Welcome to "I Hate Craig Reinbold Fest 2004." I'm in shock. Usually, I'm the only one who can rile up the ire of the Marquette community in such thunderous fashion. But Reinbold is giving me a run for my money on both Viewpoints pages today.

I'm not going to take sides in the Raynor Library debate (I think both sides bring up good points). However, I was surprised by at least one of the Viewpoints that made use of the "Reinbold doesn't like the Raynor admissions policy, and thereby must not care about sexual assault victims" argument. All of these Viewpoint authors brought up valid concerns (e.g. Marquette responsibility to provide security for students), but it is regrettable that some chose to use the aforementioned argument.

When people make such an "argument," they take their opponent's views (Part A), stretch them to the most ludicrous point possible (Part B) and then level the accusation that Part A necessarily equals Part B. And doesn't their opponent look like an ass now? You bet. The problem is, Part A doesn't equal Part B. Just look at some examples.

If you don't support the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, you might be called anti-Semetic. Why don't you tell Holocaust survivors that you hate Israel? If you don't like Richard Hatch, you might be called a "Survivor" hater. Why don't you tell the Sole Survivor himself that you hate his show? If you didn't support the war in Iraq, you might have been called an apologist for dictators. Why don't you tell the troops that you love Saddam? These are not even arguments. They're just personal attacks – and not even the fun kind. They're personal attacks that are way off base.

For those of you who still don't see it (perhaps being blinded by hatred of me) imagine a Viewpoints debate between Republicans and me. I don't pull any punches in such debates, but I keep my arguments rooted in the issue at hand. I'm not going to say, "Republicans are conservative. Hitler was a conservative. Thereby, Republicans must love Hitler." That would be nuts. Republicans don't love Hitler. Just because Republicans happen to share some aspects (and only very few – and not the really bad ones) of their political ideology with a guy who took that ideology to its extreme doesn't give me the right to compare them to him. I would probably get 100 Republican Viewpoints if I made such an accusation, and those Viewpoints would not be incorrect in rebutting me.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all about crying havoc and letting slip the dogs of war on opponents. But when you slip those doggies, make sure that you're sending them in the right direction. Going off half-cocked on an analogy that doesn't even apply to the argument just takes away from whatever point you may have had. Fighting is fun, but fight responsibly.