May 2006
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
« Apr		Jun »
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

Why We’re Better

May 22, 2006

maha

-->

When Republicans get caught at corruption, righties say …

Democrats do it too!
It’s liberal media bias! (And Democrats do it too!)
Leftie bloggers get a trip to Amsterdam! (I haven’t yet heard what nefarious quid pro quo was demanded by the Netherlands Board of Tourism and Conventions.)
Liberal news bias. Our guy just made a mistake.

Or, they say nothing. On several active rightie blogs I got no hits at all for “Abramoff,” “Cunningham,” or “Tom DeLay.”

When Democrats get caught in corruption, lefties say,

Looks like he’s guilty.
He’s not the only Democrat with ethical problems.
It was stupid, and he got caught. He should resign.
The guy belongs in jail.

Sorta gives you a clue which side drinks the most Kool Aid, huh?

Spotlight

8 Comments

Julie O. • May 22, 2006 @1:53 pm

I wrote a little blurb about it, reminding everyone that it’s still a ratio of 1 to dozens, and a troll commented that it was stupid of me to mention it, since the Repubs don’t talk about their ethical problems.

Ignoring their ethical problems is why they have ethical problems.
spearNmagicHelmet • May 22, 2006 @5:32 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20060522/bs_prweb/prweb388743_4

more poll numbers showing that I am far from alone in disbelieving the official 9/11 story.
maha • May 22, 2006 @6:34 pm

more poll numbers showing that I am far from alone in disbelieving the official 9/11 story.

Look, the reason I started this blog to begin with was that I didn’t believe the official 9/11 story. We need more investigation. We need lots of questions answered. The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Independent Commission has lists of excellent questions that still haven’t been answered.

However, the “Bush had the towers wired for implosion and it was an inside job” crap is a distraction we don’t need. I have read all of the theories about how the towers fell because of pre-planted explosives instead of the structural damage resulting from airplanes slamming into them, and they are absurd. Lunacy like that makes the legitimate questions easier to dismiss.
Swami • May 22, 2006 @6:46 pm

9/11 isn’t our only problem, the bigger problem is what resulted from it.
http://www.sptimes.com/2006/05/21/Columns/President_grabs_power.shtml
justme • May 22, 2006 @7:55 pm

Spear,do you need attention?… we all got your message in the comments the other day… why repeat it here again today?, especially after our hostess has already spoken to you about it….annoying those whom you are trying to reach is defeating to your cause…..perhaps from now on you should comment on the posts Maha works so hard to write….She does an outstanding job of trying to enlighten and expand peoples minds on a whole host of issues ….

Your post has NOTHING to do with the topic being discussed here …and it is not fair to the Lady who took the time to write it.. show some respect!Sorry to hog your bandwitdth Maha….GREAT post, as always!
paradoctor • May 22, 2006 @8:58 pm

Good post, maha; it illustrates a principle I call “epistemological ethics”, which is my hifaultin term for the virtue of admitting fallibility. I submit that it is morally wrong to deliberately choose ignorance. The rigid mind is inevitably a wicked mind as well; excessive attachment to a theory is the sin of intellectual pride. No doubt you can put this in a Buddhist perspective; and I would like to see it.

As for spear’s off-topic post, I personally wobble between the passive-complicity theory and the Reichstag-fire theory. I consider the first theory to be strongly confirmed – in part by the Bushites themselves. (“Bin Laden Determined To Strike In U.S.”, was the Aug 6 2001 PDB. When Ms. Rice admitted this to the committee, a gasp went up in the audience.) At the very least they knew something was coming, but the Mayberry Machiavellians took no policy action to prevent, only political preparation to exploit. In and of itself this is utterly damning.

So I don’t _need_ the active-treason theory; it’s just that I can’t rule it out, nor do I feel that I have the luxury to rule it out, not with these people in power. My problem is that they _act_ like perps. The secrets that have come out already as stinky enough, and you know that there are worse. How much worse?

My bet is that the truth is in the messy gray area between passive complicity and active treason. They “looked the other way.”
alyosha • May 23, 2006 @5:13 pm

I submit that it is morally wrong to deliberately choose ignorance. The rigid mind is inevitably a wicked mind as well; excessive attachment to a theory is the sin of intellectual pride.

Paradoctor, I really appreciate your stating this. I’ve had lots of experience with, and time to think about willful ignorance, which is a sickness, a willing mass hypnosis, the Kool-Aid if you will, that we’ve all been living with for years now. What’s sad is that it’s nothing new, to wit the “good Germans” who merely followed orders, for example.
Donna • May 23, 2006 @10:50 pm

Thanks for the link, Swami. That columnist, Robyn Blumner, can lay it out plainly and powerful.