Why is it that so many people get flustered when you ask them to elaborate? It’s as if we’re all expected to just accept any statements as fact without detail. I think that if you’re trying to convince me of something, you should be willing to explain why I should believe you. It’s almost funny how a question as simple as “Why?” can apparently be so frustrating.

“I hate Windows.”
“Why?”
“Because Windows sucks.”
“Why?”
“Because [insert name of program] [insert random non-OS-related action].”
“You do realize that has nothing to do with Windows, that it’s that program’s fault, right?”
“Oh you know what I mean.”

Actually, I don’t know what you mean. I do think it’s pretty obvious that you’re making generalizations about something you don’t really have a firm grasp of, though.

And so there I sit, apparently sounding like an asshole because I pointed out their ignorance instead of nodding complacently. I don’t like ignorant statements. I know I make them occasionally (more often than I’d like, unfortunately), and when I do, I would very much like to have it pointed out so I don’t make a fool of myself again in the future.

It may be polite to smile and nod, but I think it’s better in the long run to point it out. I know if somebody was blaming me for things that had nothing to do with me, I’d want somebody to set them straight.

I find that asking “Why?” will usually:
A) help to expose the fact that they don’t really know what they’re talking about and have no real argument
or
B) help them to strengthen their argument by actually using valid points instead of unsupported generalizations.

Either way, I believe the question is beneficial, and I think it should be asked a lot more often.

Jake Tapper doesn’t back down

Sometimes it’s amazing to watch politicians dance around questions, and sometimes it’s offensive. Do they think we are all idiots? Here’s the exchange:

TAPPER: Senator Reid, what do you say to critics who say, “Look, the Senate voted, including two of you up on the stage, to authorize the president to use force in Iraq. Is there not a moral obligation of the United States to make sure that the Iraqi people are safe before the U.S. withdraws”? It’s very clear that withdrawing U.S. troops might make U.S. troops safer, but it won’t necessarily make the Iraqi people safer.

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID, D-NEV: As reported in the news this morning, 69 percent of Iraqis feel they are less safe because of the presence of Americans; 21 percent of the Iraqi people feel they’re safer. That’s pretty clear that American troops who are over there protecting the Shias, the Sunnis and the Kurds — they’re not welcome. That’s the reason that they’re doing a good job of protecting the Shias, Kurds and Sunnis, but they are all trying to kill our soldiers. That is a recipe to bring our troops home. And that’s why the Levin-Reed amendment is so critically important. …It transitions the mission within 120 days, and by the first day of May of next year, our troops will be out of there, our combat troops will be out of there. They will be left to do counterterrorism, training the Iraqis — continuing to train the Iraqis and protecting our resources. That’s what the Iraqi people want and that’s what American people want.

TAPPER: I’m sorry, if I could just follow up very quickly…Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?

REID: It is clear that the Iraqi people don’t want us there. It is clear that there is now a state of chaos in Iraq. And it is up to the Iraqi people to make themselves safe….We can’t do it. It’s time the training wheels come off and they take care of their own country. We have spent billions dollars. We’re now spending $12 billion a month on Iraq. That’s enough. In the last six months of the surge, six months, 600 more dead Americans, $60 billion more of American taxpayers’ money. We, Democrats, unitedly believe that’s enough.

TAPPER: With all due respect, Senator, you didn’t answer my question.

REID: OK. This is not a debate.

TAPPER: Will the Iraqis be safer?

REID: We’re answering questions. (calling on someone else) Yes, young man? Anyone else have a question?

Not a debate? You’re damn right it’s not a debate, it’s a press conference. “We’re answering questions?” Nice try. You’re SUPPOSED to be answering questions, not dancing around like Mr. Bojangles while spouting your talking points. If you think the way to prosperity is by challenging each other to find out who can fail the fastest, so be it. You’ll be looking for another job the next time you’re up for re-election. Your constituents are not idiots, Pinky. You’d better hope the Nugget keeps your table free, you’ll be eating there a lot more often.

Happy Birthday, America!

Let freedom ring.