Showing posts with label Epistemic Closure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Epistemic Closure. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Wacky, Ideological Nonsense

I recently posted the following question on Quora:

What are some opinions of President Obama's analysis of the current state of the Republican party, saying it is supported by "a lot of wacky ideological nonsense?"

The president's quote comes from an interview he did recently with Thomas Friedman in which he said:

If you look at the Democratic consensus, it’s a pretty common-sense mainstream consensus. It’s not a lot of wacky ideological nonsense. And by the way, it generally is fact-based and reason-based. You know, we’re not denying science, we’re not denying climate change, we’re not pretending that somehow having a whole bunch of uninsured people is the American way.

As one can see from the number of views and responses on my question, the quote has generated a lot of interest. But is the president correct?

Well, I've also recently asked another question on Quora.

In looking at current conservative leaders, pundits, and supporters, which few, as a collection, best represent the Republican party today?

Here are the people listed in the responses.

Ted Cruz
Rick Perry
Michele Bachmann
Rand Paul
Chris Christie
Paul Ryan
Jeb Bush
Marco Rubio
Bill Whittle
The Koch Brothers

I'd say that's a pretty good representation of the Republican party and conservatives today.

Now, the only two names on the list that think climate change is due to carbon emissions are Jeb Bush and the Koch Brothers (even though they pretend to not believe in climate change). Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, and Marco Rubio all believe the earth is 6,000 years old. Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, the Koch Brothers, and Bill Whittle full embrace Ayn Rand's ideology, believing that the United States is slowly destroying itself (any day now!) due to the federal government.  Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, and Marco Rubio all think that as well but for religious/apocalyptic reasons. Jeb Bush and Chris Christie are exceptions to this but both are vilified for being RINOS.

So, the president is indeed correct in his assessment and it's not just opinion. The Republican party today is being driven by lunatics who once populated the short wave radio set and now have their own little bubble of unreality known as the right wing blogsphere. One need only go to townhall,com,, or even Fox News to see multiple examples of "wacky, ideological nonsense." Speaking of which..

Can anyone explain to me exactly what the fuck she is talking about?

Sunday, April 06, 2014

A Question For Reflection

As is usually the case on Sunday, I'm feeling reflective and have a question for my readers. Consider for a moment that you are president of the United States. Would you implement a policy that would likely solve a problem in our country if it was something you didn't like and, more importantly, was in conflict with your ideology?

My answer is yes. Being the president means you have to choose between something that is bad, awful and horrible. There are no good choices and I still contend that one cannot truly be a "good" president. You are either average, bad, or awful and that's entirely due to the broken down nature of reality. Our country is generally a mess and, in the final analysis, it's merely about damage control.

I realize this sounds pessimistic but I prefer to look at it as more realistic. I still maintain optimism through whatever comes our way because the other key element of our country is the devotion to Lockian principles of inherent liberty and freedom. From this springs innovation and prosperity. Despite our darker days and persistent problems, we somehow manage to rise to challenges and overcome them.

So, would you do what it took to overcome those challenges?