I guess this is how we missunderstand each other Alex. as i read things, you were clear in your dislike of Rush Limbaugh.
it seemed to be clear to me that you were trying to make a general point that your opinion about Rush Limbaugh is more valid than that of Colins because you dont like Rush Limbaugh. That logic as it is, makes some sense. - i.e. saying that Colin is biased in that he is more likely to agree. .. but this also assumes that you dont have any opinion of Rush Limbaugh whereas Colin does and thus you see things with more clarity. That would make sense if that was the case. Because that would mean you did not have a biased opinion. Furthermore, it would have to assume that you are not in anyway biased against Republicans and Conservatives... which is also not the case.
a big point Alex is that you had an opinion about the politics of Rush Limbaugh before you ever listened to Rush Limbaugh.
there is another dimension which also factors in to your opinion about Rush Limbaugh... the fact that you clearly, really dont like him. You are BIASED AGAINST Rush Limbaugh and you are also biased against Conservative politics... in the exact same way you say Colin is biased for him because he may "probably" agree with him.
You use what seems to me to be some pretty flawed logic to make a point that your opinion is more valid than Colins. (thats the way i understood what you posted)
you said exactly:
Quote:
The difference is that you probably agree with much of what Rush has to say, so you don't see the dishonestly.
|
Quote:
|
You are VERY likely to agree with alot of what Rush has to say... he is playing to your preferences...
|
in your post, you were attempting to say that Colins "probable" bias gives you a more balanced opinion. .. but that assumes you have no bias at all.
i am saying that if you have a biased opinion - its exactly that. nothing more, nothing less. it is hard to make the case that one biased opinion is more valid than another biased opinion.
Last edited by -= JR =- at Apr 1 2003, 10:26 AM