I have been reborn and I am now a strong warrior woman. These are my stories.
Published on July 31, 2008 By Boudica In Politics

One of my digg friends (my online friends are legion) submitted this and I thought it was really on point and interesting so I thought I would share it with my JU friends.

Just because you know someone's party affiliation does not mean that you KNOW them.  You can't assume that because someone is Republican that they hate nature and want to cover the planet with blacktop, have a gameshow host hairdo and wish they could personally waterboard suspected terrorists.  You also cannot assume that every Democrat is a wears birkenstocks, cares more about caribou than gas prices and are all godless atheists. 

Here's the thing there are Democrats who are Christians, actually there are many of them.  There are Republicans who love nature.  They love it so much that they want to dress in fatigues and go kill some of it whenever they get a chance - lol.  There are Democrats who wear wingtips.  Okay, I may have never personally seen this but I believe it exists just as much as I believe in Big Foot and the Lochness Monster. 

You get my point, even if we choose one party affiliation over another, we don't all fit into the neat little box of Democrat or Republican. 


Comments
on Jul 31, 2008
That is very true and everyone should take some note of this. My guess is that your friend noticed this while listening to one pundit or another (like Hannity, O'Reily, or any number of liberal pundits) and this is where everyone should learn something. When you are dealing with a debator, primarily the pundits, when they are debating they will do everything in their power to create what is known as a strawman arguments. This is where they will draw some connection between you and some unreasonable extreme like all liberals are peacenick hippies that are godless atheists or that all republicans are gun loving religious zealots. This allows the debator to attack the "strawman" rather than their direct opponent because it is easier to attack and discredit the "strawman". It is unfortunately a very effective debating tool and one used all too often. But if people can analyse a debate critically then they will be able to see the truth out of the situation rather than buying into the various strawman arguments.
on Jul 31, 2008
But do I want to know you?
on Jul 31, 2008

It is unfortunately a very effective debating tool and one used all too often. But if people can analyse a debate critically then they will be able to see the truth out of the situation rather than buying into the various strawman arguments.
 

I didn't even touch on the whole you're not REALLY a Republican or you're not REALLY a Democrat Rino and Dino arguments.  All you have to do is disagree with one of the commonly held beliefs and you're out of the club.

But do I want to know you?
do iwant to know you?

on Aug 16, 2008
When I was a youngster I wore good ole Buster Brown shoes; now that I'm eighty i go barefoot most of the time. Still a Democrat--well, a New Dealer actually.  
on Aug 16, 2008
Whether someone is a democrat or a republican makes it much more/less likely that they will believe in certain policies, and be against others. For example a republican is more likely to be in favour of the death penalty than a democrat, and a democrat more likely to be in favour of increasing (access to) abortions than a republican. You shouldn't assume that likelihood is near-certainty, but it can be used as a preliminary guide, and in particular to support other information that might suggest the same.
Meta
Views
» 77
Comments
» 5
Category
Sponsored Links