Judging by the reaction to the past few posts, I am curious. Have you had enough yet? Seriously, have you had enough?
I can keep this up. I can be as unreasonable and partisan as the rest of you. I can adopt a myopic worldview where everything is the Democrats fault, and Bush is the lord and saviour to counter the bullshit you throw around in the comments section.
Is that what you want? I can keep this up for a while. I mean, I could discuss the events of the last few weeks rationally with you, but every time I do that, you just call me an apologist, throw shit in my face, and all sorts of other bullshit. I spend an hour writing a post documenting charges that have been made that have turned out to be false, and you accuse me of spin and throw up 50 other charges that are thinly sourced. Either that, or you ignore what I have said, and simply repeat the same damned thing I have proven within a reasonable degree of certainty to be false.
So, it is up to you. I can go the way of Rush Limbaugh spouting all sorts of stuff I only sort of believe (and in many cases don’t at all), but shading it in the most irksome way possible, and I will, JUST TO PISS YOU GUYS OFF, if everyone of you in the comments continues to act like Sidney Blumenthal on meth.
So it is up to you. We can continue on, throwing barbs at each other, or we can try to piece together what has happened fairly, accurately, and honestly. When there is demonstrable proof of wrong-doings and failures, I have no desire to pretend they do not exist. Unfortunately, many of you can’t find it in yourself to concede when you don’t know something or when you are wrong. There are plenty of mistakes that have been made, and plenty of things have and will continue to go wrong, but if you want to keep trying to put this all off on only one side of the political spectrum, then I will just keep on a keeping on. And don’t bitch at me for my change in tone- you earned it.
Again, it is up to you.
Vladi G
I have an excuse. I actually am Sidney Blumenthal, and I’m on meth. There. I admitted it.
bennett
This is just a request from a reader who enjoys your site and has for quite some time. Please, close your comment section for a while. Its starting to really have a negative effect on your site in my opinion. For a while, the lefties were entertaining, but its way past that now. Close them down, wait for the children to go home, and then open things up for the adaults again.
Buddy
God forbid anyone actually try to source their quotes, anyway, John, I mean thats like the antichrist or something.
An accurate depiction of what happened will be known, and the barb throwing will amount to about what it is now, a pile of manure. I find it tiresome posting stuff that people totally ignore or try to ‘prove wrong’ with absolutely irrelevant/and/or factually incorrect information.
gratefulcub
Welcome back, and well said.
Ned Raggett
we can try to piece together what has happened fairly, accurately, and honestly
I’d only say that in an atmosphere where the vast majority of commentators and posters throughout the net/in the media presume that those last three adverbs only apply to views already held by them, you might find it hard to get people to agree on ground rules for further discussion.
Simply put — and one big reason why I’m continually glad to have never joined a political party — the very *language* has been tainted by the course of things over the past years, decades perhaps. When I hear anyone, left or right or whatever, ask for ‘fair,’ ‘accurate,’ ‘honest’ discussion, I sense the very terms being abused as soon as they are invoked — I sense their very *meaning* escaping from the intent of those who use them, however well-intentioned they are.
This is not to criticize you specifically, John. Merely to note that one person’s ‘fair’ is another person’s ‘bias’ at the present time. The two will rarely if ever now meet.
DougJ
Colie, you’re doing a heck of a job.
slide
With all due respect John, you have not been doing that. There is not one post of yours that doesn’t include an attack on those you disagree with. If you think otherwise you are deluding yourself. And when you do that, well it doesn’t bring out the best in those of us that think our motivations or intelligence are unfairly being questioned.
But to answer your question, I for one would love to have a more reasoned debate/discussion with mutual respect. But its gotta be a two way street.
kl
I vote for Plan B, because I enjoy watching old hippies froth at the mouth.
John Cole
Joe aka “Slide”- I have already factored you out of any equation which involves fair and honest.
slide
but I don’t have high hopes reasoned discussion will happen.
slide
Ok, so thats your answer. OK. An apologist like you won’t know fair if it hit you in your self-righteou, egocentric, thin skinned head.
See how it works?
Andrei
Actually… it’s up to you. All you have to do is turn off comments or start banning people to regain some semblence of control. It is your blog, so therefore, technically… it’s up to you how things proceed.
Vlad
“…we can try to piece together what has happened fairly, accurately, and honestly.”
At this point, John, I’m honestly not sure you’re capable of it. It’s not just the hurricane coverage; over the last month or so, you just haven’t been up to your earlier standard.
summr
Be unreasonable and partisan if you want to be; it’s your site
and you’re free to turn it into something only conservatives
want to read. Claiming that all other posters’ reactions are unreasonable
and partisan is disingenuous; there have been some nuanced
debates and not everyone who posts is a democrat or republican
(I’m neither). However as you may have noticed, the most inflammatory
posts (such as Darrell’s) tend to attract equally inflamed responses.
The irony is that the more unreasonable and partisan a thread gets,
the more attention (and posts) it receives. So I applaud you for your
attempts to decrease the number of visitors to your site :-).
Don Surber
Andrei’s correct
You close comments, you lose customers
Whatever happened to posting your thoughts and ignoring comments — but allowing them to run on and on
slide
John, I know I have embarassed you a couple of time for showing that you didn’t know what you were talking about. Like with the Robert’s recusal thing where you were just factually wrong. And I have realized you don’t like it when someone shows everyone when you are wrong. Unfortunatly, it is happening more and more frequently and I feel I have a duty to correct the record. You also don’t like it when I show you what a hypocrite you are, like when you attacked Andrew for incorrect facts (according to you), when you yourself put out that Washington Post story that was an orchestrated lie by the white house. The Post retracted the story even if you didn’t have the class to do the same.
Aziz Poonawalla
I agree with the sentiment: close down comments. Have an open thread once in a while. if the feedback from comments is not valuable to you, dont provide a forum for othefrs to bitch and moan – reclaim your own site. y three yea to close down comments many times in my three years of blogging at Unmedia and then at City of Brass – i usually reopen them in a few months and things rea back to sanity. its refreshing.
Im a big fan of your site and I think its your tone that sets you apart. So my motivations are selfish, admittedly. That said, close the comments! because I dont think you want Plan B either. The hippies can go froth over at Red State.
bs23
look, I really enjoy reading your blog, especially so since I’m coming at things from “the other side” — your posts are thought-provoking and thankfully devoid of major partisan blinders. i understand that the limbaughs out there — left and right — are everything from really damn irritating all the way up to part of “the problem” because they’re more concerned about thinking the right thing than actually thinking itself, but if you go all limbaugh you’ll be doing your readers-but-seldom-posters, not to mention yourself, a major disservice. alright, i know this site well enough to know when you’re ranting, but f*ck ’em, and keep on fighting the good fight. you do have sane readers out there!
dagon
see, what did i tell you?
….absurdist theater.
peace
Watcher
Maybe you could segregate your threads by political affiliation. Give each side something to prop up our close minded worldviews. Or you could just write what you believe to be true and hope that reasonable people will behave reasonably. Not me mind you, but you know other folks.
Krista
I agree. There are quite a few of us here who try to respect others’ points of view, and who enjoy a thoughtful debate on issues. But it all gets overshadowed by the ones who shriek, and swear, and call names, and are never willing to concede a point. And it’s too bad. And I don’t blame John for being thoroughly sick of it. But I don’t think that shutting down the comments section is the answer. I think we just need to police ourselves, show respect for others (even if they’re not being respectful), and respond only to debate, not to diatribe.
Buddy
Slide
Really.. Give it a rest.
neil
Sheesh. So much for good faith.
Watcher
I had a very reasonable conversation with Krista in a thread in which I was being a major ass to many others. She got what she gave, as did the others. Odd that.
Rome Again
Purely infantile John. You came out with a charge that Democrats are only wanting to blame Bush 100% for the screw-ups related to Katrina and THAT ISN’T TRUE AT ALL!
Personally, I break it down as:
NO Mayor: 25% – for not pushing a more forceful evacuation earlier (Saturday instead of Sunday)
LA Governor: 20% – for not pushing the NO Mayor harder to evacuate more effectively (but, I wonder, is it her job to babysit a NO Mayor?)
Brownie: 25% – for sitting on his hands and not acting decisively
Chertoff: 20% – for not understanding the magnitude of the problem and not keepging himself more informed of the event
Bush: 10% – for hiring Brownie and Chertoff, and placing FEMA under DHS as a newly non-independent agency.
I have not seen any great call to defer blame away from local and state officials among liberals. What you are saying is not true, and shows a black and white mentality. Think out of the box John. If you don’t though, it’s no nevermind, because after this post, I’m gone. Your fresh voice is no longer fresh; and I don’t like spending my time reading spoof blogging meant only to irk the commentors. When you wrote “I’m a Bush apologist” you lost me. Bye!
Krista
Now I feel special. :)
Davebo
Joe, I’m not trying to put this on just one side of the political spectrum as your post infers. Obviously there is a lot of blame to go around in this mess. Federal, local, state, etc.
But I, like 99.9% of your posters (to use a percentage you enjoy) don’t live in Lousianna. The only possible corrective action, via the voting booth, I can take is at the federal level.
And at the federal level there is only one side of the political spectrum at the moment.
Having said that, I think that though you’re heart is in the right place, you are dreaming the impossible dream here. This situation is simply not one that allows for calm reasoned debate on the merits. You are seeing impassioned response to a very passionate situation. Sure, some commenters may be just as passionate about the flat tax or our relations with Uzbekistan, but I think overall you’ve got one of the better groups of commenters here.
America is disgusted by what they’ve seen over the past week and rightly so. The carnage, the depths to which the humans can sink either under extreme pressure or perhaps some that started out that low. The visuals that have been pounded home since day one 24/7 on just about every channel except Nick at Nite.
I believe it has a cumulative effect that is only exacerbated by existing political ideology. Which is sad in a way because we aren’t dealing with a political problem here and frankly I’m not sure if there are any politics based solutions to it.
As many have rightly pointed out, there will be time to affix blame down the road. But what we should also be concentrating on is a solution to what should be obvious to all right now is a very serious problem for this country.
John, I respect you, and I think you’ve got the right idea with this post. Keep it up. As you compose future posts you should ask yourself “Am I part of the solution or part of the problem here”. And there’s no requirement that you put up 5 or 6 new posts a day. It’s just my opinion of course, but I think your time and the attention your blog gets will be better spent on constructive posts addressing the problems as you see them and perhaps ideas on solutions.
Perhaps a moritorium for a week or so on posts concerning other blog posts that you think are out of line or just plain disgusting. Maybe culling idiotic comments from other blogs (left or right) is not really useful to the overall goal of frank and honsest discussions.
In the end what I think we’ve seen here is the classic viscious circle. And I agree its more than just counter productive, it’s silly. I’m certainly as guilty as anyone and I’d like to take this opportunity to apologize for it.
I’d urge other commenters to take a deep breath and think before you hit the “Submit Comment” button. Read the preview of your post (really cool feature by the way) more than once. Ask yourself, “would I say this to that wingnut conservative (or wacked out liberal) neighbor of mine?” And more importantly, is this comment in the least bit constructive?
Anyway, that’s my inflation adjusted .75 cents worth. And with that I’m off to walk my whining dog which oddly enough, often clears some of the sillier snark from my doddled brain.
Blue Neponset
Shut down the comments.
If your answer to what is going on now is to intentionally piss people off then you are wasting my time and your time.
“there are other
worldsblogs than these”– S. King
Laura
I read this and I thought “wow, a Republican who’s willing to tell other Republicans that there were screw ups on the federal level, too.” Then I read the comments and it becomes clear that is not what is being said.
I read this blog because it is one of the few right wing blogs I’ve found that is willing to consider the notion that the Republicans aren’t all knowing, all seeing and all perfect. If that changes and you “go all Rush Limbaugh” then I have no reason to keep coming back. It’s bad for my blood pressure, it’s bad for my health, it’s bad for my marriage and it’s bad for my business.
I hope you don’t change and I hope you don’t give up trying to look for the truth instead of blindly siding with one party or another. But, if you are could you recommend a blog that has someone, anyone on the right who is willing to consider that Republicans might just not be perfect?
Laura — registered Independent.
Kimmitt
Davebo makes a lot of sense to me.
Steven
Here is what I’ve learned in the last 9 days from blogs and cable TV about Katrina and its aftermath:
1. When a Cat 4 hurricane hits low lying coastal areas and a major urban area, there is going to be a lot of damage and people killed, whether government is effective or not.
2. No matter how effective government is, it will be blamed intensely for what doesn’t work. See #1.
3. A lot of people dislike Pres Bush intensely and will use any fact to attack him.
4. A lot of people are intensely loyal to Pres Bush and will use any fact to support him and attack his opponents.
5. Most of the anecdotal personal stories spread on cable TV and blogs turn out not to be true. Many of the other “facts” also turn out not to be true. Most people don’t care. See #3 and #4.
6. There is no reservoir of good will left in this country. You are either us or them, and if you’re them, you are not a good American.
My conclusion: Given the above, it is unlikely that any useful lessons will be learned from Katrina.
adam
Who cares? Comment sections are either feel-good partisan echo chambers or ego-driven shit-slinging matches. I love how everyone on the internet got their degrees in hydrological engineering a day after Katrina hit NO. Real classy. Just a bunch of people with too much free time furiously googling (if they even bother to find sources) in order to briefly feel intellectually superior. Until the next commenter “refutes” their argument by heaping bullshit upon bullshit.
Ben
This isn’t lush limbaugh’s blog? Oops!
Seriously, John, don’t close the comments section. If you start banning people and that kind of bullshit, then you are just LGF… they now only allow right wing circle jerks over there and no dissenting opinion is allowed. Yawn.
jobiuspublius
As I pointed out in your “The Necessity of Partisan Attacks” thread. Scapegoating and I forgot to mention projection. Add it to the list.
Find for me in this thread where his targets have actually behaved like children prior to his posting the accusation of childishness, please. It is the second post. Go ahead. Blame it on the first poster. He has a sense of humor. He must be the enemy.
John, maybe an FAQ and a few threads dealing with journalism and critical thinking.
jobiuspublius
I notice the sports and legal threads don’t get much attention.
Pb
Yeah, I have to agree, I’ve seen more than enough partisan bullshit on here. And you can stop doing it anytime, Cole.
Seriously, I’ve seen more reasoned commentary about some of these issues from Michelle Malkin than from you, and that’s saying something. I’ve been in violent agreement with Andrew Sullivan. I’ve gotten some respect for Shepard Smith of all people. Obviously this Katrina disaster has seriously jolted all of us.
jobiuspublius
John, I forgot that I had started that post addressing you. This was not aimed at you. I was being sarcastic towards no one in particular.
Phil Smith
The problem, which many of the commenters refuse to admit, is that Cole is most distinctly not an apologist. The reason they’re here in the first place is his very notable parting of the ways on the social con and theocon issues. However, if at any time Cole posts anything that isn’t anti-Bush, he’s treated to an avalanche of ad hominem attacks. It’s ridiculous.
Ban ’em, John. And announce the bannings and why.
Steve
Rome Again, weren’t you leaving? Or was your whole “John is just another boring Bush apologist after all, so I’m outta here” routine just a passing tantrum?
Davebo
“6. There is no reservoir of good will left in this country. You are either us or them, and if you’re them, you are not a good American.”
There are thousands of volunteers across the country but especially in my fair city that seem to indicate this is incorrect.
Don’t confuse the rabid blogosphere with the real world.
Northman
I would prefer you don’t go Limbaugh on us. There aren’t very many sites where somewhat reasonable debates occur. This was one of them, and it still reaches that level on occasion, though less frequently of late. To lose such a valuable resource would be tragic.
I have to agree that some action on the comments may be in order. While I believe most of the people here aren’t actually partisan hacks and shills, it doesn’t take too many of them to totally ruin a thread, and probably piss you off with some of the shit that’s been thrown your way.
Its your site. Hopefully it will be one I can continue to visit and post to.
ppGaz
I seriously doubt that. I think it’s a taunt, and I think that you fancy yourself the world’s greatest schoolteacher and that you are teaching the kids a lesson.
You know what, John? FUCK YOU. You aren’t teaching anybody anything, you are just being an asshole.
My respect for you has gone down to near zero, and I don’t give a fuck what you think of this post, you have done nothing in the last week other than add aggravation to a very stressful and difficult situation, all so you could apparently have a little fun.
Again, fuck you.
Davebo
On a sick yet somehow funny not. Is John Stossel an idiot, a sicko, or both?
In praise of price gouging
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JohnStossel/js20050907.shtml
ppGaz
You aren’t the world’s teacher, and we are not kids, in case you missed that SUBTLE POINT from my previous post.
Jesus, I can’t believe it, what a fucking asshole.
Anderson
I just wouldn’t take it so personally, John. The more of a douchebag a commenter is, the less weight his remarks should carry. If commenters bug you, don’t read ’em. (The comment threads attract more traffice & hence increase your ads’ visibility, so I wouldn’t shut ’em down.)
Fbow, comment threads are, as already noted above, places where people get all testy. I don’t think Darrell would call me what he calls me here if we were at a bar. –Well, okay, maybe Darrell would … bad example. ;)
To me, those stranded and waterless people at the Convention Center were obvious evidence of a huge federal fuckup. But clearly, it’s not so obvious.
Anderson
And tho I tend to agree with ppGaz on the merits, I’d figure out a way to ban his ass after reading a comment like that. Who benefits from that shit? Anyone? Why would Cole want to spend godawfully huge amounts of time keeping up this blog, just to hear such crap? Fuck you, ppGaz.
ppGaz
Yeah, whatever.
To think that the asshole would jerk people around like that for days in order to — what? — prove some kind of point, or have fun at the expense of others? To make the world safe for Darrell?
That just sucks.
I’m not your target Bush-blamer in this situation. I was here bashing the city and the state a frigging week ago. I held off on the Bush bashing and suggested wait and see … until Friday, when the vile little man went on tv and insulted every citizen of the country with his stupid behavior.
Sure, there’s been a lot of over-the-top commentary here lately … because SOMEBODY HAS BEEN DELIBERATELY STIRRING IT UP, apparently.
I say again, I can’t fucking believe it. If you had told me that this was going on, I’d have said you were crazy.
slide
well, this is going nicely
Anderson
PpGaz, if you wear such a long chain, then people aren’t going to be able to resist pulling it.
Take a Balloon Juice break for a few days and chill, is my friendly non-fuckyou advice. You are taking this stuff Way Too Seriously. Why do you give a damn whether Cole or anyone else has his head up his ass?
Hell, go read Hunter & Timmy’s comments at Tacitus, and then come back & see what a reasonable guy Cole is.
ppGaz
I tell you what, this revelation explains a lot of cognitive dissonance around here lately.
I have to wonder now whether Darrell and DougJ and some of these handles are just characters in a big put-on, whether anything you see here is real or not?
Seriously. If somebody would pull the crap described above, why wouldn’t they invent personas and manufacture arguments between “characters” just to watch the ants run around the cigarette lighter?
John S.
Has everyone – including John – forgotten what this blog is called? Balloon Juice as in hot air. There is plenty of it going around these days, and often it comes from John himself. He’s not perfect. None of us are.
Sometimes when things seem like they are getting out of hand, it is best to return to your roots. In this case, it would be best if everyone remembered that about this blog.
And incidentally, this comment is asinine:
Quite often the ‘children’ that post here are from the other side of the aisle, too. And if John had the audacity to turn this site into another bullshit echo chamber, he wouldn’t have to close us down.
I’d stop coming of my own volition.
ppGaz
Apparently, nobody gives a damn.
No problem, except that the honest thing to do would have been to say so up front.
Or, you know, I could just come along at this point and say, BWAAHAHAHAHA, all you suckers, I am really a White House staffer and I have just been jerking you around for the last while. Har-dee-har. You’d be slappin me on the back and buyin me a drink right now, right Anderson?
Actually, I think you would.
EL
We can continue on, throwing barbs at each other, or we can try to piece together what has happened fairly, accurately, and honestly.
When I started reading this blog I was very impressed with the level of discourse. The consensus process WRT the facts of the Valerie Plame case was head and shoulders above what I’d seen other places.
What I see now is a far cry from that, and both sides are playing into it. John, if you are acting as the adult here, than irritating as it may be, an adult approach should prevail – not threats of retaliation. There were jerks from both sides here before, too, but the rhetorical temperature wasn’t so hot.
Can we start by looking for a set of facts we agree on?
rayabacus
Like I said John; you’d have a better chance of teaching physics to first graders.
The problem is, everyone hear already KNOWS everything that has happened. Everyone here was in fact “a boot on the ground” and was privvy to all of the communications between the locals, the state and the Feds. You see John, they KNOW what happened!! My God, can’t you see that. They KNOW!! And you have already told them that you do not know.
Unlike you, they know who was making the decisions, who was acutally doing triaage in a major disaster. You see they KNOW that Bush personally locked those people in the Superdome. They KNOW that Bush refused to send in the LANG. They KNOW John, they KNOW!!
And because they KNOW, nothing is more devastating to them then to find out what they KNOW is wrong. When you show them that they in fact DO NOT KNOW, it’s still Bush’s fault, because, GODDAMNIT, THIS IS THE US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, they’re NOT SUPPOSED TO LET THIS HAPPEN!! Because, the Federal Government is BIG and has ALL OF THE MONEY and poor old N’orleans didn’t have this or couldn’t have done that because they just…..well damnit…because they are NOT THE GOVERNMENT!! And, JESUS, DON’T YOU FUCKING CARE THAT PEOPLE DIED???
You see John, they KNOW all about the logistics of moving personnel, heavy equipment, tractors and trailers. They KNOW that FEMA had on site both boats and bulldozers. They KNOW that 15 minutes after Katrina passed that engineers should have been in place checking remaining bridges and roads to see if they could handle 50 tons plus. And they KNOW that the engineers said those bridges and roads were passable.
They KNOW, John, that Bush could have gotten away with bringing in Title 10 Troops to put down the civil unrest…damnit John, THEY KNOW THE LAW.
Don’t you see John, they KNOW EVERYTHING THAT TRANSPIRED, EVERYWHERE IT HAPPENED, IN EXACTLY THE RIGHT SEQUENCE. Armed with all of this knowledge, they therefore have the moral authority to assign blame and responsibility. And you….you who are ignorant of this knowledge….you who are bereft of the intricacies of the law…you who have yet to be blessed with the knowledge of the “all knowers”, must choose to wait before you pass judgement.
Because they KNOW and you do not – you are a FREAKIN’ BUSH APOLOGIST!!!
Like I said, physics to first graders.
slide
I despise hypocrisy. I despise those that put themselves on the pedestal pointing fingers at others for being uncivil and then end the post with a vile personal attack having nothing to do with the agrument the person made.
This all started way back when with the right wing talk show clowns. Rush Limbaugh leading the way demonizing their enemies heaping scorn on anyone not on their “side”. We’ve come a long way since then and now, just about everyone who follows politics is in one camp or the other. The “uniter not a divider” was nothing as advertised.
There have been too many insults. Too many charges of being anti-american. too many charges of being a traitor. too many charges of not supporting the troops for many ever go back to William F Buckley Firing Line debates. I for one am not going to let some right wing scum merchant (not talking about John) get away with their shit without returning fire. Childish? Perhaps. Not adding to the intellectual debate? Most definitly, but you know what? reasoned debate with bullies never does any good. A good punch in the fuckin nose (rhetorically speaking) is preferable to my way of thinking. The right wing was quick to fling the mud fast and furious when Clinton was in office and now its a little too late to complain that the other side learned well from your tactics.
ppGaz
The more I think about it, the more I think that comment is just pure bullshit.
First of all, apparently he’s had time to sit back and treat this whole Katrina-aftermath thing like a big game of “piss off the commenters”. Second, I am pretty sure that the record will show that I’ve been sworn at by Cole more times than he’s been sworn at by me, and that the series was not started by me. Further, if this is a place where he’s allowed to tell me to fuck off but I can’t do the same, then I say fine, have the decency to state that explicitly and be upfront about it. “I’m allowed to tell you to fuck off, but you are not allowed to tell me to fuck off.” What a nice and practical arrangement! What damned purpose would that serve?
I have no use for your comment at all. None.
Patrick
ppGaz just wants to get banned so s/he can crawl back from whence it came and tell the story to the grandkids.
You add nothing to the discussion. Be gone with you.
John, in answer to the original question, I’ve seen comments on at least three other blogs asking (in effect) how many short buses must have crashed near your blog in order to cause this many retards to appear. Usually the discussion is just spirited, but since Katrina it’s reminded me of the “Argument” skit on Monty Python. “No you didn’t”, “Yes I did”.
I realize the far left likes to have a center-right blog that allows comments, but IMHO they’ve worn out their welcome here. Your blog, though.
DJ
ppbbq, Anderson said that he agrees with you on the merits. So…I don’t get that last comment to him. This is exactly the childish shit you do…accusing everyone of being a white house sycophant? No one could have proven John’s point better than that. I think you’re a fucking innernet tuff-guy cunto, but believe me, it’s not out of any love for Bush or Republicans.
Anyone in my house who says “fuck you” to me would get an esophagus-stomping, no matter what I had said. It’s my house.
You personally don’t like John. Maybe you even hate him. But you’re in his house. So just go, and scream at your cats or your mother or whatever innernut tough guys do when the power goes out.
srv
Maybe we should try an experiment, ppGaz and all. If we all disappear, what will DougJ and Darrell do with each other? John would have to type with both hands at the same time.
I’m just kidding. Maybe.
Patrick
Oh, and slide?
You are a guest here. You return fire at the host’s pleasure, and up to his tolerance of you. Don’t pretend that anyone owes you this electronic jihad.
John S.
You want to talk pure bullshit?
Here it is.
It is posts like these that drag the level of discourse down somewhere between ‘child wanting a cookie’ and ‘teenager defying authority’, and for all ray’s ranting about first graders, all he proves is that it takes one to know one.
How about this for a rule: If you’re going to stir up the pot, make sure you have something savory to throw into it first. Throwing a lump of shit in neither enhances the contents of the pot, nor encourages others to want to stand over it and stir it themselves.
John S.
Patrick-
What ridiculous tripe:
Can you possibly find a larger brush to paint your grotesque caricatures with? Yes, the downfall of this blog is surely the fault of those awful lefties.
I will borrow one of your lines:
slide
ppGaz said:
I can second that.
Patrick said:
Who’s pretending anything. He can do whatever he wants.
rayabacus
“takes one to know one.”
You see, John?
Narvy
“You resent the price gouger. But if he hadn’t demanded $20, he’d have been out of water. It was the price gouger’s “exploitation” that saved your child.”
Logic, it’s wonderful. Thanks Davebo. This makes a great hook for what I really want to say:
It seems to me that this logic is not unlike some (much?) of what claims to be reasoning or analysis from many posters (and sometimes John himself). When I discovered this site, I felt happy. “Here” I said to myself “is a principled, reasonable conservative. Won’t it be pleasant to read what he has to say, find areas of agreement, engage in productive discussion, yada, yada, yada.”
John, I still think you are principled and reasonable, but I also think you take the personal attacks way too personally. I would prefer to see you respond to the invective by asking real informational questions, asking for the factual basis of an opinion, and insist (for all the good it would do) on a real debater’s defense of a position.
I know it’s hard not to respond in kind; the worst I’ve been called on this site is “simpleton”, not much of an insult, and I’m still pissed about it (as evidenced by my harping on it here). But if you continue trading insult for insult, I’m afraid that you’ll make yourself sick, and that conversation on this site will degenerate permanently. I’d hate to see either of those thing happen.
I think you should grit your teeth (if you haven’t already ground them down to useless stumps) and not respond to nasty attacks in kind. At best, it might discourage the attackers to go away (yeah, I know, fat chance), at worst at least you’ll keep your end of the discussion civil and civilized, which would make your opponents look even stupider than they are (if that’s possible).
Kimmitt
Yep. The folks running the Republican Party don’t have any good will for anyone who doesn’t share their worldview under any circumstances, and liberals have finally figured that out. So here we are, until people who put Country over Party start working on retaking the Republican Party, or else our press corps starts doing its job.
Sherard
John, I completely agree. I think the really simple fact of the matter is this:
New Orleans never believed it would really happen. They weren’t really prepared for it, and when a category 5 hurrican e was really bearing down on the city they did they best they could considering that they never thought it WOULD happen.
People generally will do the right thing, the best they can under any circumstances. Without an adequate pre-plan in place, they did the best they could. Unfortunately it wasn’t good enough. The initial planning and execution falls under the responsibility of the local and state governments and they had less than adequate plans to work with. It is not shock that inadequate planning led to inadequate execution. To think the federal agency FEMA would magically fly in and correct everything is ludicrous.
What this should be is a lesson learned for every other municipality that is pre-disposed to be likely to suffer a natural disaster, whether it be a midwestern town that is likely to be in the line of an F5 tornado, or all the west coast that sits on active fault lines. The lesson is, no matter how unlikely you THINK the disaster is, you still need to be prepared for it as if it is going to happen next week.
There really is no point to blaming anyone. You learn from failure.
Sherard
Kimmit, are you serious with that bullshit ? The REPUBLICAN party needs to put “country ahead of party”. That’s almost laughable. The “Blame America First” left is FAR more culpable there than the Republicans. I have to question your sanity.
bains
ppGaz, would you acknowledge that reasonable citizens might not be insulted?
tBone
I agree, and I think you should revisit this idea regarding Katrina, John. The resulting discussions would have to be more productive than what’s been going on here lately.
There are still plenty of people here on both sides of the aisle who are capable of honest debate; they’re just hard to hear over the racket from the caged monkeys flinging poo at each other.
pleonastic piranha
i understand how frustrating it can be if people don’t honour a space one has opened to them. welcome to public discourse; there will always be those who don’t play well with others (and i note that you have them from all over the political spectrum, which indicates that this is a good place in general).
but, actually it’s mostly your choice. each of us is an individual; we have no power over what other people post, only over our own words. it only takes a couple of people to sidetrack any discussion; trolls have a much larger impact than reasonable people. you are the one who has the power to deny people the soapbox; you can ban anyone who doesn’t behave as you expect. it’s your playground, you make and you can enforce your rules, you can show people that feeding each other’s idiocies isn’t worth it. you’re not the first person to have to do so, and you won’t be the last; throwing a tantrum isn’t the most efficient way of doing it however.
if you decide that you might as well act like the next twit it’s no skin off the back of reasonable people; one can leave as quickly as one came here. it’s your reputation at stake, really. choose wisely.
PotVsKtl
In other words, you called me and others apologists for rapists and baby killers to prove some ludicrous point.
John Cole:
Fuck you you cowardly piece of shit.
Boronx
What I don’t get is why John Cole gives a shit. The best bloggers post what they want and only descend into the cesspool of the comments if someone posts something really pertinent.
You’ll keep your sanity, and in the long run it’s a better method of reducing the number of trolls and threadhogs than trying to beat them at their own game (you can’t, your outnumbered)
BTW, this post reminds me of when Tacitus used to troll his own blog. It feels like the kid who can’t help but torment his little sister. He knows it’s not right, he doesn’t really want to do it, but she’s just so…so tormentable. And look at the way she reacts, it’s hysterical.
Jay Salter
John Cole, et. alia.,
A few days ago I posted (it was my first post here) what I thought to be a reasonable proposal. I asked John Cole to address David Brooks’ column in last Sunday’s NYT, titled “Bursting Point.”
Mr. Cole replied almost immediately by questioning my conservative credentials. It seemed an obvious ploy to avoid addressing the issues raised by Brooks. Now Mr. Cole suggests he may be willing to “discuss the events of the last few weeks rationally” if only folks would stop throwing “shit” in his face.
Frankly, I thought my request was sufficiently civil to merit a civil reply and I also thought Mr. Brooks’ description of the President’s present predicament was a penetratingly rational analysis that might serve to generate some equally rational comments in a blog such as this.
If asking the conservative Mr. Cole to address an insightful column by our national paper of record’s chief conservative columnist is interpreted as shit throwing, well, wait’ll I start pitching overhand.
Jay Salter
pmm
Why shut down comments? If you don’t like them, don’t read them. If particular commenters don’t make any sense, ignore them. Heck, there are a lot of commenters who drive me bat-sh*t crazy on one post, but are quite insightful on the next.
