Monday, July 09, 2007

Dear Olaf: About that "debate" thingie ...

Back here (in the first comment), Olaf opened the bidding with a curiously misworded submission for a debate topic:

Just to get things moving, howabout this debate topic:

"Can support for the troops be equated with support for the war?"

Um ... no, Olaf, that's not the question. The proper question is, in fact, "Must support for the troops be equated with support for the war?" Or, conversely, "Is it even possible to profess support for the troops without that support being dishonestly and opportunistically misinterpreted as support for the war?"

Blogging Tory Frank Parker ... what say you? (emphasis probably unnecessary, but let me make it easy for the hard of thinking among you)

Principle over Popularity

This is a tough issue to take a stand on for our party. But I truly hope that Stephen Harper will take a stand, defy these so-called experts and the opposition and extend the mission. We’ve supported the mission since Day1 (as have most Liberals) but unlike the Liberals we have principle. We’ve said we’re behind the troops, and we’ve got to commit to that.

And there you have it -- supporting the troops equals extending the mission, and vice versa, and one potential topic for debate is resolved once and for all, and we can move on.

No, no, don't thank me -- efficient time management is what I'm all about.


Ti-Guy said...

Resolved: Conservatism is a mental illness.

Crabgrass said...

I think we need something with plausible deniability here, ti-guy.

southernquebec said...

....unlike the Liberals we have principle.

Anonymous said...

You know, for someone who wants nothing to do with the debate, you sure are obsessing about it. You obviously want to get involved CC so why don't you eat a little crow and sign yourself up?

Anonymous said...

The topic itself is a logical fallacy -- google for "Logical Fallacies". The resolution presuposes there are only 2 ways to answer the question - instead of a third or multiple other ways. It's called the "False Dilemna" fallacy

Come on... this is ridiculous.

E said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Olaf said...


Good point, we'll take it into consideration. Your constructive criticism is always welcome.