Days of Change

The Rocks Cried Out No Hiding Place | May 17, 2015

Karl Rove referred to people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” Unfortunately, he was saying it to disparage journalists. That journalist, Ron Suskind, chose to focus on the term Rove used to define him and other reporters, “the reality-based community,” to paint the Bush administration as believers in fantasy and, gasp, religion.

If you try to invent solutions based on known factors, you are disregarding the unknown. The unknown is so important that human beings invented science to experiment with solutions to extrapolate the unknown. There are also people who have certainty that everything they know is everything they need to know to change the word for the better. Those are progressives and they often try to create their own reality.

Those watching ABC Sunday saw George Stephanopoulos back in the moderator chair after 1.) Using that position to attack an author who found a lot of money flowing through an organization that 2.) Stephanopoulos donated a considerable amount to, even though 3.) he didn’t reveal that fact until it was discovered by two other news organizations. ABC created its own reality where a moderator in their news division can donate to a former political employer after being a partisan operative, claim to have forgotten about it, and expect that the public will accept that story.

While the revelations of bias and sloppy journalism have accelerated over the years, the actual level of bias hasn’t gone up much. The good news is that alternative and social media have made it impossible to hoard reality anymore. They may still have their perches in big media, but they are in glass towers with no hiding place. It kind of reminds me of an old song.

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized

7 Comments

  1. Good points. Yeah right, the reality based community, the world of blank slates, “we are the ones we have been waiting for”, and empty words of “hope.”

    Comment by insanitybytes22 — May 17, 2015 @ 9:00 pm

    • They’re trying the same policies, expecting different results. We already know what Ben Franklin had to say about that.

      Comment by 1539days — May 18, 2015 @ 10:18 pm

  2. msm = lying scum

    Comment by Mary — May 18, 2015 @ 12:07 am

  3. Did you run across William Briggs recent: http://wmbriggs.com/post/16005/ about ‘transhumanism’, and it’s apparent belief if only enough human intelligence can be applied to solving a problem, it can be fixed? Rove may be one who thinks problems exist only in order to be solved, but I’m tired of talking about someone who’s outlasted his ‘best-by date’ by at least a dozen years.

    Comment by 49erDweet — May 20, 2015 @ 9:25 pm

    • Actually, Rove was saying that the “reality-based community” thinks that there is a perfect solution to a problem based on previous experience. That’s similar to transhumanism, where defining a problem is most of the way to a solution. It’s like the joke about how we can cure cancer by giving cancer to all the billionaires in the world.

      The Bush administration got into Iraq because they made a decision. It may be the wrong decisions, but Obama apparently didn’t make a better one, because Iraq is even worse off.

      We have to make decisions, big and small, every day. The danger is thinking you can always be right by using some magic formula.

      Comment by 1539days — May 20, 2015 @ 11:07 pm

      • Usually a choice is between A and B, and either selection starts us down a new path. There’s a third choice, sometimes, and that’s to not make a choice quite yet (and yes, I know sometimes that’s B). But if we as a nation see imminent disaster and possess the means to mitigate it’s damage, then sitting on the fence and watching is extremely difficult for caring folk to do. So I think we have to accept we’d rather have leaders that care, than act the vulture.
        Where many leaders fail, however, is in monitoring and adjusting that new pathway as situations progress. MacArthur comes to mind. Charismatic and brilliant strategist; a disaster at reacting and adjusting to conflicting results. I don’t fault GWB for his initial decision, but think the second and ensuing stages were weakened to appease too many worldwide POVs, and thus could not succeed. He disappointed me.

        Comment by 49erDweet — May 21, 2015 @ 11:59 am

      • The way I looked at it, Bush did something no one else in the world tried to do, take the fight to the Arab world that condoned the Islamist crap going on. Part of the problem was politics. Iraq wasn’t an active player, but they were a conquered country that was bending the inspection laws they agreed to when they surrendered. We didn’t go after Saudi Arabia, even though many hijackers came from there because the country tended to be an ally.

        The other part was international. The UN is made up of mostly anti-Semites and passive anti-Semites. Bush Sr. could create a coalition when Saddam was invading one Arab country and another was probably next. At the same time, France and others were getting lots of cheap oil from Iraq. No one really wanted to light that powder keg.

        GW Bush’s stand, to me, was morally right. Obama’s stance is morally cowardly but easy to defend. He will be out of office before ISIS starts killing Americans on US soil. The Arab world is full of cowardly fools who plan to wait until ISIS has taken them over to fight. Except for Jordan. They’re the only BAMFs in the fight now.

        Comment by 1539days — May 21, 2015 @ 4:45 pm


%d bloggers like this: