tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22657443.post1874888577748023783..comments2023-12-31T03:18:37.403-06:00Comments on "E pur si muove!": Another Gross Fallacy from ObamaLester Hunthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14746157071827337723noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22657443.post-10142920645145688532009-03-16T10:52:00.000-05:002009-03-16T10:52:00.000-05:00Brett,That may well be the best interpretation, bu...Brett,<BR/><BR/>That may well be the best interpretation, but it makes what he is saying at least as cynical or stupid as the interpretation we are struggling with. <BR/><BR/>Since October, the Bushama administration has been giving America its biggest shove towards socialism (or some form of statism) since the 1930s, and to refuse to discuss that issue on the grounds that those raising it are being insincere or inconsistent in doing so is just another example of the ad hominem fallacy. Further, the premise is obviously false -- plenty of people were screaming about it during phase one of this push toward whatever-we-should-call-it. I sure as Hell was -- look at my posts for late October and early November if you find that hard to believe.<BR/><BR/>In what way is the ad hominem argument you attribute to him different from the one I attributed to him? Mine has him admitting the Bush part of the Bushama regime was socialist. Yours has him (apparently) not caring. That's the only big difference I can see.<BR/><BR/>[For what it's worth, I think the system we are now entering is not socialist but fascist -- but the difference between them is one of the many things we can't discuss if we think of one of the crucial terms as a mere "epithet."]Lester Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14746157071827337723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22657443.post-10945366604234273022009-03-16T08:52:00.000-05:002009-03-16T08:52:00.000-05:00You guys are being willfully dense. Obama is simpl...You guys are being willfully dense. Obama is simply saying that the word "socialist" wasn't being tossed around when the Bush administration did the same things that are now being called "socialist" because the Obama administration is doing them. He is reacting to the word being used as an epithet, not as a defining aspect of the policy. It may be entirely fair to call Obama's policies socialist, but there is a lack of consistency in the media about this.Bretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00185765770976956873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22657443.post-73974778076999856632009-03-15T20:21:00.000-05:002009-03-15T20:21:00.000-05:00Man, maybe someday I'll be able to manage such glo...Man, maybe someday I'll be able to manage such glorious intellectualism... I can dream, can't I?<BR/><BR/>Thankfully, now when anyone searches for "Obama gibbering ninny with the brains of a toad" on Google, they will come directly here! You've made the world a better place!Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933199894935324897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22657443.post-56091931663857960172009-03-14T11:49:00.000-05:002009-03-14T11:49:00.000-05:00Danny,Maybe the problem is that BHO is just too "b...Danny,<BR/><BR/>Maybe the problem is that BHO is just too "brilliant" for the likes of us. <BR/><BR/>BTW, when I googled "Obama gibbering ninny with the brains of a toad" I came up with only 12 results, none of which contained all those words.Lester Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14746157071827337723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22657443.post-64057331941790432032009-03-14T11:07:00.000-05:002009-03-14T11:07:00.000-05:00Good catch! This is fascinating. Obama's argumen...Good catch! This is fascinating. Obama's argument initially appears to be:<BR/><BR/>1) I am responsible for instituting some massive entitlements and interventions.<BR/>2) But the Bush administration was responsible for instituting many of the massive entitlements and interventions for which I'm being attacked.<BR/>3) The Bush administration represented free-market principles.<BR/>4) By (2) and (3), the instituting of massive entitlements and interventions is consistent with free-market principles.<BR/>5) By (1) and (4), my policies are consistent with free-market principles.<BR/><BR/>Is that what's going on here? Because then how do you make sense of him saying that "some of the same folks who are throwing the word 'socialist' around can't say the same"? This suggests:<BR/><BR/>6) The instituting of massive entitlements and interventions is not consistent with free-market principles.<BR/><BR/>So there appears to be a contradiction, if I understand the argument correctly. If there's an error in my interpretation, I imagine that it's in thinking that Obama's claim about acting on free-market principles is connected with the rest of his statements; he may just be coming from left field, in which case I'd think he needs to provide one heck of an argument in his favor. But in any case, though, thanks for pointing this out -- my head officially hurts!Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933199894935324897noreply@blogger.com