Ever notice that people often post bold statements on the internet, often on Facebook, that they cannot defend when asked for evidence to support their claim(s)?
I was in a discussion today on a conservative Facebook page with a guy who supposedly is a conservative and who calls himself "Rowdy." It could be his name but I'm guessing he doesn't use his real name.
The discussion was about Arizona Governor Jan Brewer stepping down after the completion of this, her second term, in accordance with Arizona law. The article said that Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio is considering running to take her place. All well and good so far.
This "Rowdy" character posted the following: "Neither me nor my family, all conservatives, will vote for Joe Arpaio. He is a criminal and a murderer."
I made the comment "That's a bold statement. Do you have evidence to back it up?"
His response was "You can look it up for yourself. Google it. Search on J T Ready. He was a neo-Nazi and a friend of Arpaio who was killed when he was running for Sheriff."
I learned a long time ago that if someone makes such a bold statement then refuses to provide any evidence to back up that statement it's because they don't have any. And I informed him of such. He said again "Do your own research. You can find it."
At that point it was time to let him know how I felt about it. I told him that when someone makes such bold statements then tells those who challenge him to look it up for themselves instead of providing a link, anything, to back up their statement they have no credibility - at least with me. He responded "I see you don't want to do your own research so I'll find something for you."
He posted a link to one page that accused Arpaio of being a white supremacist because there was one picture of Arpaio in a car and a known neo-Nazi (local) standing outside the car smiling for the camera. Arpaio wasn't even looking at the man and you couldn't see what else was going on. I figured Arpaio had driven past a neo-Nazi rally and the man in the picture decided to get a photo op. When I said as much to "Rowdy" he blew me off as though if I don't believe what he posted I was simply an idiot.
I told him that anyone can post a bold statement without evidence to back it up. To prove my point I said "President Obama is the greatest President who ever held the office! Don't believe me? Look it up for yourself. Apparently you don't have to be able to prove your statements here."
He thought that was funny but still didn't provide any evidence to support his claim.
"Rowdy" kept dogging Joe Arpaio and accusing him of being crooked and a psychopath. All of the other readers on the thread supported Arpaio and also asked for proof of what "Rowdy" was saying. He reiterated that we should "do the research" and refused to provide anything.
Eventually I grew tired of his rants and said "I have learned through the years that when someone bad-mouths law enforcement, and specifically someone like Joe Arpaio, it often means they have personal experience with that law enforcement agency or officer. One can't help but wonder if "Rowdy", or one of his family members, has done some time in the Maricopa County jail."
His next response made me laugh and pretty much proved my theory at the same time. He said "I have no time for ignorant people. Blocked."
"Rowdy", who I have never spoken to before, blocked me for suspecting his hatred of Joe Arpaio may stem from some personal family contact. I'm thinking I was on the mark and he didn't much like it.
I went back to the thread a few hours later and "Rowdy" is still posting. I know this because one of the other people on the thread recently posted "Rowdy you have a right to your opinion just like the rest of us but name calling that is the Democrats way of discussing anything. Liberals do as well. Rowdy if you want to discuss then discuss. Name calling shows you have nothing intelligent to counter with."
I rest my case.