tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post1670064179103276886..comments2024-03-28T20:04:20.286-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: The Extraordinarily High Negative IQ of ObamaGagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-24153556650653674372009-08-16T11:51:59.056-07:002009-08-16T11:51:59.056-07:00While the term Classical Liberalism was never mono...While the term Classical Liberalism was never monolithic, there was always a general understanding that it was concerned with Rights, as derived from the nature of Man - whether from God or biology was often unclear (or fudged for cover against popular opinion), but it was understood that they referred to characteristics inherent IN Man, and in the Individual, and that those rights required people to make choices in order to develop certain behaviors and characteristics in themselves as individuals, and which also served to define what could and couldn't be done to them, without violating their rights and choices.<br /> <br />Beginning with Descartes, and becoming more pronounced with Rousseau, Hume and Kant, the philosophic notion gained currency that perhaps 'rights' didn't derive from within Man, but instead came from the environment and circumstances without Man. This is the root split that defines whether in the broadest terms, a person is of <br />- the Right - which believes rights are derived from the nature of man and depend upon choices made of his own free will – the heart and center of his life<br />, or from <br />- the Left, which believes that the persons circumstances and environment is what molds his 'character', and determines his lot in life, free will being an illusion<br /> <br />The Right believes that a person must be left free to form their own life and circumstances and that a better society is built from people living their own lives and that their right to the property they spend their time and effort in creating is inviolate.<br /><br />The Left believes that society must alter peoples circumstances, forcibly if necessary, in order to reform the people into a 'better' society and society has a first claim on as much of the property available within society that it may require in order to do so.<br /><br />The philosophies which believe that it is up to society to create the opportune circumstances so that people can be reformed and improved, is the root of the trunk which includes communism, socialism, marxism, progressivism, fascism, etc. They all developed from the same source, but have their own unique slants upon it, such as Preregressives believe in panels of experts who dictate laws and regulations as needed to reform society, while Fascists believe in One Leader who will remake society and the people as he directs.<br /><br />Ok, enough.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-41410307777675799922009-08-16T11:51:20.500-07:002009-08-16T11:51:20.500-07:00gulpingpotty said "I guess I must be as stupi...gulpingpotty said "I guess I must be as stupid as Van claims"<br /> <br />Very likely true.<br /> <br />"You'll have to forgive me if I am confused by the subtlety of your thought"<br /> <br />I forgive you.<br /> <br />"Van seems to be loudly screaming that Ford, at least, is NOT part of the left, just a "progressive"...What about Hitler? You seem to say above that he's not a progressive, so do you repudiate Goldberg and Bob's thesis that he is a member of the left as well? If he's a leftist, what makes him one and Ford not one?"<br /> <br />Crud. No doubt I'll regret this, but I'm a sucker for the seemingly honest question.<br /> <br />"so do you repudiate Goldberg and Bob's thesis that he is a member of the left as well?"<br /> <br />First off, it's obvious you haven't read Goldberg's book, or you wouldn't be asking these questions - you might want to stop presuming you know what it said and means in order to argue against your own straw self, and just break down and read an opposing view to see what sense you think it does or doesn't make based on what it says – not what you guess it says.<br /> <br />Next, though they often share the same labels(left, right), there is a distinction you have to actively make when discussing philosophies, political philosophies and political parties, and keep the context of the conversation carefully in mind.<br /> <br />Next, or existing vocabulary for discussing political philosophy, and for making distinctions between them… sucks. There is always inaccuracy and spillover, but you have to go to speak with the words you’ve got.<br /><br />For instance, to take the other side of the situation, using the term 'Conservative' as if you are referring to the right or to republicans alone, is always deeply flawed - there are plenty of 'conservative' democrats ('bluedog', etc), independents, etc - unless you are speaking to a known audience, you've got to constantly clarify what you are talking about (and yes, raccoons are a known audience, and there's several years of posts to clarify it to those who aren't - assuming they're interested in actually learning, rather than just opposing). <br /> <br />You also can't assume that 'conservative' has a philosophic or economic understanding, people very often think of themselves as 'conservative' when what they mean is traditionalist - they're not so concerned about the right or wrong of matters, but that something has always been done, or they suppose it was done in some idyllic memory of theirs, and so should be carried on the same today - and they too can be found on both the left and the right.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-41932833945444822312009-08-15T22:55:16.555-07:002009-08-15T22:55:16.555-07:00-?!
makes me think of the quip supposedly made by...-?!<br /><br />makes me think of the quip supposedly made by Orwell about some ideas being so ridiculous that only an intellectual could believe them...WWWebbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03491098272113630084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-56416946089628688182009-08-15T13:53:30.885-07:002009-08-15T13:53:30.885-07:00You have to wonder what is the point of trying to ...You have to wonder what is the point of trying to link Nazism to the left. Afte all, there are a great many atrocites and crimes that are more plausibly attributed to the left, such as those of Stalinist Russia or Maoist China. You can argue about how much these crimes tar the left as a whole, or the left of today, or even that Stalin and suchlike were not a leftist at all (after all, Lenin wrote a book vigorously denouncing the left-wing of his own movement). But if your goal was to attack the left, that would be a MUCH more plausible place to start.<br /><br />So I hypothesize that all this Hitler crap is not so much about the left, but is an attempt by rightists to evade the moral duty of acknowledging their own complicity in the horrors of the 20th century. They are constructing a childish, black-and-white model of history where all evil can be linked to the left and they can regard themselves to be as pure as the driven snow. But they aren't fooling anybody but themselves.goddinpottynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-13328089122071333042009-08-15T13:34:19.526-07:002009-08-15T13:34:19.526-07:00Every day he unleashes some kind of crazy remark t...Every day he unleashes some kind of crazy remark that you just know he must have picked up in college. But since he's only ever associated with those types of scoundrels, he has no idea how offensive he is to normal people."<br /><br />I believe that may be why he chose not to make his college transcripts available for the public to see. Probably on the advice of Rahmmy, or one of his other 6,000 advisors. <br /><br />Not so much because of the grades, but the content, which shows what Obama has been trying to unsuccessfully hide. <br />Of course, no dyed in the state wool leftist can long hide who they are.<br /><br />It's even tougher when Zero cannot stop himself from yakkin' every chance he gets. He craves the attention too much.<br />I am kinda surprised that his plants haven't been better vetted, but I reckon even the MSM can't cover for him 24/7.USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-17893622384393937462009-08-15T13:16:55.669-07:002009-08-15T13:16:55.669-07:00"But if one of my students suggested that hum..."But if one of my students suggested that human beings are programmed by natural selection "to find the truth," I'd probably slap him upside the head with my zen stick. Good thing I don't have any students. Or a zen stick."<br /><br />At that point you might wanna borrow Cousin Dupree's pliars n' blowtorch.USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-83142669870542299182009-08-15T10:56:19.929-07:002009-08-15T10:56:19.929-07:00Van,
As long as folks around here continue to defe...Van,<br />As long as folks around here continue to defend Republicans, conflating them with conservatives, as was done here for years, then I intend to point out its lunacy and flaws.<br /><br />Your argument about King, though quite true, could be as aptly used to defend FDR, and his willingness to fight Germany and Japan. Nonetheless, he is universally maligned by so-called (I use that phrase because, truly, there are so few in the country) "conservatives". The truth is, fundamentally, King was courageous, but also fundamentally, a leftist. Turns out, leftists can sometimes be courageous and quite right.<br />And I loathe leftism.Hulk Hogannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-42681429665782972052009-08-15T09:05:30.946-07:002009-08-15T09:05:30.946-07:00Like I always say, "there are two kinds of id...Like I always say, "there are two kinds of idiots in this world: born idiots and educated idiots."<br /><br />Funny thing is I'm an electronic engineer and a wanta be physicist, yet I feel ignorant of the world around me. But, these educated idiots act as if they know everything and yet remain unaware of there ignorance.<br /><br />For me, I use ignorance as a guide to learn new things.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-16507508101453206412009-08-15T09:05:26.165-07:002009-08-15T09:05:26.165-07:00I guess I must be as stupid as Van claims, because...I guess I must be as stupid as Van claims, because I do not understand why he eagerly introduces Henry Ford into a conversation supporting this statement: "read Goldberg's <i>Liberal Fascism</i> for the sordid history of the left's efforts to eliminate the less than human. There is no question that Hitler was inspired by the American progressive movement in that regard.". Goldberg claims Hitler was a "man of the left", Bob claims that the left has a "sordid history" of "eliminating the less than human", and implies by his language that the "American progressive movement" is part of "the left", you jump in to contribute the ties between the supposed progressive Ford and the supposed leftist Hitler. You'll have to forgive me if I am confused by the subtlety of your thought, but it sure sounds like an effort to tie all these individuals and groups together and smear them all together. <br /><br />Perhaps I am wrong to conflate the opinions of Van, Bob, and Goldberg. Van seems to be loudly screaming that Ford, at least, is NOT part of the left, just a "progressive" (which is a superset rather than a subset of the left). So, that's good, there's at least one evil person the left doesn't have to take responsibility for. What about Hitler? You seem to say above that he's not a progressive, so do you repudiate Goldberg and Bob's thesis that he is a member of the left as well? If he's a leftist, what makes him one and Ford not one?goddinpottynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-45186126797959911452009-08-15T08:37:47.548-07:002009-08-15T08:37:47.548-07:00Andre said "20 years from now, "conserva...Andre said "20 years from now, "conservatives" will be hailing Obama as their man"<br /><br />'r'epublicans probably will.<br /><br />The Classical Liberal wing of the Conservatives, will not.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-79258937063709258482009-08-15T08:36:08.932-07:002009-08-15T08:36:08.932-07:00Andre,
I'm not quite sure about their links, b...Andre,<br />I'm not quite sure about their links, but this reply <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/825242/replies?c=27" rel="nofollow">by Marron</a> has a better grasp of the issues than the post does, especially around the constitutional issues and confused terminology of 'right', 'conservative', etc. <br /><br />And regarding King himself,<br /><br />"<i>As for Martin Luther King, to prove that he was a flawed man is to prove nothing. Jim Crow was immoral. To fight it was dangerous and lonely, and I have nothing but respect for anyone who got out of their easy chairs and into the fight. We all believe that, if it came right down to it, we would be willing to put our lives on the line for freedom. But it did come down to it, and it was a flawed preacher, and his flawed followers, who stood up. For all of his flaws, he is the bigger man than his detractors, who were content to see oppression continue into yet another generation</i>. "<br /><br />Yep.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-29064479664360753972009-08-15T07:08:33.234-07:002009-08-15T07:08:33.234-07:0020 years from now, "conservatives" will ...20 years from now, "conservatives" will be hailing Obama as their man, like they do Martin Luther King, Jr., and, perhaps even more amazingly, Hilary Clinton.<br /><br />http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/825242/posts#commentAndre the Giantnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-87710485899012644702009-08-15T00:24:17.886-07:002009-08-15T00:24:17.886-07:00Wow potty, you don't just play one online... y...Wow potty, you don't just play one online... you really <i>are</i> a moron!<br /><br />"Van: "Not only inspired, he actually wrote what can almost be termed a 'fan letter' to American progressives... ""<br /><br />Which means that Hitler was inspired <b>by</b> ... wait for it...<br /><br />(ready?)<br /><br />PROGRESSIVES!<br /><br />Hitler - was a fascist.<br />He was inspired by... Progressives... learned a lot from them... but was a fascist....<br /><br />Oh forget it, I'm sorry potty, all this time I thought you were just trying to annoy us, but you really are unable to read.<br /><br />Good luck.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-24063176471889927142009-08-14T23:14:56.715-07:002009-08-14T23:14:56.715-07:00Van -- it's cute to see you try to weasel out ...Van -- it's cute to see you try to weasel out of something you said just days ago. Unfortunately for you, the Internet leaves a permanent record. The exchange was this:<br /> <br /><a href="http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2009/08/when-infants-attack-on-reality-and-its.html?showComment=1249959577719#8882840734304190452" rel="nofollow">Bob: "read Goldberg's Liberal Fascism</a> for the sordid history of the left's efforts to eliminate the "less than human." There is no question that Hitler was inspired by the American progressive movement in that regard.