Unfair. Steven Crowder asks, like, questions, ya know?
(h.t. to Ray Bradbury for the post title)
What a wonderful world (h.t. Bob Thiele and George David Weiss via Louis Armstrong). Yeh, just sitting here contemplating one small aspect of the wonderful world we live in. Despite the machinations of politicians *spit*, Mass MEdia Podpeople and Academia Nut Fruitcakes, we have available to us such a massive amoiunt of knowledge, our own means of fact checking and many, many eyes to do the checking on the lies, damned lies and worse perpetrated in the name of “news” and “education” that instead of accepting the lies promulgated by such as Walter Cronkite (R.I.P.) about the Vietnam War*, we can actually–easily–fact check sources of information and come up with a closer approximation of truth than is available from traditional sources.
Thank God for the resources made available via the internet. And God bless citizen journalists on the internet.
*By any rational analysis, “America lost the War in Vietnam” is a disingenuous meme on the order of the ancient Egyptian attempt to erradicate all historical record of the Hyksos or the hagiography of that greatest of presidential violators of the Constitution, Lincoln (so far: The 0! is attempting to give him a run for his money). Just saying. Do your homework and you’ll see.
In the decade or more before his death, Michael Crichton spoke widely about fear-mongering in science circles (often coupled with making a religion out of science), exacerbated by the pressing need in media to market fear (the pun was intentional; if you groaned, shame on you :-)). The Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind (and the politicians who bow before its altar) openly embrace fear-mongering both for immediate audience share and to enhance the addiction of the masses to its poisonous screeds.
Both those who embrace a strictly dogmatic scientific approach to issues and those who rebel against such dogmatism seem to often embrace fear-mongering as a primary persuasive tactic. Take “natural” foods proponents and “scientific nutritionists” or medical establishment dogmatists and “holistic medicine” proponents and put them in the same room, and you’d likely end up with a kilkenny cats donnybrook of fear-mongering. Just one example can serve as a cautionary: chelation therapy is presented by some alternative medicine proponents as THE answer to a host of ills–ills they often imply the medical community only want to treat with very expensive therapies that work less well. The medical establishment counters with scary threats of death from chelation therapy, often pointing out that more than 30 deaths from chelation therapy have occurred… since the 1970s while noting that more than 800,000 inpatient/outpatient chelation treatments are administered per year. Let’s see now… that’s about 0.0000000125% of treatments have resulted in deaths!
*feh* Fear-mongering. Since chelation therapy for other than heavy metals poisoning is most often for alternative medicine treatment of heart and artery disease how about comparison to another common treatment for heart and artery disease? Heart bypass surgery results in at least a 1.0% death rate. That’s about 80,000 times more risky than chelation therapy. *heh*
The dire warnings from the Church of Anthropogenic Global Warming (which previously was the Church of Anthropogenic Global Cooling and is now transitioning to the Church of Anthropogenic Global Climate Change) have all been nothing but crying wolf. Not one of the warnings have come to pass–not one!–and so, like other whack job religious nuts who keep pushing back the date they prophesy for the end of the world, the Church of Anthropogenic Global Warming keeps having to move the goal posts in their deadly game to keep the fictional fear-mongering within the realm of the sheeple’s oh-so-flexible suspension of disbelief.
Lies, lies and more lies, built upon grains of sand, less than even kernels of truth, lies designed to induce fear in the credulous sheeple who, thanks to long term media brainwashing aided by a public education system that seems to be designed to produce idiots and individuals who cooperate in their own lobotomization, are completely unable to even parse this moderately complex sentence, let alone deconstruct the lies fed them by The Powers That Be.
As a popularly-voiced, accessible (to anyone who really can read and do simple arithmetic at a genuine upper grade school level) preparation to skeptical perusal of contemporary science-as-religion as presented for sheeple consumption, I recommend once again James Hogan’s Kicking the Sacred Cow. It’s an easy read for any even minimally literate person, and the footnotes are well worth following.
it’s not just literacy that’s a problem, although that certainly is a problem, but, as I found out in a recent conversation with someone locally, most people can’t even tell when they’re being manipulated with numbers. The “more than 30 people have died since the 1970s” attempt to frighten people away from thoughtful consideration of chelation therapies noted above is one such example. By contrast to the 30 or so deaths out of 24,000,000 or so chelation treatments in the U.S. since the 1970’s, 90 people a year are killed by lightning strikes. That’s roughly 0.000000003% of the population… per year! Ooo! Scary, huh? Not. Sure, ones chances of dying from a chelation therapy treatment are more than ones chances of dying from a lightning strike, but compared to other risks, both are neglible in the extreme. (I’m not advocating chelation therapy for anything but heavy metals poisoning. I’m just noting that scare tactics are reprehensible… and that the only defense is knowledge.) WHat’s my point here? Most folks wouldn’t even bother to count the zeros in the numbers offered above, and even more wouldn’t be able to discern how they were educed. The “recent conversation” that spurred this observation? Someone who’s back in school commented on how much trouble her statistics course was for her. Numbers are haaaard. *heh* Without a calculator, most folks can’t even balance their checkbooks. Heck, with a calculator many folks can’t. (OK, even I don’t do as many maths problems in my head as I used to do. I’m slowing down.) Even with calculators, math is just too hard for most folks, Why? Because most folks can’t do simple math at all and have no idea what that calculator they’re using is doing with the garbage they input–garbage because they don’t know what to input to get answers they need.
