A gentleman on Twitter (something I rarely get to say) — sent me a link to a debate on Brexit as an illustration of arguing on the merits vs. operating on emotion.
I can’t offer an informed opinion on the issue, but no rational person would deny who’s in command on this debate.
It was embarrassing
But as out of Daniel’s league as Eddie is, he’s a helluva lot better than the absurdity I face on Iraq WMD. For nearly 20 years, I’ve been practically spit on for following the principles that Thomas Sowell & his followers promote.
It almost makes me miss the good ol’ days of garden-variety Bush apologists — when at least their contempt for the truth was in the theatre of war. Sowell’s acolytes are a whole other breed, as they defend him before they even know what the subject matter is.
And once they do — they issue rapid-fire ridicule and/or some “nobody’s perfect” platitude to instantly absolve him. Never mind they have no idea of the depths of dishonesty involved here — bottomless lies by both parties, I would add.
This man muddied the waters of debate on matters of world-altering magnitude — and never once addressed the marquee evidence that Powell presented.
Trying to reach Sowell’s army of apologists is akin to having a debate about leaving the EU with people arguing to end apartheid (after it’s already ended, no less).
These people make it impossible to rein them in on what the issue is actually about — as they butcher the principles they praise.
Even if you prefer the word of politicians and pundits — couldn’t you at least consider the word of nuclear scientists, physicists, and top-intelligence officers?
Sowell’s hailed as a hero for following the facts — but he didn’t go anywhere near ’em on this issue. How do you reconcile that? How can you simply write it off as “wrong” when he entirely abandoned the principles he’s put on a pedestable for?
THIS — is not argument, it’s regurgitated garbage:
And as the person who wrote and produced the most exhaustive documentary ever done on Iraq WMD — I would know:
Seems like that would raise eyebrows on anyone after in the truth — especially someone lauded for following the facts. I defy you to find a single instance of anyone on the Right even attempting to make an argument on the dimensions, material, and quantity of the tubes.
You’ll be lucky to find them mentioned at all.
You think it’s just a coincidence that all the “arguments” on the Right just happen to follow the same pattern (conveniently leaving out the most key evidence presented by Powell)?
That — all by itself, speaks volumes
To anyone who thinks world-altering wars are more important than whining about websites that expose painfully obvious lies, anyway.
“Compared to What?”
Well, I like Sowell and I think he clearly got the Iraq war wrong. No intellectual, not even Sowell, can or should be expected to get things right 100% of the time.
After all your posturing & pushing Sowell as some kind of saint-like Sherlock Holmes — basking in his “National Treasure” narrative and broadcasting his “brilliance” in the mind of a Maverick:
by the way
Where’s his admission of being wrong? If you’re gonna make a living off preaching responsibility & accountability — shouldn’t you lead by example?
So the rules only apply when it’s about the Left? Is that how your precious principles work?