Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Fallacy after Fallacious Reasoning after Fallacy...



The United States of Blame.

Tom Whipple, a retired CIA analyst (yes, that CIA) had this to say on his web site today.

No wonder that, according to a recent Washington Post poll, 58 percent of Americans are mad at President Obama, 68 percent mad at Congressional Democrats, and 72 percent mad at Congressional Republicans, and 62 percent want to throw somebody out of office in hopes of finding a shining knight who will solve their economic problems. If only it were as easy as going out and voting.

Interestingly, six in ten surveyed by Pew believe that the economic situation will be better soon and that the recession is only temporary. This alone vividly illustrates how poorly the true state of the global economic situation is understood and the size of the shock that most of us are in for.

Nearly everyone will admit that continuing oil shortages and that high (above $100 a barrel) oil prices would be devastating to the prospects for economic recovery and that persisting very high (say above $200 a barrel) oil prices would send the U.S. and many other economies into a deep, long-lasting depression. The problem is that few are willing to consider seriously the accumulating evidence that increasing oil prices and eventually oil shortages within the next few years are as inevitable as the sunrise. Most of us have no thoughts about the issue other than the current price of a gallon of gas. Among those who appreciate that the world's petroleum resources are finite, few understand the proximity of the crisis.
We have become the United State of BLAME. Obama and his team were doomed by the zeitgeist blowing when they took office. The ghost of Jimmy Carter is long indeed. Rather than tackle the problem head on, the Administration punted/puked, hoping only to gain a second term - because that is the only measure of success in politics. What we really needed in the 2008 election was an old man not considering a second term - Ron Paul and John McCain come to mind - and willing to "do the nasty".

Oh, well.

---------------------------------------------

BTW

Remember that Congressman, Carson I believe, that claimed that Tea Party folks/fat white folks used the "N" word (and FYI, I deleted someone's recent comments because of the use of that word) repeatedly? And that Andrew Breitbart of breitbart.com then offered $100,000 as a reward if someone could substantiate this with a recording or video... and given the number of video cameras on hand and visible in the news shot it is reasonable to conclude that if it were shouted at the Congressman SOMEBODY would have picked it up... Well, guess what.

People make false accusations. Congressmen make false accusations. Strippers at Duke LaCrosse parties make false accusations. People in divorce court make false accusations. I consider false accusers to be lower than child molesters - especially Carson. Look, we all expect people with mental illnesses, borderline personality disorder, bi-polar disorder, mood disorder... to pull this sh*t. Sitting Congressmen? Not so much. And where is the F***ing media? Nowhere to be found.

The accusation is always on the front page. The retraction is on page 18, right under the pet obituaries. In this case, it just kind of faded away with the help of the Media





23 comments:

PioneerPreppy said...

For the record... It wasn't my post which was deleted :)

Dextred1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tweell said...

McCain would have punted as well. 'Maverick' has always done what he figured would get him maximum media adulation. The difference between him and Obama is that with McCain we'd be on the winding staircase down, instead of the express elevator. Ron Paul could have, but getting him elected? To borrow an acronym, NAFC.

bureaucrat said...

Yeah, you deleted my comments, Jeffers, even though the word was not demeaning in that context to anyone.

The readers can judge for themselves, with the horrible word *censored* (how Libertarian) ...

My text went something like this ...

"The job of a police officer is more complicated than it was 30 years ago, when the cop job essentially meant "busting some n****rs heads"

Anyone can tell that is a "facetious" (amusing/humorous) sentence, and no one would take that naughty word to be anything but a reference to the bad old days when any idiot with a stick could be a cop.

Read "Tom Sawyer," the greatest American novel ever (or was it Huckleberry Finn ....). It's fulla that word. :)

But I'll stay gone if you want me gone.

A Quaker in a Strange Land said...

Bur:

You can post it like that or in quotes as the "N" word and not hear a peep from me. I was trying to simply give you a another opportunity to express yourself without giving offense.

The word is simply too hot to handle and too offensive and will definitely be taken out of context even if used innocently in making a point. BTW, I listen to Rap and sing along in my car, "N" word and all... the "N" word would likely have left our lexicon were it not for the Hip Hopers... but I am not going to take them to task on it. As I have said many, many times... Life is NOT fair.

Libertarianism does not work by censuring nor by ignoring important sensitivities. It wasn't that important to your point and I felt disinclined to reprimand you for something lacking substance. If I were able to delete certain words I would have done so. Blogspot does not allow comment editing.

Tweel:

I am afraid that you are probably correct... but one can hope.

A Quaker in a Strange Land said...

