Okay, I admit that calling simon a nut-job was not nice of me. I will also admit that I haven't seen the original conversation referenced above about whether obama is the antichrist, but it sounds like name-calling to me if I've ever seen it. And, for clarity, the reason I called simon a nut-job (meaning crazy) is that he said he doesn't care whether a potential president is the "antichrist" or not. I would care about something like that. ;)
Let me also promise you that I love american ideological diversity. And before my post has people sure as the light of day that I'm a liberal democrat, I would like to make it clear that I'm actually registered as independent. For me, it's about supporting whatever candidate I think is right for the job, be he or she republican, democrat or something else.
I do have a problem with the story, which is AWFUL. I think it has to be the worst thing I've ever seen outside of an email forward. It takes a complex situation and simplifies it to smithereens, until, in my opinion, it no longer relates to real issues. In fact, in my opinion, the story in my post is just like it: completely manipulative.
It's total propaganda, and there are so many attacks in it against so many people, ideas and institutions that it's hard to keep up. It pretends to be an honest little story, and then it's chockablock with large and little jabs against liberal democrats and anything associated with them. Let's do a little dissecting to see what I mean.
These were especially obnoxious lines:
"Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his."
"The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father."
Here are some other descriptions of the daughter (aka liberal democrat):
"deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed"
"she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire"
"she answered rather haughtily"
"angrily fired back"
And how is the father described (aka conservative republican)?
Wise, winking, gentle, and smiling.
It also implies that the poor are poor because all they do is party and drink. Let's look at this one: "'Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over.'" is that what the poor in america are all busy doing? Because I thought a lot of them were working their tails off for minimum wage that still won't pay their bills. Also, I don't believe that the children of the poor are out partying and getting drunk, do you? So why is that being implied in the story?
I know what parables and allegories are. But let's not put this in the same category as plato's description of the cave. What was posted is nothing more than a wolf of spin in sheep's clothing.
