Friday, December 30, 2011

Post of the Moment: How to Prove Bigotry

If I wanted to prove Ron Paul is a bigot, I'd work hard at finding a person who could testify honestly to the bigoted ways in which Ron Paul treated him or her.

And if I was unable to find such a person, then I would have two choices.

I could conclude that Ron Paul isn't a bigot.

Or I could hold fast to my prejudice against Ron Paul, and look for ways to assassinate his character by such devices as guilt-by-association.

Constructive Destruction: How to prove bigotry

Guilt-by-association is one of the weapons used by people who have little to no evidence of personal guilt on the part of the accused. Without evidence of the accused's malicious or otherwise wrongful acts or intent, the accuser is left with character assassination in service of the proof burden.


...the tactics used by a canvasser or "outreach" person on behalf of any Congresscritter are not conclusive evidence that the Critter clearly endorses the tactics or language used.

At most they are evidence that the Critter hired and used a person who employs such tactics or language.

And I don't think anyone who's run a business, or has held a supervisory role in an organization, would rush to agree that every employee or underling is without exception a mere conduit of the business owner or supervisor.

I'll break that down more simply:

In a team sport such as American Soccer (elsewhere on Earth = "football"), when a player fouls an opponent and earns a yellow card, is it fair to assume that player's coach instructed the foul, ordered its occurrence, mandated its execution?

Or is it more fair to recognize independent agency on the foul-committing player's part?

Think about that one before you go assuming Ron Paul is a "bigot" or "racist" by dint of what an outreach person did.

1 comment:

  1. Typical. It's everyone's fault BUT the man whose name was on the newsletters, right?

    Considering who Paul has "ghostwriting" for him (and we all know he wrote some of those incendiary comments), I don't see why I should trust his judgment for delegating positions in his cabinet or within the Federal government.

    Considering the enormous amount of guilt-by-association necessary to support the conspiracy theories of not only Paul, but Paul's supporters and this very site... I found this whole whine-fest a laugh riot. You'll all be back to where you're most comfortable when Paul is retired and you can go back to supporting no one and criticizing everyone.


If the post you are commenting on is more than 30 days old, your comment will have to await approval before being published. Rest assured, however, that as long as it is not spam, it will be published in due time.

Related Posts with Thumbnails