My Mission Statement:

My parents and I don’t exactly see eye-to-eye, politically. That’s probably obvious from the title of this blog. Growing up, it was hard to argue with them. My parents are intelligent people and, as a child, I simply didn’t have the mental juice to present a cogent argument.

As I grew older and my views grew apart from theirs, I struggled to find a way to effectively present them with my view of the issues. The tools available- arguments based primarily on ‘common sense’ and what facts either side could recall off the top of their heads, did not facilitate nuanced discussion. I wrote off political argument as pointless, futile and circular.

Then I started working at Cracked. We have a simple rule there: If you want to make a factual claim, find someone(s) smarter than you who can back that claim up. I apply that same principle to every blog post I write here.

Nothing I write here is made with any hatred or malice towards conservatives or my family or anyone else. I’m just trying to collect facts for use by myself, and anyone else who finds themselves surrounded by opposing viewpoints at family gatherings. These letters are half entertainment and half crib-notes for any argument you may find them helpful in.


14 Responses to My Mission Statement:

  1. Shedlock says:

    This isn’t a place for rhetoric to be met by hard facts, but for a place of logic-weak rhetoric to be met by stronger rhetoric. Argument and persuasion of any kind is rhetorical; and yours is stronger, with a good appeal to logic. Keep it up, but bear in mind rhetoric isn’t a derogatory term šŸ˜‰

    • Dan says:

      I don’t care if what you’re saying is correct or not, you are clearly missing the point of this 4 sentence “About” page. Go away

      • Shedlock says:

        Well sorry about that. I really like your blog and was explaining what I find particularly great about it. Which is it’s appeal to logic in the face of emotional argument, as you say in ‘this 4 sentence “about” page’. But I’ll leave, as you request.

      • Erm, Shedlock. Dan is not me. I’m the author of this blog and I think this is the first time I’ve ever replied to a comment. I don’t want you to feel I’m snuffing you.

    • PDR1987 says:

      There’s no such a thing as ‘logic weak’ rhetoric. Rhetoric, or speaking well, is simply exposing an idea or concept with ability and prose. To present logic and fact as counter points do not require rethoric, since there’s no need to embelish anything. In many ways, and since the beggining of argumentative discussion, there has been a conflict between rhetoric rich discourse and logical thinking and arguing.
      While good rhetoric do not diminish a discourse in any way if it’s backed by facts, without them any rhetoric is disposable.

      • Shedlock says:

        Entire speeches by politicians, or individuals, anyone, can be made without a single appeal to ogic, or ‘logos’. They can instead appeal to your emotions (‘pathos’) or make an appeal which makes their character look good (‘ethos’). It’s about what you’re trying to achieve in the statement; provide info, make yourself look good to the hearer, or make them feel strongly what you feel. Every argument makes use of all three to an extent, but the popularly consumed media currently focus on huge appeals to pathos. Anyway, I’m not going to post here again. See here (under ‘Persuasive Appeals’) for clarity on what I’m talking about:

    • Shedlock says:

      @LTCP: Good to know, sorry for stuffing up the comments section anyway. Keep up the good work!

  2. Brent says:

    I just found your blog through Cracked and I really dig what you do here. I thought it’d be a half assed political blog about the same partisan points we all hear about. But I can tell you put a lot of hard work and effort into this and it really shows. I can see the Cracked tongue-in-cheek humor abounds on this blog and I’ve bookmarked it; so I hope you can continue to deliver some insightful, funny ass ideas. And no I won’t donate any money to you or your blog

    • PDR1987 says:

      I don’t know what is the point of your last comment. If it’s sarcasm, I’m sorry, if it’s not then you’re the nicest rudest commenter I’ve ever seen.

  3. PDR1987 says:

    Great blog, I will try to comment often, when I have something to contribute. I’m brazillian, born in a liberal-turned-conservative family and I know exactly how frustrating it is to argue with ridiculous points with people you love inconditionally.

  4. Seth says:

    I like it, pointing out the problems with conservativism, without being liberal propaganda (I’m not saying I believe theres a liberal bias in media, it’s just that most anti-conservative blogs are filled with liberal propaganda). I’ll be here often.

  5. I’ve completely re-written the about page. As many have pointed out, my use of the word rhetoric was incorrect. And for that I can only offer my deepest apologies to the dictionary botherers out there.

  6. Cornh says:

    This is a great blog full of great data that I will happily show off in my daily attempts to give a clear perspective on conservative-liberal arguments.

    Everything is transitory, even ideas.

  7. Laura says:

    Dear LTCP – I heart you with all my might. Your well-structured arguments and impeccable research will go a long way in helping me to defend myself at my next family gathering. Thanks for helping me preserve my sanity, articulate my POV, and avoid sounding like a touchy-feely-douchebag-commie-pinko-treehugging-idiot liberal if/when the subject of politics should arise.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s