Friday, April 08, 2005
I am preserving this link, look at it if you want.
The irrational outraged liberal in me at times just wants to lash out, sacrificing some legitimacy in my arguments in the process, just to put certain conservative mindset or debate strategies out of political discussion.
So, I know not all of you are political junkies, but you still might enjoy this post. The symbolism is even funny in a non-political way but the message extremely satisying if you take the time to follow the links in this post and find out just how screwy and fake the Powerline guys are.
Now it looks like my discussion with Lyon fizzled out (or has it?). That's all right... don't want to fan the flames of hostility. But the above post takedown is so effective in eliminating almost any respect I have for people who use Powerline guy's opinions to shape their own that its one of those viscerally satisfying blog posts to read.
Here's the tamest paragraph on this site for your enjoyment.
They get nothing right. Their fact-checking skills are atrocious. They neither report nor call experts, it's just whatever they invented twenty seconds ago. Watching them work is like attending a high school debate match in the impromptu event. Arguments are created on the fly, accuracy is unimportant so long as the product accuses the "MSM" or Democrats of some cardinal sin that'll leave Powerline's sycophantic readers moaning with the exquisite pleasure that comes only from having one's biases expertly stroked. The plausibility of their claims ranges from pathetic to laughable (has Big Trunk debated PZ Myers on the biological uncertainty of evolution yet?) and their traffic and credibility is entirely predicated on the work someone else did, success they've been totally unable to replicate. They have failed.
Powerline's extended legal theory excerpts is probably their only good use. This is not about a clash of conservative vs. liberal. This is about people who create scandals out of nothing. It is if, for example, someone cuts and pastes an inflammatory quote from Ward Churchill (hmm, why does he come to mind?), and I reach a conclusion without looking at the citation, source, or context.
My conclusion would be, given the patented Powerline mindset "Well that's obviously a fake person created by Republicans to villify liberal professors and Democrats in general, why he doesn't even exist, how repulsive is it that they are fabricating academic authors and fabricating statements that he made, just so we can look bad. IT'S DISGRACEFUL, IT'S UNAMERICAN, AND I AM SOOOOOOOO JUSTIFIED IN CALLING REPUBLICANS STUPID." And then when its revealed he's real and he did say those things, I would be like "Um, there are still unanswered questions here, BUT I AM NOT IN THE LEAST BIT WRONG."
That was fun. I'm trying to think of other ways to make my point, but when I try to think of photos or evidence that sheds Republican policies in a good light, a lot of the more prominent ones ARE staged to hide the ambigious reality or sad truths of a situation. So in my thinking out loud I've touched on a fundamental difference between liberal and conservative blogging strategies. Conservatives like Powerline try to twist what you see with your very eyes and raise doubt about their authenticity, and takes it one step further by trying their mightiest to prove that the doubt they've created was somehow deliberately manufactured by the original producer of that photo or memo or whatever. Liberals sometimes doubt the images the mainstream media feeds them, check the facts, and find how solid the truth of those images or memos are.
Getting very philosophical here. How about this: The Powerline guys are mean, egotistical, anti-intellectual smelly heads.
Back to paper-writing!
So, I know not all of you are political junkies, but you still might enjoy this post. The symbolism is even funny in a non-political way but the message extremely satisying if you take the time to follow the links in this post and find out just how screwy and fake the Powerline guys are.
Now it looks like my discussion with Lyon fizzled out (or has it?). That's all right... don't want to fan the flames of hostility. But the above post takedown is so effective in eliminating almost any respect I have for people who use Powerline guy's opinions to shape their own that its one of those viscerally satisfying blog posts to read.
Here's the tamest paragraph on this site for your enjoyment.
They get nothing right. Their fact-checking skills are atrocious. They neither report nor call experts, it's just whatever they invented twenty seconds ago. Watching them work is like attending a high school debate match in the impromptu event. Arguments are created on the fly, accuracy is unimportant so long as the product accuses the "MSM" or Democrats of some cardinal sin that'll leave Powerline's sycophantic readers moaning with the exquisite pleasure that comes only from having one's biases expertly stroked. The plausibility of their claims ranges from pathetic to laughable (has Big Trunk debated PZ Myers on the biological uncertainty of evolution yet?) and their traffic and credibility is entirely predicated on the work someone else did, success they've been totally unable to replicate. They have failed.
Powerline's extended legal theory excerpts is probably their only good use. This is not about a clash of conservative vs. liberal. This is about people who create scandals out of nothing. It is if, for example, someone cuts and pastes an inflammatory quote from Ward Churchill (hmm, why does he come to mind?), and I reach a conclusion without looking at the citation, source, or context.
My conclusion would be, given the patented Powerline mindset "Well that's obviously a fake person created by Republicans to villify liberal professors and Democrats in general, why he doesn't even exist, how repulsive is it that they are fabricating academic authors and fabricating statements that he made, just so we can look bad. IT'S DISGRACEFUL, IT'S UNAMERICAN, AND I AM SOOOOOOOO JUSTIFIED IN CALLING REPUBLICANS STUPID." And then when its revealed he's real and he did say those things, I would be like "Um, there are still unanswered questions here, BUT I AM NOT IN THE LEAST BIT WRONG."
That was fun. I'm trying to think of other ways to make my point, but when I try to think of photos or evidence that sheds Republican policies in a good light, a lot of the more prominent ones ARE staged to hide the ambigious reality or sad truths of a situation. So in my thinking out loud I've touched on a fundamental difference between liberal and conservative blogging strategies. Conservatives like Powerline try to twist what you see with your very eyes and raise doubt about their authenticity, and takes it one step further by trying their mightiest to prove that the doubt they've created was somehow deliberately manufactured by the original producer of that photo or memo or whatever. Liberals sometimes doubt the images the mainstream media feeds them, check the facts, and find how solid the truth of those images or memos are.
Getting very philosophical here. How about this: The Powerline guys are mean, egotistical, anti-intellectual smelly heads.
Back to paper-writing!
Thursday, April 07, 2005
Chicago ain't all peaches and cream...
In some chats with people I'm learning some new things about Chicago that don't shed it in very good light.
1. From some planning students that have been in the graduate program for a while, I've learned Chicago is a very corrupt city, more than most municipalities even. Apparently, if I wanted to get a job in the planning department of Chicago (not necessarily a main career goal, but it would be on a long list of jobs I'd like) I would have to "know" somebody that runs Chicago, if you know what I mean. I really hope I get some skill sets out of my Master's degree and that I can COMBINE that professionalism with a marriage to the daughter of a well-connected rich Chicago Jewish politician to get a job in Chicago. Going by personal connections alone (what's the term for that? something-ism? not nepotism) I would feel too guilty for not getting a cushy job by merit alone... unless I marry a total hottie Jewish girl. If she was moderately attractive and a had a good personality, then I would feel guilty.
2. Chicago is a very Democratic city, but not necessarily a liberal one. There's this entrenched political machine that will always elect Democrats but they won't be necessarily progressive, help the needy, or advocate for the rights of minorities and other marginalized groups. This partisanship without any values behind it is definitely more pervasive on the other side of the aisle, so its kind of dissapointing. A open-minded Republican elected in Chicago would probably bring some bold new ideas that could change this city, maybe for the better. The current mayor Richard M. Daley has served since 1989 and from what I know plans on running over and over again until, well he's dead. That's what his father, Richard J. Daley did, when he served for almost 20 YEARS as Chicago mayor. There's something creepily royal about that. As horrible as the national political scene is (what's good about it, huh?), is some consolation that the Dubya era will only last 8 years.
3. Chicago is an extremely unhealthy city. In the top 10 ranking of obese cities (watch Supersize Me to get more stats) Chicago is up there with all these red state cities with huge consumptive lifestyles. The unhealthy food is really good here, though, so maybe there's some excuse. But I don't see a lot of vegetarian restaurants, recycling isn't as easy or pervasive as in Iowa, and public transportation is used a lot less. A visiting professor candidate that I was escorting who was from New York was very surprised that the trains weren't packed right during rush hours. These are just empirical observations (again with the big words, I hope I used that term right), but I'm sensing Chicago isn't such an enlightened place. At least it doesn't live up to my perception of it when I visited it as a tourist.
But I still like it here.
1. From some planning students that have been in the graduate program for a while, I've learned Chicago is a very corrupt city, more than most municipalities even. Apparently, if I wanted to get a job in the planning department of Chicago (not necessarily a main career goal, but it would be on a long list of jobs I'd like) I would have to "know" somebody that runs Chicago, if you know what I mean. I really hope I get some skill sets out of my Master's degree and that I can COMBINE that professionalism with a marriage to the daughter of a well-connected rich Chicago Jewish politician to get a job in Chicago. Going by personal connections alone (what's the term for that? something-ism? not nepotism) I would feel too guilty for not getting a cushy job by merit alone... unless I marry a total hottie Jewish girl. If she was moderately attractive and a had a good personality, then I would feel guilty.
2. Chicago is a very Democratic city, but not necessarily a liberal one. There's this entrenched political machine that will always elect Democrats but they won't be necessarily progressive, help the needy, or advocate for the rights of minorities and other marginalized groups. This partisanship without any values behind it is definitely more pervasive on the other side of the aisle, so its kind of dissapointing. A open-minded Republican elected in Chicago would probably bring some bold new ideas that could change this city, maybe for the better. The current mayor Richard M. Daley has served since 1989 and from what I know plans on running over and over again until, well he's dead. That's what his father, Richard J. Daley did, when he served for almost 20 YEARS as Chicago mayor. There's something creepily royal about that. As horrible as the national political scene is (what's good about it, huh?), is some consolation that the Dubya era will only last 8 years.
3. Chicago is an extremely unhealthy city. In the top 10 ranking of obese cities (watch Supersize Me to get more stats) Chicago is up there with all these red state cities with huge consumptive lifestyles. The unhealthy food is really good here, though, so maybe there's some excuse. But I don't see a lot of vegetarian restaurants, recycling isn't as easy or pervasive as in Iowa, and public transportation is used a lot less. A visiting professor candidate that I was escorting who was from New York was very surprised that the trains weren't packed right during rush hours. These are just empirical observations (again with the big words, I hope I used that term right), but I'm sensing Chicago isn't such an enlightened place. At least it doesn't live up to my perception of it when I visited it as a tourist.
But I still like it here.
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Chirping of Crickets
If I don't put something up, people will visit my blog as just a trendy fad that Jonah got into for a while. Well, I won' t stand for that. I see what happens when I put thought provoking posts up, so maybe I will conjure up something, but not now.
My internship with the Woodstock Institute is turning out to be good. The first two days were all right anyway. It's nice to have work as a break from class, and class as a break from work, and anything productive to do away from my apartment as a break from worrying about the godawful amount of papers I have to write in less than a month.
So, well-wishers and arguers alike, post comments about anything.
My internship with the Woodstock Institute is turning out to be good. The first two days were all right anyway. It's nice to have work as a break from class, and class as a break from work, and anything productive to do away from my apartment as a break from worrying about the godawful amount of papers I have to write in less than a month.
So, well-wishers and arguers alike, post comments about anything.
Sunday, April 03, 2005
All right.
Geez, how can someone get so little done on a lazy Sunday? Oh yeah, there's the lazy part. So my internship starts Tuesday and my next round of stuff due starts a week from Monday. I think I'm staying on pace.
Here's a blog post to whet your political appetite. Get this in your head that this isn't Oxboro Christian ministiriy's website, this is the Federal Government's view of the dangers of sex and the advice that parents should give to ensure their kids practice absitence only, which is the supercool awesome trend of the day you know! It doesn't prevent teen pregnancies, or reduce the spread of STDs, but it can sexually repress some more people that might let their bottled hormones and sexual agression out in some other way!
And I should not be the only one creeped out by the multi-ethnic photo. Except for the white lady in her 30s hiding at the right, it's all minorities of all different ages at the forefront of the government's website citing the dangers of teen premarital sex. Yeah, it could be coincidental, or an attempt to potray anything associated with the government as diverse, but it obviously stood out for the blogger.
I don't gotta rant, just take a look at the link.
Here's a blog post to whet your political appetite. Get this in your head that this isn't Oxboro Christian ministiriy's website, this is the Federal Government's view of the dangers of sex and the advice that parents should give to ensure their kids practice absitence only, which is the supercool awesome trend of the day you know! It doesn't prevent teen pregnancies, or reduce the spread of STDs, but it can sexually repress some more people that might let their bottled hormones and sexual agression out in some other way!
And I should not be the only one creeped out by the multi-ethnic photo. Except for the white lady in her 30s hiding at the right, it's all minorities of all different ages at the forefront of the government's website citing the dangers of teen premarital sex. Yeah, it could be coincidental, or an attempt to potray anything associated with the government as diverse, but it obviously stood out for the blogger.
I don't gotta rant, just take a look at the link.
