About

Contents

Guidelines

Glossary

Contacts

Discussion

Recent Discussion

Create New Topic

Membership

Join Now

Login

First-timers please visit Guidelines and Contents.   Thanks/sbw

Helping MPR understand political parties

Minnesota Public Radio wonders how the Republican party should change. MPR doesn't seem to understand that it's the Democrats who need to change. See: Political party futures. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 7/17/08; 11:41:02 AM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

On American patriotism

[Obama read a speech on patriotism that others, pointed to on Just One Minute, commented on. Here was my comment.] America is a great country because of what Americans have done. They changed the world for the better when our founders took into account the failings of all previous government, considered the lessons of history and philosophy, understood the natural self-interest of mankind, and manufactured a durable, flexible, constitution that enabled people, through a free market economy, to improve their own quality of life. Our government modeled how it could make itself better peaceably through a Bill of Rights. It survived internal dissention to extend liberty to the least among us. It extended the vote to all adults. It spent its own cherished children and wealth to extend liberty to others, asking in return, not empire, but a small place to bury our fallen. America is a great country because it is a nation that knows it is not perfect. Accordingly, it lets even the least among us suggest a better way, gives them the freedom to try to convince others of it, and codifies our humility forever in regular democratic elections. America does not impose itself on the world, but willingly, gracefully, shares the secrets of our success so that the fruits of liberty shall be available for all. Our patriotism springs simply from understanding that we have been blessed, and owe our children good stewardship of the liberty earned through the intelligence, community, and sacrifice of those who have gone before. Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 7/2/08; 10:12:58 PM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

No surprise political science misreads blogging

A research paper concludes "Those few people who read both left wing and right wing blogs are considerably more likely to be left wing themselves." A comment misread by many. Not the first time. Not the last. My comment: Hmm. Mostly, I read to learn -- to check my mental map of reality for consistency. I am not after confirming my own beliefs. As Montaigne wrote, "Why should I not run to embrace the truth when I see it coming." I have asked at notable blogs populated by liberals for pointers to helpful blogs to read. Their pointers have not panned out. I still look, but feel like Diogenes in search of an honest man. More to the point. The statistical song and dance engaged in by the aforementioned research paper illustrates why political science is the laughing stock of academia. Research paper, indeed! The leftness or rightness of a blog isn't worth a rat's ass. The quality of thought is the issue. If more bloggers find quality thought here than elsewhere, well, good for them. The idea that I should venture into arenas of foolish thought and vacuousness to appear open-minded is hilarious. Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 7/2/08; 9:09:01 PM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

NPR = Not Precisely Reporting

NPR, with pretty much a botox face, gave this report, Wednesday, on the housing bailout bill. I nearly choked on my morning coffee and dashed off this comment on their website: Subject: Naylor should report the useful housing bill background -- Wednesday, NPR's Brian Naylor said, "It may have been pride of authorship, but the Housing Bill's Democratic sponsor, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd of Connecticut said, 'The stakes couldn't be higher...'" Pride of authorship? The key language was taken almost word-for-word from Bank of America, prime suitor for Countrywide, the major failing lendor. Naylor continued that "Dodd may be guilty of a slight exaggeration...." Dodd got a sweetheart loan deal from Countrywide's CEO, so he and other mostly Democratic senators may be guilty of much more that NPR decided to report. Don't make it so easy for political hacks to succeed. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 6/26/08; 8:05:05 AM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

Critical Times for Critical Thinking

Elizabeth Scalia writes about the failure of critical thinking, In response, I suggest one of the few ways to make it seem worthwhile to someone. Karl Popper reminded us the strengh of science is its ability to test falsification, not truth. It's almost too late for the valuable lessons because no one can be taught anything they don't care to learn. The only way to make the personal advantage of critical thinking accessible to them is through their own experience -- this way: Think of an instance in your past when you thought you were right and got hurt because you were mistaken. That shows that sometimes you think you are right, not because you are right, but only because you are convinced. If you can be mistaken and not know it, how are you going to discover where? Doubt is important because you bet your future on the quality of your mental map of reality. People who doubt their own certainty willingly interact with others to improve how they understand their world. This carries over to society. Cultural behaviors may be relative, but the minimum behavior at the edge where two cultures meet is not. We call that edge "society." Just as an individual values doubt, doubt is important for society. The strength of democracy isn't that it gets things right. It doesn't. But democracy codifies the humility we just might be wrong and commits to a process to learn where and try to do better. Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 6/20/08; 5:05:02 PM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

