Way back on page 9, Dyslexia wrote:
what I see coming is the ACLU defending the N Y Post cartoonist.
To this, in response, Dlowan wrote:
That would be ironic.
Then, in response to her, I wrote:
It would also be consonant with the mission of the ACLU.
And then, finally, Aidan wrote:
Exactly - not ironic at all actually. Entirely appropriate. And I'd be in total support of it.
Because now not only does it seem people can be told what they can write or say - it also seems that people are comfortable telling other people how they should or have to interpret something they read or hear.
Bullshit - give me free speech any day.
So, Aidan did not respond to what i wrote, and what she wrote bore absolutely no relation to what i had written. I not only did not deny that it were ironic, by using the little word "also," i acknowledged the irony. Aidan did not choose to respond to Dyslexia, and she did not choose to respond to Dlowan, she chose to respond to me. However, what she wrote was no response at all to what i wrote. I call that piggy-backing and i object to it, and always will. It didn't even really qualify as a straw man, although i described it that way, because she was not disagreeing with me--she was agreeing with something i had never written. Furthermore, i don't agree with a single thing she wrote in the post quoted above, apart from the notion that the ACLU would take a free speech or free press case.
All of these post can be found at the bottom of page nine, and seen in their context. If Aidan wishes to quote me, and take her chances on being raked over the coals for making such a stupid set of remarks having nothing to do with what i wrote, i cannot, of course, forbid her. If she pulsl **** like this again, i'll go after her again for piggy-backing my post, and once again point out her failure to comprehend what other people here write.