I have created a new category called “Stink Bomb”.
A Stink Bomb is an ugly, thoughtless accusation thrown out in an argument, typically ad hominem, whose purpose is to short-circuit any thoughtful discussion – really, to precipitate the avoidance of any further rational discussion that might be happening or about to happen. “Racist” is probably the top one. “Fascist” and “Nazi” are two other common examples. “Shill”, with no supporting evidence. “Uncle Tom”. It is the intellectual equivalent of throwing a stink bomb into the middle of the round table. It’s a non-sequitur. Nobody wants to touch it. And suddenly everyone wants to leave.
Let me give you an example.
Bring up the 10th Amendment and the concept of State’s Rights when discussing the proper role and scope of the Federal Government, and try to have a rational conversation about it, citing the Constitution, Federalist Papers, and other founding-era documentation.
“Jim Crow Laws! Racist!”
End of discussion.
It’s pretty tiresome being compared (and not so subtly equated to) 19th Century Democrats and their attempted uses of that argument to argue unequal protection under the law based on race. What they were attempting to justify using the concept was dead wrong … but the concept itself … I mean … what do they think the 10th Amendment means, anyway?
Oops. I mentioned it again. Here it comes ….
And they allllll moved away from me on the Group W bench.
And then I said, “but I was gonna talk about marijuana laws”
And they all came back, shook my hand, and we had a great time on the bench, talkin about crime, mother stabbing, father raping, all kinds of groovy things that we was talking about on the bench.
Hypocrites. (<===and that is NOT a stink bomb, because I backed it up with a solid example)Loading Likes...