Manufacturing a measure of good and evil

Wretchard asks, "Is there a fundamental definition of evil?" His is really a question of society. Make a distinction between culture and society and mankind can manufacture working relationships. Society is the edge where any two cultures (or individuals) meet. Through a culturally-independent thought experiment, the minimum requirements for society can be deduced. First among those requirements springs from doubt -- that in the past we were mistaken when we thought we were right. From the humility of having been mistaken, and knowing it can happen again, we socialize. We allow others to say things we care not to hear, but need to know. Society, then, is too important to leave to religion, and requires only our ingenuity -- God-given or otherwise -- to invent. And it is as good for us as its absence is bad. Hmm. A culturally independent establishment of good and evil. Nice to know it's possible. Mother Nature doesn't care whether we choose to do it, but we, and our unimaginably distant descendants do. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 6/12/08; 4:29:54 PM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

What Paglia can do with a sword

I followed a friend's pointer to the latest Salon, which I never read (except for Keith Knight "K Chronicles" comics) and an Op-Ed by Camille Paglia, whom I never read. Now I understand why. In the early paragraphs she bypasses McCain, asserting it is style, not substance, that matters, and that, after Bush, America needs more style. She bypasses any media criticisms of Obama because the media is in bed with McCain. Besides, she adds, such many and varied criticism must be wrong because it is endlessly repeated. Obama must be good, Paglia concludes, because his waffling shows he has an open and flexible mind. Obama isn't making things up on the fly; rather he is a "conciliator and synthesizer". And, she says, "his administration will be as good as its appointments" demonstrating her immediate need for eyeglass regrinding, for not seeing the multitude of bodies thrown under the Copperhead Express, Obama's campaign bus. But the real reason to read the Op-Ed, according to my friend, is the savaging of Hillary and Bill in the sixth paragraph. Ignore the previous five oh-so-predictable libberish grafs and be hit in the eye sockets with the tawdry description of scheming and an over-active libido. It's rapier-like and funny. But if McCain is disqualified for style-over-substance, Paglia DQ's herself for the same reason. She follows her inflammatory demagoguery in the very next paragraph with a claim to be "shocked and appalled at Hillary's inflammatory demagoguery". No reason to read any further. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 6/12/08; 8:26:51 AM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

Educational claptrap

From the Daily Mail: Drop 'middle-class' academic subjects says schools adviser: -- "The professor believes the origins of our subject-based education system can be traced back to 19th century middle-class values. " My comment: The professor can "believe" anything he wants, but what does he know? If he knew the Seven Liberal Arts, he would trace their origin a lot further back than the 19th century to the Middle Ages. The first three, the Trivium, taught students to think - Grammar to put thoughts in order, Logic to assure those thoughts were consistent, and Rhetoric to convey sound thoughts to others and analyze theirs. Absent this understanding, the professor has a degree, but dangerously little education. Most teachers are just students who passed organized hoop-jumping. Certainly things must change, but not this way. For instance, democracy is taught as "majority rules" when it really codifies the humility that we just might be wrong, and society with others helps discover where. Medieval scholars taught that, too. Relativist claptrap doesn't work. Don't buy it. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 6/4/08; 10:57:26 AM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

The freedom to offend

As we write, the British Columbia Human Rights Commission is engaged in paramount stupidity, undermining the freedom that allows it to exist. See: Mark Steyn's Freedom. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 6/2/08; 5:49:54 PM from the Opinion Dept. Permanent link: #

Deciphering political news

To decipher political news it's necessary to understand the mindset that lets so much candidate bilge slip by unnoticed by the press or the electorate. See: Liberalism that isn't. Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 5/10/08; 6:49:29 PM from the Opinion Dept. Permanent link: #

An essay on Democracy

Democracy is misunderstood, but it can be made more accessible. See: Accessible Democracy. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 4/28/08; 2:03:47 PM from the Opinion Dept. Permanent link: #

Obama - No wonder

Barack Obama's "Checkers" speech on Rev. Wright was not a success. No need any longer to wonder whether Obama is A uniter not a divider? Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 3/22/08; 10:11:35 PM from the Opinion Dept. Permanent link: #

Question for Obama

Question for Obama: Senator Obama, when you said, "My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington." which you do you intend to represent? Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 2/21/08; 9:30:49 AM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

Where have I heard Obama before?

