Politics, Business, Sports and Crapola

My Thoughts, My Rules


Posted by Dug on December 13, 2006

I just love the fellows over at (un) SoundPolitics.com and Jonathan Gardner who posts as the Federal Way Conservative.

This morning I was reading a post at Jonathan’s blog. I found it to be very funny and then very sad. I imagine he is a very bitter, hen-pecked, little man. In any event, I could not let his post go unchallenged. (The inspiration for this I have admittedly stolen borrowed from Carl Ballard at EFFin’ Unsound.com). I have become a fan of his after stumbling onto his very funny, very irreverent, mocking and intelligent blog. So, with apologies here we go…..

Let’s begin: WTF does this mean? What mistakes is he talking about? What fallacies?

    As a student of Physics, I learned a few things about what science really is. It is not what the vast majority of people think it is. There are several fallacies that people adopt, without considering their implications. Science is the practice of trying very hard not to make these same mistakes.

Honest to God, this is his next sentence. One minute he is talking about Physics and science and fallacies. I think he is talking about mocking being a fallacy of science, maybe it becomes clearer later on?

    The one I wish to address is the mocking of that which they refuse to understand.

Nope, not any clearer. But somehow he is actually going to compare Galileo with Bush and Iraq. Suggesting that critics who came much later and proved Galileo wrong are to be compared with future critics who will prove Bush right? I mean it looks intelligent, but it is not passing the smell test.

    Galileo met a fair number of critics to his ideas. Galileo was, of course, wrong about everything. The planets didn’t move in a circle and his equations were only neat estimates of a very messy reality. The only critics that were correct were those who came much after his time and questioned his assumptions methodically, reasoning about their implications, and replacing them with something more sound.

Now we get to the heart of the logical argument where all reason has been cast aside and political ideology has taken over. I am sure Bush will not be thought any more the fool in the future than he is right now. (Jonathan: The second sentence of the following paragraph has no meaning.) As for “another world war”? You might be right about this, but, not in the way you think. More likely it will be the entire world against us.

    I imagine some of his critics discarded his theories because it just seemed so silly. Maybe they entertained his writing with their reading because it was good for a laugh.

    Of course, nowadays nobody would take Galileo for a fool, even though he was wrong.

    Today we stand in the middle of yet another world war. The battle lines are drawn by our enemies, they have assaulted us at every opportunity, and are busy manufacturing the weapons and training the troops for the next assault.

This next pair of paragraphs exposes Jonathan for what he really is. An emotional reactionary, who is prepared to send others to fight a battle that only and a few wingnuts see. He is not prepared to go, it is much easier to send the sons and daughters of others. What a confused asshole! And coward.

    People who see this and point it out are mocked openly. For some reason the idea of a third world country securing a nuclear weapon, transporting it covertly to the United States, and successfully detonating it, killing millions of Americans seem silly. The idea of religious fundamentalists half a world away secretly plotting our torture and death seems absurdly composed by the frenzied mind of an equally psycopathic dictator here at home.

    Remember that Churchill was mocked and laughed at. Remember that Lincoln endured his fair share of scorn as well. Every great leader, pointing out the way to go has been laughed at at some point in their careers. It goes with the game.

Lets compare pianos and Christmas wrapping paper. First my, confused friend, it is D-R-E-D Scott and he is rolling over in his grave at the comparisson you are making. Second, we mock you because because you are a moron and because you are such an easy target. Did I mention you are an asshole too?

    Just be careful not to get caught up in that crowd mentality. It was the crowd who murdered Galileo for his work. It was the crowd who praised the supreme court for the Dread Scott allowing slavery everywhere. It was the crowd who hailed “peace in our time” as Chamberlain returned from Germany. It is the same crowd who mocks those who see the danger and point it out for what it is. And I did consider your argument. I considered it, compared it to the facts and determined you are full of shit. Crowd mentality. Do you mean how the administration whipped the country into a frenzy about terrorists and Islamofascists? Pot, kettle, black!

    The problem with those who mock is that they don’t even consider that their opponent may be right. They don’t analyze their statements, their suppositions, their premises, or the logical steps taken to get from point A to point B. If they do, and find it inarguable, they refuse to attack the presumptions or logical steps and instead resort to other logical fallacies to expose it as weak.

Carefully laid out strategic goals and a plan? What fucking plan? That is the whole problem here. There was no plan for containment, control and rebuilding. NONE. We did not morph him into a monkey. We did not have to. He did that all by himself. Can you say 28% approval rating? And dropping faster than a speeding bullet. No WMD, no connection to the events of September 11. This is called lying. He is therefore a liar. His military record is suspect at best. And as for stupid, well I rest my case.

Look dumbass, here you prove my argument and disprove yours. Thank you. Your whole argument is we are there, he lied to get us there and now to save face, we can’t leave. There is no war to be won. There are lives to save and country to leave that does not want us there. It is a civil war. Open your eyes, read something besides Bill-O and Flush Flimbaugh.

    Rather than get distracted, it is critical to examine the arguments for what they are. President Bush may be a liar, stupid, or a draft-dodger, or a combination of those, let’s suppose. President Bush may be evil, a dictator, or even the descendent of an ape. Yet, this does nothing to refute his argument on why we need to fight Islamofascism in Baghdad, or why we can’t withdraw without complete victory, or why sending more troops right now won’t help us win the war any earlier. His argument, in the mouth of his attackers, is thus strengthened, having no weakness to attack, no flaw to expose, no error to discuss.

You are calling for war. Oh, God, take me now. Under which made up pretense do you wish to wage war on the leadership of Iran? War kills civilians too. You do not stand correct. You are sitting there in your comfortable house, with lights and electricity, pontificating on something know absolutly nothing about. Has Iran attacked us? Are you just still mad over the 1970’s hostage thing? Are you just typing to see your own byline?

    In the same way, when I call for war on the Iranian leadership, and I am met with comments about how I should wear adult diapers, I am led to believe that my opponents don’t have anything to argue with, and thus I stand correct. I will remain correct until anyone is able to expose the flaw of my arguments.

I know you wanted a cogent argument without name calling, but in my defense, I did keep it to a minimum. You dumb, fucking imbecile.



  1. […] I wasn’t going to make fun of FWC for a while. Mix it up a bit, you know. Maybe go local. But since he called me out, I figured I’d better do something. Fortunately, Politics, Business, Sports and Crapola did the heavy lifting. So how to mix it up, but still not, you know, have to do too much work? I hope I find some way before the end of this post. As a student of Physics, I learned a few things about what science really is. It is not what the vast majority of people think it is. There are several fallacies that people adopt, without considering their implications. Science is the practice of trying very hard not to make these same mistakes. […]

  2. Carl said

    Borrowed works. It isn’t like I invented the form.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: