Comments on: The Reality of Reality

By: Dennis J.

Dennis J. — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:55:29 +0000

Really enjoyed reading this page…Thanks alot

By: Stuart_Creque

Stuart_Creque — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:25:27 +0000

I like "WAGD" as a shorthand. The entire message of Obama's address to Congress was delivered better by Schwarzenegger in Terminator 2: "Come with me if you want to live." (Implicit is the idea that anyone who won't follow Obama blindly into massive carbon taxes, socialized medicine and the rest must be a suicidal nut case.)

By: James Hudnall

James Hudnall — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:14:49 +0000

Most of these WAGD* theories tend to be bogus. So when something real comes along it's going to be hard to convince people because of the hysterics.

What I detest about these WAGD scenarios is they are mass hysteria created by a few people to cash in. And sometimes they are just plain ignorant and counter productive to solving human problems, like the hysteria over GM foods which could help feed the world. Instead they call them "Franken Foods" and claim it'll kill us and other nonsense.

The AGW scam is bad for our economy. Bad for our costs of living. Bad for job production (except bogus "green" jobs) and will cause serious problems even if we didn't have this financial crisis.That makes it triply bad.

* WAGD: We're All Gonna Die

By: Tennwriter

Tennwriter — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 03:21:26 +0000

This screaming is the body politics immune system waking up to the fact that there is a problem virus invading it, and it needs to start cranking out antibodies to deal with the situation pronto.

So with Y2K, they screamed too much, but also a few hundred thousand COBOL programmers worked for a few years and solved the problem.

Earlier, we faced the problem of Japanese economic supremacy. We freaked, we started changing our ways, and suddenly Japan was left in the dust. Japan was 'all the trains run on time', and we got efficient too, and then we got different. America is a Phoenix. Our societal ways get destroyed, and then reborn in a more functional system. The Japanese were more rigid than us, and could not keep up once we hit the nitro.

OTOH, you have problems that are not real. I suppose by this 'body politic' metaphor that could be considered allergies with the reaction ranging from a rash to anaphylactic shock (or giving the ecofreaks everything they desire to deal with AGW).

By: Tennwriter

Tennwriter — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 03:20:06 +0000

I think there are two categories of problems. Real and Fake. Brilliant, I know.

AGW is fake. Y2K was real.

With real problems, the danger is frequently overstated because often times people don't get up to work on a problem, and those with money don't open their wallets before the screeching reaches the "We're All Gonna Die!!" level. Which means there is a decided tendency to be required to become an extreme fanatic to get anything done.

By: scjeff

scjeff — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:49:06 +0000

..and incindeary.

By: Sojourner

Sojourner — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:44:36 +0000

Interesting. I had never heard the term "Classical Liberalism" used that way before. You learn something new every day. Now I understand a bit more where you're coming from.

By: Writer_X

Writer_X — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:36:32 +0000

Sounds like we need a revolution. Or at least more people who take the time to educate themselves about what's really happening in the world instead of spending all their time watching reality shows and sit-com drivel. http://the100mostannoyingthings.blogspot.com/

By: James Hudnall

James Hudnall — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:21:03 +0000

I am a classical liberal* as opposed to the modern one which is more of a blind ideologue parroting talking points without knowing what they really believe. Too many people today just follow the herd and haven't developed critical thinking skills. * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

By: Sojourner

Sojourner — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:46:14 +0000

Ah, perhaps I misread you. Many of the posters on this site would regard "mindless liberal" as a single word that encompasses all liberals. If you're only talking about the flamers who pop in and out of a comment section spewing insults, then your middle paragraph makes more sense. It would be a better world if the flamers on both sides (since there are also conservatives who haunt liberal sites for the same reason) would just keep their rants to themselves.

I agree with you, that as long as you know your bias, you can question whether it is blinding you to the other sides' valid points. To me, it's about understanding your own biases, rather than trying to label everyone else's bias.