Obama calls Hillary "Bush-Cheney Light"

[GaryC 7]

ETA: I do agree that just because someone didn't direct something at you that you won't necessarily take it personally.

Surely that goes both ways however? Specifically that the post that Devilette wrote might well have been motivated (certainly coloured) by similar offense caused by Gary's generalisation of 'city folk'.

Yes, of course it goes both ways!

I'm just saying that if I'm wearing a red shirt and someone says, "Anyone who wears red shirts is stupid", claiming that it wasn't an attack against me is kind of silly. If one identifies with the generalized group that is being insulted, then I think it qualifies as a personal attack.

Well that's a fair point, but in this case however it amounts to being offended by someone saying that "Anyone who wears red shirts is stupid", but being unable to see the offense in a similar sweeping statement about 'blue shirts'. That's blatantly hypocritical.

Yes, agreed. And I think that's exactly what went on here.

Ok, one further clarification and then I am done. I said that city dwelling dem voters were gullible. Yes that may seem insulting to those that live in cities and vote dem. It wasn't meant as anything but a political jab in the spirit of the preceding posts. What Dev did was kick it up several notches and it spilled over into a personal insult. While both can be considered "insults" I would say calling everyone from fly-over country uneducated, homophobic and fat to be a bit more provocative. I discount the crack about "following a dictator" as a political jab and a response in kind to my gullible remark. The rest goes over the top and that is what I objected to.

Generally if someone is insulted by something - the tendency is to respond to it with something more 'extreme'. Standard rules of escalation.

Respond to a slap with a nuke? It went to far IMO. That is the reason for my rant.

[no name 1]

I REPEAT, since it's obviously did not sink in the first time.....

Gary I said that stuff to prove a point, and Ionescu has covered it. You said I(being a big city gal) am misguided & more gullible & not a part of REAL America. Was it a personal attack? Nope. It's a statement biased against all big city dwellers. Much like my statement was against REAL AMERICA, not you personally.

I was not trying to insult you, honest. I may have been OOT, but I can find polls that say basically the same thing, albeit, less harshly.

Point made tho.

Signed-

a gullible, misguided, easily fooled big city Dem gal (living in unREAL America)

Edited July 27, 2007 by devilette

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Respond to a slap with a nuke? It went to far IMO. That is the reason for my rant.

Even so - I'm not sure why its so offensive seeing as generalisations are ten-a-penny on these threads. I refer again to the constant association of anyone who criticises the current administration as supporters of the 'other side'.

We had polarised politics in the UK - but nothing like this. Half of the arguments in these threads are caused not by the issues under discussion but by ideological clashes between specific people.

Can we not engage people on the merits (or lack of) of their own ideas, rather than merely associating them with a generalised caricature of the 'enemy'?

Edited July 27, 2007 by Number 6

[Dr_LHA 3]

GaryC getting pissy about people making generalizations:

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Can we all agree that generalizations completely derail the chance of ever engaging in meaningful political discourse?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Can we all agree that generalizations completely derail the chance of ever engaging in meaningful political discourse?

We can agree certainly - I just don't think that people recognise that they are doing it. Its all throughout this thread.

[Dr_LHA 3]

Can we all agree that generalizations completely derail the chance of ever engaging in meaningful political discourse?

Spoken like a true liberal.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Can we all agree that generalizations completely derail the chance of ever engaging in meaningful political discourse?

Spoken like a true liberal.

LOL

[no name 1]

Can we all agree that generalizations completely derail the chance of ever engaging in meaningful political discourse?

Spoken like a true liberal.

and I'm damn proud of him!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

...I should add though that we should be able to trade political jabs from time to time, if the direction of the thread is heading that way.

If we're all taking this too seriously, then some drinking is in order!

Let me add by saying only red blooded Americans drink!

...from blue states.

Edited July 27, 2007 by Mister Fancypants

[Dr_LHA 3]

Is it beer time already? (looks at clock) 3:51PM. Yeah OK.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Is it beer time already? (looks at clock) 3:51PM. Yeah OK.

Whooohoooo for beer! I vote for beer!

[no name 1]

Is it beer time already? (looks at clock) 3:51PM. Yeah OK.

Whooohoooo for beer! I vote for beer!

Steven - it's not even 1PM. Get back to work!

[Jenn! 918]

A nice blue state beer for me please!

[no name 1]