The simple answer is to learn to read. No, not how to read: to read. Read copiously, and choose books that are both well-written and have something worthwhile to say and that are well-grounded in reality. Even science fiction or fantasy novels can be more well-grounded in reality than much of the fear-mongering toxic waste poured down the gullets of credulous UNliterate sheeple by the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind and its partners in crime found in Academia Nut Fruitcake Bakeries and Congress.
SEE THE UPDATE BELOW!
I’m growing weary of (read, “getting royally pissed off by”) Mass Media Podpeople, Academia Nut Fruitcakes, leftard politicians *spit* and others of their ilk telling me that because I strongly disagree with The Obamassiah’s policy statements, even more strongly dislike his lies and deliberate, slanderous distortions, false accusations of lying against people who simply reveal his record, lack of basic historical-political (apparently no idea of Russia’s role in the Security Council), geographical (“been to 57 states” [with one more in the Continental states to get to] but not “allowed” to go to Alaska or Hawaii–at that time–IOW, thought the U.S. to be comprised of 60 states!) and cultural (“clinging to guns and religion”) knowledge, and contempt for middle America, and more–because of all that, I am a racist.
*throws the bullshit flag*
The Loony Left Moonbat Brigade (weak swisher-sister inheritors of the Red Brigade) wants an unqualified liar, slanderer, communist and apparent racist to be elected on the Affirmative Action/Racial Quota ticket. Now, if that’s not blatant racism, what is? As Paul Jacob said in a recent Common Sense episode (no, I didn’t listen, but I read the transcript*):
…would it not be racist, condescending, unjust, and downright stupid for us voters to treat a black man’s qualifications for the job of president as irrelevant, just to prove we’re not racist?
Indeed it would be racist to do so, and so it is the leftards who accuse non-racist folk like me of being what they themselves are: racists.
Ahhh, play on false guilt to enable expansion of the “feddle gummint’s” plantation. Sneaky, dishonest and sure to play well with the sheeple.
So here’s the only response people who despise racism can make to this sort of racist Affirmative Action/Racial Quota campaign: Vote McCain/Palin.
UPDATE: Another example of racism, bias and The Hivemind in the tank? See Michelle Malkin (h.t. The World According to Carl) for the story. Malkin suggests calling the organizers of the debate (202-872-1020) or emailing Janet H. Brown ([email protected] to express your views. Here’s what I emailed:
Dear Ms. Janet H. Brown:
Are you aware of the strong conflict of interest Gwen Ifill has that seriously impairs her appearance of impartiality in tonight’s scheduled Biden-Palin Vice Presidential debate? You are aware, are you not, that she has an hagiographic book about Barack Obama (“The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama”) scheduled for release on January 20, 2009? The publisher’s blurb, including such comments as, “THE BREAKTHROUGH is a remarkable look at contemporary politics and an essential foundation for understanding the future of American democracy,” alone should be enough to cast serious doubt on Ifill’s capacity to be an impartial moderator.
May I respectfully suggest replacing Ifill before the reputation of your organization suffers irreparable harm, and that, in the future, a better job of vetting moderators be done?
(Alternatively, I do like the suggestion of some that Governor Palin open her remarks by congratulating Ms. Ifill on the upcoming release of her book and ask her to tell everyone the full title… Oopsie. :-))
*re: NOT listening to radio talk, etc. Try it. Stop only listening to so-called “news” and commentary on radio and TV. Find the transcripts and read what was said. It’ll be an eye-opener. Absent vocal (and with TV, visual) distractions, content becomes king, and often better understanding of what was said ensues. Heck, when something reads a bit hinky, diagram the sentence(s) out and note the actual relationships of words. Yes, sometimes listening can reveal more, but at the very least read what was said as well. (*heh* Anyone who didn’t twig to Clinton’s manipulation of the truth when he said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman. *pause* Miss [yes, that is what he said, and not one single feminista objected to that any more than they did to his sexual predation] Lewinsky,” just wasn’t paying attention. Indeed, every. single. time. he uttered that lie, he placed that very significant pause in exactly the same place. Think about it. So yes, sometimes listening can be helpful. See here, the last 35 or so seconds.)
