiny. Which are you doing?

I've always wondered, once people feel the need to engage in data and word manipulation to continue to make an argument for a position, why they hold that position in the first place. I suppose the same question goes to willful ignorance about facts and data that contradict a position as well. Why hold a position if the only way it works is if you intentionally avoid thinking about anything that might be wrong with it? For me, I want to know what my position is, why I hold it, and whether it's a good position or if there are better ones (even if just slight modifications). Life should be a constant process of adjusting what you believe about the world around you as you learn new things. Refusing to look at and process new information out of fear of maybe having to re-evaluate something you believe currently seems counter to this.

I guess you don't recall that I don't actually read any of your posts, I just post here because it is my private journal.

Hah. That was pretty darn funny.

Stupid's not so much. I get where the "let's focus on anything except what matters" concept comes from though. I mean, the guy ignores entirely what is said in the stuff he's criticizing, and obsesses over the art forms? Ok... And then goes off on a tangent about cops and sucking toes? Er... And in the one bit where he almost sorta kinda circles somewhat near a point he talks about cops only enforcing laws after the fact (again though, why this tangent when he's supposedly talking about some conservative view points about kids?), he fails to grasp that laws can only tell us what we're not allowed to do (hence enforcement after the fact), but still suggests that they should be more proactive (at a food truck event no less), but I'm reasonably certain that if you actually had cops doing this (proactive enforcement) he'd the among the first to bash them for profiling people or something.

So yeah. Typical liberal nonsense. Kinda expected. Surface level examination at best. Do people actually think that guy is interesting or has something decent to say?