Please don't hold my Rap inclinations against me. I like R&B, rap, Motown... I played football in high school and college and many of the players were black and played music in the locker room or the team bus, etc... and I got to like the music.

Its not a PC music genre to be sure but some of the music is fun to listen to even if some of the lyrics can bring offense. Again, life is NOT fair. If white singers spoke those lyrics... well it would not be tolerated.

It is not my show... I'm just working the lights....

bureaucrat said...

The "word" is not needed at all in popular conversation, and wouldn't have been "sustained" this long were it not for a whole culture of people -- black, white, brown -- who feel such "shock" words are the only way they feel like they have any power at all, in a world where you are either rich or you are _____ (fill in the blank).

I still think my use of the "word" was in no way offensive and emphasized the point, but I can move on ...

Sooo, what are we talking about ... how about those Gulf oil holes!!!! It's pretty much all or nothing now. Either BP plugged the leak, or Simmons and his nuke idea will eventually be required. :)

Dextred1 said...

Bur,

Was wondering where you were!

Stephen B. said...

I disagree Bur. I think that usage you employed WAS offensive. Sorry, I just do.

In my work with residential teenagers, mostly black, I must hear the word about 30 times an hour. We've tried stamping it out, but it comes back and back. They don't see the problem with the word, but I object to the N word on two grounds:

1.) Just let ME try to use the word and they'd freak, and rightly so. A word simply cannot be okay for only *certain* kinds of people to use. If the the latter is the case, then the word is simply too tainted. Letting only certain segments of society employ the word is divisive and ugly, pure and simple.

2.) Even when the black kids use the N word, they use it in a negative way. That is, as employed by them, it's synonymous with "rascal" or "little devil" or something similar. Even though at first, this might seem harmless, I think it's still kind of self-hateful in a way because it's a small, but constant reminder, that African (NIGERian) people are in some, even small way, less of a person than non-N'ers are. As a mentor and role model, I'll object every time to that usage of theirs' too.

The word simply HAS to be retired by anybody and everybody that considers themselves an anti-racist, with no room for negotiation.

Regarding what could have been after the 2008 election - I simply think that NOTHING at this point from the White House can save America from what is to come as the US is simply beyond help at this point in terms of dealing with making do with less energy.

bureaucrat said...

If I heard the word 30 times an hour, I'd be pretty numb to it myself. But it is all context. If they think they show everyone how tough and cool and worldly they are by using "the word," let them. It means nothing to me. But for them, it's a badge of honor. Let them have their badge. They have little else, with the jobs gone ...

A Quaker in a Strange Land said...

I agree with Stephan (obviously). The word needs to be retired.

But somehow I think it won't be... but what's that have to do with us? Let us all agree not to use it here. What any choose to do in their own lives is not my concern. My only concern was to not offend readers of this blog in this way (we offend each other enough.)

Let us move on.

Anonymous said...

Stephen,

We have been beyond the point of resolving the energy problem without serious pain since well before 2008. There is still a big range of how bad things will be in five to ten years, depending on what is done now. Every day we fall further into the hole. Both the best outcome and the worst outcome are becoming worse day by day.

Regards,

Coal Guy

Stephen B. said...

This passage is at the core of where we are now:

Nearly everyone will admit that continuing oil shortages and that high (above $100 a barrel) oil prices would be devastating to the prospects for economic recovery and that persisting very high (say above $200 a barrel) oil prices would send the U.S. and many other economies into a deep, long-lasting depression. The problem is that few are willing to consider seriously the accumulating evidence that increasing oil prices and eventually oil shortages within the next few years are as inevitable as the sunrise.

Most people I know still refuse to even talk about this. Now, if we can't even talk about it yet.....?

Rather, one sees writings and talk about a "recovery", as if it's even remotely possible. Sometimes such people postulate a recovery if only the Dems lose, or if the Repubs can be held further at bay.

Ya, right. Inevitable as a sunrise? How about a sunSET instead?

Yes Coal Guy, it's bad.

bureaucrat said...

They refuse to talk about it cause they don't have to. :) But you have a "malfuction" in Gulf oil drilling, and the story leads the Nightly News (NBC) every night for 86 days (I watched almost every day). They will talk .. when it becomes newsworthy and trendy to talk about it.

Oil/gasoline/diesel will NOT go to $200 a barrel for any length of time for the reason you stated -- it will slam the economy down so hard that demand for oil will drop, and prices for oil/gasoline will drop (simple economics). What we will have is ERRATIC prices, going up and down, perhaps violently, as oil products become more and more hard to find at ANY price. This isn't Europe (with their $10 equivalent cost per gallon of gasoline, a price they have sustained for decades). They have (real) trains, and the whole of Europe fits into the landmass of the U.S. east of the Mississippi River plus Texas. They have a lot shorter distance to go.