Brian
I have made few comments on this site, but view it many times per day for updates. John, you have one of the most reasonable perspectives out there in blogland, and you have to figure whether or not it’s worth your peace of mind to keep trying to reason with people who don’t have the intellectual heft to rise to the occasion of a true dialogue.
I have taken the opportunity to comment on other blogs, Left- and Right-leaning. Even when you can find someone who won’t call you names, there are more who bring the discussion down to their desperately low level. Time and time again, I see this “dialogue” occur: “Just shut up and go stick your fist up Chimpy’s ass”; “Get a clue, motherf**ker! And when you do, then go jump off Halliburton headquarters!”; “You racist, apologist s**twad! Go on vacation and twiddle your guitar like Dear Leader, so we can get things done here.” It can go on and on, but this sort of fatuous prose inevitably brings down the level of discourse. And when you call them on it, they come back with something like “Hey, it’s a free country. I can say anything I want, and so can you. It’s called having a conversation”, as if ignoring everything that went before that eliminated any possibility of a conversation.
Maybe some others here are right, give the comments a rest for awhile, or use that “delete” button a lot more. If you lose the comments, we can email you and you can highlight those emails in your posts, if you choose. Either way, I’ll still read your blog, and I think most others will as well.
ppGaz
I’d acknowledge that somebody might assert such a thing, but I have to tell you, I don’t see how that position can go unchallenged.
However, you are making a reasonable parry in an unreasonable context. Nobody here is having a nice polite conversation with John … or anyone else .. because nice polite conversation is not held here. Period. Noone dares to speak badly of Emperor Bush without being dismissed as Lefty Trash, called names … standard procedure.
So let’s say for the sake of argument that I believe John when he calls for calm discussion. I don’t, yet, but I’ll stipulate it for the sake of discussion.
Fine. Please demonstrate how, in the presence of the Darrells of the world, one has that calm discussion. I’m a quick study. Show me how that is done.
Show me how the commenters maintain their composure when day after day the same lies and strawman arguments are thrown down?
Here’s how it goes:
A: Bush has acted like a jerk. “Didn’t expect the levees ..”
B: You’re just a vile Bush-hater
A: But he acted like a jerk
B: Oh sure, B-B-B-Bush is to blame for everything.
A: I didn’t say he was to blame for everything, I said he acted like a jerk.
B: That proves you are nothing but a liberal Bush-hater, only a Bush-hater would say that.
A: Are you kidding? He acted like a jerk? Only a Bush apologist would say otherwise.
B: Oh, so now I’m nothing but a Bush Apologist? Only a true Bush Hater would say so.
…. ad infinitum.
Tell me something: If you ran a blog, and really DIDN’T want that exchange going on all day and all night, what would you do? Turn off comments? Okay. Try to inject some reason at key points in the exchange? Okay. Try to show how each side has a valid point? Okay.
Or would you just provoke more and more frustrated exchanges every day, and then yell at the commenters for doing it?
Gee, let me think this one over.
John S.
‘I know you are but what am I’ while a fascinating refrain for a six year-old is hardly the basis for adult intellectual discourse.
Since you threw out a scathing criticism of someone else’s OPINION without offering a shred of rationale to explain your position, I think it would be more apropos to question YOUR sanity, Sherard.
sarah
John, I agree with those people that have argued for the return of the “Plame style” discussion to this issue. I too am a “leftie” who reads your blog often because you (rationally) provoke my thinking in the way that Tacitus used to before it devolved. I think you call a lot of BS appropriately. But this tragedy seems to have taken you down a bit. Whoever said…it is hard, but you have to be the adult…is right. Screw the people on both sides who yell and scream and swear like foul children. This is your blog – don’t go to that level. There are lots of us, I’m sure, who infrequently comment but VERY frequently read, who would leave if things continue the way they are.
Maybe a little vacation is in order. Get your head, get out of the news, come back when you feel less tempted by the crazies here. You have lots of value to add – please don’t make it useless by becoming ANOTHER stupid extremist right-wing voice.
Ben
Boronx Says:
What I don’t get is why John Cole gives a shit.
The fact that John Cole does give a shit is why his blog is better than most… go read LGF or the other partisan repub sites and see if you can detect their disdain and arrogance for others. Not usually the case with Cole.
Mike S
So when did said chain yanking begin? Don’t you think a concensus building thread would have been more helpfull? It worked with the Plame flame wars.
Emotions are high. I don’t think I’ve ever called you an appoligist, and have defended you and some of the more reasonable people on the board even though I disagree strongly.
I’m as guilty as anyone at escalating flame wars, regardless of how many times I try not to. But I can’t think of a worse time to try to enflame from the get go than right now. There’s a lot of bullshit getting flung around on both sides. Some are rumors that build to facts. Others are outright lies. The reason I started coming here, first was right around the Abu Ghraib scandal, is because I saw that you were resaonable although sometimes wrong.
So two questions.
When did you begin trying to start flame fests?
And do you want me out of here? If you ask, I will stay away and not rename myself to come back.
ppGaz
How do we know that DougJ and Darrell are two different people?
How do we know that they are not both creations of John, who is just enjoying the hell out of watching us try to reason with Darrell, or figure out where DougJ is coming from?
Without continuity, without some kind of intellectual integrity, without sequiturs ….. how can anyone be sure of anything?
I basically have ONE BEEF about George Bush in the Katrina context (no, I am not one of those who has “blamed him for everything” despite the fact that yes, I despise him in a profound way) …. My one beef is, that spectacle he put on last week, culminating in Friday’s tv show, was an insult and embarassment to everyone in this country, and he ought to be ashamed.
That’s it. But you know what? If I called him Hitler, I’d get the same damned reception in here.
Sojourner
John:
Perhaps the reason the lefties are so pissed off is that we are profoundly tired of this administration:
They ignored the warnings prior to 9/11. That’s a FACT. Could they have stopped it? Maybe not but maybe if the air traffic controllers had been warned that this was a possibility, it wouldn’t have taken so long to shut down the national air space and one or two of the planes could have been kept on the ground.
The Bush administration then takes the U.S. into a war in Iraq based upon lies or incompetence. Our kids are dying for a “democracy” that in all likelihood will lead to a life of hell for more than half the population. What, exactly, was the point of that?
The Bush administration implemented (and continues to implement) tax cuts for the very wealthy at the expense of government services that benefit us all and producing a huge deficit that we all have the honor of paying for.
The Bush administration chooses not to believe in global warming in spite of the very real likelihood that it is the reason for the growing strength of hurricanes we’ve seen over the past few years. The ocean is a few degrees warmer, which provides the fuel needed for the Cat 4/5 hurricanes.
The Bush administration wants to allow the teaching of Intelligent Design, which will further weaken the scientific base of this country. The U.S. is no longer the leader in technology and Bush is doing exactly the opposite of what is needed to regain that leadership.
The Bush administration has weakened environmental laws, in spite of increases in health indicators such as asthma.
The Bush administration chose to focus on Social Security, using a strategy that would do little to improve its solvency while dramatically contributing to the deficit. Why didn’t he focus on programs that need near-term help such as Medicare and Medicaid?
The Bush administration’s Medicare drug prescription plan is wonderful for the drug companies but does very little for the average retiree.
The Bush administration has done nothing to address the issue of health insurance.
The Bush administration reversed the progress Clinton made in strengthening FEMA. The consequences of this were obvious last week. I’m sorry but if the media and Walmart can make their way to New Orleans in less than 24 hours, why did it take FEMA so long? And why was FEMA so disorganized? Good grief, their SOLE MISSION is to deal with situations like this. This does not let the state and local folks off the hook but the Bush administration is solely responsible for the damage they did to FEMA.
And the list goes on and on.
Perhaps these are some of the reasons why the lefties are so profoundly fed up with this administration. If you truly are not an apologist for this administration, then it seems to me that you have to recognize the validity of at least parts of the lefty discontent. But what I’m hearing from you is that we have no right to be pissed at this administration and little right to challenge the Bush apologists who support this administration unthinkingly.
With all due respect, you’re out of line on this one.
Vlad
[i]”The ‘Blame America First’ left is FAR more culpable there than the Republicans.”[/i]
Yeah. They’re ruining the country with their control of the Preisdency and the House and the Senate, to say nothing of the 75% of the current Supreme Court they’ve appointed.
Vlad
“If I called him Hitler, I’d get the same damned reception in here.”
Admittedly, he’d look kinda cute with the little moustache.
ppGaz
That’s just pure bullshit. My “White House” reference was a hypothetical, clearly. Suggesting that those who claim the high ground here reverse the situation. Suppose that someone on “the left” came along and said, “Ha ha … the joke’s on you. I’ve been pulling your chain all along to teach you a lesson. I’m really a White House staffer, not a lefty at all.”
Sorry, I don’t see the humor in that kind of thing.
But if someone thinks that what this arena should be, that’s up to them. Maybe they think it’s funny, but I don’t find it funny, or honest.
I’ve probably done the least direct Bush-bashing of anyone on the “left” here in the last week, yet in this new phony-baloney context, everyone gets painted with the same brush.
Last but not least, the “conservative” label is being abused around here. There is nothing “conservative” about Bush’s behavior last Friday. Nor is there anything “liberal” about calling it what it was: Embarrassing.
John S.
Perhaps not usually, although I have seen John have just as much of a penchant for arrogance and condescension as the best of them. The only difference is that he usually backs up his strong views with some sort of rationale.
Steve S
It appears that it’s really up to you. It’s your blog.
You’re the one who has turned into a Rush Limbaugh ideologue. The only reason people are responding to your posts is because you keep posting bullshit, like your thinly sourced claims of mythbusting.
There’s plenty of other sites out there which have posted detailed histories of events, as well as documented the conflicting claims of the Bushies. Repeating what you read on Rush Limbaugh isn’t helpful.
Tim F
Exactly. He’s not a kossack and we should never expect him to be. But, even when I disagree at least I have faith that he came to a conclusion fairly. On the internets that’s saying a lot. Read back through those painful, protracted Plame exercises. John takes ten times the effort of your ordinary blogger to appreciate where everybody’s coming from.
When you weigh that along with John’s practical ownership of the torture issue among the rightwing blogosphere, I think that he has more than earned the benefit of the doubt here. Quit assuming that he has the same nefarious intentions as your Powerline or Drudge and his posts will start sounding a lot more reasonable.
Excepting the last few, which as I said before were probably intended to piss people off an make a point.
rayabacus
Maybe we can put to rest the story about FEMA not getting to the Superdome in a timely fashion. The director of the Red Cross has been making the MSM rounds. She states that the Red Cross tried to get food, water and blankets to the Superdome on Tuesday but the Government Officials would not let them
She said that the Officials did not want to attract people to the Superdome. DAMN GOVERNMENT. THOSE SUPPLIES WERE RIGHT THERE FOR THOSE PEOPLE AND THE OFFICIALS TURNED AWAY THOSE PEOPLE FROM THE RED CROSS.
Oops. It turns out that those Officials were LOUISIANA STATE OFFICIALS.
From Hugh Hewitt’s show today:
The Fox News Channel’s Major Garrett was just on my show extending the story he had just reported on Brit Hume’s show: The Red Cross is confirming to Garrett that it had prepositioned water, food, blankets and hygiene products for delivery to the Superdome and the Convention Center in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane, but were blocked from delivering those supplies by orders of the Louisiana state government, which did not want to attract people to the Superdome and/or Convention Center. Garrett has no paper trail yet, but will follow up on his verbal confirmation from sources at the highest levels of the Red Cross.
http://hughhewitt.com/
There’s also a transcript from Fox’s O’Reilly, I think last night. There is also an article in the Times-Picayune.
Patrick
John S,
Not the downfall of this blog, Johnnie boy, just the downfall of the Katrina discussions.
Let’s return to the beginning of these comments. A humorous statement. A few on-topic comments. slide tells John he’s lying, and is dismissed by the host. slide attacks. slidelike creatures, in their best Beavis and Butthead behavior, all group around and uh-huh uh-huh uh-huh.
So, excepting that I struck a raw nerve on your thin-skinned hide, I made no comment about you and expect none of your crap in return.
bains
For you who dont believe Hugh Hewitt nor Bill O’Reilly
Here’s the Red Cross
John S.
Patrick-
Could you possibly exude for pompousity and condescension? I assure you, my “hide” is rather thick, but that doesn’t prevent me from taking to task someone such as yourself.
You simultaneously chide slide – while falsely promoting the notion that he represents most “lefties” – for his invectives while spewing forth the same type of nonsense you deride him for.
I don;t need to be on the receiving end of a comment to respond to your flagrant hypocrisy, and I submit that when you stop hurling crap around here like a monkey in a cage that you will find no crap being volleyed back to you.
Mike S
Was that before or after Bush begged and pleaded with Blanco to evacuate because she wasn’t going to?
There’s a lot of stuff the state government screwed up on, and I have heard others in this vein. But the amount of spin and lies coming out of the feds and pravda is unbelievable. These days, if FOX says it I take it for granted that it is false.
Hunter asks a good question in relation to the Bush begged lie.
So for the sake of argument, fine: let’s grant the central premise the White House was following the dangerous progress of Katrina well in advance, and urged evacuations. Let’s grant the premise that they were “ready” for this storm, according to the standards that Bush set for himself. On vacation. While receiving ceremonial guitars.
Does that make the now-universally-recognized-as-inadequate administration response better? Or spectacularly worse?
bains
I think there are items on that list that nearly every righty agrees with. Will you recognize that there are other items that are based upon conjecture, and that the righty has heard all the arguments the lefty can offer and still finds the argument wanting?
Mike S
I don’t understand why the formatting is right in insta preview yet posts different. The last two grafs should have remained in block quotes.
Bains.
I had seen that the other night. It’s one of the dumbest thing I have ever seen a state government do. Brownie should have kicked their asses and made them allow the RC in. Of course that would have required him doing something other than appearing on every show on TV.
Krista
Well met, sir! (Or ma’am.) It IS rather exhausting wading through all of the insults, profanity, and broad generalizations, isn’t it? Like Watcher said earlier, he and I had a really good discussion about gun control, and we were both presenting our case, and I know that he definitely made me think. I hope that I did the same. Calling people names, or spouting generalizations is not going to make people think. It’s just going to make them plant their feet like mules, and refuse to listen to you, even if you DO have a legitimate point buried in amongst all of that vitriol.
Patrick
Johnnie S, old chum,
You are a pompous ass, and beneath my contempt. Please, kindly piss off. I shan’t address you again.
Mike S
I will. And it is the reason I like this blog. When emotions aren’t flying it is the best place to discuss them.
John S.
Thanks for highlighting the fact that you are part of the problem around here, despite all your whining about:
John S.
I couldn’t agree more.
Stormy70
My head hurts.
EL
This may stir things up, but I hope on the side of dealing with facts and analysis: The evacuation of those who couldn’t easily evacuate.
I don’t know if there is documentation of a state plan for this – I welcome a link. However, would there have been time for such an evacuation? I gather city buses used to take people to the Superdome. Was there enought time to get those people out of the city with city resources?
If they could have been evacuated, what provisions would be made for them in whatever location they would be evacuated to? From the Hurricane Pam exercise, one hurricane researcher:
What I take from this is that authorities (and I’m not specifying which) had problems envisioning the scope of the disaster. They could not reconcile the expected devastation with what they expect in this country. Now this is from the Pam exercise in 2004, so what did they think Sunday August 28 of what they might have to do if the city flooded? I haven’t seen anything that tells me.
BinkyBoy
I already told you I had enough, John. Your readership is the one taking the hit, why continue with the vitriol?
This country is the one taking it in the piehole by a man who was re-elected only because of the R next to his name. His leadership is questionable, and his delay most certainly got people killed in New Orleans. If this is the kind of leadership we can expect from him in the future if/when there is a terror attack, this country is screwed.
Katrina is horrible, the deaths are occurring and will continue for a few more weeks, possibly. I’m not trying to gain political capital by holding up dead decaying bodies and shaking them. I tried, along with most of the lefties here, to point out that the lack of leadership and the delays that are easily visible are proving that our lack of capable leadership is harming this country, in more and more visible ways.
When we point out that those murders were preventable, we are told that we love the murderers and are morons. Thanks, John, but thats the kind of lame ass commentary I can get at any right wing site. No one is apologizing for the murderers, but we’re trying to explain that the delay in deployment and the lacksidasial leadership did nothing to prevent it, nor other murders and deaths. Why do you continue to take that so personally?
I read this last post in the hopes that somehow you may have retracted your earlier asshole remarks, but I find that all you are doing is spitting in the faces of those that have made your blog so successful and fun to be part of.
Good luck regaining your sanity, John. I might watch and see if you ban ppGaz, slide or others, but I think I already know the answer. You’ll encourage the Watchers, the Jeff’s, and the Phil’s, just because its most comfortable for you, maybe.
rayabacus
Check it out.
http://www.nola.com/newsflash/louisiana/index.ssf?/base/news-18/1125239940201382.xml&storylist=louisiana
I don’t trust a lot I hear in the MSM, however I don’t think that Fox would put up a transcript with the head of the Red Cross, with her words right there for her to dispute if it wasn’t factual.
A reasonable person would say, “Hey, so that is what happened at the Superdome. That explains the situation and the delay.” Now whether you agree that that was the right decision by those officials is another story. I don’t know why they made the decision that they did.
Krista
EL –
This is all stuff that I hope is seriously, seriously addressed once things have calmed down somewhat. Whatever people might think about who is responsible, who is not, and so on, it cannot be denied that EVERY major city should have comprehensive and well-thought-out evacuation plans in place for terrorist attacks, natural disasters, industrial accidents, etc. They might not get it perfectly next time…they might NEVER get it perfectly. But there’s always room for improvement, and I truly hope that local, state and federal governments start taking this very, very seriously.
Tim F
Sounds like Patwick from the Atlantic forums again. Lucky us.
Vlad
Ditto.
Patrick
Binky,
Your continued complete lack of understanding about disaster planning and mitigation is as breathtaking as it is uninformed. If you had the slightest idea about how these things are planned and dealt with, you’d realize that (aside from some less-than-polished public statements by agency administrators) this incident will go down as being (federal management only here) one of the most successful disaster management ops ever.
This does not vouch for the fact, yes the fact, that the initial part of this disaster was handled, well, disasterously. If you know about FEMA and it’s stated purpose, you know that their role is primarily training and assisting local and state governments in handling incidents. That plan anticipates that the first steps of mitigating a disaster, evacuation and S&R, are handled by local and state. Those were poorly handled, and FEMA is neither responsible for that nor can mitigate it. The military is the stopgap and performed remarkably.
Rhetoric like this is shameful:
I agree strongly with the last three words of that snippage.
Patrick
Tim,
If you’re talking about me, please address me. It’s impolite.
Krista
I think the military did a phenomenal job. I just wish they’d somehow been able to get there earlier. Maybe it wasn’t possible, but maybe it was. We’ll have to see how it all washes out.
In the meantime, I heart Gen. Honore. :)
ppGaz
Now that I’ve had some dinner and been invited to a high school football game …. I speak calmly.
To that point: My response to the post you refer to was to (a) stipulate that your facts were right, and (b) stipulate that your conclusions were not wrong-headed.
I then asked two questions, and swore not to crtiticize your answers to them, which I did not, AFAIK. You answered, and I moved on.
So …. what exactly are you so bent out of shape about?
I didn’t particularly follow what others did in that thread, but I don’t see what the hell the beef is here.
EL
Take a look at this transcript
(emphasis added)
Obviously the press conference was already set up, and while not explicity said, it sure sounds like decisions had been taken before that phone call. But I actually don’t think it matters much to the facts I think important – the planning, and actions taken when it all began to fall apart. I find it mainly used by people saying that Blanco didn’t know what she was s
BinkyBoy
Why is it shameful? To accept that 9/11 should have been a starting point for discussion about disaster relief and control is one thing, but to blindly say that FEMA holds ZERO accountability in a failure of a situation is just laughable.
Narvy
The same way we know that Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are two different people.
DougJ does not let his political opinions get in the way of civil conversation. Darrell does not allow civility to get in the way of his political opinions.
scs
I just want to make sure everyone sees this on the Red Cross website that DougS supplied:
http://www.redcross.org/faq/0,1096,0_682_4524,00.html#4524
Seems like the Red Cross is comng down on the state side.
EL
Sorry, I thought I had taken out that last sentence.
Krista
Guys, come on. Not productive.
Sojourner
Seems to me that this list is more than enough to cause a reasonable person to be furious at, and disgusted with, this administration. So why does it matter if other arguments are found wanting? Enough is enough.
Ted
John,
I discovered you during the campaign when I looked for balance and someone to read on the other side of the aisle.
While your blog was well written, and educational, it was to my total amazement, balanced; incredibly rare thing in today’s politics.
Lately though, and especially in the past eight days, you have become stridently partisan. And you seem to be swimming upstream. People on both sides are critical of the Federal response.
Do you feel there is anything in the federal actions we should learn for when the next disaster comes? It is not unpatriotic or inappropriate to learn from our actions.
Maybe you need to push back from the computer for a while, take a walk, maybe even declare a 24 hour posting sabatical (and shut down comments too for that time maybe). But truth be told, you are sounding a bit petulant. You are better than this.
I liked the days when reading you fell between strident Right wing sites and strident Left wing sites. I have several of each in my aggregator. I will grieve, if the only moderate voice I’ve found is gone.
Krista
That was really great of the Red Cross to post that, though. I bet it answered a lot of questions.
Don’t we wish that all large organizations (i.e. companies, the government, etc.) were so forthcoming with the rationale behind their actions? Cheers to the Red Cross for treating people like intelligent adults!
scs
Sorry about my repeat post, apparently it was posted earlier in the segment.
Patrick
Sojourner,
Every single item on your list is refutable, or just patently wrong. I don’t accuse you of lying or being stupid, since you’re just repeating well-traveled claptrap.
But please don’t post later as if you’ve written something chiseled on stone tablets which are the basis for further discussion. I’d be happy to refute with links, but I doubt it’d either inform or entertain you.
BumperStickerist
Here’s something that might help the Left understand the concept of ‘Vacation’ …
If a band somewhere in the vicinity of the President plays ‘Ruffles and Flourishes’ four times followed by either “Hail to the Chief” or “The Star Spangled Banner” then the President is not a vacation.
Narvy
Probably-not-very-good-satire alert:
What kind of ignorant [expletive] would post something as [expletive] as that. It’s obvious to anyone who doesn’t have his head up his [expletive] that the [expletive] Red Cross embezzled all the charitible contributions given by my side and the [expletives] are now lying about it. [Expletive] those [explitiving expletives]!!!
Now back to the reasoned discussion of who is really responsible for making the hurricane a category 4.
(Apologies to Krista.)
Tim F
Patrick,
My stars, how right you are. Please forgive the impropriety, old chap. Now, do say on which sites of genteel rightwing discourse John’s blog is being slandered such. The proprietor might think it rude to be told that his blog has become a shithole without being told by whom.
Hoping that you are well,
your humble servant,
Tim F
ppGaz
But if the two parts were being put up by a good writer, that would be easy to pull off.
But my question was rhetorical. If we are just having chains jerked, which I take it is the thrust of this thread, then how far will people go to jerk chains?
I may be obnoxious, but at least I am telling it like I see it, I’m not pretending to be pissed at Bush so as to see if I can get someone else pissed off. I manage to get plenty of people pissed off without trying deliberately to see if I can do it, if you get my drift.
Tim F
The capitalized Left is back. Cue minor key strings.
Narvy
Well, some of us think he is.
scs
Sojourner, saw your list on why you are tired of the Bush Administration. Seems to me almost everything on that list is just the REPUBLICAN PLATFORM. If not Bush and some other Republican, I think basically the same things would be happening that would annoy you. No use to demonize Bush. So what you are saying is you’re tired of Republicans. Well if you’ve seen some national maps showing local results of voting, its basically a red country with some little blue dots. It doens’t look like Republicans are going anywhere anytime soon. So either the lefties start winning some elections or you’ll have to just live with it. (or go to Canada I guess). No use stressing about Bush all the time.
slide
Patrick said:
Not quite. Second post (the humorous comment?) to the appeal by John for everyone to make nicey nicey contained this:
Patrick’s chronology slide tells John he’s lying:
Well, what I actually said was:
I then followed up with:
John Cole’s magnaminus response?
Calls me dishonest. Yep, that John Cole surely would really like to uplift the discussion. Translation: Don’t disagree with me as my fragil ego can’t handle it.
Ban me if you must John but I’m not taking your shit without responding in kind.
Boronx
What I don’t get is why John Cole gives a shit.
The fact that John Cole does give a shit is why his blog is better than most… go read LGF or the other partisan repub sites and see if you can detect their disdain and arrogance for others. Not usually the case with Cole.
You’re right. John Cole pays attention, and he reads, that’s what makes him valuable to read in turn. But when we’re mucking about down here insulting him and everyone else, he’ll be better served by letting his post at the head stand on its own, to move on to something worthwhile.
My advice, for what it’s worth, is to address only arguments that either change his outlook on the situation or cause some new information to be put forward either to make the argument or counter it. Become thick skinned. Ignore all mean, worthless, or stupid comments. Not only will this promote healthy comments, but it will reduce John’s motives for unleashing mean, worthless and stupid comments of his own.
Lately, Cole’s been doing the exact opposite. Whether out of playful malice or because he’s just thin skinned…
Patrick
Tim,
I don’t have any servants, but thank you for lowering the level of noise.
John frequents the places in question and I’m sure is well aware of the comments being made. In fact, the posting that begat this very civilized discussion was nakedly a tweak of some readers.
Worked well, no?
tBone
Hear, hear, my good man! It would be simply splendid if the good Mr. Cole would institute rules demanding that all the motley commentators here hew to a more civilized form of discourse.
But without all of the dumbfucks, what would we have to talk about?
Mike S
Start with Patrick:
Compared to Bains:
followed by me:
I could converse with someoe like Bains for hours. Patrick would be a waste of both time and breath. Read the list and ask yourself why Patrick would even try to defend a few of them, let alone claim to “easily refute” them.
Patrick
slide,
You left out the part where you questioned John’s veracity:
Which is in response to his statement:
So I amend my statement thusly:
slide ignores John’s question entirely, as s/he has apparently ignored John’s previous postings and links (provided for context.)
At any rate, nice chatting with you. Isn’t it nice that some blogs actually have open comments? Even when we fill them with crap?
Tim F
Patrick,
Some are more tweakable than others. If I found my way to your unnamed sites, and had a store of passive-aggressivity that I needed to work out, I can assure you that I would find a few impassioned souls easily baited into diatribes. Here on the internet one can easily mistake unanimity for gentility.
Tell me if you are not in fact the Patrick who frequented The Atlantic for some time. Identical MO and language use, but these things happen. If not I’ll gladly explain why this fellow came to be known as Patwick.
Just Some Guy
Trolling your own blog. Bloody awesome.
Mike S
Are you calling him a liar? He did say he was cutting his vacation short to get back to DC after all.
Narvy
From the list:
Off-topic (if that’s possible here), but what is the reason that the legislation that created the drug plan explicitly prohibits the government from negotiating prices with the drug companies?
tBone
scs, have you heard the saying “Acres don’t vote?”
Sorry, but the red/blue thing irritates me – we’re largely a purple country. Too many people (Ds and Rs alike) forget that.
Narvy
Mike S, please see this.
Sojourner
Really? Every item? It may be well-traveled claptrap to you but I have yet to see a compelling argument against any of the points I’ve made.
Sojourner
Okay, which Republican president would you claim has made as many idiotic decisions as this one?
Otto Man
Christ, not this again. In this country, people get to vote, not the land.
Take one of those little blue dots. Say, Brooklyn. About 70 square miles of land. Tiny on a map, but it alone holds 2.5 million people.
Take a big swath of red states. Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota. It’s over 321,000 square miles there, and yet it holds about 2.4 million people.
The “little blue dot” of Brooklyn has more people in it than these three states combined. Just because the county-by-county map made this country look like a sea of red in the last election didn’t make it so.
Otto Man
Good question. He surpassed Harding a long time ago, and I think he’s clearly moved past Nixon with this latest round of goofs.
Narvy
claptrap: n. Often used in “What you say is claptrap“. An abbreviated way of putting one’s hands over one’s ears and singing “I can’t hear you, la, la, la”
Sojourner
This one’s a keeper.
slide
Patrick:
You are certainly doing your part.
Tim F said:
Do tell us
Patrick
Mike S,
1. Ignored warnings on 9/11. Please link me to one reputable source on this. Nothing foreign and not the 9/11 Commission, which will prove to be even a bigger waste of time and money than the hunt for semen on the White House carpet. Any source that doesn’t mention Able Danger is disqualified.
2. Every government agency in every civilized country believed Saddam had WMD in abundance. Where’s the lie or incompetence?
3. Tax revenues have exploded even after the tax cuts. Kennedy proved it, Reagan and Bush have copied it. The deficit comes from spending. Don’t be lazy – look it up.
4. Global warming is cyclical. Has nothing to do with hurricanes.
Notice where the quote from the hurricane expert appears in the story in USA Today.
5. How, exactly, does teaching Intelligent Design alongside the pure scientific theory of the origin of man weaken the scientific base? I thought debate was good?
6. Bush hasn’t weakened environmental laws enough, if we’re not drilling in the Arctic tundra and off the coast of California. And putting windfarms in Teddy Kennedy’s front yard. Call me goofy, but things like this don’t make sense.
7. The statement about Social Security is amazing. Allowing me some choice of how to grow my retirement is a bad thing and will take money away from… whom exactly?
8. Medicare drug benefit – hey, we agree on something.
9. Health insurance – this is too complex to be flip with. But trust me, I work in the industry and nobody goes without healthcare. We just go without being paid for it.
10. FEMA performed according to spec. They were there BEFORE the hurricane even made landfall. If you don’t understand that FEMA is the equivalent of federal insurance adjusters, you’d better go to their website and read their mission statement. They own expertise and planning – they train and assist.
OK, so that was fun. Anything else you don’t want to discuss with me?
Patrick
Since I know that Narvy doesn’t know what it means, I shall provide the actual definition which is spot-on description of what it was referencing:
bains
I think your missing the larger point scs…
The Red Cross was ready to supply food, water, and toiletry items to the folks in both the Superdome and the convention center, but was prevented by LA state DHS – Governer Blanco’s realm of responsibility. I’m not going to fault her for her logic eg setting up relief stations in NO for fear of tacitly encouraging the folks to say in NO. Blanco clearly wanted to get them out. Tuesday 20:15 she issues the order to evacuate the Superdome. Somewhere around noon, Wednesday, FEMA provides 475 busses to aid the evacuation; Late Wednesday Blanco signed the order suthorizing the LA National Guard to seize busses to aid the evacuation.
All the while, the Red Cross has been available to provide a sembalance of aid, yet is denied.
Now obviously there had been some coordination between Fed and State, but just as clearly, there were conflicting chains of command… and a helluva lota confusion.
FEMA is, as I understand it primarily an assessment and coordination vehicle. While I’m not sure whom is under its perview, I’m fairly sure that the Red Cross and other non-profit aid organizations are. The National Guard is under the Governer’s control, until she abdicates that authority to the Federal government.
Patrick
Sorry Tim F, I missed your reply above. I am not, in fact, the person of whom you speak. Not sure what The Atlantic is. I comment infrequently on all of the rightwingnazibushitler blogs I read, but this past week’s events has drawn me out of lurking.
And I’m not sure why on earth I would need to know about the source of your misspelling.
Phil Smith
Wow, that’s just paranoid. On to Sojourner:
Really paranoid, and here’s one bit of proof.
7:59 — AA Flight 11 takes off.
8:01 — UA Flight 93 takes off.
8:14 — UA Flight 175 takes off.
8:20 — AA Flight 77 takes off.
In short, no, none of the planes could have been kept on the ground, and to be so completely and utterly ignorant of the facts at this late stage in the game indicates to me that it would behoove you to learn a thing or two before shooting off your desparately, nay, obscenely ignorant mouth. You folks who think that the “X-Files” was a documentary have been babbling this particular brand of bullshit for far too long, and only serve to demonstrate that you are utterly unfit to select our government.
In other words, why in the world would anyone give a rat fuck in a rolling donut what you think?
Mike S
From the Red Cross FAQ
and
It’s criminal, imo, that they did not get in there when they could have saved some lives. The plan, again imo, should have been to use the SD as a weigh station giving people food and water as they waited for the next round of busses. Whether it was Nagin, Blanco or Brownie they should be either fired or voted out.
CaseyL
Yes, the Red Cross site does say that state as well as federal officials aren’t letting them into New Orleans.
There are also stories of federal troops being punished by their commanders for rescuing people when their orders were to carry out purely reconnaisance missions. And stories of people being herded like cattle, put into planes, and not being told where they’re going; people being dumped in open fields with few provisions and no word about how long they’re staying there.
And stories about firefighters from all over the country, showing up ready and eager to commence rescue operations, only to find out that their primary mission is to appear with George Bush in a photo op. And stories about rescue operations that had to be suspended because Bush showed up for a photo op.
And there are timelines, lots of timelines, that put the lie to Administration claims that Blanco didn’t declare a state of emergency until Bush “begged” her to.
The same timelines show President Bush officially declared that a “state of emergency” exists in Louisiana and ordered Federal aid to the affected areas to complement state and local relief efforts on August 27 – but on August 29, FEMA director Michael Brown waits 5 hrs after Katrina has hit to ask his boss, Michael Chertoff, for 1000 Homeland Security employees to be sent to the region and gave them two days to arrive.
Two days? The state of emergency had been declared on AUGUST 27. Katrina hit on AUGUST 29. And Brown gives his tardily-requested personnel TWO MORE DAYS to get there??
And Bush, meanwhile, continues on one campaign stop after another. It’s two days since he issued his orders, Katrina has made landfall, the Superdome is full of people but not full of supplies for them, the levees fail, the city floods, desperate cries for help are on the news for all to see…
Does Bush call Brown, Chertoff, anyone, and light a fire under them?
No.
Does Bush interrupt his campaign stops, his cake-cutting, his guitar-brandishing, to head back to Washington and call Chertoff or Brown on the carpet? Does he light a fire under them then?
No.
On September 1 – one day after even Brown’s lazy-assed deadline – there’s still no help; Nagin calls the situation critical and issues a desperate SOS for more buses to evacuate those stranded at the Superdome.
And what does Bush do? Poses with Trent Lott, cracks about Lott’s house, and says “Brownie, you’re going a heck of a job.”
No matter what deficiencies there were in the locals’ preparation and response to Katrina, that does not excuse the criminal negligence on the part of the Bush Administration. By August 29, responsibility rested squarely with the Federal Government.
And – what the Bush apologists can’t seem to get through their all-bone skulls – this is four years after 9/11. Four years after Bush supposedly made protecting American lives the absolute centerpiece of his rhetoric; four years after Bush completely reorganized the Federal emergency apparatus for the singular purpose of protecting American lives; and less than one year after Bush rode to election victory on the claim that only he could protect American lives.
Four years of big talk… and this is what we have to show for it? A drowned city, a casualty count that could reach five digits, and an Administration that dithered for FOUR DAYS over whether and how and what kind of assistance to send?
Why on earth are you defending the Bush Administration? How is it even possible?
Do you value your lives that little?
bains
No, Sojourner, what I said is that there were items on your list that ‘the righty’ finds unpersuasive.
I asked ppGaz if he would acknowldge that a reasonable person might not have been insulted by Bush’s Friday evening address. The reason for the question was I was trying to figure what his definition of “reasonable people” was. By your comment above, I’m left with the impression that your definition of a reasonable person is that they would have to agree with every item.
Which, by the way, would necessarily exclude every righty, many centrists, and some lefties. Which is fine if that’s how you feel – but it absolutely precludes honest discussion with anyone who does not share all your beliefs.
Defense Guy
In a reasonable world, which the blogosphere mostly is not, people can have differences of opinion without it meaning that they are the devil incarnate. If I as a Republican stated that the vitriol did not start under Clinton, or even under Reagan, but more likely under Washington, then that would be my opinion, which might not mean that I wish to drown kittens.
Or I could say that the differences of opinion that you lefties have makes you the worst scum sucking vermin on the face of the planet and I just cannot believe what you are doing to my country.
We are all probably capable of both, but it seems in these trying times that we would mostly stick to the ‘you suck’ variety of public discourse.
John’s site has been a great place to go to get John’s opinion for a long time, even before he decided to throw some on my side of the aisle under the bus for the Schiavo thing. It will continue to be a great place to go for John’s opinion on things long after this current president is gone.
That said, you lefties are still scum. Especially you ppgaz. Hugs and kisses.
Nash
Good ol’ John proves that the Golden Rule is a thing unknown to conservatives.
Defense Guy
No Nash, a single conservative cannot teach you any lessons about all conservatives. The best you can hope for is a lesson about that conservative.
The one with the gold makes the rules?
over it
So, pretty much, this whole thread is an argument about arguing in threads?
I think that the word is….redundant?
Do whatever it is that you want to do John. This is your playground and if you want to kick the bullies out it is in your power. In fact, if you want to keep the bullies and kick everyone else out(might be entertaining for a while)….you can do that as well. ;)
jobiuspublius
Cole, you’re fired.
BumperStickerist
This is a bit of a nit, but it’s a 450 mile wide one.
Ummm CaseyL, could you go back and report to those among the reality-based that 450 mile wide hurricanes travelling at 10-15 miles per hour take, oh …. say 20-30 hours to finish passing through an area.
If the operative term is ‘landfall’ remember that that is the eye of the hurricane, so there’s the whole back-half of the thing to consider. So, that’s at least 10-15 hours right there … after landfall.
And, lest we forget, the hurricane came in from the Gulf and headed north, so those folks would have to wait for Katrina to pass them by before heading into New Orleans.
I know in the grand scheme of things it’s not much – but this ‘waited five hours’ line just shows that the reality-based don’t really understand reality.
Cheers.
bains
Defend? no…
Rather a refusal to buy into a myopic and politically driven narrative with the aim to exculpate local and state jurisdictions so that all significant fault can be laid upon Bush.
Mike S
The “historical document” saying “Bin Ladin determined…” But over all I find most of that claim to be arguable.
In case you missed it, even the President admitted that they would have no effect on solvancy and would cut benefits for those not opting out.. Do you deny that Mediacare is in much more dire straights? That was ne of her main points.
Thank God you’re not President.
Do you think ID is science? Do you think teaching children that scoence and belief are equal is a good thing? Debate IS good, dishonest debate is bad.
You completely ignored her comment. She said “The Bush administration reversed the progress Clinton made in strengthening FEMA. The consequences of this were obvious last week”
Defense Guy
Who gets to decide what is honest and what is dishonest debate. From what I hear, the ID should be looked into conclusion was made by a respected scientist at Cambridge.
nyrev
I think the latter is what’s more likely to happen whether John likes it or not. Hopefully, John was able to blow off some steam with his little sociology experiment, but the end result is going to be Darrell and his other brother Darrell on one side of the fence and slide on the other, throwing insults and generalizations at each other in unmoderated glee. Eventually, the bulk of people in the middle of the political spectrum will get tired of getting caught in the splatter and find some less aggravating way to waste their time.
At least John’ll save bandwidth.
Dan
I think the best solution would be to take a few days off. See friends. Enjoy the outdoors – West Virginia is beautiful, and the frost will be coming before you know it. Read something enjoyable. Print out the comments section and use it for dart practice. Do whatever it takes to recharge.
bains
I’d agree… But there are extenuating circumstances. Both the corridor into and the immediate area around the Superdome had by that point degenerated into a state of lawlessness. We know that the local police (with 200-500 awols) had their hands full, as did an underdeployment of National Guard units. Some tough decisions had to be make – and hindsight’s a bitch.
Mike S
I’m thinking that’s a funny.
Dave Ruddell
I don’t get it. I just don’t get it. I don’t get why so many people who disagree with John so profoundly keep coming back here. Are you on some sort of mission perhaps, to save John’s political soul? Now I’ll admit that I like this blog best when John is stomping on the idiocies of the GOP (a target rich environment to be sure), and he’s gotten a little but crusty these last few weeks, but so what? It’s his blog. You don’t like it, go away. And for the sake of all that is holy, if you publicly announce in the comments that you’re going away, don’t come back in the next thread for just one more shot. If you actually think you’re going to cause some great enlightenment in your opponents, I have to ask; how long have you been reading blogs? Has this ever happened?
John, as a regular reader and infrequent commenter, I’ll offer this advice that you can take or leave as you please: shut down your comments for a while. Don’t set a length of time; could be a day, could be 11 weeks. You pretty much have a constant flame war going on right now; there’s plenty of fuel, and plenty of heat, so the only way you’re gonna put this puppy out is to starve it of oxygen. The other two parts of the old fire triangle will always be there, I suppose, and upon re-opening comments you will get flare ups. But they might not be so bad. And your blood pressure might retreat to more reasonable levels.
ppGaz
And so this thread sort of dissolves into a microcosm of every flame war we’ve seen in the last few months.
Too confusing.
Defense Guy
Mike S
Source
Still think it’s a funny? Bet he’s not so respected anymore. You just can not, and must not, question the established ‘truths’ in the scientific community. Not with all that sweet, sweet grant money running around anyway.
MI
Accusing John of being a Bush apologist and sycophant, calling him a hypocritical, shrill partisan, and telling him to fuck off is one thing, but c’mon
Seriously, I’ve seen more reasoned commentary about some of these issues from Michelle Malkin than from you
that’s just being mean.
In all seriousness I would hate to see the comments closed. I know it can get a bit heated from time to time, but more often than not this place is a great (and ever rarer) forum for honest political discourse.
ppGaz
Interesting. But, is that a testable hypothesis?
In light of the complete absence of any data to support the idea, how would you argue that it should be given any credence?
Wouldn’t a suggestion that little green fairies from outer space brought the genetic information be just as supportable?
tBone
Patrick, I think you need to read the quote you provided again:
They’re saying that there are cyclical variations in ocean currents, not that global warming is cyclical.
The article also contains this:
And the very first line of the article is this:
I’m not saying “global warming caused Katrina!”, but I don’t think that article supports the point you were trying to make.
Defense Guy
ppGaz
Perhaps you should forward your ideas to the scientists at the Smithsonian for consideration. Have it peer reviewed.
Narvy
Since Patrick does not recognize sarcasm, I shall not bother providing a definition.
Patrick, since you know what I don’t know, perhaps you would enjoy talking with Stormy, who predicts how I will behave on this site in the future, based on “experience”.
confused
Admittedly I haven’t read all of his posts on the subject, but the last real post by John concerning the hurricane response didn’t strike me as being particularly partisan. It seemed to basically say that we should wait for the facts about what happened to become clear before playing blaim games (and gave some rationale for this by pointing out some early claims that are now believed to have been incorrect); also, the post seemed to indicate that rather than the blaim game being our major concern, we ought to be more concerned with how to make sure that disaster responses are improved for the future. Are these honestly such wild ideas? I don’t get how urging caution before leaping to conclusions about what is certainly an extremely complicated event is somehow being an apologist for anyone.
BTW, I am neither a Rep nor a Dem, didn’t vote for either party for Pres in the last election, and have absolutely no love lost for Bush. In fact, on a personal level I find him pretty irritating and on a political level I disagree with many of the things he has done and stands for. However, I find it extremely distressing that almost before the hurricane had run its course people on both sides of Bush had already turned the hurricane into a blaim/defend Bush topic. Are we really that devolved in the political arena that we can’t even take a week or two to worry about the people involved before using their misery as an excuse to push our political agendas? This whole thing just highlights how pathetically partisan a lot of politically active people have become. I say shame on all of you. Long after Bush is gone from the White House there will still be people trying to put their lives back together after this tragedy. Oh, and in case you hadn’t realized it, Bush isn’t going to be back for a third term, so it really doesn’t matter how well you all attack/defend him.
Narvy
Gosh, can’t they all be culpable together?
Steve
Patrick wrote:
Obviously Richard Clarke’s book is perhaps key. It simply wasn’t a priority for them, they just didn’t understand that their campaign ideology wasn’t reality.
The fact that they were wrong?
But revenues exploded in 1993 too, and you guys said they wouldn’t. Coupled with tightening on spending, we ended up with a balanced budget.
But you guys increased spending… as a result you have a massive deficit. I don’t think you can accuse others of spending too much, when you’re the ones with hands in the golden cookie jar.
BTW, Reagan introduced the largest tax hike of the 20th century.
Is it? I don’t know. But you seem pretty sure of yourself. What evidence do you have to prove this? Is it any more or less credible than the evidence to support the Global Warming claims?
How exactly does teaching religion alongside pure scientific theory, strengthen science? How does teaching science weaken religion?
It still sounds to me like we have a religious faith problem. That is, too many people who lack faith in religion, that they are terrified by science. That’s an issue for priests to deal with, not teachers.
Why not drill off the coast of Florida?
Seriously, we need to move away from Oil. I’d like to see Bush push more Nuclear power, but he’s dropped the ball there as well.
Good question. Streamling this is something the Democrats have been pushing for years. Why are the oil companies so against this?
You have many wonderful choices. They’re called 401k, IRA, Roth, etc. Use them.
Sure you get paid. You get paid by raising the rates on everybody else who does have insurance.
Actually they’re trying something unique here in Minnesota. Hospitals are offering the same prices to those without insurance as to those who do have insurance. They’re finding that when you offer reasonable pricing, people are more likely to pay their bills.
Someone int he Bush administration lowered the bar.
That’s the issue here.
Narvy
nyrev thinks that “keep the bullies and kick everyone else out” more likely to happen than having th bullies go away. This sounds like natural selection; it certainly isn’t intelligent design. I’d hate to think that we’re witnessing survival of the nastiest but then again, nice guys famously finish last. (Yes, Patrick, that is indeed a cliché.)
ppGaz
Uh, yes, of course, whatever that means, except that I did not advance any idea.
I asked questions, the gist of which can be summed up this way: Of what value is your reference’s “intelligent design” suggestion, if it is basically on the same level as a suggestion that little green fairies did it?
If you disagree that the two suggestions are not comparable, then maybe you’d take the time to explain why you think so?
If you can do that, then you’d be the one with the new idea that would be worthy of peer review.
The fact that a goofy idea was suggested by a person with a PhD doesn’t change the fact that it’s a goofy idea. Does it?
Narvy
Let’s argue about this. If we play our cards right, we can achieve infinite regress.
ppGaz
I think John already did that. But wouldn’t you eventually be agreeing on agreeing, rather than arguing about arguing?
Which is not to say that you could not be arguing about agreeing or agreeing about arguing.
Narvy
It’s evolution in action. See this.
jobiuspublius
href=”http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/7/1791/96325#16″
EasyRider at DKos noticed that the southern half of LA is missing from Statement on Federal Emergency Assistance for Louisiana, August 27, 2005.
They are included in Statement on Federal Disaster Assistance for Louisiana, August 29, 2005. But that last one only mentions funding.
I guess Worst POTUS Ever doesn’t have to investigate himself now. Dam! Them bloggers are good!
Narvy
Hey, why not? This is an easily testable hypothesis.
Narvy
True. That’s why we think the earth is flat, that the sun and planets revolve around the earth, that light propagates through the ether, that combustion is the product of phlogiston… Well, I could go on indefinitely about the suppression of real truth, but the scientific establishment is after me and I have to hide.
Narvy
The same could be said of some, perhaps many, professing Christians.
jobiuspublius
Why is my comment awaiting moderation while everybody keeps posting away? Have I exceeded my quote of partisan and personal attacks?
Narvy
Heavens! I go away for a couple of hours and the grist for the sarcasm mill just proliferates like crazy. Maybe I should go away more often.
Note to the clueless who can’t recognize when they’re being fed a straight line (in the sense of comedy, not geometry):
The last sentence of the first paragraph is a straight line, intended to attract sophomoric jokes. Run with it.
Narvy
Note to ppGaz:
I posted my testable hypothesis crack before I saw your much-too-serious-for-the-subject post on the same subject. Sorry, didn’t intentionally step on your turf.
jobiuspublius
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/7/1791/96325#16
EasyRider at DKos noticed that the southern half of LA is missing from Statement on Emergency Assistance for Louisiana, August 27, 2005.
They are included in Statement on Federal Disaster Assistance for Louisiana, August 29, 2005. But it only mentions funding.
scs
Bains, yes I AGREE with you that it was the LA STATE office that prevented the Red Cross to bring food and water from reaching the stadium and other areas, perhaps I didn’t express myself clearly there. What I don’t get is, why isn’t that Red Croos webpage made into a bigger deal than it is? I think it’s HUGE! Where is that in the media? Didn’t see it in the NYT tonite.
Now we know why the refugees didn’t have care in the rescue areas. If at least THAT had been done, it would have gone a long way to improving the situation. At least we wouldn’t have had to have watched old sick people die of dehydration in the heat right in front of our eyes, after they were SUPPOSED to be in safety. Where is the uproar over this?
jobiuspublius
Why do my comments keep awaiting moderation?
ppGaz
Not a problem! Defense Guy, for reasons I have never been able to fathom, just loves to see how far into his intellectual mouth he can insert his foot, and survive.
The man can chew his own toenails.
Narvy
At this hour, when the normal people have gone to bed, “everybody” seems to be mostly me. And moderation seems to be a foreign concept on this site these days, so you may have to wait a long time.
Ignoring the typo, do you mean given or received?
jobiuspublius
EasyRider at DKos noticed that the southern half of LA is missing from Statement on Emergency Assistance for Louisiana, August 27, 2005.
They are included in Statement on Federal Disaster Assistance for Louisiana, August 29, 2005. But it only mentions funding not action.
jobiuspublius
Narvy
ppGaz:
I take it you’re not in the Eastern time zone either. Like I couldn’t infer that from your – what do they call it these days…handle? screen name?… So hard to keep up with the jargon.
jobiuspublius
Ignoring the typo, do you mean given or received?
Two quotas?!? Wow, that’s generous.
Narvy
Thank John, it’s his generosity.
ppGaz
When all the dust has settled and water drained, and all the Fristian “hearings” have been held …. it will be said that …
No controlling legal authority can hold that anyone, anywhere, did anything wrong or was remiss in any way in the runup to and aftermath of hurricane Katrina.
All assertions to the contrary will be dealt with severely.
All to my chagrin, of course, since I am invested in my own calls for action in the last ten days:
1. The resignation of Mayor Nagin
2. The resignation of Governor Blanco
3. The firing of Director Brown
4. The jailing of Darrell
Okay, #4 isn’t true … but the other three are, and in that order, starting about a week ago.
Narvy
You left off the impeachment of the President. Careless!
Liberal Agitator
John, I used to respect and enjoy your blog. Too bad you’ve become a self indulgent and self important idiot.
Narvy
Thank you, Liberal Agitator. I was about to go into pleasantness shock. I really needed that fresh injection of pointless vitriol.
scs
Man, you all loved John C. when he was worshipping Michael Schiavo. But that was just John’s pro-manly side. Now that he’s come back to who he is, a moderate, you are all dumping on him. So much for being open-minded and letting people be who they are.
ppGaz
Nah, he’s not worth all the attention it would get him.
The man is barely fit to be a men’s room attendant, that’s about it, but impeachment just gets him more space in the history books. He already can’t really govern, so I say just let him be. He is good material for Jay Leno.
Narvy
You left off Jon Stewart. Careless!
Liberal Agitator
Just read through the comments to this inane post of yours. I’m shocked at the number of people willing to indulge your fantasy.
Your standard for what is “fact” is highly suspect to me at this point. Several of your “facts” you use to dispell other “facts” you find unfair (read inconvenient) are, as several have pointed out, THIN at best.
When you have an objective standard to determine what you will accept as “fact” give me a call, I might be interested. Until then your “standard” appears pretty subjective and partisan to me.
DougJ
I don’t know of any of you feel this way, but I’ve been sick to my stomach all week about New Orleans, not just because I love the city, but because I feel like it truly is Bush’s fault. And since I’ve always supported Bush, it is therefore partly my fault too.
Pretty much what it comes to is this: I can’t support this president anymore. I’m not becoming a Democrat, either obviously. they’re just too secular. And I really don’t agree with them about much of anything in terms of issues.
I don’t know how anyone who not start to distrust Bush anymore after all of this. He didn’t really even end his vacation til things got desperate. Then he joked about the whole thing a bit. And now he’s trying to pretend he’s compassionate about it. I think he’s a good man underneath it all regardless, I know he is really, but something went wrong with him here. I don’t know what it is. But it isn’t right.
Don’t expect me to start agreeing with you, ppgaz and tbone, but I can see where you’re coming from now when you go after Bush.
Narvy
Lib Ag:
I don’t want to pry, but who is the “you” in that “yours”?
Liberal Agitator
No Narvy, that wasn’t vitriol, that was my honest and uncensored opinion. If you thought that was vitriol you’d be shocked at what the residents of NO are saying about Bush apologists which, unfortunately, John, in my estimation has fallen in with.
Liberal Agitator
Sorry for being unclear Narvy, I was referring to John Cole himself.
jobiuspublius
ppGaz, you’re an inspiration! We don’t have to impeach Worst POTUS Ever. We can just let him wonder back to crawford with Brownie and give them crayons!
ppGaz
DougJ …. I give John permission to send you my addy. Write and convince me that you are not a group of people conducting some sort of experiment.
Seriously.
scs
DougJ – I think Bush has a touch of autism, like Chirac once said about him. He has his good moments when the outside world gets through to him and he is focused and his bad moments when he is not. I guess no one’s perfect. But lets not exaggerate and make EVERYTHING Bush’s fault. You are the one who told us about the Red Cross memo pointing fingers at LA, that is where MUCH of the blame lies.
jobiuspublius
Nooooooo! It’s the serpant! Don’t eat the apple!
Narvy
Guilt is a wonderful thing, especially if you’re Catholic or Jewish.
Late to the party, but come on in! Everybody’s always welcome.
No wisecracks about religion here, but I cynically believe that a lot of people who purport to be religious are closet secularists. Think Pat Robertson and diamonds, Pat Robertson and assassinating heads of state (a traditional religious practice), … Well, you get the drift.
Debatable, but probably not a testable hypothesis.
Y’know DougJ, I really like you.
Narvy
My god! And I thought I was cynical!
jobiuspublius
What happened to Worst POTUS Ever is that his spin machine was on vacation.
ppGaz
This obsession with “everything” being somebody’s “fault” is just weird.
I don’t think I have said that “anything” is anyone’s “fault” in so many words. Not even wrt Nagin and Blanco, whose resignations I asked for a week ago.
However, there is leadership, and there is lack of leadership, and most of the “leaders” I’ve seen in the last two weeks couldn’t lead a fly to a balogna sandwich as far as I am concerned.
A leader doesn’t let his city get fucked over like Nagin did, or her state, like Blanco did. Or his country, like what’s-his-name did. And if they blew it, they wouldn’t go on tv and strut around acting like a damned fool.
I wouldn’t be able to say that any particular failure is any particular person’s fault at this juncture, but I can say that the world has had more than its share of strutting horse’s asses on television lately, and some people in the blog world just don’t seem to get that.
jobiuspublius
And these guys are in denial about the dream teams dream vacation.
ppGaz
Well, you almost certainly are! But anyway, DougJ has been through at least a couple of rather profound style, position and language changes in the last month. I think it’s reasonable to conclude that there might be more to the handle than meets the eye.
Narvy
jobiuspublius:I looked at the redstate article. I don’t have the energy to list the errors in logic.
Narvy
I hope that “almost” is a typo. If not, I’m insulted.
ppGaz
It is, almost.
DougJ
Certainly not all his fault. That is not what I meant. But the way he has handled is not good and it probably had led to some more deaths than there had to be.
jobiuspublius
Worst POTUS Ever is failed to save lives, failed to make us safer, failed to make us an organization that could rescue us form Katrina EFFECTIVELY, that’s just a subset of how he fails to be President. But, we’ll wait for the whitewash.
By the way:
Lieutenant Udkow for President of the United States of America ’08. Or at least FEMA director.
Narvy, I don’t know how I stomached that RS entry.
scs
I agree, ppGaz, you have been rather fair on this botched relief thing, as you have been open to spreading the blame around. See there is hope for far-lefties.
DougJ
Pppgaz, I don’t see how anyone could have watched this hurricane and not gone through a profound change. I’m a little disappointed that so much of the discussion here is the same now as it was before the hurricane. This kind of event should change people. It certainly changed me. I’m not going to try to hide that.
scs
Yes DougJ, he had some bad moments last week to be sure. Still, I will stick by him. There’s something about him I like, as much as others on here dislike him. I like his rebel, underdog, punk attitude. He knows no one likes him and he doesn’t care. Kind of like I was in junior high, I can relate.
Narvy
To all you people who can’t find anything better to do at night than post to a weblog, this has been more fun than I’ve had since the last time I … well, I can’t remember what I did that was fun. But I have to pack it in. The fate of the tiny bit of the Free World that remains depends on my getting to work more or less on time tomorrow.
Hasta mañana/luego/la vista.
(Contrary to popular belief, the phrase “Hasta la vista, baby” is not the personal trademark of the Governor of California, who has had a statute approving gay marriage dumped in his lap – wait, that’s an unfortunate choice of words – sent to his desk and who really really doesn’t want to have to sign or not sign it. But I’m rambling.)
DougJ
I can relate too. That’s part of why I liked him to begin with, also because he was the first president to really put his faith out there the way he did. But last week I decided that I didn’t want someone with a rebel, punk, 7th grade attitude in times of crisis. I want a real adult. Life is to precious — a city like New Orleans, a national treasure is too precious.
You know, if it were a reality t.v. show, I wouldn’t vote him off, but it’s too important for me to look at it that way anymore.
scs
Well, you can’t help liking who you like. But he is only President for a few more years. How much more damage can he do? Hopefully not a lot.
jobiuspublius
Probably? Hiring “Helluva Job” Brownie, probably? Staying on vacation and on tour rather than putting a boot up Brownies ass, probably? 5 days without food or water, etc., dead babies and grannies, probably?
I have spent years watching the train comming down the tracks and trying to wakeup everybody I saw on the tracks. I could have been in canada by now, or europe.
scs
Did you READ the Red Cross web site we pointed out to?
Narvy
While I was typing my farewell, this came in and I can’t let it go by:
The scion of a wealthy and influential family who has pursued the family’s business interests, been privileged all of his life beyond the wildest dreams of any of us, and is a professing Christian is a rebel, an underdog, and a punk?
Could you elaborate on this?
Oh, never mind, you already have.
jobiuspublius
One way or another I have to get you onto the fellon list.
Narvy
You’ve GOT to be kidding!
Mike S
That may be one of the scariest things I’ve read here. I suppose a narcoleptic pilot could fit into the “nobody’s perfect” catagory as well. But do you want him flying the plane you happen to be riding on?
Narvy
I recommend Costa Rica.
scs
Okay, he grew up in Texas. He was transferred to a prep school and did not fit in there or in college. New England preppies thought he was a cowboy. I like that he kept his Texas accent, didn’t try to act like some intellectual, didn’t try to act all high-falluting. And don’t say cause he was to stupid to do so. He has average intelligence at least and I know plenty of dumb people who try to put on an intellectual act. I just like his contrary nature.
scs
!
I was.
Narvy
I think Bush has a touch of terminal narcissism.
Mike S
The main problem is that he is still like a Jr. high kid.
jobiuspublius
Maybe, Blanco’s upto no good. I hear her national guard is rather nasty. IIRC, they were there first and baracaded everyone in and the Gretna Police didn’t want anybody from NO crossing the bridge into Gretna. The question is, what exactly is she upto? Manufacturing a big heap of hate to be lobbed at Worst POTUS Ever? Tin foil hats everyone! The night is young!
DougJ
I do too, but it just doesn’t make up for the way he treated this disaster. It’s just not right. It’s like, I really like the movie HUD. There’s just something about that character, you can’t not like him. Bush has some of that. But when you think about the consequences in real life, it just doesn’t add up to have a president who is like that.
Mike S
I like that he can turn it off and on at will.
Another fine attribute for the most powerfull man in the world.
scs
Ok ya’ll, I just said a touch of autism. Don’t get too excited here. I think he has talent in some ways and failings in others. Besides, you ever hear of the idiot savant?
jobiuspublius
Too beautifull and defenseless. Look what happened to NO, Disaster Profiteers.
scs, you’re killing me. You have to stop reading them teen music magazines.
I need sleep. night night folks.
scs
Besides, I can’t believe I am spending so much time reading and talking about Bush. He is just one man. Most top positions are just ceremonial anyway. They give speeches, they shake hands. They are figureheads. Government is a machine with thousands of people chugging it along. Bush reflects his Republican party. If you don’t like him, blame the party.
scs
Sleep is more important than Bush.
Mike S
Well, you’re half right.
Narvy
Without attacking his intelligence, about which I don’t really know anything, I would prefer a President with better than average intelligence. Like maybe, oh, say a Rhodes Scholar.
And what exactly is his nature contrary to? Inheriting wealth? Being a conventional Big Businessman (oil, baseball, you name it)? Drinking in his youth and abstaining in adulthood? Professing and practicing a mainstream religion? Aiding the wealthy in becoming wealthier? Asserting American power across the planet? I could go on, but my head would explode. Yeah, a lot of James Dean there.
George, George, quite contrary … The man is the most conventional, mainstream, in-the-system person imaginable.
jobiuspublius
Is there anything he doesn’t break?!? I blame his momma.
Narvy
Right! Just the sort of person we need as President!
Narvy
Yup. He’s just one Chief Executive of the United States and one Commander-in-Chief of the US military.
Candidus
Why are you surprised, Mr. Cole? You’ve certainly earned your audience.
Aaron
John, I’d like to see a poll of your commenters:
If Brown should be fired, should Nagin or Blanco resign?
I mean, if we really, truly want to assign blame and punish the incompetent…
Or to be charitable I guess we could let Nagin and Blanco stay but they have to fire their “Brown’s” too.
My guess, is that they’ll all be like Vicki on Little Britain…Yah, but, no but…
Narvy
Actually, they should all be exiled to a planet with a hostile environment.
Mike S
yes
jobiuspublius
This entire administration should be fired. Nagin, not sure, yet. Blanco, maybe, I’m wondering what she’s upto with her nat guard.
OK, NOW I go to sleep.
Mike S
If someone fucks up massively, we believe they should be held accountable. Maybe you should try it sometime.
Mike S
But from past experiance I’m expecting Brownie to get a Medal Of Freedom, if not the Congressional Medal of Honor.
eileen from OH
Honestly, John, I think this is what happens when you have a blog. Lots and lots and LOTS of divergent opinions. I personally cringe when someone goes after you for what you post and mis-interprets what you are saying – or trying to say. And I hate it when it becomes ad hominem (to paraphrase SNL “John, you filthy slut.”) But I also don’t know why it gets to you. I mean, NO ONE likes to have that kind of stuff flung, but having a blog will attract exactly that kind of thing. You can either be read and have responses or you can be like most of us – reading and responding to what others take the time to do.
I hope this doesn’t sound like a “whattaya want?” comment, but well, I guess it is. A blog invites comments and if it doesn’t, well, it ain’t a blog. If you really want to keep out the wingnuts of all stripes, you shut off comments and become a diary or you censor out what is outrageous. Although that is really subjective. But again, that “subjective” is your call as the owner of the site.
If you want to filter/censor/whatever then you are perfectly within your rights to do so – it’s your goddam site. But if you want to continue to get responses from all sides, I don’t see what you can do other than what you do now. And develop some thicker skin. And I say the latter with great respect. But I also think, from other stuff you’ve written that you take a lot of stuff to heart. Which is bad from a blogger/mediator viewpoint. But it’s also very much a positive from a human viewpoint.
If that makes any sense at all.
eileen from OH
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
It’s pathetic how the resident lefties here trash Bush. If Bush had a D not an R next to his name, you would applaud the taking down of Saddam in the name of human rights, you would applaud the prescription drug program, you would applaud no child left behind, etc.
