In an assessment of Stephane Dion’s call for aid to help minority’s deal with hate crimes, Jarrett Plonka does a find job dismantling the argument and pointing out numerous flaws with various Liberal’s positions on this matter. But what gave me a smile was his reply to a comment from Stephane Dion’s Blog Campaign Co-Chair, Rob Edger.
Rob Edger: What’s your alternative?
Jarrett: Basically, either treat all these so-called “hate crimes” as leniently as we do with “normal crimes,” or treat all “normal crimes” with the fire and brimstone with which we appear to want to treat “hate crimes”.
Jarrett is wise beyond his years and disarms the question quite handily. He goes on:
I know which one I’d choose in an instant. The decision is harder for the Cotlerites to whom I referred, who have to balance their desire to have that progressive society while reconciling some of the internal contradictions (including a few that I outlined) that notion presents.
I know which one I would choose too Jarrett.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Wow thats just crazy, if I ever saw a smackdwn man, this is it. Speechless just speecless at the depth of him.
ha
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Wouldn’t a “smackdown” be if I were making an argument, and then he made some counterargument which was much better? In this case he gave a straightforward answer to my question, which was asked only out of curiosity – I wasn’t advancing an argument at all.
Political discussion doesn’t have to be the “Crossfire” method of talking points and arguing. Sometimes, like in this case, people can just seek to better understand another’s viewpoint.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Rob, Republicans ask Democrats what their Iraq exit strategy is because they know there is no answer coming. Your question, to me, appeared to be in the same style.
Jarrett offered a couple of chances for someone to counter his thought process and provided four clear points, of which at least two, if not all, were a clear dismantling of your leader’s (and thus your Party’s) view on this subject.
His response to your question not only continued his surgery, but it clearly portrayed the fact that the LPC is now sucking AND blowing when it comes to getting tough on crime.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
p.s Rob. For you, I added to the post title “(And Paints Another Face On Stephane Dion)”. Jarrett’s post was good enough to get both of you.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Wow, er, um…
What do I say?
Thanks?
I’m flattered. Honestly.
Also, kudos to Rob for dealing with it like an adult.