November 21, 2024

6 thoughts on “Writing to Restore Clarity

  1. Agreed. What exactly is your criticism, Renick?

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like you’re saying that because Democrats supported Obama’s “change” message, they are contradicting themselves in not supporting “change” for this election cycle.

    “For the omniscient observer, old change was good and new change is bad.”

    I hope I’m misreading you here–which is very possible–because, if this is what you mean, it’s a patently ridiculous argument: obviously Democrats supported Obama last year on a message of center-left change, not in favor of the abstract concept of continual change.

  2. J.S. – glad you asked. You misread indeed. I’m just pointing out that it’s not ‘change’ or ‘sanity’ these people want, it’s only ‘liberal change’ and ‘liberal sanity.’ Obviously your reasoning would be correct in your last statement.

    This is honestly a pretty simple case I’m making, I’m not going to try to paraphrase it for you Ferenk, but I’ll highlight some parts:

    ‘It is the 18-34 year olds who are just so inundated with rationality that the only way to view the Tea Party is as a plaid-laden Halloween costume.’
    ‘The omniscient observers that convened for the satirist’s rally are an abstraction of an emerging ideology that finds its roots in arrogance and disingenuousness.’
    ‘They view themselves as too philosophically sophisticated and too politically prescient to be troubled by the mundane and pedantic criticisms of crazies that object to stagnant economies, governmental social overreach, and deaf representatives.’

    The new technique by many Democrats is to disguise their liberal views as the only reasonable or sane ones. They basically take on a completely false persona. If my label is confusing you, the omniscient observer is one who portrays himself as just a rational person who can see, understand, and know all, and this leads him to conclude: ‘Democrats are right!’

    It’s childish, and we’ll see today how effective it is.

  3. Also, I appreciate your criticisms – the legitimate ones (jab at Ferenk) – but my new policy has been to generally abstain from commenting on my own articles, so I probably won’t say anymore on this subject.

    Thanks for the comments though – the legitimate ones (another jab at Ferenk, ahah).

  4. Ferenk, sounds like you managed to navigate the ‘psychobabble’ and understand my point, because you basically agreed with a lot of it, and then gave a quick example.

    You agree that the people at Stewart’s rally are liberal. Only other thing I’m saying is that these liberals’ main method for addressing issues is calling their opponents (Republicans, Tea Partiers) ignorant, fear-mongering racists that can’t perceive reality.

    You then say you agree that many Republicans are ignorant, fear-mongering racists.
    You then say my perception of reality is wrong (‘what is real and true’).

    You are the omniscient observer!!

  5. Haha, Ferenk, a direct printscreen from ‘revisions’ section:

    1 November, 2010 @ 16:52 by Oliver Renick

    This is why I abstain from commenting on my own posts.

Comments are closed.