In fact, you care nothing about what Bush or any other Republican DOES, YOU ONLY CARE ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK THEIR INTENTIONS ARE. You assume Bush and all R’s have bad intentions, so no matter what they do they must be wrong and evil.
DougL
The “debate” of evolution vs. “intelligent design” being taught in public schools is so clumsy because it’s mostly really not properly framed.
“Debate” as it applies to evolution vs. “intelligent design” is the wrong word; it implies that the two things are comparable. They’re not, at least not in terms of science. “Intelligent design” is not science no matter how much some of its proponents want to dress it up to look like science. [Bear with me. Don’t tune out yet.] Trying to do so makes it look like at best that one doesn’t understand what “science” is and, at worst that one is intentionally trying to confuse the issue of the difference between science and religion. “Science” isn’t just simply a guess at how or why things work or how or why things are the way they are. Science is that plus it has to be testable (not, as some people incorrectly believe, that the essential quality of something being science is that it’s provable – there are lots of things in science which are not provable, but definitely ARE testable). Intelligent design is not science, no matter how you dress it up, because it’s not testable. If something is not testable, it’s not science. That is not at all to say that it’s an invalid idea — just that it’s not science.
That said, I don’t have a problem with people believing in intelligent design (whether or not one wants that strictly to mean that the Earth is only around 6000 years old). I don’t have a problem with the concept that God exists. I happen to believe in God myself.
I strongly disagree with the rhetorical tactic that tries to claim that teaching evolution teaches people to be atheist heathen. Belief in the validity of the idea of evolution does not automatically necessarily preclude belief in God or some other Higher Power. Part of the problem is that at best, a lot of people don’t understand that evolution doesn’t address or even try to address the issue of the origin of life. In the worst case there are definitely those who are aware of this but intentionally confuse the issue and try to conflate science with religion. Evolution is simply the testable theory of how one type of organism changes over time to become a slightly different organism. The theory of evolution in itself (as originally presented by Darwin in The Origin of Species) doesn’t deal with the origin of man (he did deal with that in The Descent of Man, which is based on the theory of evolution, but that’s entirely different from saying that evolution says that man descended from apes). It doesn’t suggest or say anything as ridiculous as cats changing into dogs or vice versa. It doesn’t say anything about the existence or non-existence of God (well, unless your personal “flavor” of belief in God is absolutely incompatible with the idea of the Earth as being any older than 6000 or so years old).
I don’t have a problem with teaching intelligent design in public schools [bear with me] so long as it’s not presented as science, because it’s not. That said, lets be honest and just go back to calling it creationism – nobody’s really fooled by the window dressing; I still don’t have a problem with it being taught in school as long it’s not presented as science. Present it in a comparative religion class or philosophy class. Some (many?) public schools actually have those classes. I don’t have a problem with the idea of presenting the concept of science as a form of religion, if that’s what people want to do; proponents of creationism have argued that in order to cram creationism into science curricula, and if you want to have that kind of comparative discussion/debate — and I think that is conceivably an interesting discussion — it belongs in a comparative religion or philosophy class.
Can we agree under these conditions (i.e. in a comparative religion or philosophy class, not science) that it’s OK to expose students to the idea of creationism in public schools?
By the way, if it’s allowable to have creationism in public school as part of a comparative religion or philosophy class, we can talk about Buddhism or Islam or Taoism in comparative religion or philosophy class, too, because, after all, debate and exposure to different ideas is a good thing, right?
To sum up, I don’t have a problem with teaching creationism in public schools so long as it’s not presented as science. Present both science and creationism/religion side by side in a comparative religion or philosophy class. Fine. I don’t even have a problem with after having both ideas presented side by side in a comparative religion or philosophy class someone decides that they choose to believe creationism and disbelieve evolution.
Unfortunately, even though I believe in God, there are some (many?) on the creationism side (especially those in the ~6000 year old Earth camp) that do have a problem that I don’t believe in God in the exactly same way that they do and that is their problem to deal with and not mine.
Patrick
tBone,
That article I linked to could have been written upside down, and would have read differently. It could have been written from the Director (expert) perspective, then listed the dissenting opinions.
As my statement read, note where the hurricane expert’s opinion was placed.
Cheers!
Patrick
Mike S,
Let’s agree to disagree about 9/11 (for which there is plenty of blame to pass around, reaching back as far and further than the first WTC bombing) and Social Security (which is obviously in severe trouble because of being looted all these years for general revenues, as well as being poorly managed – the questions is, what to do about it?)
Environmental laws – (actually, laws in general) should have automatically sunset (expire) without periodic review. One of the most unfortunate effects of laws passed is that they become bedrock for other stuff to grow from, when the original law may have been crap to begin with (based on bad or outdated science, etc.)
ID – I never said ID was science. I said it was a competing (or complementing) theory and I don’t believe there is harm in allowing (which is the operative word in the original list) it.
FEMA – I stand by my statement. I’ve been in emergency services for almost 25 years, and my exposure to FEMA has been that they have become a more focused and helpful tool for local and state agencies. Every news article I can find googled that relates to the growth or contraction of FEMA or it’s programs ignores the reorganization under DHS and the fact that some of those funds and concomitant duties were shifted to other agencies. I doubt that anyone will argue that the Department of Homeland Security represents a contraction of federal government or it’s influence.
Steve,
9/11 – Clarke’s book is not reference material. It’s sweeping the dust with a tree branch.
WMD – Wrong isn’t lies or incompetence. The fact that every politician, both sides of the aisle, and the UN also believed it lends credence to the good faith.
Taxes – Don’t turn this argument on it’s head. Of course when you raise tax rates, revenues will go up. Tax revenues has much more to do with the overall activity of the economy than the specific tax rate at that particular moment. Which is why revenues increased while Jimmy Carter was wearing sweaters for us.
Nice dig about Reagan. You left out the part where he cut taxes to far lower than they were when he took over. Just an oversight on your part, not intended to deceive, I’m sure.
That said, can you argue that allowing business owners to keep more of the earned revenue will most likely result in business expansion and further revenues generated (and taxed)? If not, this subject is also finished for us.
ID – I never said I wanted to strengthen science. I said teaching a competing or complementing theory doesn’t necessarily weaken science. But the science is being taught in an increasingly religion-sterile environment, which I can’t justify to be helpful. (before somebody screams Constitution, find me the words that say “religion shall not be taught”.)
Environment – I don’t care if you drill in the damned Fox River (right near my house), but I think we need to maximize the output of oil that we’re sitting on. That said, I also believe that conservation and alternative fuel technology is promising. A year ago, we downsized both of our cars to 4 cyl manual transmission, one of which is AWD so I can still offroad (about ten feet off road.)
Social Security – I do use those alternate choices. I still resent money being confiscated, ostensibly for my own good, that I have no control over. Which goes into bridges to nowhere and Robert C. Byrd memorial portapotties.
Health Insurance – yes, the price of an aspirin goes up for you if you are insured, but then your insurance company only sends 28 cents of the dollar and you end up getting billed anyway.
FEMA – Can you cite a specific example of someone “lowering the bar”? I can’t find the program goals from the calendar years in the 90’s, but I’d bet you’ll find that 9/11 did more to redefine the agency than most anything else.
But FEMA is not meant to be the governmental vacuum cleaner that swoops in and immediately cleans up all messes. It’s an agency that coordinates federal asset deployment and management in coordination with local and state agency leadership. If you want to say, as some have, that the local and state leadership was inoperative and the feds should have taken over, I’d disagree. LA was far from effective in handling the situation, but they were not at the point where they should have been swept aside by the feds.
All this said, Katrina is ultimately about mankind helping mankind. At it’s most human element, it was residents of NO counting on their civic leaders doing the right thing, and the state of LA doing the right thing and the feds doing the right thing. You can plan for it, you can train on it – things still go wrong. It neither implies malice or demands a pronouncement of incompetence (not that those things are not possible.)
The real reason people died is that they didn’t leave the area where they were at risk. Whether they did so by choice or inability to leave, if they had not been there they mightn’t have died. I think any reasonable person can see that the evacuation part of this, the before-landfall day or two or three, was directly linked to the deaths. Say what you want about whether the feds could have made the sky dark with thousands of helicopters on Tuesday morning, the fact remains that if the people had been evacuated there would have been no need for S&R. As natural disasters go, this one was about as forecast as they come.
Here’s my profound statement and last word in this comment thread:
Every day, our hospital tries to save lives (non-hurricane related, just everyday heart attacks and trauma victims). Sometimes we succeed, sometimes we fail. That doesn’t mean we’re either malicious or incompetent. I don’t believe anyone in management, not a single person, related to the Katrina effort is either malicious or incompetent, though there most certainly were incompetent performances.
Defense Guy
It depends of course, on what you define as goofy. When Darwin was first floating his ideas, most folks thought they were pretty goofy. I will consider the source though, and realize just how stupid you think the idea of a creator is.
Defense Guy
It was never my intention to restart a conversation about ID, but I don’t know why some of you fear even the idea of it being researched. It is massive ego I suspect.
I notice also, that ppGaz just cannot bring himself to actually discuss the content of what I said, which was merely to point out that some scientists think it might be worth study. Quick, let’s burn them at the stake for scientific heresy.
John S.
I’d like to extend my thanks to all those folks who are doing their best to live up to the good name of this website:
Keep up the good work!
I tell you, the United States would be heaven on Earth were it not for all those damn lefties. Everything is their fault, and we’d be much better off if everyone held the same conservative views…dissent is just so pasé.
Narvy
Oh,Boy.Stupidity! Says:
Congratulations. It’s so rare that a screen name so closely matches the content of a post.
Some of us care about the results of their policies and actions.
Defense Guy
John S
Mine was a joke, so you should take it as one. I don’t think lefties are scum, and I should think the completely over the top paragraph and the more sane ones in that post should easily point that out to you. Why do you lie on me man? Where is the love?
Lefty scum.
Defense Guy
I demand a retraction.
And a cookie.
John S.
Judging from the rest of your diatribe in that post Patrick, would I be correct in thinking that you are a hospital administrator?
Because that would explain an awful lot about your views:
Only an hospital administrator looks at the job his facility does and comes away with the incredibly inhumane philosophy “you win some, you lose some”. I’m sure when your hospital loses a patient as a result of maximizing the bottom line, it isn’t a matter of malice or incompetence – just greed.
Which makes you less of an ’emergency services’ worker and more of a businessman whose office happens to be in a health care facility.
John S.
Defense Guy-
To quote my 5 year-old nephew:
I’ve read enough of your posts to know where you stand, even when you’re kidding on the square.
But just out of curiousity, could you please highlight the ‘saner’ portions of your post that show your love?
Thanks.
Anderson
I can’t believe I just read all that.
Actually, lots of wheat in the chaff, too much to address.
Here’s one point though on the ID/evolution debate:
Can we agree that any time a Christian church includes the creation story in a service, a Darwinist scientist should be invited to provide the alternative point of view?
Didn’t think so.
Narvy
I haven’t seen any proposals for experimentation or research methodology. Any of the Biology Ph.D.s on this site want to take a crack at it? As far as fear is concerned, there’s no reason to fear ID. The Intelligent Clockmaker only has to set the pendulum swinging, and the mechanism will then do whatever it does without the need for further intervention: evolve new species, redeem mankind (I say that because the ID proponents are careful to distinguish between the Designer and God), whatever.
This makes me think of William Shockley, a great physicist, winner of the 1956 Nobel Prize in Physics, credited with the invention of the transistor, who late in his career devoted his life to reaserch to prove that the “white race” has higher intelligence than “non-white” races. He had the credentials, so his study proposals must have had some merit.
Narvy
Um, what adjective applies to a competent person who performs incompetently? Isn’t that a paradox?
Wait, maybe I misread your post. Management is competent but non-management is incompetent. Which suggests that competent management is not competent to choose the people who work under them.
Slartibartfast
My suggestion, John, is to devise some posting rules and enforce them as loosely as suits you. Over at OW we levy temporary bans for those whose temper simply got the best of them but are normally civil, and permanently ban anyone who’s simply there to sling shit. We’ve got posting rules and we enforce them (less than vigilantly sometimes, but that’s OUR choice). Probably boring for the more spleeny of your customers, but that’s freedom, ain’t it?
You’ll lose customers, sure, but you’ll also lose those who simply show up so they can toss out insults in lieu of an argument. Anyway, my opinion; feel free to completely disregard. At a minimum, though, you could filter out those who are are so bent on complaining that they’ve forgotten they can simply go elsewhere. Last I looked, DU still had comments open.
Narvy
Dude, there are Christian Darwinists. Some apparently smart people don’t seem to have a problem reconciling Christianity with Darwinian evolution.
Patrick
John S,
You can assume nothing from my stated association with a hospital. However, if you take from my statement that we don’t do Herculean tasks on a daily basis, then you’re not worth talking with. You’re really a glass-half-empty-and-leaking sort of chap, aren’t you?
People DO live and people DO die, despite our best efforts. That is reality, choose to accept it or not. Every save is a high and every loss is a heartbreak, but to deny either is just ignorant.
capelza
The intelligent design “debate”. It wasn’t a debate in the scientific community and still isn’t for the John Cole 99.9%.
The ‘debate” was created by folks who are not science-based. If people are willing to call it what it is, a social and political debate, then fair enough, but do not imply that it is even remotely considered by so by “science”…
As for the “blame Bush” thing. Whatver failings Nagin and Blanco have, and I am sure they are many, that will be dealt with inside LA. As I am a citizen of the US, I CAN raise my voice against the federal culpability. And please, be honest, the Bush admin IS playing it as well, a prime example being the “Blanco didn’t issue a state of emergency till Wednesday” or whatever it was that a “senior WH offical” “leaked” to WAPO.
Brown should be fired…I watched him on the news saying everythng was in place and the evacuation of N.O. had gone very well. This was before the levees broke. The cronyism of placing eminently unqualified people in positions like FEMA IS bad. Make him the ambassador to Andorra or something, but for god’s sake, get someone with qualifications in charge of an agency like FEMA.
I think the horror of what has happened in the Gulf region has everyone’s nerves fried and while we do what we can outside of the blog world, when we meet here, the rage, frustration, and sadness finds an outlet that may or may not be productive. The one thing most of us can agree on is that what has happened down there is a tragedy.
Cyrus
Patrick Says:
5. How, exactly, does teaching Intelligent Design alongside the pure scientific theory of the origin of man weaken the scientific base? I thought debate was good?
Stawman. Bush wasn’t suggesting debate, he was suggesting that watered-down Christianity be taught in schools on an equal footing with actual science. Yes, that does weaken science.
And –
ID – I never said I wanted to strengthen science.
I think that says a lot right there.
I said teaching a competing or complementing theory doesn’t necessarily weaken science.
Well, yes, it does. Put it this way: do you want students taught that Galileo’s inquisitors were right? The difference between going back to the Dark Ages and forward to set the stage for the Enlightenment – it’s just a matter of opinion?
But the science is being taught in an increasingly religion-sterile environment, which I can’t justify to be helpful. (before somebody screams Constitution, find me the words that say “religion shall not be taught”.)
Well, duh, it doesn’t include that phrase. But “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” – the government teaching religious beliefs, and teaching them as such rather than as history or art, is establishing religion. If you want to change the constitution, or if you think that part shouldn’t apply to individual states, at least admit it.
I’m sure you thought it was irrelevant that I used Galileo as an example. I’m thankful I did have to go so far back, because it means that recently most major scientific debates have revolved around the scientific method rather than religious dogma. Despite the best efforts of the theocons.
Narvy
They’re right next to the words that say “This is a Christian nation.”
Anderson
Dude, there are Christian Darwinists. Some apparently smart people don’t seem to have a problem reconciling Christianity with Darwinian evolution.
Oh, I’m one of them (including the “apparently”). I’m just trying to illustrate the fallacy of “equal time.”
It never ceases to amaze me that people with no grasp of general relativity, or quantum electrodynamics, nevertheless accept those theories because the scientfic community does … but if the biologists say Darwin’s right, they must be wrong! it’s a conspiracy! etc.
DougL
It depends of course, on what you define as goofy. When Darwin was first floating his ideas, most folks thought they were pretty goofy. I will consider the source though, and realize just how stupid you think the idea of a creator is.