Hmm. Barack Obama said, "I want to go before the world and say that America is back and that we are ready to lead." I have the strange sense I've heard all this before. Oh, yeah. I remember where: "We have to do more than just elect a new President if we truly want to change this country" - Dan Quayle "We will move forward, we will move upward, and yes, we will move onward." - Dan Quayle "The future will be better tomorrow." - Dan Quayle "This President is going to lead us out of this recovery." - Dan Quayle "My friends, no matter how rough the road may be, we can and we will, never, never surrender to what is right." - Dan Quayle "What you guys want, I'm for." - Dan Quayle Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 2/20/08; 8:19:33 PM from the Opinion Dept. Permanent link: #

When culture and society compete

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, lends his intellect, education, and experience to resolve the conflict between British law and other cultures... and fails. I try Helping Rowan Williams. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 2/12/08; 9:50:33 PM from the Dept. Permanent link: #

Not wasting 5 minutes 42 seconds of my life

Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds, pointed to a video link where Mickey Kaus and Robert Wright discuss the welfare-terrorism connection for 5 minutes and 42 seconds. Clicking on the link I discover that to find out if I am interested at all I am obliged to pay the video penalty. I can't read a summary. I can't scan through a summary. Take a note for Web 3.0: Video and audio are not the answer -- they are only an option. When they become the requirement, people bail. Time is too valuable to fritter away listening to people talk at their speed, not mine -- the talk is too slow, or too fast, or too detailed, or not detailed enough. Convince me to listen, don't make me. Discuss Posted by Webmaster on 2/11/08; 12:50:37 PM from the Opinion Dept. Permanent link: #

The Archbishop of Canterbury just doesn't understand

On another blog, The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has called for new laws to protect religious sensibilities that would punish 'thoughtless and cruel' styles of speaking. I commented (at 1/29/2008 8:53:26 PM): Your assignment for tomorrow: Plan an essay explaining why the freedom to offend is a core principle of society. Hint: 1) Start with a reflection on your own past when you thought you were correct and were mistaken. 2) Then, in humility, consider how you depend on others to help you recognize those mistakes. 3) Finally, explain how you depend on an accurate mental map of reality to plan your best future. Deduce from this mind-experiment why it is that the freedom to offend, and to be offended is essential to an individual. Then project this insight to where groups of individuals interact. We call this society. Interesting, isn't it, that democracy codifies the humility that any one person can think of a better way to do something, and to try to convince others of it. This, my friend, is the freedom to offend -- to tell someone something they may not care to hear. Now that you have planned the essay, instead of writing that one, write an essay on why this insight is not taught in schools. Assignment number two is to consider why the freedom to offend does not imply the necessity to do so. Hint: respect for others who share humility. These two insights are the cornerstones of civilization. Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 2/9/08; 4:35:44 PM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #

Not so fast, newspaper buzzards

Network TV news will die before newspapers will. Here's why: Network TV News will die first! Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 1/27/08; 9:13:54 PM from the Opinion Dept. Permanent link: #

Whom to support for President?

Oh, those political quizzes that help you select for whom to vote. I gave up on their choices and wrote my own. See: A new Electoral Compass USA. Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 1/13/08; 10:20:27 PM from the Opinion Dept. Permanent link: #

Support Ezra Levant's human rights

Ezra Levant, a magazine publisher has been hauled before an inquisition known as the Alberta Human Rights Commission for publishing the Danish Muslim cartoons, about which some ass took offense. My comment to his website follows: Fly this cartoon high: Toonophobia -- The irrational fear of blasphemous cartoons And do not talk of free speech as a right -- rights are bestowed by authority. Far from a right, Free Speech is civilization's cherished necessity. Civilization is impossible without the freedom to say what other people don't want to hear. Why? Because sometimes people think they are right, not because they ARE right, but only because they THINK they are. And, if mistaken, they cannot accurately plan their best future. Even if it offends, the greatest respect one can show is to help one see more clearly. Civilization requires only two considerations: 1) humility -- to consider the possibility one just might be wrong; and 2) respect for others who can help one see more clearly. You see it every day in practice: The core value of democracy is that it codifies humility -- the permanent cycle of elections pays homage that today we just might be wrong and best learn from experience; and that democracy honors the smallest voice that can suggest a better way of doing things and try to convince others -- even if the small voice offends. You can deduce this from your own experience. You can recall instances when you thought you were right and were mistaken -- that your mental map was wrong. From yor own experience it becomes obvious that whatever the intentions of the HRC, they poison the well of society. Discuss Posted by Stephen Waters on 1/12/08; 11:08:57 PM from the Comments Dept. Permanent link: #