Another Try At Understanding Definitions: "Hypocrite"

[Bricker]

@emacknight

The real problem here is that a few weeks ago Bricker slipped up and said, “It is acceptable for people to die because they can’t afford the proper treatment.” The edit option expired before he could add 5 pages of lawerly fine print.

So we have, on record, an expressed belief. For him to not be a hypocrite, his actions need to remain consistent with that expressed belief.

Meaning, that if shit hits the fan, he will consider it acceptable for his family to die, because they could not afford proper treatment.

I get the feeling Bricker knows this, and knows that he wouldn’t find that acceptable. So started an entire thread to make sure he has wiggle room when he needs it.

Ha. Ha ha ha.

It may interest you to know that I said this about Bill Bennett and the charge of hypocriscy:

@Bricker

There is nothing immoral about blowing millions gambling.

He never said there was. He hasn’t espoused a view and then acted contrary to it.

I also said:

@Bricker

At most, minty, you have shown that the organization he’s founded takes a slightly different position than he does. And the woman he married takes a slightly different position than he does. Now, I don’t doubt that in the green household, minty’s word is law, and mrs. green and you speak with but one voice.

I still can’t call a man a hypocrite based on what his wife says being in conflict with what he does, though. To qualify for the hypocrite label, both the behavior and the words must come from the same person.

So, too, with his organization. It’s not a committee of one. Even though he founded it, it is bound to reflect the views of others. You cannot call him a hypocrite based on what his organization says.

And in a remarkably prescient trick, I knew that I would need this defense because I’d make a mistake before the edit window expired, so I cleverly laid this defense ahead of time.

In 2003. Seven years ago.

Is that planning, or what?