If it wasn’t so damned funny.
After our newest visitor, or what some would call a troll, Church Secretary, made a number of unsubstantiated accusations, including called yours truly a racist, a homophobe and a fella who needed firearms to compensate for his manhood, I decided to walk on over to his little hole in the wall to see what I might see.
And I found something that made me have to scratch my head and re-read it, due to its unabashed libtardedness.
He quotes Dr. Condi Rice as saying the following,
You can’t allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them, because if they commit the crime, thousands of innocent people die
C-Sec then goes on to comment thusly on that quote,
Hmm… Okay, so she’s our international defender of democracy sans habeas corpus, due process, and all that other, um, democracy stuff.
The reason for my confusion is that here in America, we have a whole slew of laws that make certain conspiracies, such as the ones terrorists might plot, illegal. Maybe he doesn’t want us to be able to prosecute a terrorist before they carry out their murderous plans, but I sure as hell do.
I would hope that he would know that these laws are on the books since we have prosecuted a number of terrorists on conspiracy charges.
At first I thought he might not know what a conspiracy was, but then I remembered that lefties such as himself are quite adamant in their cryptic conspiracy theories such as the oldie but goodie “Bush took this country into an illegal war to kill poor people and minorities and also to make CheneyMcHitlerburton gazillions of dollars”. Also known as the “Bush Lied, People Died” mantra.
So I guess that either he really is a complete ignoramus or he is being purposely obtuse as to the point of Condi’s statement so that he can bash the administration.
Either way, he makes not only himself look like an idiot, but also his commentors as they follow his chowderheaded line of thinking, leading me to believe that they might just have trouble thinking on their own and wait for the idea that fits their mindset to go forward with a train of thought.
What is missing from alot of flawed arguments, and Secretary is no exception, is CONTEXT. If we had the will, we could take everything out of context and create a wonderful fantasy land where everything suits us and we win every argument. For me, reality is good so I stick to it.
I am new to this whole blog thing and was drawn here because it seems to be the only place to share ideas and thoughts on the 2 subjects most people avoid talking about, but I think are the most significant, religion and politics (in that order).
I have learned alot here, and at Secretary’s place, not because I necessarily agree with EVERYTHING I read, but because I find it useful to see all sides of every issue. A good debate on an issue to me is a free exchange of ideas where both parties at the very least learn something about the way the “other side” thinks. It is ideally constructive without getting personal, but this is always a risk when people are particularly passionate (or arrogant, in some cases). Hopefully, my demeanor here and elsewhere reflects this philosophy.
Please allow me to step down from my soap box now.