Letters to the Editor
-
Rebecca - Your Dishonesty Verges on the Rovian
In your response to the fury generated by your article you dodge any responsibility for your intentionally sensationalistic language, saying "At no point do I claim that voting for Obama means you're sexist."
Perhaps you didn't use those words, but you compared male Obama voters with sinister violent sexist cultists. Here's a sample:
"there is something dark and funky, and probably not so female-friendly, running below the frantic fanaticism of their Obama-loving compatriots."
"man who made a series of legitimate complaints about Clinton's policies before adding that when he hears the senator's voice, he's overcome by an urge to punch her in the face"
"young men get glassy eyes and start spitting out vague things about how Barack Obama is going to save humanity. Really, have you seen their eyes? It's this faraway look. It's scary."
Rebecca, how is that NOT implying these men are something ugly and deranged?
Then you have to admit: "7. Everyone who notes that this piece is anectdotal is absolutely correct, and that criticism is totally fair and on-target."
Rebecca, this article begins with a third person tone of journalistic authority, implying your assertion had the weight of some type of concrete reporting.
Now you admit it's personal impressions and a self serving selection of quotes and stories, fitting the facts around the conclusion.
I don't mind opinions or personal impressions when they're presented as such, but that's not what you did.
You made a sensationalistic assertion about a major ugly trend which is in reality mostly speculation and conjecture with little reporting done which might question the thesis.
How is this any better than the closed minded behavior of the men you claim to describe? It's as as much a bad faith argument as "Liberal Fascism". Just like Jonah Goldberg, when someone calls you on your truthiness you dodge responsiblity for your actions and make excuses.