Once again, lying about a virtuous woman is not on the same moral plane as making appropriate remarks about a depraved woman.
Right. Fluke should make sex tapes. Your version of "appropriate?" I guess you are right. It's not hypocrisy, it's swinishness. Palin would not approve of such vulgar public jokes about misguided left wing students. 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."
But although you may be a very fine person in other respects, your approval of those particular jokes is selectively boorish (not hypocritical, because you believe they are "appropriate"). 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.
Fluke is my enemy too. I doubt if I could stand to be around her. But I don't know her really. For all I know, she doesn't need birth control because she doesn't like men.
The vast majority of people who make false accusations of hypocrisy based on an erroneous definition of the concept are leftists.
Any evidence to back up that claim? 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."
I tried first to explain why it’s not hypocrisy to agree that a slut is a slut while holding that a virtuous woman is a virtuous woman, then I expressed my judgment that, based on what you say and how you say it, you are not a conservative, but an agent provocateur.
And based on what you say with your rickity "arguments," you sound like you use such charges against conservatives who disagree with you.
It is long past time for decent people to wake up and realize that when dealing with scumbags, civility is nothing but a self-imposed handicap.
Extreme, timid civility can be a handicap, but beware lest we become what we say we hate.
If it’s true, say it. If it’s a lie, call it a lie. No hypocrisy is involved.
OK, you lied about me. Maybe you can't help it.
“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.