Features
Articles and Essays
Hot Air Analysis - Non-meterological
| Hot Air Analysis - Non-meterological |
|
|
|
| Written by Lee Poirier | |||||||
| Thursday, 06 October 2005 | |||||||
Page 2 of 5
Christ almighty! Barely over a week, and I can already feel your heavy breathing down the back of my neck. Alright, guess I'll have to defend myself in front of the, oh, four or five people that frequent this site: you, me, my dad, and Marc (I saw a reply of his somewhere down there, so I figure he comes here when he's bored). Actually, this entire paragraph really does nothing to refute your claim, does it? Man, I am playing right into your hands. I'd agree with you that the sarcasm was nonsensical, for the most part. It is true that those few sentences would offer nothing towards a legitimate debate, but it wasn't done without purpose. As you put it, Ms. Thornbrugh was reaching for a political soapbox, and in her two hundred words she made one or two fairly obvious points, and spent the rest exaggerating and ranting, with no small amount of sarcasm herself. I used only fifty words to convey what sarcasm I wanted to (since, given her emotional argument, this seemed plenty fair), and I largely succeeded at what I set out to do. It was pointed, clear, and appropriately condescending. If this was a one-on-one affair, I would consider omitting that kind of tactic, but as far as I'm concerned, Ms. Thornbrugh is a lost cause, and there are plenty of other people out there to convince. I'd rather spend the fifty words re-introducing the topic, countering her own heavy sarcasm, and suggesting some intelligence behind the author, than merely stating that I disagree, and continuing from there. And while I'm certainly condescending towards Ms. Thornbrugh, I don't understand how you arrived at me being a sexist. Perhaps I'm getting wrapped up in all the accusations of patronizing, but the word "legitimate" was purposefully used to emphasize the sarcasm. I dont tend to freudian slip while I'm writing, and as of yet, you are the only person to receive it that manner. In any case, the three of us will be awaiting your point-by-point analysis of the subject. (Yikes! There I go again with the meaningless fluff. I guess I could edit it out, but then it wouldn't sound as condescending)
|
|||||||
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|






