You all remember SUZANNE’s catastrophically clueless statement here:
That is why I don't talk a lot about abortion with other people.
Now guess how many fetus-fetishist-related posts she’s written on her abyss of a blog since then. Nine. That’s right – nine. And each one is more hysterically alarmist than the one before. I think someone needs a hobby. Oh wait, that is her hobby.
Eewwwww.
7 comments:
Well, technically she's correct. She doesn't talk about abortion with other people. She talks at them, over them and despite them. But even the word talk is suspect here, she doesn't so much talk as she shrieks, hectors, wails and whinnies. And let's face it, other people are really secondary to Suzie all-caps prating and barking. I'm quite sure the endless screeching lecture continues long after any sentient creature has quit the vicinity.
Either that, or she doesn't consider bloggers to be other people.
Not knowing the whole context here, I don't see the contradition in her statement. I take this to mean that she doesn't talk about abortion with other people in person. Instead, she prefers the comfort of the blogosphere where her ideas can be put down on a page, rather than shouted at on a public, in-person stage.
James, she's on your NP blogroll, but you don't know her context? Well, that explains why she's on the NP blogroll, I guess. She is anything but non-partisan.
She's also spawning. New hobby, I guess, since the old one doesn't seem to win her any points/converts/traffic/support.
I'm only responding to Lulu's disbelief about Suzanne's comment, "That is why I don't talk a lot about abortion with other people" and how she doesn't see a contradition between that and the blog posts that follow. I'm only saying that one could probably argue that the two don't contradict, and that she's using the anonymity of her blog to blog things she doesn't speak about in public. Make of that what you will. As Lulu sagely notes, "that is her hobby."
In terms of context, what I don't know is the content of those blog posts that Lulu is talking about. If Suzanne is, say, blogging about her experiences of talking about abortion with other people, then my point is incorrect. Clear?
I think you're making this more complicated than it needs to be, James. My point is that while SUZANNE says she doesn't talk about abortion much ... the reality is that it's pretty much all she talks about.
You know, since she's up the duff, it might be a good idea to lay off ol' SUZANNE.
To be fair, she did state expressly that "that is what blogs are for." When criticizing a persons words, you should give them the most generous interpretation compatible with their stated beliefs. With conservatives, this usually still leaves them painted into a corner with a pointy hat on their head, but in this case you are intentionally disregarding her obvious intentions to attack a straw man.
She claims, as noted above, that she does not talk about abortion in person, but prefers to post about it on her blog. Now, this doesn't make her any less wrong, any less stupid, or any less dishonest in her postings. What it does do is make it disingenuous for you to call her a liar because she posts on her blog about abortion.
Really, conservatives are wrong enough, stupid enough, and dishonest enough that you don't need to cheat, so why do it?
Post a Comment