But, lets have some hope ... at the end of the year (hopehopehopehope), we are supposed to see the Chevy Volt, a 100% electric car, made available. If there is lots of lithium (for batteries), a big maybe, that could change the game somewhat. If not, the E85/ethanol-powered cars & vans do work (I've driven them for 18 years). There just isn't enough corn to replace oil with ethanol, and there never will be.

k said...

"F@ck hope!"
-George Carlin

Hope is just a p.c. reason to sit on our a$ses.

Stephen B. said...

Bur, I think I agree with oil not getting to $200 for very long (unless some the currency is diluted much more) as yes, the economy will pull back enough to take the pressure off of oil prices.

But then the economy tries to heat back up again.....and there's that $200+ mark

and again, and again.....each time the economy stumbles harder....each time the quantity of oil produced and consumed sinks further.....

I'm not sure if you're trying to imply that it won't be that bad, but it sounds pretty insufferable enough for a lot of people already.

It's too bad people won't talk about *it* because they/we are losing even more precious time than we already have to even somewhat ameliorate the coming economic fallout. I force the conversations as much as I can. To hell with what anybody thinks at this point. What they do or don't do afterward is their business.

Stephen B. said...

(unless the currency is diluted much more)

that is

Anonymous said...

The price of oil is irrelevant. Whether economic collapse occurs at $80/barrel or $400/barrel doesn't mean much in the scheme of things. It doesn't matter much if there is no oil to buy or it is available but you cant afford to buy it. Either way you don't get any.

Regards,

Coal Guy

bureaucrat said...

Gentlemen, gentlemen, please try to remember that the United States, and the world, got along just fine before oil was discovered in 1873whatever. We had to use horses, spare parts didn't come in those neat plastic holders, and we couldn't fly to Mexico for vacation, but we survived. And for the smart people who live in a walkable/busable/trainable city, who have debt under control, who are growing potatoes in the backyard, who are familiar with ethanol as a vehicle fuel :), things will be ok. Medical might suck, and people will die sooner, but we've been thru this non-oil life all before.

We can always eat our guns and our gold if things get dark. :)

Anonymous said...

I see the ridiculous Bur comments continue. You do know that the country/culture/environment is very different than "1873" right? Small things such as a population of about 40 million in the US back then, compared to 300million+ now. Skills and experience actually LIVING under the pre-Oil conditions.

So conditions are quite different, the comparison is a farce. We aren't an agricultural do-it yourself culture, we are hyperspecialized--in many things that are supported by Oil.

I didn't think you had gold or guns Bur? So just ripping on some type of wealthy survivalist stereotype to fill your quota of inane biased garbage for the day?

It's funny that the most biased and prejudicial crap is typed by the "white knight" of liberalism on this blog.

Sure the world will continue, but read history, empires tend to not do so well during their decline periods. So the US as the largest food producer (propped up by petrochemical food system) will just what--become urban backyard gardeners? You parent's should ask for your money back on that degree they bought you--your incessant quips are starting to make me think you take your "logic" from the quote book of Sarah Palin.

-Meiyo

Stephen B. said...

Lol Bur. I was kind of with you on the oil price thing, but that latest comment, saying that the world will continue as it did in the 1800s.....umm, have you thought about how much harder it is to learn to drive a horse compared to a car? We don't just instantly recreate the horse support infrastructure either. Then too, we'd need like 5X the horses we had back then, while a mare at best can toss one foal a year, which in turn will need a couple of years to reach breeding age assuming the offspring is even a female. It'll take years and years to rebuild the draft animal population, lol.

Then too, a good deal many people don't know how to really cook from scratch anymore, or how to grow anything. I could go on and on, but we've been over this a thousand times already anyhow.

No, we won't just go back to the 1800s easily.

Stephen B. said...

How are people going to grow potatoes in the back yard when a goodly number of folks aren't even sure, when looking at a bunch of apples and potatoes, as to which one grows in the ground?

bureaucrat said...

In 1776, we were all backyard gardeners. Only a few million people here at that time. We survived. Not easy, but survived.

If you aren't accepting my "we'll find a way ridiculousness," please tell me how you plan to panic, screaming down the street, yelling about how This is the end! This is the end! Why don't you rehearse the endtimes for us, put it on youtube, and we'll watch you make a fool out of yourself. ;)

The end of one empire is the start of a new empire, and on and on ...

We have lots of time to learn lots of new (and old) skills, and of course the oil will never completely run out. We won't have American Idol on TV anymore. That will indeed break my heart.

Any idiot can grow potatoes. I can grow potatoes. :)