Wandering through a disjointed, rambling discussion with the voices in my head this A.M….
It’s a good thing I was under-caffeinated this morning. Too many “driving while brain dead” people on the road. Had I been properly caffeinated (thus, awake), I’d probably have stroked out at the number of folks who let a little dampness (after a night full of heavy rain) turn them into Aunt Tillies on the road… But enough of that.
Ever think about the differences between stereotypes and archetypes? They have common roots in real world relationships and usefulness. Archetypes as theoretical models actually have less usefulness in our quotidian experiences, IMO. Stereotypes though…
Ever notice that stereotypes get a bum rap in the talk of Academia Nut Fruitcakes, Mass Media Podpeople, et al, and yet Academia Nut Fruitcakes almost universally stereotype stereotypes as “bad” and Mass Media Podpeople cannot utter two sentences in a row without using stereotypes.
Why is that?
Well, on the one hand, Academia Nut Fruitcakes despise anything that simplifies models to the point of actual usefulness, while at the same time unconsiously making sweeping generalizations (oversimplified assumptions) about the unusefulness of simple models, AKA, stereotypes, which they have come to characterize as oversimplifications of some observed or imagined trait of behaviour or appearance.
(Mass Media Podpeople, OTOH, are unable to think in complex terms at all, and so have nothing BUT genuine oversimplifications to offer. In their case, stereotypes really are a bad, bad thing.)
Why do stereotypes exist to begin with? Because humans are generalization machines and Occam’s Razor is one of the most powerful tools (I almost typed “forces”) of reason. Face it: most “jocks” are intellectually stunted boors. Yes, it’s true. Nerds are, by definition, socially inept. Latino men are almost universally dominated by machismo (natural public reaction to their basically matriarchal home life–*heh*), and American society is becoming ever more feminized day by day.
Sidebar: I don’t have to defend any of the statements above, because to any person who has more functioning brain cells than a head of cabbage they are self-evident. Stereotype-driven, because they are generalizations from the real world that are testable hypotheses that can stand against exceptional tests: they work.
Example: the feminization of America. 99%+ of America’s future is brainwashed in our society’s prisons for kids (disingenuously referred to by Academia Nut Fruitcakes, Mass media Podpeople and politicians *spit* as “public schools”). More and more kids are being drugged out of their minds because, being boys, they act like boys, and our prisons for kids are dominated by female teachers for whom boyish behavior is anathema. Take a typical playground event: bully picks on victim. If the victim does the female teacher-acceptable thing and “goes crying to surrogate mommy” all is well in the eye of the prison for kids. If the victim does the right thing and plasters the bully, he gets in trouble. OK, maybe both get in trouble, but the point is that to satisfy a feminine culture, a forceful personal response results in injustice: punishment for self-defense.
And this trait is, of course, permeating our society. Self-defense is equated with aggression at an increasing rate. By all meeans, lets talk with the crazy guy with the atom bomb…
And that is but one of many examples of the feminization of America.
And so it goes with many things slurred as stereotypes: they are reflections of a reality the politically correct simply want to deny, as they embrace instead their reality-based fantasies and tyrannical utopian/dystopian views.
As someone once said (something like :-)), “In much of [their] talk, thinking is half-murdered.”
THIS is an open trackbacks post. Link to THIS post and track back. 🙂
If you have a linkfest/open trackback post to promote OR if you simply want to promote a post via the linkfests/open trackback posts others are offering, GO TO LINKFEST HAVEN DELUXE! Just CLICK the link above or the graphic immediately below.
I just got this email from John Stephenson. Let’s get with it, folks!
Yesterday we announced that we would be joining Debbie Schlussel, blogger/investigative writer/lawyer as the primary intervening party against the ACLU in their case challenging the NSA. We now have more details. Every person that wants to be involved will need to email her with their address, and othe info. She will send them an affidavit to sign. No cost to anyone. As nice as it is for her to do this all for free, we have set up our donation button in an attempt to raise the $250 it will cost to file the affidavit. It would be greatly appreciated if some of you could send some readers. Perhaps we can find some generous donors for this worthy cause. Thanks, Jay Please share…
Praticing my dope slap (“air whiffs” only 🙂 at Conservative Cat
The Stupid Party needs to get some schooling in Texas Holdem, cos the Demoncraps are taking their shirts:
It used to be that the press would report the happenings of politics. Somewhere along the line, the process became perverted, and politicians began playing to the press and engaging in behavior that was motivated solely because of the prospect of media coverage. The tail wagged the dog, and politicians learned they could manipulate the press. Today, the message of politics is delivered through a liberally biased prism. Not only do Reid and the Democrats make moves designed to get media coverage, they take full advantage of the premise that the people reporting the news are predisposed to liberal ideology.
