Tuesday, September 20, 2005

As Rita Bears Down on the Gulf...

...an interview on the Weather Channel with a lead author of the recent study in Science.

RealPlayer req'd; launches instantly.

As the author says, there's never enough data to be sure -- absolutely, religiously sure -- of anything. That's why it's "science." I'm sure this will be colored "relativism" by those who use that term as a club, rather than out of understanding what it actually means, but the only certain knowledge a person can have is geometric or religious. Of course, the former has been complicated since the 19th century, and the latter is false.

Note the similarity between the ID folks and the anti-global-warming folks: you can't say FOR SURE (according to their definition of "sure"; see above), so we can shove our ideology into that unavoidable (if you're not a religious wacko) amount of doubt in any epistemological statement on reality.

It's called "propaganda by brainwashed (or cash-washed) knuckleheads."

By the way, Lores finally got her wish: she was on Hannity and even got a picture with him! So cute! I note a copyright notice has appeared on the bottom of her blog, too. Or was it always there? Not sure. He's almost as cute as John Roberts, who just makes me all moist and tingly.

The big laugh on Roberts is that, unless he's lying, which is possible, he's actually FAR more centrist than at least I thought. I heard both days of hearings (was driving all over creation, so had the time). He's undoubtedly brilliant. What worries me is his overly expansive view of executive power. Last thing we need, but that's why he's been nominated (Hamdi). Bush could give a rat's ass about abortion (or "limited government" or the "free market" or "limiting foreign adventurism" or etc., etc., etc.) in comparison to other real priorities. And what are those, pray tell?

Look to actions taken and monies spent...there is no other way to tell. All those dupes who voted for him on abortion alone (or on his supposed "conservatism") are going to be pissed. Bush don't need you; neither does the GOP. Who else are you going to vote for? Democrats? Exactly. And exactly why the Dems have sold out blacks. Who else are they going to vote for? Hilarious.


Actually, on second thought, they won't be pissed because most of them won't know, or will have so much noise flung at them (read Boorstin's The Image from 1961, in which he defines "pseudoevents") that they won't notice the utter truth staring them in the face: Bush's admin is NOT conservative (by any definition I know of), but rather something more like fascist. (Click here for Chapter 1.)

Additionally, I find it hilarious that anyone could be so naive as to think that Clinton "followed polls" but Bush does not. No politician has ignored polls since they began. Why would they?

Furthermore, addressing a comment of Lores' on a non-copyrighted blog (and one that will never be copyrighted), did it ever occur to you that 13% of the world's people may not trust their governments because they can see what's right in front of them? I mean the Republicans in this country alone have foisted Watergate, Iran-Contra, and now Iraq and Katrina onto an amazingly passive nation -- certainly passive press. Add in Vietnam to that, which was partly the work of Democrats. Gee, why should we trust the government?

Question (which will go unanswered): Why do you NEED to trust your government? This system was set up so that trust was at a minimum. That's genius. It's called "checks and balances" and goes back to at least Montesquieu. (Yes, I'm sorry; he was French.)

I know that's not as important as "being a lady" or how cute Hannity is or what a good-looking family man Roberts is, but as a progressive, I don't like the recent turn in our culture to solipsistic, self-oriented, self-promoting, identity-obsessed inanity (rhymes with "Hannity" -- coincidence?) that the Right, laughingly, passes off as a child of the Left.

Meanwhile, as Lores springs fully formed from Hannity's cute head, something slouches toward Bethlehem, waiting to be born.

(Lores, I don't post on copyrighted blogs. Sorry.)

5 Thoughts:

Blogger Demotiki said...

Lovely Rita, Meta Maid,
May I inquire descretely . . .

Tuesday, September 20, 2005 10:46:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Inquire about anything but the federal government's preparedness for a disaster four years after 9/11.

Tuesday, September 20, 2005 10:51:00 AM  
Blogger pawlr said...

In the never, never land of Neocon thought, the distrust of the people for their government is a sign that the polity, like a wayward prodigal child, has drifted away from their all knowing, benevolent parent, the Godfearing, upright Republican Government. This is an effect of, not the past failures of Government, but the past failures of the people themselves to cleave to virtuous lifestyle choices. Women who prefer vigorous public careers over homemaking, children who prefer drugs and rap to mowing lawns and painting fences, and men who throw over their wives of 30 years for their administrative assistants. For such a corrupt people to question their government is but the churlish whining of us whelps that, in their ignorance, fail to grasp the joys of tough love.

Here's a reality check: Governments Lie. They always have and always will. Hence our Constitution, written by wiser fools than us.

Tuesday, September 20, 2005 1:27:00 PM  
Blogger Demotiki said...

Paul,

You apostate! How dare you even hint that the President has lied. When you hold him to account, the terrorists win!

Tuesday, September 20, 2005 7:38:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Ah, yes, very Lakovian, Paul!

There is indeed something going on, but I think it has more to do with fundamentalism -- of the Christian/Jewish and market kinds -- than with Daddy figures.

After all, abortion was the main reason Allen voted for Bush. If that's not tunnel vision, and tunnelled by fundamentalism, I don't know what is. (With all due respect, Allen.)

Those folks more than questioned their government when it was being run by Clinton. Is he a bad Daddy, then?

Anyway, the point is to stop these people, whatever motivates them. I actually don't think their minds can be changed at this point. I'm talking the hard core of unquestioning support that has survived Katrina. If that can't do it (even with local and state ball-dropping, never questioned here), pretty much nothing can. If a fucking Arabian horse-trader can be set up to run FEMA, and after totally fucking up a terrorist-level disaster four years after 9/11...well, there's really no way to reach anyone who still supports these idiots.

Thursday, September 22, 2005 10:49:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home