It's like hunting cows with an Uzi...

The posting that follows is from today's "Sioux City Journal" Letters to the Editor section (6/16/05). Pity poor Paul Guggenheimer for having to put up with his conservative counterpart week after week! Anyway, I do sometimes wonder if the Rights' general inarticulateness derives from the essential hallowness of the basic tenets of modern Conservatism, or simply results from a mixture of laziness and sheer hubris. Feel free to weigh in on this issue!

"When the Journal first introduced its “Left vs. Right” column, I was excited. After all, nothing beats spirited debates on important topics. Also, being forced to confront a well-reasoned opposing viewpoint forces one to think about and refine one’s own ideas.

Unfortunately, we got Michael McNeil representing the “Right.” I do not mind so much the utter predictability of his positions. I do wish Mr. McNeil would at least follow the conventional standards of logical argumentation.

This week’s “debate” over Guantanamo was typical. Rather than argue the relative merits of Guantanamo itself, Mr. McNeil avoided the issue almost entirely and instead immediately employed a logical fallacy, diverting the reader’s attention with irrelevant attacks on the alleged motives of Guantanamo’s critics. Moreover, he unfairly used solitary quotes taken out of context (from unbiased sources, really?) to dismiss both Carter and Amnesty International out of hand, without even the courtesy of referencing their actual statements. Finally, he erroneously implied that Amnesty International has critiqued the human rights record of the U.S. but not those of North Korea, China and Cuba, which is patently false should one actually read Amnesty’s readily-available reports on those countries.

Are Mr. McNeil’s argumentative skills so lacking, or does he not trust his readers’ ability to understand and appreciate a well-reasoned, analytical essay? Does he not recognize that name calling and snide remarks are merely entertaining, and not truly informative? Perhaps the Journal should consider finding a more responsible and competent local pundit on the “Right.”"

Peace!
Historian