I hate Ann Coulter. I don't even know her, but I know I hate her. She might be a delightful human being in person and it's just her on-TV persona which is a vile, nasty, hateful, little troll. Just the titles of her books are enough to make me want to slap her in the dick. There are only a handful of people in this world that I can seriously say would make the world a better place if they would go ahead and die, and she makes it on the short list.
Now that I've set that up properly I can go on. Her entry about Sarah Palin was innocent enough until she decides to take you for a trip down crazy person lane with this one: "Palin is a threat to liberals because she believes in God and country and family- all values liberal pretend to believe in but secretly detest".
What the fuck???
Bear in mind that Ann Coulter is credited with doing things like "exposing liberal hypocrisy" or being "refreshingly politically incorrect". One reviewer of her books says she is "intelligent, thoughtful, and articulate".
I just have a hard time deciding if she is serious or doing all of this as a ploy to get paid. I can't see how anyone who takes politics seriously and considers themselves a somewhat intelligent person can read that statement about Sarah Palin and liberals and think to themselves, "what an intelligent, thoughtful and articulate statement!".
Here's what's wrong with it:
- Argument from fallacy
- Bare assertion fallacy
- Blanket statement
- Argument from repetition
- Generalization
Essentially, I am trying to use terms used in the proper art of debate to refute an asinine comment, which only begs the question:
Who's the bigger idiot, Ann or myself?
Have a good weekend. I'm hoping to get drunk. Slap hands!
No comments:
Post a Comment