I was very disappointed with Joe Reisert’s recent column about the Occupy movement.
Reisert began by comparing the Occupiers to a child throwing a tantrum. This fallacy of argument is covered in high school English classes.
Second, he extrapolates from the individual to the whole, a fallacy Reisert understands. For example, in our current economic condition, it is best for a family to conserve and save.
However, because we are all saving and conserving our economy is in the tank: notice the great interest after Black Friday in the question, “Did we start spending again?”
After this, Reisert covered the demonstrators as a second-rate Rush Limbaugh might. What a shame.
I know that freedom of assembly is guaranteed by our Constitution. However, I also know this is not synonymous with the rght to protest. I know over my lifetime these issues have been in the Supreme Court multiple times.
But I do not understand the subtleties of what will happen in the streets and in our courts as the Occupy movement continues. Reisert is an expert; he could have helped us. Instead, he took the low road and threw gasoline on the flames.
Tom Berger
Oakland
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.