Two against two: ad hominem

This morning I was standing in line waiting for a blood test. Four of us got to chatting. About the time the doors opened, the subject had turned to people not going back to work. Two of us said people were tired of the low pay and crummy working conditions and two of us said those who don’t go back to work are lazy. As we entered the lab we parted but on the way out I was behind the guy saying they were lazy. He was quite friendly with the staff as we left and I jocularly said, “did you get poked?” He just grunted, “Yeah.”
So he was not happy I disagreed with him. Would he have been willing to have a discussion about this? I doubt it.
So to me he does represent that large portion of American society that is pissed off that Biden did the rescue plan, etc. Why is that? This is where the ad hominem argument is unavoidable. All the background and experience I might bring to bear, that the other lady could have brought to bear, is not going to penetrate this self-image he has of a “hard-working American.” If you don’t shore up that image for him, screw you.
Wanna bet he voted for Trump…. twice?


  1. Paul Widergren says:

    I could, if I had to, get a job as a substitute teacher, but I am too lazy.

    Three Myths of the Great Resignation

    1. Pat Barrett says:

      Thanks for that. I just subscribed to The Atlantic two days ago.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *