What's O'Hanlon Been Handlin'

Mr. O'Hanlon has taken to the op-ed pages again to defend the op-ed that he couldn't defend when Glenn Greenwald asked him the relevant questions that the media as a whole couldn't come up with. Scary!
He's calling it "The Work Behind Our Iraq Views" and it is quite a work! In it he once again refers to himself as a critic of the administration's war policies in responding to an op-ed by Jonathon Finer ("Green Zone Blinders"), despite this statement to Greenwald:

if I'm being held up as a "critic of the war", for example by Vice President Cheney, it's certainly only fair to ask if that is a proper characterization of me. And in fact I would not even use that characterization of myself, as I will elaborate in a moment.

He is a critic. He's not a critic. What week is this? Did he forget his morning Kool Aid the day he spoke to Greenwald?

Mr. O'Hanlon has held himself out as an academic, a learned man drawing conclusions based on good data, albeit data supplied by those who profit from his positive conclusions. But he's shown himself to be a person willing to shade the truth and even to have different truths (about himself, no less) on different days of the week. But he's also shown himself to be one capable of the lie of omission to advance his preconception. He fails to address the more substantive critiques of his conclusions (if preconceptions can be graced with such a word).

He does not address the issue of seasonal adjustment of mortality data, which when applied erases the basis of his conclusions. He does not address the obviously fascist idea that the military has data that has to be secret but that contradicts the real data and shows that all is well in Iraq. In what sphere of academia does this pass for intelligent discussion?

The ony one I can think of is the sphere of public opinion where the public has been "softened" with the psuedo-science and anti-science that the bush administration has promoted for the past six and a half years. All of their attacks on science and suppression of facts and aspersions cast on those who believe data have been the air campaign, bombing the minds of America into submission, to prepare for the ground war, led by generals like O'Hanlon. The "shock and awe" of climate change denial, intelligent design, and the wonderfully effective "abstinence only" programs has come to its fruition and a landing has been made by the forces of "we don't need no stinkin' facts!" Inc.

Let me summarize for you the "work" that Mr. O'Hanlon did according to his latest op-ed. He did, in fact, briefly leave the green zone, he did, in fact, listen to the military's "data", he went to school, and he knows people who know people who told him things. Now if I said that I had found a cure for cancer and I should be believed because I have been to cancer wards, I have looked at "data" supplied by the people who want to sell the cure, I've gone to school, and I know people who know people who told me positive things about it...I would be laughed at by my colleagues. But in Mr. O'Hanlon's world, it seems to be something he is quite proud of.

It inspires me to write this FICTIONAL, SATIRICAL defense of his academic credentials in the style of the real Mr. O'Hanlon.

Interviewer: It has been alleged that you spent most of your time in the Rathskeller* while in school. Is this true?

O'Hanlon: Absolutely not! I was taken on several tours of the campus by the administration and I was able to confirm that classes in Political Science were actually going on.

I: And did you attend any of these classes?

O: No, but I did know several of the people who attended classes and they confirmed that they were quite informative. This was a good school, let me remind you! I spoke at length with several students who were directed to me by the administration and they all had wonderful things to say about the classes that they had attended. Let me remind you that some of these tours lasted HOURS! The amount of data I collected about Political Science in those tours was incredible!

I: But you didn't actually attend the classes or collect any actual data about Political Science prior to getting your degree?

O: You know I think there is much to much emphasis on this. I am an academic. I have a special mojo that allows me to take poor data and combine that with my vast social connections and come out with the right conclusions.

I: And in terms of Political Science, what are the "right" conclusions?

O: Why the ones that please my employer and get me airtime as an "expert". Any idiot knows that!

Can't argue with that logic!!

*Back in the olden days, when the drinking age was 21, colleges had bars, often in the basement and frequently called a Rathskeller.

The Long, Long Haul

I am aghast, as are many others, at the writings of Stu Bykofsky in a Philadelphia newspaper calling for another 9/11 to unite our country. There are so many things wrong with the article, not the least of which is the fascist idea that if we just had an enemy, real or imagined, to inflame our nationalist, stateist, xenophobic fears we could be the strong fatherland that god intended us to be and rule the world. Many people worry that the holocaust will be forgotten. Well, whether Bykofsky is a Jewish or Polish (or both or neither) name, it is sad to see that the rhetoric of the fascist state would win support under such a name.

I would like to focus, however, on an often repeated lie that appears in this column that points more directly to what is creating the rift that Mr. Bykofsky laments in our society. That is the lie that Americans just can't be in a war for the long haul. He writes,

"Americans have turned their backs because the war has dragged on too long and we don't have the patience for a long slog. We've been in Iraq for four years, but to some it seems like a century. In contrast, Britain just pulled its soldiers out of Northern Ireland where they had been, often being shot at, almost 40 years."

Being an Irish-American I have to control my effusive joy for the amazing success that the British occupation was for the Irish people and return to my point. This straw man first appeared (in my lifetime) during the Viet Nam war. Despite its utter lack of credibility, it still seems to have legs with those who support the never-ending-war-of conquest model of American unity.

Since this column appeared in a newspaper, may I be excused for thinking that it represents some form of journalism? If so, might Mr. Bykofsky supply some, oh I don't know, FACTS! Does he have anything to back up this position? Mr. Bykofsky seems to be under the impression that he is watching M*A*S*H II and ratings have declined since they killed off the very popular Saddam character. Can Mr. Bykofsky point to any evidence that those opposed to the war are also suffering under this delusion? Can he point us to the anti-war writings that declare that it's a wonderful war, it just can't sustain an audience for another season, so we oppose it? Are there any polls that indicate that the American people cite this reason for not supporting the war? Does he have anecdotal interviews to make the claim that even some people may oppose the war on this basis? If he does have any of this evidence, he fails to share even a shred of it with his readers.

In fact, if one looks around at the writings of those opposing the war, the reasons have to do with the lies that started the war, the incompetence of carrying it out once the ill-conceived debacle was initiated, the lack of reasonable plans to provide ACTUAL support (beyond bumper stickers) to the troops who were asked to carry it out, the distraction and diversion of resources from the ACTUAL war against the people who attacked us, the cronyism that insured that incompetent management would be the hallmark of the US occupation. Does any of this sound like we wanted the show canceled for lack of interest?

No, and if one takes the time to look for factual evidence to back up their opinion piece, one will find that those who speak of the public being "fatigued" by the length of the war are the very same people, like Bykofsky, who support the war or, worse still, those who started it. I am tired of being handed this straw man by people like him and being told that this represents my opinion. It most certainly does not.

The most ironic aspect of this charade (to me) is that I don't believe that people like Mr. Bykofsky (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) would accept this childish and specious argument from their child. Although a child might have a better excuse for an incomplete understanding of logical discipline and be more easily excused for such a lapse. If you had the misfortune to have a child who repeatedly broke the law and you pleaded with your child to take a look at their actions and the poor choices they have made, all in the hope that the child would see the effects their choices were having and reform, but the child replied that you weren't really concerned about them living a more productive life but actually just fatigued by the length of time they had been breaking the law, how would you respond? "Oh you're right! I really don't care whether you stop torturing the other kids in the neighborhood! I'm just tired of hearing about it every day! Brilliant!" By Mr. Bykofsky's logic, we would all drop our opposition to the child's transgressions and join in, as one big happy family.

Or maybe he would hire the even bigger neighborhood bully to attack his family and show them the joys of pulling together for the clan?

An adult, presumed journalist, ought to know something about logic. He ought to know a straw man when he sees one. He ought not to see his job as the distribution of scarecrows but more correctly as the distribution of fact. I look forward to his exposition of the facts that he uncovered to support his views on the motivations of those opposed to the war in Iraq.

Happy Birthday Menachem!

JetBlue, O'Reilly, and Dictionary Usage

Another day, another dumb blunder from Faux News and Bill-O. It would be hilarious entertainment if there wasn't the sad backdrop of realization that there are people in this country who take Bill-O seriously.

As many of you probably already know the man who would be McCarthy attacked DailyKos as a Hate Site, comparing them to Nazis for the contents of some unmoderated diaries on the site. We all know there is nothing more "hateful" to the progress of a good authoritarian state than free speech! One in particular was quite an egregious pronouncement of hate...someone called the pope a primate!

I emailed Billy to ask, since I'm sure he can use a dictionary and knows that a primate could be a mammal in the group that includes humans or the highest bishop in a church, whether it was the characterization of the pope as human or as the highest bishop in his church that Bill-O found hateful. I was hoping to be able to clarify for everyone just which usage he was objecting to but, alas, he hasn't responded. Still looking for his dictionary I presume. (Bill! It's over there under the loofah!)

I was even hoping that Bill would give me contact info for whatever group informs his views on the pope. He must either believe that the pope is to be thought if as a diety and not at all human (unless of course pope Naziburger is actually a robot, I didn't think of that until now! So that's where Hitler's Brain went!) or he must belong to a sect professing an alternative Catholic hierarchy and holding that someone other that the Bishop of Rome is the primate of the Catholic church. I thought I was going to be able to bring you a great report on whichever group Billy belonged to but no such luck.

Now in his show B-O had a staffer ambush the JetBlue CEO and challenge him about their donation of 10 tickets to the YearlyKos blogger convention. The JetBlue CEO handled things fairly well considering the circumstances. I wrote to JetBlue corporate communications and expressed my support and understanding that they had been ambushed by a horrible and dishonest "journalist" and they actually wrote back thanking me for seeing through the charade.

However, within 24 hours of being bombarded, I'm sure, by the utterly non-hateful B-O supporters JetBlue asked that their logo be removed from the YearlyKos ads/banners and issued a statement that voiced assent to the idea that Kos is a hateful site. Bad move.

I wrote back to JetBlue and expressed my disappointment. I summed up what I thought of the move and I offered them free access to use it in their ads if they wish to count on B-O's dwindling demographic for their business. But if you see it, you'll know this slogan is my baby!

JetBlue: If you're smart enough to define primate (or even to look it up), we'd prefer you use some other airline!

Mosuo

In another post designed to stem the growing tide of xenophobia in America, a link to a great video about the Mosuo people of Tibet. A matriarchal, matrilineal society that practices an interesting system of "walking marriage". The full 20 minute video is very good. It is a little sad to see what is happening to the society now that the Chinese government has made them a tourist attraction. Enjoy!
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/rough/2005/07/introduction_to.html

Happy Coming Out Day!

Today is national coming out day. I hoped that over the last decade we would have become more civilized and extended basic rights to more of our citizens. Unfortunately, the current Reich has decided that a better way to increase the fairness of our society is to take everyone's rights away. Some of us may forget that our gay friends still lack some of the most basic rights that our society affords when we are busy worrying about ALL of our civil rights being trashed in the name of "Bush-Fear", a rather malignant fever going around these days.

Many people speak out against homosexuality being against the teachings of Christ. It was so important to Christ...that he never said a word about it. There is condemnation in the old testament, so if your Jewish I understand your religious objection. It is also clear that Paul wasn't a fan of the gay lifestyle, but why should his opinion trump the big man in the religion? I think it is time to think critically about this. Unless you follow all 613 commandments in the OT, don't talk to me about the OT and unless you call yourself a Paulian and not a CHRISTian, don't tell me that Paul's hangups ought to be Christ's doctrines. Take a deep breath and accept that for all of recorded history the world seems to be created about 90% heterosexual and 10% homosexual. Do you think that if this was an error, God might have picked up on it and changed his/her ways by now?

