Arguments, Liberals and the Health Care Debate

This afternoon I stumbled across an excellent article entitled "Argument Writing for Liberals 101" written by Garrett Baldwin. The article discusses blogs, free speech and a recent attack the writer received from a reader:

On Monday, I received my first piece of ‘hate mail’. It was a riveting diatribe exploring the unprogressive complexities of my posting on George Bush and Barack Obama. The writer’s argument exemplified my problem with anonymous writing. The critic failed to grasp any core part of the argument, and instead just attacked my individual personality. You might call that form of argument Rule 12 for Radicals.

The note reads (sic:)

“Your a [complete] idiot. What did you do, steal a bunch of quotes from Rush Limbaugh and tie them together? Your just another racist repug and your pissed that Barrack Obama’s in the White house. Your side had 8 years and Bush destroyed the economy. Just leave the (sic:) distict of Columbia. No one wants you here. CONSERVATISM IS DEAD GET OVER IT!!!”

Mr Baldwin then proceeds to assist the writer with recommendations on how they might improve their attack on his position. He begins with Grammar:

Part One: Megan’s Basics

1) Spelling: Barack Obama only has one ‘R’ in his name, and you have probably written, read and screamed his name in adulation at least 30 times a day since mid-2007. The fact that you are unable to remember this spelling is troubling. Maybe it was because you took the ‘R’ out of District (sic: distict of Columbia) and gave it to your president’s name. No worries, you’re just maintaining the Joe the Plumber spirit, right? Spread the letters around.

2) You’re and Your: I cannot even remember how far back I would have to go to remember when I learned this basic rule of grammar. Probably at a time when I was unaware there was a President outside of George Washington, and my principal dressed up as Christopher Columbus on Columbus Day. That was in the mid- to late-1980s. Even if you forget this rule, Megan, you own a machine that has a grammar checking device. You typed that attack, yet you seemed incapable of hitting F7.

3) Spelling Numbers: In long form writing, spell numbers zero to nine. After 10, you may use numerals.

4) Commas: Commas are needed before every use of the word ‘and’ in your statement. Each of your clauses has a noun and a verb, which means that each can stand on its own.

He then goes on to discuss how to present ones thesis and how to support it thoroughly. In addition, he uses the health care debate to demonstrate how to do it well. All while attempting to assist his critic while maintaining a self deprecating tone.

Rebut the central argument of the opposition

This is my favorite paragraph, because you get to attack the other person’s argument… not the person, which is what the liberal would prefer. All you need is some logic, and their arguments fall apart.

In this paragraph, I would take a swing at Obama and Pelosi’s reasons for trying to railroad through this bill. Right away, I might say, “Pelosi argues that this reform is essential because she claims that she has the support of the American people, and there is an immediate need to insure 46 million people without proper care options.”
So I attack, with a great big, “HOWEVER”, Pelosi’s argument is flawed because…

She does not have support of Americans as the polling data continues to plummet and Americans are opposed to Congress’ actions since January.’ Americans who favor this plan trail 46 to 49 percent, according to polls released today. I would cite this data.

Furthermore, I could attack her almost arbitrary figure of ‘46 million uninsured’ who do not have access to healthcare, a fact which the Heritage Foundation has systematically proven to include 12 million illegal immigrants who do not pay taxes, nearly 10 million people who can afford healthcare, but refuse to purchase it, and millions more who have enrollment options but utilize Medicare and Medicaid.

And then there’s the people who are dead but are still being counted.

Just like that, I have seriously damaged Pelosi’s reasons and evidence for passing healthcare so swiftly.

In the Garrett Baldwin is a complete idiot, argument, Megan does not rebut anything I wrote in my article about Bush and Obama’s deficit spending. But, she could try to make some sort of logical argument that Garrett claims to not be a complete idiot, however... Then she would attack my claim with further evidence that might damage my argument, thus making me look foolish.

She fails to do any of these things. Instead she demands that I should leave the (sic: ) ‘distict of Columbia’, which I am assuming is a band.

This is a must read article. Read the entire article here.

---