Add new comment

Here I am reading it 3-4 days later... Also note that I don't really watch the news much, I much prefer to gather facts online and try and form an opinion instead of listen to talking heads bluster on any channel... Of course it is hard to find unbiased, non opinion articles online too... sigh, I guess that is just the world we live in, every fact comes with a handful of opinion and spin (anyway, every way, up, down, left, right) it is up to the responsible consumer to weed out the actual facts I guess...
Anyways as to why Dr. D got upset, at least to my read... The original question, while it may have been innocent, was not really about the article at hand, and it is a common flame war starter and / or insult, "Heh, heh, I bet you watch Fox News Too!" and since you have read this blog for a while I am willing to bet you knew Dr. D's answer would be Fox News... Anyway, I will assume that you meant it innocently and not to bait anybody, however it should be noted that the question alone put the conversation on a heightened level of emotion. While I was reading these comments as soon as I read that question my exact thought was, "Ohhhh this is about to get good..." :) Again, not saying you meant to bait anyone, just that it put the initial emotional quotient of the thread at a 6 (out of 10, normal would be 3-4).
And here is where we get to what actually set Dr.D off... In your 3rd post on the thread, the one that you keep asking people to point out where you went wrong you said, "To say that their hosts aren't pandering to a certain crowd is disingenuous." I would be willing to bet that Doc got to the last word in the sentence and didn't even read the rest of the post just started writing his heated reply, which I will say was more strident than it needed to be, but Dr. D was obviously responding emotionally. Why? If one reads this blog for any length of time they will see that Dr. D is all about integrity, honesty, and openness of thought. If you tell Dr. D he is wrong, or stupid, or fat he would laugh it off or engage in debate, but you called out his integrity, you basically called him a liar, and THAT is what ruffled his feathers...
From Merriam-Webster:
dis·in·gen·u·ous adjective \ˌdis-in-ˈjen-yə-wəs, -yü-əs-\
: not truly honest or sincere : giving the false appearance of being honest or sincere
Actually it is even worse... Not only did you call him a liar, but you called him the worst type of liars, you called him a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Anyway, I am sure that is not what you really meant. And in fact this type of thing gets me in trouble all the time as well. I want to win a debate and I want to sound smart (I am smart, and I am sure you are smart as well, I am not calling that into question...) so I use a word that I LIKE, one that sounds good and one that probably has several syllables, and one that holds some weight, but unfortunately is the wrong word and doesn't actually fit the sentence I am meaning to write, but I use it anyways because I like it so much and... boom, it blows up in my face. Anyways, you asked what prompted the reply,and while I am not the Doc, that is what would have set me off...
LR, I like having you around, and we need different and dissenting voices, so don't let a little vim and vigor from Dr. D run you off! :)
Cheers,
OBF