PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #41
I would also suggest that we all try to write for clarity and avoid ambiguity. If one has to go on to "explain" what one was trying to say in an earlier post, I think that would tend to indicate that the first post wasn't written well enough to begin with. It's sort of like jokes... if you have to explain the punch line to your audience, the joke probably needed to be reworked before it went into the act in the first place. And that's fine... but trying to defend the poorly written joke and trying instead to put the onus on the audience is just not good form.
In your case, PC... if you had simply said, "oh... I can see how I was unclear. I should have stated that, as a percentage of their total caucuses, republicans were more supportive of the civil rights act than democrats at that time, because, back then, the racists in America were primarily in the democratic party and primarily in the south... unlike today", you would have won accolades from all sides for your forthright honesty instead of the catcalls from the left for your obviously inarticulate and inaccurate statement.
1. It was clear.
"If one has to go on to "explain" what one was trying to say...."
I did no such thing. I merely highlighted your lacuna in the area of the English language.
It may, in fact, reflect the admission standards in our respective alma maters.
2. If you have a problem understanding words in the future, I suggest you avail yourself of a dictionary.
3. "if you had simply said, oh... I can see how I was unclear. I should have stated that, blah blah blah...." has the strong aroma of an excuse.
4. "...you would have won accolades from all sides for your forthright honesty instead of the catcalls from the left..."
By what stretch of imagination have you come up with the bizarre idea that I have any fear...much less of the Left???
As the old saying goes....'One can only judge others by oneself.'
Clearly you haven't seen many of my OP's.