|
|
|---|
|
American Politics Journal Atrios Barry Crimmins Betty Bowers Buzzflash Consortium News Daily Howler Daily Kos Democatic Underground Disinfotainment Today Evil GOP Bastards Faux News Channel Greg Palast The Hollywood Liberal Internet Weekly Jesus General Joe Conason Josh Marshall Liberal Oasis Make Them Accountable Mark Morford Mike Malloy Political Humor - About.com Political Wire Randi Rhodes Rude Pundit Smirking Chimp Take Back the Media Whitehouse.org More Links |
Subject: All bunched up
It seems that Mr. Dale Plueger has gotten his
panties all in an un-substantial bunch while making
remarkably generic accusations of literary substance
abuse against Mr. Howard Zinn ("Impeachment
by The People," Feb. 8).
Well, in order to be fair to Mr. Plueger's own
apparently unsubstantiated allegations, I went online
and referenced the Weekly's "Past Issues" link,
where I then read Mr. Zinn's "Blogtopic" cyber-print
article regarding the popular impeachment of
a currently sitting, criminal government junta (most popularly
known on the Web as the BFEE, or the Bush Family
Evil Empire).
After having accomplished that, now I have a short
question concerning Mr. Plueger's own substantially
vacuous and editorially irresponsible assassination
piece in the Weekly's Letters to the Editor section
of March 8 ... Where's the beef?
Plueger's letter "What tripe" claims that all
kinds of "unsubstantiated" allegations of fact and logic were
made by Mr. Zinn. In the meantime, Plueger's
wholly unsubstantiated opinion piece actually functions
as nothing more than what us Web aficionados
identify as a "Troll" composition, mostly because - as
a "hit" piece - it provides not one single instance
of comparison and contrast regarding the "truthiness
or falsity" of what Mr. Zinn had actually composed.
Instead, DP most severely limits himself by only
making nasty little primary schoolyard style insults which are,
to the greatest part, limited to Plueger's perspective
of Mr. Zinn's own Web-based reputation as a "blogger."
Mr. Plueger is now attempting to functionally
dismiss all political reasoning into a certain brand of personal
destruction against the new, double-syllable
bad-boy popularly known as the "blogger."
To paraphrase an increasingly famous blogger,
"If you can't argue the facts against somebody's stated opinion,
then argue the logic. If you can't argue the
logic, then do so using the facts. If you can successfully argue neither
the logic nor the facts, then the best alternative
left is simply to call your opponent nasty names."
Even under this rather severe limitation, a really
talented name-caller can still "win" the popular public opinion
encompassing a contested debate.
Well, this only goes to prove one thing, which is that, as things change, the more they yet seem to remain the same.
Dan Daugherty
Alatadena.