It amazes me what passes for debate sometimes in political discussions, both in real life and on the net. I'm not sure about anyone else, but whenever I do make a strong statement, I make sure that I can defend it. I try to think through what my opponents will counter with and run a little mock debate in my head. Only when I am comfortable with my statement and the reasoning behind it do I broadcast it either in conversation or in print (blog). And yes, there are many thoughts inside my head that almost escape, until I run through this little exercise and decide I'm not ready to defend that idea, so I'm not ready to share it.

I had a liberal friend once ask me "Why do Republicans hate the poor?" I was floored by his question. I asked him if he thought I personally hated the poor and he said no. I probed further and I became convinced that his position was based on what someone (Jesse Jackson?) said in a speech. His example was that conservatives are against welfare, thus we hate the poor. (It is not an isolated opinion.)

My answer was something like this: I do not see welfare as helping the poor but as a trap that keeps them there. A safety net is an important thing and we have to have one, but long term welfare creates a class that is unable and unwilling to provide for themselves. I think the key to assisting the poor is opportunity instead of handouts. We both have the same goal: we both don't want the poor to remain poor. We just have drastically different ideas on how to get there. And just because you don't think my idea has merit means I have no concern for that segment of society.

The conversation pretty much went nowhere from there on. He would not budge from his assertion because he couldn't accept that anyone who didn't support the welfare system could not possibly care for the poor. And all this despite me sharing my perspective and despite the fact that we actually worked together distributing food to the poor on multiple occasions.

All of this is just to point out how much I appreciate Dean's dismantling of a most ridiculious statement. And also just to remind people that there is not much point in making an argument that can be so easily refuted.