House of Eratosthenes

Blogger friend Phil made a comment, and pointed to his own stuff in doing so. The subject is why our current President, and by extension all or most liberals, don’t want us watching Fox News. The critique against Fox is supposed to be that it is far less enlightening or accurate compared to other networks; but little-to-nothing is said by these critics about the factual tidbits Fox brings that its competition simply leaves out.

Phil notices something about how the leftist mind comes to call true things false and false things true. It isn’t their motivation to do this…at least, that is not their primary motivation. Rather — well, I’ll let him tell it.

All during the [ObamaCare] “debate”, their side was talking about what was literally in the bill’s wording (when you could get them to talk about details in the bill at all rather than The Grand Idea or how evil/stupid their opponents were) … and our side was talking about what the effect of the bill would be.

We said “it’ll mean this will happen” and they said “Fear monger! That’s not IN THE BILL!” and hence it was, to their eyes, “proven false”. But now even proponents are openly admitting that that [the medical rationing, or “Death Panels”] is exactly what we’re talking about. Government officials being in charge of what care you get based on whether it’s “worth it”. To whom? By whose standards?

This is bigger than the death panels. I see it in quite a few issues.

“If you make it more expensive to employ people, fewer people will be employed.” “LIAR! There is nothing in our legislation that raises the minimum wage, requiring businesses to lay off employees!” It’s all about intentions. Cause-and-effect be damned. Take away people’s guns, and they won’t be able to defend themselves. But our intention is to make people safer! So violent crime isn’t going to go up, it’s going to go down! Because that is what we intend to have happen!

The trouble is, to the loyal leftist history always began yesterday morning. So our nation’s long and busy history of government programs that were intended to cause one specific thing, and ended up causing something more-or-less the precise opposite, is conveniently overlooked.

Intentions. “It Isn’t In The Bill.” That is all that matters. If you factor something else in…like, real-world rules of if-you-do-this, such-and-such-happens…well, you’re evil, stupid, crazy and bitterly clinging to your Bible and your guns. Fooey on you.

Update: On the subject of how this makes false things true…I’m looking over this list of broken Obama promises (hat tip to Linkiest) and it probably isn’t what you’d ordinarily expect. Not a whole lot of dry reading about repeal this bill, pass that bill…this is wild, out-there type stuff. Remember when you were seven and you wanted to become President so you could make it illegal for your little brother to beat you at Monopoly, or by Executive Order you could make it possible to hide broccoli in a glass of milk? This is a little like that.

“That is why there will never be true security unless we focus our efforts on targeting every source of fear in the Americas. That’s what I’ll do as president of the United States.”

I’m curious. How many sources of fear are there in the Americas? Did He promise to get them properly targeted, or just to focus our efforts on targeting them?

I think the defense is going to be, He has intended for the sources of fear to go away and that is plenty good enough. Some variation of that. Because outside of that, this promise is rather tough to defend.

Just a typical problem you walk right into, when you live in a world in which intentions are everything & nothing else matters.

“…and ALL transactions in the sale/purchase of gold will be reported to gub’mint authorities, because that’s somehow related to assuring that the “medical community” are paid a minimum of 80% of whatever they decide to charge for ALL assumed medical “needs”.

“LIAR…That’s NOT in the bill…….um, well, not exactly.”

On another note, talking heads on the Fox morning show mentioned Sarah Palin as a nominee qualified to play the part of Wonder Woman in the impending remake.
I guess the Caribou Barbie merchandising line was a non-starter.
- CaptDMO | 10/04/2010 @ 08:31
“Gay” marriage will lead to polygamous marriage…”
“Animal” rights will lead to “anthropomorphic projections”…
“LIAR…it doesn’t SAY that.”
Which “network will carry the new “Sister Wives” show?
What “rights” are extended to “service animals”?
What is the law concerning the killing of a “police” dog?

I wanna marry my horse, but I can’t afford a bridal suite….
- CaptDMO | 10/04/2010 @ 08:40
That is why there will never be true security unless we focus our efforts on targeting every source of fear in the Americas. That’s what I’ll do as president of the United States.”

Which officially makes him a source of fear in the Americas.

And thus he disappears in a puff of logic.
- philmon | 10/04/2010 @ 09:16
Philmon FTW!
- Duffy | 10/04/2010 @ 09:37
We have nothing to fear but fears themselves.
- jamzw | 10/05/2010 @ 22:07

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Phil’s Point About Liberal DebunkeryMonday, October 4th, 2010

Phil’s Point About Liberal Debunkery
Monday, October 4th, 2010