And infusion of testosterone and an ability to call the Dem’s bluffs every now and then might make a difference in how the game is played in Washington…
Boudicca picked up a non-meme-ish suggestion and passed it on in Top 10 Good People of 2005. Not necessarily “big names” but folks who’ve been a strong positive influence, personally or in wider society.
At least, that’s how I’m choosing to interpret this. 🙂 Bou’s post was a lil vague (she was still heavily medicated from her surgery), and GuyK’s post at Charming, Just Charming (whence Bou picked this up) is pretty open-ended.
So, maybe not ten. Maybe not the TOP ten. But quite a few.
Let me begin with my fav top ten bloggers who have had a positive influence on me this year. Keep in mind: I am NOT listing them in any order other than maybe alphabetically, ‘K? Having pared it down to only ten, I feel badly because another list just as long belongs with this one. So, as wrong as this list is, here are ten OF the top good folks who have positively influenced my life this last year:
Kris at Anywhere But Here
Christine of BTW and Morning Coffee & Afternoon Tea
Bou (heal quickly!) at Boudicca’s Voice
My Blogmom, Carol Platt Liebau 🙂
Kathryn at Cathouse Chat
Diane of, well, Diane’s Stuff
Rich at The English Guy
Kat from Keep The Coffee Coming
TMH (secretive booger that he is) of TMH’s Bacon Bits
Woody of the eponymous Woody’s News & Views
Please keep in mind that I’ve left off many who have been just as good to me, had influence just as positive as the folks on this list, but I’m trying to keep this portion at ten. The rest of you who belong on this list also know you do, but you’re the kinda folks who will take it in the right spirit. Good on you one and all.
In “real life” I’d have to list my Wonder Woman, Lovely Daughter and Bubba at the top. No matter what (even when I’m not at my best or irked with one of them or whatever), they are the most positive influences in my life. Period. They KNOW the real curmudgeonly me, and still lend me their light.
I miss my neighbor. Yeh. The one neighbor, really. Always ready to help with anything. Nobody’s perfect, but he was a thoughtful, generous guy.
A couple of my siblings definitely qualify as strong influences for good-older sister and younger brother. Pretty constant contact with these two, and they are always uplifting. Heck, I’d have to say my youngest nephew has been a strong positive influence! (Just keeping up with his academic progress has thrown me back at some classics in my reading.) Great kid.
Guy at the local grocery who has fun playing my silly people/word games. Heck, the checkers there are neat, too. Aww… even the owner’s a really nice guy (though he’d not necessarily want ya to know it–likes to play curmudgeon. heh).
And two clients who have done medical transcription for years (you know who you are-and since you read this blog, I’ll let this be your “Have a great new year!” OK? :-). Thanks, ladies, for your continual positive outlook and influence on me. Oh, and thank the bread baker, too.
NOTE: this list is not exhaustive, either. Just a quick runback through a few contacts in the last lil bit who have been constant positive influences over the past year.
And that’s my of ten of the top Good People of 2005 for the “real world”-how about yours?
By now you’ve probably heard the cannard that Cheney said Iraq was responsible for 9/11. The MSM (main stream media, or, as I prefer, mass media podpeople) have been going ape over this lie, based on a Meet the Press interview with Tim Russert on September 14. In fact, many of them have been showing a clip they say has Cheney saying that very thing.
Not so. You can look it up yourself (the transcript is online here), but here’s the part from the September 14, 2003 Meet the Press quote that the MSM, and their partners-in-crime in the Democrat party, disingenuously clip to create their lie…
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Tim, we can do what we have to do to prevail in this conflict. Failureâ€™s not an option. And go back again and think about whatâ€™s involved here. This is not just about Iraq or just about the difficulties we might encounter in any one part of the country in terms of restoring security and stability. This is about a continuing operation on the war on terror. And itâ€™s very, very important we get it right. If weâ€™re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so itâ€™s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that itâ€™s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. They understand whatâ€™s at stake here. Thatâ€™s one of the reasons theyâ€™re putting up as much of a struggle as they have, is because they know if we succeed here, that thatâ€™s going to strike a major blow at their capabilities.
MR. RUSSERT: So the resistance in Iraq is coming from those who were responsible for 9/11?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I was careful not to say that. With respect to 9/11, 9/11, as I said at the beginning of the show, changed everything. And one of the things it changed is we recognized that time was not on our side, that in this part of the world, in particular, given the problems weâ€™ve encountered in Afghanistan, which forced us to go in and take action there, as well as in Iraq, that we, in fact, had to move on it. The relevance for 9/11 is that what 9/11 marked was the beginning of a struggle in which the terrorists come at us and strike us here on our home territory. And itâ€™s a global operation. It doesnâ€™t know national boundaries or national borders.
Thx to Polpundit for checking the facts.