What's wrong with Dr.Dawg?
As always, God is in the details.
Robert McClelland wrote this:Not me. People like Klownsella, Chernyuk and Smeagol the Jew have taught me it’s not worth getting involved. When next they come for the Jews I doubt I’ll even be able to muster up a “what a shame”.
But according to Dr. Dawg he said this:
If “freedom of expression” is the issue, let me say unequivocally that no one is urging that Robert’s site be shut down. He’s as free as he’s always been to say anything he likes. But he doesn’t get to be on our progressive blogroll if he’s going to defend a vile comment about not giving a crap if they start rounding up Jews. Period. And if you don’t like it, start your own blogroll. No one’s stopping you.
The details:
- Robert's comment was not that he doesn't "give a crap if they start rounding up Jews". This is what he said: When next they come for the Jews I doubt I’ll even be able to muster up a “what a shame”
Why would anyone want to attack Robert McClelland in such an irresponsible manner?
Update:
- Dr.Dawg gets spanked here too
6 comments:
If you imagine there's a distinction between Robert's remark and "not giving a crap," then I can only respond that it's one without a difference.
What's wrong with you?
There's a clear difference, and you know it too.
Like I said, God is in the details.
The main difference between Robert's statement and your interpretation lies in the word "doubt".
Like I said, God is in the details, but given your reaction to my posting, I doubt you'll be ever be able to comprehend the difference.
did I already mention that God is in the details?
:)
Reading comprehension is always a help in these cases.
In "Comment #37," what is being "doubted?
To give Robert credit, he writes in plain, unambiguous English. The "doubt" he refers to is whether he'd even muster up a sympathetic clucking sound as they take his neighbours away.
That sounds awfully much like "not giving a crap." From the perspective of the putative victim, it's identical.
As I said, you are making a distinction without a difference.
Yeah, this whole "doubt" argument people are coming out with is idiotic. Robert's doubt isn't whether or not he'd try to stop the Jews from being rounded up. He quite clearly says he wouldn't.
His "doubt" is, when they're rounding up the Jews, will he even be able to bring himself to say "what a shame".
Well, if you're not even sure you'll be able to say "what a shame" as you sit back and watch your neighbours being led away, how is that different from not giving a crap? Surely, if you give a crap, shaking your head and saying "what a shame" would be the LEAST you could do. But Robert says he doubts he'll even be able to do that.
Robert's "doubt" is the most repugnant part of the statement. NOT a mitigation.
Dr. Dawg:
Robert's doubt isn't whether or not he'd try to stop the Jews from being rounded up. He quite clearly says he wouldn't.
Most people didn't.
His "doubt" is, when they're rounding up the Jews, will he even be able to bring himself to say "what a shame".
The people who did, God bless them, might have done the right thing, but they were also naive, thinking they could stop the Nazi machine by saying what a shame. Many of those who spoke out paid for it with their lives.
Well, if you're not even sure you'll be able to say "what a shame" as you sit back and watch your neighbours being led away, how is that different from not giving a crap?
Most people didn't speak up because they were afraid.
Post a Comment