I've heard pundits and politicians use the word "lockstep" countless times. It's most common context seems to be contributing to accusations that the opponents do not think for themselves and are all just lemmings that do what their told.
![]() |
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Auburn_lockstep.gif |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockstep
Do politicians really know what the implications of referring to people as in "lockstep"? Are they intentionally comparing their opponents to prisoners forced to just fall in line? I'm not sure they really care. Attacking the character and independence of opponents is hypocritical and a reflection of the accuser's weakness. Why can't more pundits have a discussion without the name calling and give the American population the pleasure of real, substantive debate?
Lockstep? If you're accusing the other party of lockstep, you might consider looking how you're own feet are tied to the hypocrites in front of and behind you.

No comments:
Post a Comment