Why is it that I am still surprised by the loaded questions in your polls?

Maybe it is because they are getting even more so.

I have noticed a dwindling interest by other readers. Probably since there is nothing worth discussing.

I don’t think it is so much a loaded question as it is loaded answers.

And certainly getting more humorous!

But the answers we choose are no less true.

hey whattheheck,

how the heck are you? i agree about the loaded ‘choice’ we are given here as the editors no doubt intended, but nothing to discuss?

o.k. i’ll bite - i think we will eventually find that the attorney scandal is all about elections. the GOP needs to suppress the vote in order to win. this requires compliant ‘party-first’ U.S. attorneys in key states or pay-back for cronies (i.e. OK).

the GOP meme you hear a lot is about a vast and threatening ‘voter’ fraud problem. some 20 individuals over the past 6 years have found themselves in trouble (including ann coulter) - many of whom were only guilty of ignorance (one driving license app had automatically registered him in his state).

the very real problem is ‘election’ fraud as we saw in 2000, 2002, 2004, and in 2006. you know, that ‘one man one vote’ thorn in the conservative psyche - who hate sharing citizen power with the riff-raff.

the ‘after the fact’ numbers (available at voting rights activist sites) point to some 5 million voters being disenfranchised in 2006 through one trick or another - this number will increase for 2008.

the real question for me is what about all those attorneys who were not fired?

remember y’all ...  you’re either with us or you’re against us.

Hi there, Hourglass,

I guess we can always find something to discuss — silly me :-)

What bothered me about the questions most was that I just came from my Center for Learning in Retirement discussion group where I heard the same kind of foregone conclusions to nearly every topic.

What I found most interesting there (and here) is how selectively their method of validation is applied.

Examples:
Validation by current consensus —

The Al Gore movie, “An Inconvenient Truth”— “More than 900 scientists agree that human behavior is causing the rise in temperature.”

Katrina, Columbine, Virginia Tech — Political/Media saturation of a theme

We got into the war in Iraq based on lies.

If enough people can be found to produce a consensus — the conclusion MUST be true.
———————————& —

However… There was a time when the U.N, Germany, France, Spain, and the vast majority of the U.S. Congress believed Saddam had WMD (pre-invasion).  Seems like a consensus to me.

Why we believe is at least as important as what we believe. As Mark Twain put it, “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you — it’s what you know… that just ain’t so.”

Whenever an idea is presented as incontrovertible we need to beware!
———————————& —

I just heard an author discussing his new book which sounds interesting. I went to amazon.com and read the reviews — now I have to read it.

The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb

well, wth, here we go again ...

Good Mark Twain quote. Then there is: “there are none so blind as those who will not see” ... John Heywood (1546)

the ‘consensus’ that led us to war was reached by false and/or cherry-picked information and a consorted suppression of facts. our MSM were insider cheerleaders.

Your examples:

1. Validation by current consensus

i would say wth, that the current consensus is/was derived through the exposure of information that the MSM chose to sit on or refused to show and was revealed by brave people who refused to be silenced by thebullies ...

2. The Al Gore movie, “An Inconvenient Truth”— “More than 900 scientists
agree that human behavior is causing the rise in temperature.”

even if you’re not convinced. aren’t the measures we would need to take to counteract the ‘possible’ and most science says ‘probable’ impact appropriate if we want cleaner air, water and soil AND ween our reliance on oil and the war machine it feeds. it could just be the fulcrum of a much needed industrial and technological revival. wall street is doing great right at the moment mostly due to new financial instruments and markets, M&A that hurts our workforce and war profiteering. there is no trickle down and the few are owning more and more.

3. Katrina, Columbine, Virginia Tech — Political/Media saturation of a theme

kind of a mixed salad here, wth.

a. katrina response served two purposes - a. don’t rely and don’t trust government. this helps the cons in that they only want gov as an arm of authority not as a entity that benefits society as a whole. and b. it allows a shift of vast areas of property ownership - an ethnic/economic cleansing and real estate bonanza.

you are aware that the first boots on the ground in NO were mercs authorized to shoot to kill, right? white couple steals bread and bottled water - survival. black mother steals baby formula - wanton rioter.

b. columbine and VT - three things here. i. do we need semiautomatics for hunting or warfare? ii. why can’t sport/hunter buyers wait for a logical, thorough and necessary background check? iii. it’s time the usa got a mental healthcare system like the one that existed in most states (like CA) until the dismantling of the 80s (Reagan).

c. the political/media saturation as you call it is what i call infotainment for the 24/7 couch potatoes. have you noticed all the same pundits who have been wrong all along are still showing up on all the Sunday steno/spin shows. it’s all the fault of the non-existent liberal media or the democrats or, or, or, Bill Clinton’s penis.

4. We got into the war in Iraq based on lies.

wow - it’s more than that wth - this admin is guilty of treason if our elected reps have the courage and faith in the resilience of the American people to pursue all evidence now in hand. have you not heard of the Downing Street memo? “the intel is being fixed around the policy.” the White House destroying a CIA front company (Brewster Jennings) involved in tracking WMD moneys and materials just to attack Joe Wilson - a messenger that warned the White House there was no ‘there’ there.

5. If enough people can be found to produce a consensus —the conclusion MUST be true.

this is exactly what the admin did to start a war of choice. anyone who didn’t agree was silenced or destroyed. the WH Press Steno Corp asked scripted questions in the weeks before war.

6. However… There was a time when the U.N, Germany, France, Spain, and the vast majority of the U.S. Congress believed Saddam had WMD (pre-invasion). Seems like a consensus to me.

is this willful blindness? the coalition of the willing ...

the u.n. presentation was all ginned up and unfortunately Colin Powell’s legacy. the mobile labs - if anyone would have bothered to ask scientists or even lab technicians - are too unstable for ‘cooking up’ AND delivering WMD. read about it.

but before that ... germany and france knew our intel was wrong because they knew who was supplying it - remember ‘freedom fries’ and the boycotts of french wine? funny, no one up on the Hill was burning their mercedes benz. 

our members of congress and senate gave advanced authorization based on intel privately provided by the admin to select GOP leadership. other criteria such as inspectors and cooperation was thwarted by the admin. the inspectors were thrown out by the usa before they could complete their work - and perhaps reveal there was no ‘there’ there.

7. Whenever an idea is presented as incontrovertible we need to beware!

we agree! unless, of course, it is supported by fact. turn off the TV, wth, or move out of the usa for an extended period of time - you’d be amazed at the depth of deceit the american electorate is suffering under. all of which is common knowledge worldwide. we are watching in shock and awe.

hourglass,

My point was actually about the risk in favoring consensus to determine truth.

The thing I found interesting about your reply — even though I agree with the possibility, or even likelihood of some of it — is that most of what you say either is, or has been the consensus reported in the media.
 
Think about how consensus is often formed today. Repetition of dubious or unsubstantiated reports and polls. The importance to be first with a story and nearly everyone repeating the same story for days on end.  The desire to please their majority audience — political (left or right leaning), advertising or PC (pro or con) — print, audio or visual.

I just began reading a very interesting book about the human thought processes — The Black Swan, by Taleb.

I heard him on TV and what he said matches some of what I had attempted to present in the discussion group which I mentioned. He does a far better, more concise, yet more thorough explanation than my try at it.
(Of course he has the advantage of no interruptions to his train of thought. I had a lot, “Yes, but…” to deal with. :-)

Democrats amaze me. They have a wide open subject and lose it.

It is not about firing.

It is OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

Hear a D claim it.

If the attorneys were on a case and pulled off for political purposes it is obvious..

Does anyone lead D?

Too deep to see the trees?

I knew there were no WMD
Hans Blix knew
Scott Ritter knew
Many UN Inspectors knew

Saddam son-in law said they were destroyed after Gulf Slaughterama.

Saddam Chief Chemist in Canada said ,they were destroyed after the Gulf Slaughterama on Canadian TV, many times.

FEAR FEAR FEAR

Maybe they will find some.
My job will be gone.