Partisanship revisited

I received a very long comment in response to my last post, one that came from "Anonymous." I know who it is, of course, because only one person I know would have read the post and commented in such depth.

There's no need for me to repost the comment here, as it's on my blog anyway. But I did want to respond and make myself clear on one aspect of my last post. When I say I disregard or heavily discount a partisan viewpoint, it doesn't mean I reject it entirely, but rather that I consider the source as part of careful consideration. Yes, rejecting all partisan viewpoints and only seeking original sources would leave to a lonely, decisionless existence. Not considering the source of opinions and advice on subjects followed by further search for more information would instead lead to an often misguided and manipulated existence instead. I know that side from personal experience, having been misguided and manipulated by others to my lasting embarrassment, not to mention lasting debt. (For those that know me fairly well or better, remember Thom? Partisanship to the point of lies and theft. How about Craig, Esquire? That guy led me astray in other ways and I alienated certain relatives unnecessarily, although they are relatives I've done just fine without, so the damage has been more limited.)

I've become more careful and less trusting of the motivations of others, but I don't think I've swung so far that other way to become cynical, paranoid, or innately suspicious. With regard to the people I mentioned in the last message, I'll point out that I have far more respect of Rich than many that fall in his liberal camp because he comes to discussions with facts that back up his opinions - he can clearly lay out why he feels the way he does. I don't always agree with him (and in fact, don't always disagree with him, either - think tort reform) but I can at least understand where he's coming from, consider why he thinks as he does, factor in other things I know and believe and my own priorities, and then come to conclusions that may or may not vary from his. In other words, my views on things that differ from Rich's are usually about differing underlying values which I don't hold but do respect, rather than any real or perceived lack of depth in his thought. Frankly, I have more respect for a well-thought out opinion that disagrees with me than a shallow opinion that I agree with.

So understanding a partisan source is more about raising flags that I should consider more carefully rather than an out-and-out rejection, and I'm merely unlikely to act on partisan arguments without further discovery.