Have you ever thought critically about the way that we tend to overlay our prejudices onto life's events? If you are a woman and a man "hits on you", we call that a man doing what men do. No big deal. If you are a guy and a women "hits on you", how much more frequently do we apply some pejorative like "nympho", "slut", or at least "a bit forward." (Myself, I just say "Yes Ma'am!). If you aren't interested, however, don't we just say "No thank you?" But if you are a guy and a guy hits on you - can you just say "No thank you?" I've done it. It works! Many men seem to have a different reaction however. What do they do if someone offers them some unwanted food, like weinerschnitzel and they don't like weinerschnitzel?? Well, maybe that's the same question.

These are three exactly analagous situations and yet, many people's perceptions are very different.

If you listen to some of the religious leaders who yak against homosexuality, you will hear that a person making such an inquiry on a same sex basis is some type of recruiter for some supposed "alternative lifestyle." Why aren't men hitting on women considered to be heterosexual recruiters? Is sexuality like enlisting in the Army? They need recruiters? Why aren't there "Be As Gay As You Can Be" ads on TV? I don't know about you but I didn't need any recruiting to my sexual preference.

I read some conservative web sites that suggest that all homosexuals are promiscuous and this is the great sin of their "lifestyle." In fact, homosexual individuals run the same gamut as heterosexual individuals; Some are quite prolific sexually and some could take it or leave it. But it seems all the rage among conservative people these days to be "faithful" to their "beliefs" no matter how enormous the collection of facts that contradict them. Have I used enough quotation marks tonight?

In fact our closest primate relative (WARNING: Creationists should stop reading here and go pray for me!) the bonobo has a society where sex is a very important and frequently used tool. Conflict is often settled with sexual relations between the parties and the bonobo society is characterized by promiscuous females. Now scientifically, the term promiscuous doesn't carry the connotation that it carries in our everyday jargon. In this sense it merely means females who mate with multiple males. No value judgment added. I guess that in some ways our society is a reflection of just how much shame it takes to overcome our DNA. Now I should have put overcome in quotes because we don't really overcome it do we? We just move it to a lower level and let it operate under the table where it can cause a lot more trouble.

And finally on a National Coming Out day when Mark Foley probably isn't celebrating his recent outing, let's all remember that if we are going to make a connection between sexual preference and pedophilia that homosexuals are underrepresented among pedophiles. If we abhor any group for their greater proclivity for pedophilia, that could only be the heterosexuals. I vote for calling pedophiles pedophiles and leaving sexual preference out of the discussion.

Disciples From the Left: More From the "Values Voters Summit"

Disciples From the Left: More From the "Values Voters Summit"
Here is an interesting post on the plan to get the "values voters" out to vote for the right. The plan....lie!

I guess the religious right not only dismisses that namby-pamby Sermon on the Mount stuff but they're also not to keen on the Thou shalt not part of those liberal commandment thingys.

Thanks to Jim Johnson at Disciples From the Left.

Who's got a Boehner?

Awful news about Representative Foley these past few days. At least the man passed legislation against himself? I guess that makes him better than Bush, who passed legislation to decriminalize his past criminal behavior! It is a funny ethical scale the have over there on the right.

The media seems obsessed with asking whether his Boehner was aware of what was going on. I don't understand this and I notice that they spell Boner different over there on the right. Well, Boner or Boehner, I think if he's asking young boys to undress I'm thinking his Boehner's quite aware of the situation...Oh wait, I guess they have some other guy named Boehner over there on the right, sorry about that. I'm thinking they better check his email if the man is walking around calling himself Boehner!

At least all of us who were confused about the Lewinsky thing now see what was so objectionable to the Republicans about that situation. She was over 18 and legally she could consent to sex. Apparently if Clinton had molested a child the Republican leadership would have happily kept it under wraps. Just another stupid Clinton mistake! I hope they pick that up on Faux News! This demands some coverage!

I Blame Superman

I blame Superman for the current state of affairs. We heard it first from him, over and over. Every time the show came on!

