Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
The position you took along with the sarcasm, seems naive to me. I don't know what the guy's intent is, you don't either - but to pretend that his motives can't be for reasons other than altruism prompted me to respond. I used the example given because of direct personal experience. I did some anti-gang volunteer work with some pre-teens in a drug and gang infested area. The kids idolized the gang leaders and big time drug dealers. They thought those were the guys that cared, even-though those were the same guys who would kill their fathers, turn their mothers out, and get them killed - all because those guys may have given them some shoes, or fixed up a b-ball court, etc. And, yes I am a cynic.
|
No one is pretending that he can't have ulterior motives. Everyone has ulterior motives. The thing is that we don't really have any evidence either way. Your issue is that you assume that I'm being naive for not insinuating something for which I have no evidence. I admit it, I think that it is unlikely that Soros views contributions to the Harlem Children's Zone as a viable means of waging war on Fox News. That doesn't make me naive. It makes me sane and rational. What power does the Harlem Children's Zone have over Fox News?
Furthermore, if Soros were attempting to buy off poor people (as you seem to be insinuating that he is, or at least that he might be, you don't know, but you know that he could so it's obviously worth mentioning as though it's plausible), the fact that he contributes to a limited-scope child educational program in New York would be one of the least efficient ways of doing so. So your "I'm not sayin', but I'm just sayin'" accusatory nonsense doesn't even make sense.