<br /><br />Van: "Not only inspired, he actually wrote what can almost be termed a 'fan letter' to American progressives... "<br /><br />Van: "Here we go: Hitler may have first come upon the anti-semitic "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" thanks to an extended newspaper serialization financed by American Proregressive, Henry Ford, ""I regard Henry Ford as my inspiration,"...<br /><br />So back in the ancient time of this past Tuesday you and Bob were perfectly happy to conflate Hitler and the left and progressives and Henry Ford, but now that I've called you on your bullshit the fine distinctions are so very important.goddinpottynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-59405190571222673302009-08-14T22:27:49.583-07:002009-08-14T22:27:49.583-07:00I like chocolate milk.I like chocolate milk.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-80551814274962633922009-08-14T21:25:18.714-07:002009-08-14T21:25:18.714-07:00pottyfood said "I believe your resident pinhe...pottyfood said "I believe your resident pinhead Van was recently arguing that Henry Ford and John McCain were leftists"<br /><br />I know these are big words, but do try to follow along. <br /><br />'Progressive' is one word, 'leftist' is another. See how that works? hmm... ok... I'll break it down further,<br /><br />'pro-gres-sive' see? three syllables, 'left-ist' two syllables... see that? Two different words, two different meanings - that doesn't mean they don't have some things in common, but even so, they are not the same.<br /><br />Ok, good... now stay with me here... Progressivism was a political philosophy which claimed adherents in most of the political parties of the later 1800's and into it's height in the early 1900's. Teddy Roosevelt (republican) and Woodrow Wilson (democrat) were both popular, though rival, progressives. Do a little reading <i>not too much</i> don't strain the brain... baby steps. The truth is out there. Courage.<br /><br />Ok, now here's what's going to be the tough part for you, because it involves not just nouns, but concepts too. <br /><br />'Progressive' is the higher conceptual term, the larger set, which contains people who are on the left, and on the right. It's primary visible distinctive feature, is a near mania for rule by experts. Nothing gets a progressives blood going like setting up panels of experts with the authority to 'reform' and 'guide' the lesser people in need of their expertise. <br /><br />While those with economic philosophies that tend towards socialistic views, leftists, make up the majority of progressives today, there are also those who nominally support 'free market' policies (overseen by experts of course, who will keep people in line), also make up sizable numbers within progressive circles. The key non-visible aspect of proregressivism is it's adherence to pragmatism, the belief that principles may be fine in theory, but action, doing '<i>what works</i>' is far more important, and shouldn't be restrained by airy theories.<br /><br />So people like McCain will have many fine things to say about free speech, and free markets, but <i>"Gosh darn it! There's too much free speakin' going on! People are giving TOO MUCH money to people that experts like me don't agree are 'sound'!"</i>, and so you get little 'r' republicans for campaign finance reform, etc.<br /><br />Ok, that's enough for tonight. Rest. Read some in the morning. You'll get it eventually... just remember... maybe write them down so you can <i>see</i> the difference, 'progressive', 'leftist', two different words... related... but different.<br /><br />Phew!Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-34128872999783522662009-08-14T20:32:10.735-07:002009-08-14T20:32:10.735-07:00@Northern Bandit:
1. I sense that you are gropin...@Northern Bandit: <br /><br />1. I sense that you are groping towards Truth by standing on a putrid, collapsing mound of lies. Don't think that's going to work, and I'm doing my best to hasten the collapse.<br /><br />2. Bob's demented and ignorant rants about "leftism" are amusing rather than enraging. Today's example is a good one -- it could not possibly convince anyone who was not already in the tank, so not at all dangerous. Still, it is hard not to answer libel. <br /><br />"leftism [is] a bankrupt and odious creed unfit for any decent human being"...well, since you define leftism so expansively as to include practically everyone (I believe your resident pinhead Van was recently arguing that Henry Ford and John McCain were leftists), then the world is quite full of indecent human beings.<br /><br />3. I am fascinated by how your wretched politics relates to the less-obviously wretched take on science, psychology, metaphysics, and spirituality. In other words, you give God a bad name, but I imagine he'll survive.goddinpottynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-51660700078157471322009-08-14T17:35:27.829-07:002009-08-14T17:35:27.829-07:001. "And what evidence is presented for Obama&...1. "And what evidence is presented for Obama's supposed lack of brains?"