Joe Wilson expressed his disapproval about the fact that the mixed-race daughter of Strom Thurmond decided to go public about it. I believe the word he used was "unseemly".
That seems to lend more weight to the implication that Mr. Wilson holds views that could be reasonably considered prejudiced, if not bigoted.
Well, my point was that the sentence (to which you objected) strengthened the hypothesis that Mr. Wilson associates with bigots because he is a bigot himself.
[Joe Wilson] has close ties and a 100% approval rating from the Family Research Council, an evangelical organization headed by Tony Perkins, a former politician who has worked with David Duke of the KKK and spoken before the Council of Conservative Citizens, a major white supremacist organization that battled desegregation.
When I read that sentence, "evangelical" is not the word that sticks out. Nor do I connote to it the overtones of some of the other terms that do catch my eye. I believe your objection to the sentence as it is structured has missed the main point and instead targets something rather tangential.
Well, my point was that the sentence (to which you objected) strengthened the hypothesis that Mr. Wilson associates with bigots because he is a bigot himself.
I disagree. Quite to the contrary, the attempt to use Guilt By Association undermines the author's credibility. They would have a stronger argument if they omitted such straw-grasping, and focused on JW's own words and deeds.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
That seems to lend more weight to the implication that Mr. Wilson holds views that could be reasonably considered prejudiced, if not bigoted.
no subject
no subject
[Joe Wilson] has close ties and a 100% approval rating from the Family Research Council, an evangelical organization headed by Tony Perkins, a former politician who has worked with David Duke of the KKK and spoken before the Council of Conservative Citizens, a major white supremacist organization that battled desegregation.
When I read that sentence, "evangelical" is not the word that sticks out. Nor do I connote to it the overtones of some of the other terms that do catch my eye. I believe your objection to the sentence as it is structured has missed the main point and instead targets something rather tangential.
no subject
I disagree. Quite to the contrary, the attempt to use Guilt By Association undermines the author's credibility. They would have a stronger argument if they omitted such straw-grasping, and focused on JW's own words and deeds.