Faster than a speeding bullet!
More powerful than a locomotive!
Able to leap tall buildings at a single bound!
Look! Up in the sky!
It's a bird! It's a plane!
No, its Superman!
Strange visitor from another planet who came to earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal man. Superman! Who can change the course of mighty rivers, bend steel with his bare hands and who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a quaint metropolitan newspaper, fights a never ending battle for
Truth!
Justice!
And the American Way!

There it is right there, drummed into our heads week after week...truth...justice...and the American Way. At one time truth and justice were a part of the American Way but now Superman's evil plan has come to fruition and the subliminal message has taken hold of America. Under his evil power the government of the US was able to give up truth and justice and yet still can convince themselves that they preserve the American Way because as Superman taught us there is truth and there is justice and then there is something else called the American Way.

I say that, despite his super powers, we can defeat Superman's diabolical scheme and make truth and justice a fully integrated part of the American Way once again. It takes courage to stand up to a superhero, but we can do it merely by voting out every member of congress who voted to remove truth and justice from the American Way and then removing the party that currently controls the executive branch as soon as we possibly can.

I blame Superman for this mess and I'm not voting for him either!

By the way, I hope to post a lot of serious stuff about critical thinking here at critical thinking but I can't be serious all the time! Hopefully, some days there will be fun. If you come back and it sounds like I've lost my mind, think satire, sarcasm or then again, I may have lost my mind!

Mourn America

Mourn America
I know I'm piggybacking on Jesus' General two days in a row but stop by and pay your respects to a once great nation. But be careful what you say because the Unitary Executive now has the power to lock any of us up, any time, for anything (or for nothing). Remember the good old days when we used to complain about how awful it was that the USSR did this stuff and we used to look down on Pravda for being a "news" agency that just mouthed the words of the ruling party. I know many of the same patriots who deplored Pravda and the USSR, who now love Faux News and Bush. It really is amazing what a full circle we've traversed in my lifetime on this.
I, like many others, believed that we learned something from Viet Nam and from the authoritarian excesses of the Nixon administration and it is so sad to see that we learned absolutely nothing.
Can anyone think of a greater victory for Bin Laden than to watch us remake ourselves into the Soviet Union of the 50's/60's because we're so afraid of him that we can no longer think critically?

Jesus' General

Jesus' General
has a good rundown of the torture bill and a little further down the page a good quote from some guy named Thomas Jefferson on suspending habeus corpus.

What's our Policy on Democracy

This is a brief post to kick off the blog...hope you all enjoy and offer some insightful comments.
Watching the Bush administration one has to wonder what their policy on democracy is exactly. It seems that nations who currently have a Unitary Executive (The Artists formerly known as Dictators) are felt to need democracy and the nations currently suffering under the weight of democracy, like the good ol' US of A, need to have a Unitary Executive. It would seem that this administration is willing to go to any lengths to accomplish both aims. Obviously, they feel that violence is appropriate in accomplishing both goals and they have done violence to bodies, violence to minds, violence to careers and reputations, violence to science, violence to logic, and violence to the constitution. Obviously they feel that the Unitary Executive of the US should have all the characteristics of the former Unitary Executive of Iraq, such as secret prisons and torture.

The thought to ponder is: What happens after we establish democracy in Iraq and a Unitary Executive in the US? You know the one who is in the process of granting himself the right to torture and absolving himself and his cronies from responsibility for abuses already commited so that his egomania might rival that of the former Unitary Executive of Iraq? Wouldn't the theory seem to require that the democratic government of Iraq would be required at that point to attack the US to overthrow the Unitary Executive and re-establish democracy here and put the neo-unitary exec on trial for war crimes? At that point does Haliburtons Iraq division get all the contracts to bring democracy back here?

Is this the perpetual motion war machine that represents the business plan for institutions like Haliburton for the next century?

Or maybe we all need to do a little more critical thinking about the people we've put in power in this country?