“I admit I used “hypocrisy” in an informal way.”
No, you used it incorrectly.
“However, the standard definition makes it very difficult to use correctly, since in many cases one would have to read minds to determine whether the inconsistency was intentionally deceitful.”
There are ways to determine that without having to read minds. In any case, there is no excuse for using the term incorrectly.
“Fluke should make sex tapes.”
You just acknowledged that it was a joke.
“It’s not hypocrisy, it’s swinishness.”
There you cross a line. You have lost your standing to lecture on civility.
“Palin would not approve of such vulgar public jokes about misguided left wing students.”
You a good friend of hers, are you?
“She knows what it feel like to be the object of cruel remarks that pretend to be “jokes,” so it would be hypocritical for her to claim they were “appropriate.”
The problem with you and the word “hypocritical” is that you simply don’t understand the concept. I know that you think you do, but you don’t. Once again, slut-joke about virtuous woman, malicious lie. Slut-joke about slut, appropriate.
“your approval of those particular jokes is selectively boorish”
Naughty, naughty. You have no standing to comment on others’ manners.
“Somehow you have the ability to recognize that some left-wing comments about Palin are inappropriate, but do not possess that ability when applied to political enemies.”
It should be pointed out at this juncture that, while I understand the arguments you are making, you do not understand the arguments I am making. I know that you think you do, but you don’t.
Some years back a story circulated that made Hanoi Jane Fonda look very bad. When it emerged that the story was false, all of us here immediately undertook never to repeat it again—because it was not true.
The left-wing comments about Palin are inappropriate because they are false, not because they are leveled at someone I like. Rush’s jokes about Fluke are appropriate because they are grounded in truth, not because they are leveled at someone I dislike.
“Any evidence to back up that claim (that the vast majority of people who make false accusations of hypocrisy based on an erroneous definition of the concept of hypocrisy are leftists.)?”
Decades of observation and experience.
“And even if that were true, your “logic” is like saying that since you have a pet, it must be a dog. That would be a guess, not “judgment.”
Buncombe. It is not an exercise in deduction using logic; it is an observation.
“And based on what you say with your rickity “arguments,” you sound like you use such charges against conservatives who disagree with you.”
No, I don’t sound like that at all. I sound like someone who, when he encounters someone who argues like a leftist in favor of leftist positions, hypothesizes that he is dealing with a leftist.
“OK, you lied about me. Maybe you can’t help it.”
You’ve said that a couple of times, but you haven’t identified the supposed falsehood.
That said, it looks like you don’t understand the concept of lying either—another trait very commonly found on the left.
A lie consists in uttering or otherwise communicating something known to be false, with the intention of deceiving the recipient. Being mistaken—not that I think I am—is not lying.
And, with that, I’m done with this.
Look who's talking. You do not have the character to discern that calling someone vulgar names and saying she should make sex tapes is inappropriate.
You a good friend of hers, are you?
No, but she did not, and will not, claim that Rush's comments were "appropriate," "based in fact," etc. If she did, she would be on your level.
Some years back a story circulated that made Hanoi Jane Fonda look very bad. When it emerged that the story was false, all of us here immediately undertook never to repeat it again—because it was not true.
Maybe there are, or were at one time, some conditions under which you would not condone unjust attacks on such people. But in 2012 you use the term "grounded in truth" to try to justify vile comments.
You just acknowledged that it was a joke.
I assume that's the way Rush was thinking, but he realized later it was not "appropriate." If you think you can use that kind of language in real life, and excuse yourself by saying "joke," (not to mention accusing innocent people) you will have real problems.
Once again, slut-joke about virtuous woman, malicious lie. Slut-joke about slut, appropriate.
Says the person who just told me I have no standing to lecture on civility.
Rush’s jokes about Fluke are appropriate because they are grounded in truth, not because they are leveled at someone I dislike.
The latter appears to be the case, although you may have some mental condition I do not understand. If you actually knew enough about Fluke, there might be some basis in fact, but I even then I would not agree it was "appropriate" to make vulgar comments on the radio.
No, I don’t sound like that at all. I sound like someone who, when he encounters someone who argues like a leftist in favor of leftist positions, hypothesizes that he is dealing with a leftist.
Pure lunacy. And no, you did not just make a "hypothesis." You made that accusation. Don't you have better things to do than make baseless accusations?