<br /><br />How about trying to convince an audience that they should let government run health care by comparing it to the post office AND mentioning how the post office keeps messing up? He was trying to make another point but could not see the trap he set for himself as he set it. You confuse beautiful grammar with beautiful semantics when evaluating intelligence - hence the wringing of hands in the Democrat party worrying that they might not be using the right words to make a winning message.<br /><br />2. The Federalist Papers compendium is one of those things that makes me reluctantly admit that the traditionalist view that we are in a declining age of humanity could be true - very few could write like that today and even fewer would read it.<br /><br />3. back to Godinpotty - you conflate a political party and the conservative movement of which it is only a flawed incarnation.... but there is no difference between party and ideals on the left so I understand the confusion.Alannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-88263116856542729072009-08-14T15:38:55.509-07:002009-08-14T15:38:55.509-07:00goddinpotty keeps coming back because he/she:
1. ...goddinpotty keeps coming back because he/she:<br /><br />1. senses that raccoons are groping toward Truth in a deep way he/she hasn't encountered anywhere else;<br /><br />2. dimly realizes that Bob -- and numerous others -- are completely correct in depicting leftism as a bankrupt and odious creed unfit for any decent human being;<br /><br />3. is irresistibly intrigued by #1 while simultaneously being enraged by #2.<br /><br />The only question is for me is whether people like goddinpotty are beyond hope. Most people would have said I was 15 years ago.Northern Banditnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-54820709678411105822009-08-14T14:50:34.226-07:002009-08-14T14:50:34.226-07:00(-K)<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/03/magazine/03Obama-t.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all" rel="nofollow">(-K)</a>Susannahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381272662339466736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-44571245381864070042009-08-14T14:02:38.258-07:002009-08-14T14:02:38.258-07:00gulpingpotty said "manifest idiots like Bush,...gulpingpotty said "manifest idiots like Bush, Palin, and McCain"<br /><br />It's a comforting truth about fools and liars, that despite the obfuscating haze of their words (or because of them), the truth about themselves is so clearly demonstrated by their own words.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-27598305041714010562009-08-14T13:39:39.093-07:002009-08-14T13:39:39.093-07:00Thanks for your inquiry. If you change your mind,...Thanks for your inquiry. If you change your mind, remember the Membership requirements (Bylaws, sec. 2):<br /><br />- US citizen for the last six months<br />- have a public school diploma<br />- pay a $1.50 initiation feePeteynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-62379414573494746452009-08-14T13:31:16.379-07:002009-08-14T13:31:16.379-07:00It is pretty funny for the party led by the likes ...It is pretty funny for the party led by the likes of manifest idiots like Bush, Palin, and McCain, not to mention the cable blowhards like the innumerate O'Reilly, the clownish Beck, and the gross Limbaugh -- complaining about the intelligence of Obama. And what evidence is presented for Obama's supposed lack of brains? A couple of lame, made-up memes from the wingnut echo chamber. Oh, but right, you have redefined "intelligence" to mean something other than what everybody else means. <br /><br />Oh well, if you want to paint yourself into an intellectual corner where you exchange private insights in a private language with your own slavish cultists, go right ahead. The rest of us have a world to deal with.goddinpottynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-16576886018017970312009-08-14T13:15:42.024-07:002009-08-14T13:15:42.024-07:00We must support the president in his failure to su...We must support the president in his failure to support the troops, or it could help fail to threaten the troops he endangers!Orwellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-54245736404661134362009-08-14T13:11:42.359-07:002009-08-14T13:11:42.359-07:00" stop criticizing the commnander in chief. I..." stop criticizing the commnander in chief. It endangers those who protect our freemdoms (sic)"<br /><br />Right! Like the freedom to, oh, let's say, criticize our leaders! No, wait, that can't be right...Northern Banditnoreply@blogger.com