KingPin, you seem to honestly believe he was being sarcastic, witty, or anything other than genuine:
it was an exaggeration... yet you seem to want to take it literally, as if it was a personal attack.
His lack of response to you could be due to a variety of reasons... 1) He's trying to stay on topic, 2) he isn't going to let you call the shots around here, 3) he's trying to see how riled up you'll get, and/or 4) he wasn't being literal when he said it.
Either way, it is not the serious accusation that republicans are guilty of conspiracy to commit mass murder that you've been making it out to be. You're blowing it way out of proportion.
As to the other link concerning the f-word... well, granted, an accusation of mass murder is more serious, but we can see that he never really did make that accusation.
Technically, his argument is better, since you're blatantly breaking a profanity rule. Your argument is shaky, since his controversial quote contained your own words... and was a sarcastic comment... not breaking any rules.
Okay, clearly from his posts, he doesn't think "REPUBLICANS ARE GUILTY OF ATTEMPTED MASS MURDER" (you're starting to sound like a drama queen). I don't think he needs to defend or retract that statement, since he never really made it.
He's avoiding the issue because it's ridiculous... fabricated... twisted... incorrect.
What you are asking him to do is unfair... you want him to defend a statement he didn't make. By refusing to do so, he's hardly a coward... he's just not acknowledging your rant, or giving it any validity.
His words about the republican party wanting to kill the elderly was a word for word replica of one of your posts... only with sarcasm, to show that he didn't feel that way. In his later post, he clarified it by saying "hurt the elderly" instead of the more severe "kill the elderly".
So there really is no " baseless and repellent accusation that the Republican party wants to cause the deaths of senior citizens" as you say. So how could I be upset with Like someone to blame? How could I be mad at him for comments he didn't make?
You know, right now, the ball is in your court. I've tried to show you that that accusation never happened. If such a statement was made, then it would not be acceptable. But that statement HAS NOT been made.
Oh, really?
I submit that he was not being sarcastic, that he was INDEED accusing the Republicans of plotting mass murder. Let's look more closely at what he said:
1) The
original statement:
Geez, now that you mention it...I do indeed remember Republicans WANTING to starve kids, kill the elderly, and destroy the environment. Well, practice does make perfect...so eventually they might accomplish this. So much for compassionate conservatism...
I agree with you that, on its own, the post COULD be interpreted as sarcastic. I said nearly as much: "I hope I'm missing the sarcasm, irony, and wit in this post - because it is galling (though not that surprising) to believe that a liberal in this forum would ACTUALLY believe that the GOP wants dead senior citizens and dirty air and water."
But even on its own, it looks like it was more likely to be taken literally, since he tries to USE the accusation to further debunk the myth of the "compassionate conservative," a point he made earlier in the same thread:
Donahue devoted his entire show to discussing the Patriot Act...and hands down his right wing guest Mr. May of some conservative public interest group whose only goal is to strip us of our civil liberties and turn America into a quasi police state was aggressive, nasty and relentless as he berated everyone from a civil liberties attorney to a poor middle aged Muslim woman whose husband has been illegally detained since October...with no charges brought against him...other than being Muslim. Mr. May "personally attacked" the civil liberties attorney and insulted this innocent Middle Eastern woman on national TV. He showed an inability to debate without making it personal...that is what burns me. It was compassionate conservatism at it's best.
It is clear that he believes "compassionate conservatism" is a fraud. It is also clear that he was using the accusation of "starving kids, killing the elderly," etc. to confirm that the phrase a fraud. He wouldn't have done that if he was being sarcastic.
And ALL of this from the first quote alone.
2) The
second statement:
In closing, I would only add that many examples exist of Republican efforts to destroy the environment, starve kids, and hurt the elderly...I'm just not going to take the time to spell them out for you, well, ok...maybe just one for the road.......ANWAR.
You focus on the fact that he changed "kill the elderly" to "hurt the elderly." Truthfully, that is important; but it could just mean that he doesn't have "many examples" of mass murder, just mass harm.
First, while better, the accusation isn't MUCH better. If Republicans really DO make "efforts to...hurt the elderly," that's still pretty evil. If they DON'T, the accusation is still quite offensive.
MORE IMPORTANTLY, you miss the entire point of this second comment: it CONFIRMS that he was being serious with the first comment. He DOES believe that the Republicans want to do all these nasty things, and he offers ANWR as evidence.
Above ALL this, he doesn't make any effort to correct himself.
If I
sarcastically accused the Democrats of WANTING to kill/hurt the elderly, and if another forum member mistook that as me being serious, I would make EVERY effort to correct him - to explain that I was being sarcastic. There isn't a single hint of that from this guy.
By itself, the lack of a correction means little. Combined with the facts that Statement #1 appears to be serious and Statement #2 CONFIRMS the original as serious, it leads me to conclude that HE WASN'T BEING SARCASTIC.
If I'm wrong, I'll eat crow. If "like Someone to Blame" retracts his statement as being a sarcastic quip that I misunderstood as literal, GREAT.
But it looks like I'm right on this.
You concluded with the following:
It seems like you will only be satisfied if Mr/Mrs. Like someone to blame publicly apologizes for saying (and truly meaning) that "republicans are guilty of attempted mass murder of senior citizens"... I don't think it's fair to ask them to do that... to retract a statement that wasn't made. Maybe he should apologize for saying that Republicans want to hurt the elderly... those were his words.
And bottom line, I don't think you should leave over this. Political discussions are not worth this. I think you're a bigger man than that. If someone disagrees with your political party (and not you indirectly), or even slanders your party, or even slanders you personally, I would think you would just accept that the person is wrong and forget about it. It seems like your more offended by his attack on Republicans than you are by other people's attacks on you personally, or their attacks on Christianity.
I will be satisfied by the following:
1) A statement from "Like Someone to Blame" that I misunderstood what was said, that he was in fact being sarcastic.
2) A statement from LSTB that he has no proof to back up his belief - that it is in fact baseless.
3) LEGITIMATE and OVERWHELMING evidence that an accusation this offensive is actually rooted in truth. What must be shown is this: not only that Republican policies would harm the eldery, the environment, and children, but that
such harm is the DESIRED EFFECT from such policies. (I doubt that such evidence exists.)
4) Assurances from the moderators that accusations this offensive - particularly those made in earnest - will not be tolerated without legitimate evidence.
None of this is too unreasonable. And I have no use for an environment where this IS considered unreasonable.
Finally, I'm particularly offended by this accusation more than most attacks against me or my faith because there is no attempt to address my indignation at the accusation.
Most of the misunderstandings here are typically worked out through the system that LSTB is resisting: someone says something controversial, a second person calls him on it, and the first person typically tries to provide evidence or admits a mistake.
LSTB is doing neither.
So again, I call on "Like Someone to Blame" to either retract the statement (as being sarcastic - or whatever) or to start defending.