The Last Laugh

Jeff Bone jbone at
Mon Apr 21 20:51:35 PDT 2003

On Monday, Apr 21, 2003, at 19:07 US/Central, James Rogers wrote:

> I would assert that Reagan is far more deserving of credit than any 
> other
> President I can think of.

Why am I not surprised?

<much ditto pro forma deleted>

>> and Bush II
>> will get
>> the credit for the economic recovery experienced under Democratic
>> leadership from 2004-2008.  (I'm not saying you've said all of those
>> things, but I'm just waiting for you to fill in the blanks.)
> This is all a lovely fantasy, but what does it have to do with me?  You
> should spend less time and emotional energy creating straw man around 
> what
> you imagine that I "really" think and get on with the issues.  Your 
> model of
> how and what I think is clearly broken, and I don't fit into any 
> popular
> molds anyway.

Perhaps the problem, James, is that you do in fact fit into at least 
one popular mold much more than you'd care to admit.  Let's roughly 
divide your statements into two categories:  assertions, and assertions 
about your assertions.  Many of your assertions follow a familiar 
pattern, to the point where some of your assertions (i.e., the above 
about the Gipper) are predictable.  Your assertions about your 
assertions are somewhat petulantly in direct contradiction to this 
observation about your assertion.

 From this I conclude that one of the following is true:

(1)  You are doing an absolutely stunning imitation of a dittohead, but 
in fact are not one
(2)  You are a dittohead and recognize this but claim that you aren't 
for some reason or other
(3)  You are a dittohead but are in denial of this fact

In any case, having concluded this I now know that there are some kinds 
of assertions and certain arguments that you might make that I cannot 
rely on.  Now, I'm an easygoing guy, and I think there're all kinds of 
discussions we can have in which I can treat you as credible.  But I 
now know the class of discussions for which I cannot.

> I'm not emotionally invested in politics, I mostly just like to argue. 
>  A
> point that escapes most people is that I rarely volunteer my personal
> opinion, only observations.  You try MUCH too hard to read "intent" and
> "ideology" that I'm intentionally not offering, and it rarely fails to 
> lead
> you off on ridiculous tangents.

Well, then, I hope at least you're enjoying the Primrose Path with me. 

Overall, methinks you doth protest too much.  If the shoe fits, wear it.


More information about the FoRK mailing list