re: #196 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

That’s my argument.

Why do you keep doing that, if you don’t disagree?

How is that your argument? Weren’t you saying that we should use sources ‘closer to home’?

If anyone else wants to use lazy historical references because they’re more convenient, no one is stopping them.

I’m just saying why I’m not doing it.

Why do you call them ‘lazy’?

You seem to agree on every other level, so what’s the issue?

My issues right now are the following:

1. You repeatedly think that those using the analogy want to do so because of the emotional impact. That may be true of some, but for others, it is obviously the historical weight of it, not the emotional one, that’s being referenced.

2. You seem to think Godwin’s law is a logical fallacy.

3. You think that referencing Nazis in order to communicate a reference to genocidal intentions is ‘lazy’.

4. That weird thing you do with your ear.