|
Let's be as clear as possible here, since we're discussing one of the most vile emotions humans are capable of. If the implication is that Rush preaches messages of hate, that would be unsupportable. He may broadcast messages and ideas you hate, but that's a different thing, entirely.
I believe there are a very few figures in human history that have actually and literally broadcast hate messages - and it should be clear to a discerning mind that Rush is not in that category.
So, why engage in or even entertain such a hyperbolic form of discourse? Why ramp up the rhetoric to the point where someone who is rather mild on the scale of vitriolic sentiment is accused of hate speech? I just don't think see how we get anywhere with that sort of exaggeration.
Probably what is being expressed is something closer to the fact that people who are on the other side of the polarities of political expression from him hate his ideas. And they make the common logical fallacy of arguing ad hominem (The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself).
When we persistently pursue tactics like this - we end up with many of the types of problematic exchanges we see on this Forum.
__________________
create evolution
|