DADvocate

Responding to my post about Ed Schultz endorsing voter cheating in the Massachusstets where I pointed out ACORN's involvement steve2 responds, "To the best of my knowledge, ACORN has never been involved in voter fraud (precise wording here)."

Seeing steve2's response, I was stunned. How could a supposedly well-informed, intelligent person, as steve2 claims to be, not be aware of the antics of ACORN? Perhaps, steve2 practices inferred justification, a closed minded process where the closed minded person seeks information to reinforce his/her closed minded view.

the "inferred justification" part is what I find most interesting. People believe whatever they want, and then search for things to back up those beliefs. They disregard information contrary or challenging to things they believe. This has far reaching effects for policy considerations and only increases divisions within the American population.

Indeed, reading steve2's comment, you can see from the "(precise wording here)" part that he's trying to nit pick over the word fraud for some reason. Apparently, the use of the term "fraud" carries more importance for steve2 than ACORN voter/election activities that led to investigations in 13 states. Perhaps, steve2 supports these actions because the ends justify the means. How can the ignorant masses know what is best for them? They should follow the path prescribed by the intelligentsia.

In a second comment steve2 asserts, "Yup, I actually read them. Like most accusations of voter fraud, they are not substantiated. In this particular case one, yes ONE person has been convicted, not ACORN." In the New Black Panther case no one was convicted because Obama's Department of Justice suddenly decided not to prosecute. Nothing to see here, move along.

And, of course, following the rules of inferred justification, steve2 apparently fails to do a simple search to find in any other ACORN convictions. He would find some in Missouri and Washington.

steve2's focus on convictions serves as a smoke screen to hide the many illegal activities of ACORN for which there is no conviction or prosecution. Yes, let's only look at prosecutions, not at the actual activities. It's like only looking at the number of times doctors pay malpractice damages or lose their license instead of the number of times a doctor messes up. The figures would make doctors look much better although medical treatment (not just doctors) lead to more than 200,000 deaths per year in the U.S.

Over the past 50 years, from the time I first started questioning what adults told me, I've learned skepticism of doctors' advice and treatment. Whether it was failed treatment for my prepatella bursitis or a woman who died from a brain tumor because her doctor insisted her headaches were simply the complaints of a histrionic women, rarely is the doctor sued, let alone prosecuted.

Like many, steve2 chooses his terms and definitions carefully and precisely in order to satisfy his inferred justification and to be "right."

Here Sarah Durand outlines the Democrat's strategies for more election mischief in 2010. The threat still stands. Despite this, people like steve2 and some of the other commenters to that post care more about splitting hairs of the meanings of a word, or winning elections at any cost than ensuring free and fair elections with one man one vote.