Sunday, April 24, 2011

Synova Attacks (She's Never Done That Before)

My friend, Synova, challenges me on Althouse:

At what point, Crack, are we supposed to enforce "good" on anyone?

Now - try it now - it's not like you've tried it before. You never know - things just might change for the better.

What do you want us to do about crappy Brittney Spears music?

Ignore it. As Frank Zappa reminded Tipper Gore's PMRC, there's other music. You don't have to do this.

What do you want us to do about silly 20 year old boys?

Do what my friends and I did with one today: educate him.

Perhaps we can appoint a committee to approve music?

That would be communism.

Do you think that your music would get approved?

Hell no, I destroy communism.

We could approve books, too.

Funny you should say that while misreading me.

Do away with something as vacuous as a NASCAR romance.

What? You got a problem with NASCAR? Don't put it on me.

We could have a committee to approve books and do away with all the outright damaging new age self-help crap.

I'll settle for prosecutions for fraud, and other related crimes, thank you.

Maybe the committee will enforce good Christian morality in everything.

I don't know where you got this committee thing, or where you're going with it, but I'm glad it's your idea and not mine.

Instead of reporting a blog the citizens don't like so it gets flagged, maybe it will get shut down instead.

This blog has been taken down twice, and now flagged as indecent, so you don't think getting it shut down isn't already the intent?

We could pass laws against fast food, since fast food is bad for the masses, the poor and minorities who need protection, and if it's illegal maybe they'll eat more vegetables. Sound like a plan?

If you're a liberal.

Do you just want us to agree that Brittney Spears sucks? Yes, she sucks.

A little louder, please.

But at this point you sound a little bit like the whiners who complained that Joe the Plumber got a slice of the finite publishing resources that someone else deserved... someone with the right opinions instead of the wrong ones... someone worthy.

I "sound a little bit like" that? That's probably because you spent this entire post putting your words and viewpoint in my mouth. The only thing you said that sounded even remotely like me is "Brittney Spears sucks". I never asked or demanded a committee for anything.

One of the biggest problems I have talking to people, online, is their assumption they can read my mind, sort my thoughts, or interpret my meaning, without asking me for clarification. Setting up a bunch of straw men and then knocking them down yourself is your and Obama's tactic, not mine, so it doesn't surprise me you're confused as to where I'm coming from:

Like Obama, you don't care where I, or anyone else, is coming from or you would've asked and not gona on and on, charging me with this made up committee nonsense.

That, too, is a much too common problem today.

But not as common as thinking such behavior constitutes fair play, good citizenship, or debate. Your whole line of attack strikes me as silly. Too silly for me to seriously reply to it. I will say this much, though:

Maybe if we did start listening to people who are worthy - you know, not those who will claim "He is risen" while knowing anyone who says that is committing a fraud - we might be better off.

Way, waaay, better off.

1 comment:

  1. Maybe I didn't understand what you were trying to say. It's not always easy. If you don't think what I said applied then ignore it.

    Or try to explain why people can't have fun when you think they should be grown up and serious. Is it the timing, or do you really think that everyone should be sober all of the time?

    And I don't think that people are telling you to lighten up because they disagree about the things you think are serious so much as because, this is my reason at least, if a person burns themselves out they can't do anything at all. There is too much out there and at some point you have to protect yourself.

    It's entirely possible that I, for example, have a lower threshold of tolerance than you do or you have a higher point where you can still function than I do. So maybe I don't measure up. And if you can be "on" all of the time without making yourself crazy, then great.

    Most of us can't. Or we've tried in the past and become overwhelmed and had to stop.

    Sometimes I do look the other way. Some days I don't look at all. Some days I can't look because I can hardly deal with what's right in front of me and borrowing more isn't an option. But I'm not putting myself in the place I was in 20 years ago when I had to stop, full stop, for years and try to learn to get less upset and find that distance. It's better now because now I can pay attention and try to influence the little part of the world that I can influence, to try to push it a little bit toward what is right.

    I sent in my application for UNM last week and I'm terrified. I'm terrified because when I was 20 I felt invincible and the fussy adults complaining about universities were fussy. You want to talk about the rot in the heart of our society? My tolerance for stupid is almost as low as yours is, and if it was only stupidity that didn't hurt anyone it would be different. But it's not.

    I'm not confrontational in person. I don't know if I can learn to be. I'm already borrowing stress ahead of time. Stupid of me to borrow trouble.

    But just now, I just can't find it in myself to be anything but happy about some young people goofing off.