My take:
“Goofy” was probably a poor word choice by Mike S. Whether or not anyone considers an idea “goofy” isn’t really the point. As Defense Guy points out Darwin and his idea of evolution was at one point considered something like “goofy”. A lot of new, particularly revolutionary (ideas in general) are considered “goofy” at the start. ID still doesn’t meet the minimum qualification for being science – that being whether it is testable.
If anyone wants to research ID — PhD or not, “respected” or not — I don’t have a problem with that. If the research develops some way to test ID, great. When it becomes testable, then we can call it science.
Regarding teaching it in public schools as an alternative viewpoint, I don’t have a problem with that either, so long as it’s not presented in the science curriculum because it’s not science.
As far as whether or not anyone presently posting in this thread personally wants to call ID science – that’s beside the point. The controversy in Texas and Kansas (I’m sure there’s more places than that, those are just the two that immediatly come to mind) is specifically over presenting ID alongside evolution in science textbooks – in other words, presenting ID as science. (Sorry, I don’t have any links offhand, but if pressed, I’m sure I can dig something up later.)
As far as science seeming kind of sterile, well, that’s pretty much the nature of science – sterile, analytical. Kind of like complaining that orange juice tastes so … orangy; or like complaining that there’s not enough mathematics in literature.
If it’s all about exposing students to different ideas, I’m all for it as long as it’s not presenting something (ID) as something it currently isn’t (science).
The problem with the evolution/ID controversy today is that it’s improperly (carelessly? intentionally?) framed by the extremes on both sides of the argument as being necessarily science or religion as if they were necessarily mutually exclusive. Many, if not most people who have a scientific view of the world have absolutely no problem accepting science for what it is and accepting that God exists.
DougL
Gah. It doesn’t like nested blockquotes, apparently. Blame me for being relatively new…
Top of the last post should then be:
Narvy
If it’s not presented as science, just what viewpoint is it an alternative to?
ppGaz
You’re eithe a liar, or stupid, or both.
I addressed exactly that point: The assertion of ID cannot be scientificially studied. It isn’t a scientifically testable hypothesis. That’s why it doesn’t belong anywhere near science.
The fact that a “scientist” might think that ID is a possibility does not change that fact.
At this point, given the reams of posts that you participated on surrounding this subject, I can only conclude that you are as dense as a board, or else you are posting nonsense just to stir up churn for the fun of it.
over it
Perhaps this or this?
I learned the above in Literature class, not Science class. I guess I.D. could have a place in Lit class?
capelza
Over it…in college I studied Science in the various science courses…I studied Literature in lit courses, and studied Religion in religion classes. Seems pretty simple to me.
ppGaz
In this case, the idea is not addressable as a testable hypothesis using scientific methods. The fact that a person with a PhD suggests it does not change that fact.
The suggestion that a hypothesis might once have been viewed as “goofy”, and therefore, we should give some additional credence to all goofy ideas, is absurd. The idea of the round earth was once thought to be goofy, therefore, a suggestion now that it might be square should be taken seriously? Uh, no.
ID is not science, and should not treated as science, nor taught as an “alternative” to science. It is based on a model that supports belief in the absence of evidence, or inspite of evidence to the contrary, and therefore should be taught in that context, along with other superstitions and religious beliefs.
DougL
uh. It doesn’t have to be science to be an alternative to science. If you want a label that contains them both, try “philosophy”.
Science can be considered a philosophy (yes, you can find college courses, even majors called Philosophy of Science). Science can be viewed as a philosophy just as Buddhism (or any other religion) is a philosophy. At this point, I’ll state that we’re heading out of my depth into metaphysics.
Narvy
Good response. I can hardly wait for the ID proponents to start teaching about the Intelligent Designer’s jealousies, physical battles, and colorful sex life.
tBone
The first 10 paragraphs of the story support what the hurricane expert says in the last paragraph; the dissenting opinions don’t appear until near the end of the story and are only given two paragraphs. So I would disagree that the story would have read much differently if it had been written “upside down.”
Regardless, you could read that article top to bottom, bottom to top, or start in the middle somewhere – it does not support a definitive statement such as “Global warming is cyclical – has nothing to do with hurricanes.”
Now, if you had said “There’s a lot of debate in the scientific community about a possible link between global warming and hurricane strength; therefore it’s very premature to conclude that global warming had anything at all to do with Hurricane Katrina,” I’d be right on board with you.
Narvy
No kidding. Sorry, I really don’t mean to be snarky (a first!), but “philosophy of science” is not the same as “science is a philosophy like Buddhism”. And I don’t get the concept of “an alternative to science”. Science as I understand it is not an optional belief system. It does stuff like test physical phenomena and always get the same result (well, maybe not in quantum theory, but hey…). What is the alternative to that?
ppGaz
I’m not disagreeing with anything you said here, DougJ, but after we learn that bloggers will pimp threads just to “piss people off,” I started to wonder if maybe you are having some fun with us too. No offense, but how would we know?
To turn it around, as I suggested upthread, I could be a plant for the White House, talking left just to stir up the righties and manipulate the threads. How would you know? It would be relatively easy to pull off.
So, you pretty much have to take my word for the idea that I’m not a plant for the White House. Or just a character invented by John. Or Darrell, or the creator of Darrell, or ……
I’d post my addy right here, but ….. I’ve had some unpleasant experiences with crazy people out there, stalkers, and I am a little gunshy. John has my email address, I am sure he’ll give it you since I have given him permission to do so.
Narvy
Terrific. Science by word count.
Narvy
Dude, are you writing a movie script? Pitching a replacement for “24”? And I thought I was paranoid.
tBone
Uh, Narvy, I don’t think you were following the conversation. I wasn’t commenting on the science, but on Patrick’s interpretation of the article.
No worries, though; this thread is off on so many tangents you’d need a Cray to track them all.
ppGaz
That in itself is a paranoid idea, isn’t it? Clearly you are out to get yourself ………..
W.B. Reeves
In other words, you’ll neither confirm nor deny the accuracy of of John S’s deduction. Highly convincing. Particularly when we consider that your “stated association with a hospital” was introduced by you in order to produce an assumption of your competence by the reader. Unpleasant to be hoisted on one’s own petard, isn’t it?
Defense Guy
John S
Nevermind, if you can’t read the whole post then I won’t bother reprinting it for. I retract my earlier statement, and replace it with you alone are scum. Hope that’s better.
John S.
Defense Guy-
Boy you sure don’t like being called out for the nonsense that you issue forth, do you? Then again, I suppose you are merely living up to the standard of this site as of late – just a lot of hot air, and little more.
Whatever gets you through the day, pal. Notch another ‘kill’ on your blogger bedpost if you must.
John S.
So Patrick, you can neither confirm nor deny that your job is to find a way to maximize profits, eh? I guess I’ll take that as denial non-denial.
Coupled with the various strawmen you threw out that have nothing to do with my statements, I gather the best response you can muster is desperately flailing around to discredit me somehow, so that you don’t have to deal with my responses that apparently make you uncomfortable.
Defense Guy
John S
Aw poor baby. Don’t like it when the mean old republicans have something to say. Don’t worry, there are plenty of people out there who can prop up your worldview for you. I just happen to think you are an overly sensitive ass.
I was not the one keeping a rainman book of all the hurtful things said. By only one side of the argument of course.
I’m sure if you hurry, you can make it to KMart before Wopner starts.
Defense Guy
Notice of course that no one else picked that out, perhaps they read the whole post and took that statement in the context in which it was meant. I know context is a big word for you rainman, but after Wopner maybe you can look it up.
Kimmitt
Don’t be lazy – look it up.
That’s the last thing a Bush apologist wants anyone to do; go to the CBO website.
In 2000, the Federal Government collected 20.9% of GDP in taxes. In 2004, that percentage shrank to 16.3. That’s a 4.6% drop.
In 2000, the Federal Government spent 18.6% of GDP in expenditures. In 2004, that percentage jumped to 19.8. That’s a 1.2% increase.
Which is to say that tax cuts are responsible for 4/5 of the deficit, while expenditure increases are responsible for 1/5.
Narvy
tBone Says:
This is true, but I couldn’t let the 10 to 2 paragraph ratio pass without at least one snide comment.
Narvy
How did I miss this one? I must be slipping. (Another straight line, that.)
Patrick, we can assume anything we want to. For example, I assume you’re a patient. There, I assumed something, thus proving your assertion false. (That, by the way, is an example of Science in Action. ID proponents please note.)
John S.
Defense Guy-
You are cracking me up! It seems as if you’ve got your “Schoolyard Bully Manual” memorized, but I must say that your responses amount to little more than calling me a host of names and doesn’t really disprove my point.
You can sit there and postulate all you want about my mental capacity, but in doing so you clearly show that you ARE a proud member of the intellectualy bankrupt thugs that are determined to turn this site into little more than a pissing contest.
tBone
Yeah, fair enough. Anal-retentive? Who, me?
Defense Guy
Ok rainman. Don’t worry, it’ll get better. Someday reading and comprehension will be possible for you. You hit bottom a while ago, when it was pointed out that my statement was a farce, but you seem to want to keep digging. Tell the chinese hello for me when you get there.
I’m sure you are an excellent driver.
Narvy
tBone, since “crayfish” doesn’t make sense in this context, I have to ask: Are you a computer weenie? Since we’re talking about a Cray, are you an old computer weenie? Am I being nosy?
Narvy
Isn’t it interesting that two of us are having a humorous, friendly, civilized conversation interleaved with a drearily unfunny, hostile, name-calling conversation?
And people ask me why I think this blog is entertaining!
Dave Ruddell
What was the original topic of John’s post again?
Patrick
tBone,
What I was clumsily trying to point out is that this MSM (center-left from my occasional exposure) article was that they quoted all sorts of scientists and sources on global warming, which is occurring (although when I was in high school, the US was blamed for global cooling which was going to bring on the next ice age), while the best source for whether a hurricane had any relation to global warming and the water temperature – was virtually ignored. That is all.
John S, if you will take come comfort in context, I’ve been a paramedic for 23 years and have been teaching them for 18. So please tell me what qualifies you to evaluate emergency operations?
Kimmet, looking at gross numbers, revenue is down 7% and spending is up 28%. I hadn’t thought to analyze it by GDP, but that’s also an appropriate context. So the gross revenue goes up while the % of GDP goes down. Must mean the GDP grew? I don’t really know crap about economics, just looking at numbers and trying to make sense of it.
And last, Narvy. Sorry I brought up ID. Oh wait, I didn’t. But DougL has some really nice arguments that I’ll have to read through a few times to really digest (sort of like a Bill Whittle article.) As for now, I still think that the steadfast resistance to teaching ID as an alternate theory, I don’t care if it’s a philosophy class, won’t intrude too much on your scientific dogma.
tBone
In order: yes, not really, and yes. Chalk up the Cray reference to reading too many science-fiction novels and thrillers in my misspent youth.
And yeah, it’s kind of funny to be having a civilized conversation here – like sitting down to a tea party in the middle of a knife fight.
John S.
Defense Guy-
Like I said, get out your ‘skull’ decal to affix to the wall where you rack up your blog ‘kills’. As I have already pointed out, your general attitude towards anything not part of your worldview is to belittle it and dismiss it, and regardless of whether you were joking this time or not, you continue to prove my point.
But I guess that means you win…
John S.
Patrick-
Thanks for finally responding to my query. I’m not sure why you were so evasive in the first place. Anyway, I am surprised that you are a paramedic, because quite frankly you came off in your long post as more of an administrator than a care-giver (I have known plenty of both).
I don’t know how to respond to yet another one of your pretty little straw men:
I never claimed to be qualified to evaluate emergency operations – you did. I did however question your qualifications on the matter, and after you bobbed and weaved, you finally came up with something.
So again, thanks for the straight shooting, Tex.
tBone
OK. Still not sure I agree with your conclusion but I see where you’re coming from now.
I think you’ll find the vast majority of commenters here who oppose ID being taught in science classes have no problem whatsoever with it being discussed in a religion or philosophy class – several have explicitly said so (myself among them).
Also, I agree about DougL’s posts – very well-written and well-reasoned. Wish I’d written ’em.
Patrick
JohnS,
Not sure what that had to do with anything, but I’m glad I could finally satisfy your curiosity.
tBone,
Peace, bro.
DougL
I think you may be interpreting my use of “alternative” as implying some sort of relative merit and I really don’t mean to. Separating off for a moment the issue of relative merit, you could take of a couple of qualifiers in your statement and still be left with something you’d agree with.
“Science is a belief system.”
From that, take statements of the form:
“<X> is a belief system.”
You could replace <X> with any of: Science, Buddhism, Christianity, and you’d still end up with a true statement.
That’s what I mean by “alternative”. Sort of in a similar, but clumsy way, you could say apples, oranges, and grapes are alternative fruits.
Nor do I mean “alternative” in any sort of sense of “mutually exclusive”. I have absolutely no problem subscribing to the belief in science as a belief system as well as subscribing to a belief in God.
So, science, Buddhism, Christianity are all belief systems. The defining quality of science is that it is a belief system that is testable. Again, that science is testable is not and should not be interpreted as relative merit. If I can drag out my fruit analogy again, that would be like saying, “Oranges, lemons, and limes are alternative citrus fruit. Saying that Oranges are orange-colored doesn’t say anything about the relative merit of the other fruit; it doesn’t mean oranges are tastier.”
Defense Guy
Dude, get a grip. It’s not about winning and losing. It’s about not seeing everything written by someone on the ‘other side’ as a personal attack on you. I continue to prove your point because you continue to wish to see a major difference between us, where you are this noble character and I am some sort of evil characture of all the eeeeevil republicans you have ever known or dreamed of. You went looking for evidence to prove your point and you scooped up mine, intentional or otherwise, and you got called on it. The crap I was typing was farce and you in your ‘worldview’ where unable to see it as such. So, who needs to check themselves?
Kimmitt
Happens to the best of us, especially these days. After all, who could predict that NO would coordinate with FEMA to mail DVDs to poor people telling them they’re hosed?
John S.
Defense Guy-
Just keep calling me names…I find it preferable to your attempt to rationally explain how your persistent barrage of ad-hominem attacks is somehow my problem.
Incidentally, I never said you were an evil Republican. If that’s how you see yourself, that’s too bad. In fact, I never cast any dispersions about you other than quoting you to make the point that namecalling and blame has become a substitiute for rational discourse around here.
When I asked you to clarify your position, you responded:
So who needs to check themselves?
DougL
should’ve been
Gah squared. WordPress 2 : DougL 0
ppGaz
You can’t be serious? That’s the most blatant act of projection I’ve seen around here in a while, and that is saying something.
Defense Guy
ppGaz
I named you personally for a reason. I actually do wish you specific harm, and you can quote me on that.
Defense Guy
No, not really. But you are an annoying leftie.
If ya’ll want to get in any last words on this one, go ahead I won’t be back to this thread.
Defense Guy
John S
I stated, with humor even, that you had scooped my post up as an example of ‘leftie’ bashing. I notified you that you had made a mistake. Remember all that. Did you say, oops my bad? Nope, you just continued ahead fighting the good fight. You are just a hopeless dick.
Narvy
I like that one.
Narvy
An alternate theory to what? If it’s in Philosophy, presumably it’s not an alternate theory to somehting taught in Science. (Otherwise, the interdepartmental squabbling would be horrendous.) I suppose there are circumstances in which ID could reasonably be “taught”, in the same way that Greek mythology is taught.
“Scientific dogma” is an oxymoron. It’s usually used by the proponents of ideas like cold fusion or perpetual motion, and it means “Knowledgeable scientists won’t take me seriously.” Yes, institutionalized science sometimes resists new ideas, but the resistance crumbles if the ideas are factually supportable. Sadly, physical reality always wins.
Narvy
DougL:
I want to continue this discussion, but I don’t have time right now.
Maybe later; stand by.
ppGaz
Okay, but I have no idea what you are talking about.
Sorry.
John S.
Defense Guy-
If you really were joking about your universal hatred for “lefties”, then I am sorry if I missed the humor in it.
As for your inability to articulate anything that resembles a meritorious point without resorting to namecalling and a borderline temper tantrum, I am also sorry for that.
You must not be a very welcome guest at dinner parties.