Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
so an "elite" is anyone you can't win an argument against. and they're all evil, those people who can't win arguments against. and that's how it goes.
well thanks for clearing that one up, cimarron. it sure has been fun interacting with you, as it always is. i learn alot from each and every one of your fine posts.
i'd say something off-handedly sarcastic here but i'm not really in the mood to read a post later that's either all rending of garments and casting of ashes or that blames me for the demise of the entire board. and america in general. or whatever.
|
Winning an argument against you is such an absurd notion. It would require you to entertain the fact that you might be wrong. Something tells me you work in academia.
The fact that you use "teabaggers" as an intentional demeaning of their movement in order to dismiss it outright rather than engage in debate of the core merits...well, that's why it's "elitist" - you further my case.
---------- Post added at 05:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:28 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by dippin
There is a difference between elite and elitist. Millionaires are the economic elite regardless of how they feel about the poor. Candidates in national tickets are political elites regardless of how they feel about the disenfranchised. Contributors in the most watched news channel with spots on prime time are media elites regardless of how they feel about the viewers.
She might not be an "elitist," but she is, without a doubt, "elite."
|
I would agree with you on that. I didn't realize that was the context. They were becoming intertwined in the thread.