Quote:
Originally Posted by dculkin
Because that is the conclusion they drew. Why do you say the argument is ad hominem? Are you saying that any line of reasoning that leads to the conclusion that someone is likely to betray his country is by definition an ad hominem argument? Lets say that, in addition to the facts cited by moveon, we learned that General Patraeus would make millions of dollars and get to sleep with Halle Barry if he made the case for continuing the surge. Would you still say that it is ad hominem to suggest that the might give a false report?
|
You see nothing wrong with labeling a man sworn to uphold and defend the constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic, as a person who would betray his country -- based on nothing more than their opinion of contentious current events?
That's your prerogative.
I think it is character assassination of the most cowardly sort -- they self-righteously risk nothing and seek to gain power through cheap insult.
B