- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Somewhere, in a discussion of the twisted musings of a right wing nut job I have been called 'Lazy and Cowardly'. I take offense and need to respond politely. The point I make here is that we validate right wing hysteria... simply by discussing it. When we make intellectual arguments to counter idiotic assertions by talking point spouting mouthpieces, we elevate them and diminish ourselves. The Coultergeist's ravings about 'Liberals' need to be countered aggressively, pointedly and factually. But, the strength of the argument lies in arguing substance, not style. If she is a plagarist, who cares? If she is a liar, a self promoter, and a venomous spewer of invention... call her out. The more we, as Progressives allow the dialogue to be dominated by discussions of plagarism, and ignore discussions of fact and ideology, the weaker our argument is. In essence, a discussion of plagarism by Ann Coulter is a Red Herring which validates her message by diminishing dispute. Surely, she did copy text. Intellectual laziness has taken her far, so why stop now? The point I make here is that Progressive dissent validates her by Headlining her obvious intellectual sloth.
Never Lazy, Proud of my Convictions, and Shouting from the Rooftops...
Buffalo Bill
