Paulsheviks Attack Sean Hannity

Night of the Ron-Bots?

I generally like and agree with Hannity, but I have to say that he can stifle debate and use very oversimplified arguments and ad hominem attacks.

I'm glad he's on the air and I listen to him, but at times, I really believe he could have better reasoned responses (I agree with most of his basic premises, but think they are undeveloped).

I really believe he could have better reasoned responses (I agree with most of his basic premises, but think they are undeveloped).

Underdeveloped, sort of like his intellect and his ethics.

Unfortunately, it would seem that reasoned, thought out discourse in which actual ideas are exchanged and developed cannot be found on tv or radio, and when it is attempted, someone points out some inane situation like a few supporters being idiots or what have you.

SheikBen wrote:Unfortunately, it would seem that reasoned, thought out discourse in which actual ideas are exchanged and developed cannot be found on tv or radio, and when it is attempted, someone points out some inane situation like a few supporters being idiots or what have you.

Ben,
What would have happened had that been Obama or Huckabee supporters chasing and cursing a radio host--any radio host?

Hi Keli,

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the actions of these people. I'm merely saying that they are irrelevant, just as they would be if they were Obamites (sounds Biblical--didn't Joshua destroy them?) or Huckabites. I like Ron Paul and also concede that he has an unusually high number of followers who are odd ducks. But that says nothing about his ideas or himself.

I'm sensitive to this because, as you are, I believe the Bible to be the Word of God (I realize there's no religion forum here) and that hope is found in the shed blood of Jesus Christ and in Him alone. Now sometimes there are people who purport to believe the above the two principles and yet act the fool, say by visiting prostitutes or what have you. These individuals have no bearing at all on the message, and attempts to use them as such are lame. So my point is that I would like to extend to Dr Paul the same courtesy that I wish others would extend to our faith. (I am FAR from equivalating politics with faith, just mentioning that the same tactics are used in both places, and both for wrong reasons).

A pretty profound post regardless of your motives.

OC,

Profound? A blind squirrel finds a nut!

I fear that we are not developing, as a nation, the ability to distinguish between people who follow a doctrine or a person, and that doctrine or person themselves. Secularists will offer up the Crusades as something that bolsters their low opinion of faith, and people will mention a small number of Paulsevites to reflect negatively on Paul, and that's just doesn't follow.

Now, if a preponderence of Christians throughout history fought in holy wars, or if the preponderence of Paul's supporters were 9/11 truth squads or what have you, then there would be something worth considering.

I should say another problem I have with the present discourse is that I am finding way too much in the debates about mistakes and bad statements made by political opponents, and not enough about honest policy differences that are important enough by themselves, and really ought to show a distinction.

Hillary compared Obama to Bush, for example, which is both patently ridiculous and irrelevant to the differences between them (I'm no friend of Obama, mind you). I'm told that Hillary and Obama's health care plans are a bit different--can't I hear more about THAT and less about personal attacks (or a couple of idiot followers/silly things said 2 years ago/who "supported the surge" when/any other inane issue?)

I'm so with you, Michael. Most of the candidates are far more interested in attacking their competitors than discussing their own ideas and plans it is sickening. The media just swarms over this stuff.

Some of the debate questions have been plain stupid. "How many of you own a gun?" Now that's what Americans need to know about the candidates. They don't have time for discussion on the economy but they sure have time to ask who believes in evolution.