The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (SPECIAL ACCESS) KGB Political Debate Central For The Tea Party the Bell Tolls

Apparently you dont know what epistemic closure is, because you have been frequently misapplying it. Also somewhat amusing is that I actually read most of the liberal rags, and value good writing and reporting when I see it. Unfortunately false continuum and false consensus is all the rage these days and when so many on the "left" cannot even start with valid premises its hard to find them convincing.

You seem demonstrate an open lack to disregard anything said. Its not that I disregard anything you say, its just you dont say anything new regardless of any facts or arguments placed before you.

Kind of amusing, because I dont shout at real "liberals". I just hold disdain for sheep who dont even have a grasp on their own core vision, and follow the media herd off into logical irrelevancy and think extreme hyperbole makes for convincing arguments.

If your idea of a real "liberal" is a guy who spends their time excoriating "Tea Party" people, and thinking apologizing for the incompetence, corruption, wealth transfer policies, and outright malfeasance of the Clintons and Obamas et al... yet still supporting them 100%.....

Well.. I suppose I do shout at those hypocritical flakes on occasion. I do find it extremely interesting that someone who supposedly is a "liberal" can support Obama, Clinton, Feinstein, Pelosi and crew... then turn around and accuse others of not listening to anything outside of some "fever swamp".

Emotion and self-image have trumped intellect in the segment of politics that self identifies as "liberal". That is what I find sad.

Disagree with misapplying. Way I use the term - extreme version of confirmation bias to the point that everything is self-referential. 'If you don't understand my explanation, read previous sentence in this post or you are wrong' kind of thinking.

Simplified example: political right's belief that cutting taxes is always beneficial for the economy that flows into small government that flows into hate of deficit spending. None of these concepts are necessary wrong, but when you loop them and ignore everything else - they lose intellectual coherency and becomes dogma. If I were to point out that cutting taxes during recession will inevitably increase deficit spending I get blank stares and get accused of "extreme hyperbole".

This is in a way a framing problem compounded by indiscriminate poisoning the well. You won't hear any arguments that are not framed on your terms, and if I try to fit my arguments into such limited frame then it inevitably creates coherence problems.

I have offered this demonstration before - I can channel conservative views without average person being able to tell that I do not share them. At the same time I sincerely doubt that you could fake a convincing liberal for anyone but your fellow right-wingers.

Its so strange, because you honestly seem to be projecting yourself on to me. It is kind of creepy how your assertions about me continue to reach new heights of irony.

quick example: Lately I have been channeling Stockman , who opposes most tax cuts during recession. I have given thoughts on taxes before, but it does not matter what I or anyone else says : you hear entirely what you want to hear. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say you have an imagined concept of what other people actually think, and you somehow internalize what they say in a manner that comports to the caricatures you have fixed in your mind. This creates an extremely distorted view of reality, and pretty much guarantees that any assertions you make are grounded in false premise.

If you want to talk about framing problems, what you really mean are premises and assumptions. What you really seem to mean is that you are incapable of identifying and attacking premises you believe to be incorrect. At least you admit to having a coherence problem. But again, this is not even a real problem.. objectively speaking, but rather a result of the distorted view you hold of everyone else.



Not sure this merits much of a response, just know I facepalmed exceptionally hard.

The end analysis is that you project an extremely limited, two dimensional view of the world. Anything that does not neatly fit into your mental model gets fit, regardless of whether the geometry of the peg matches the shape of the hole. As a result it does not matter what is said, or what concepts are articulated by others - if they do not match your own, the result will be you shouting "crazy redneck tea party etc" , while ironically talking about how others overuse "poisoning the well".

But as has been and will likely always be, self gratifying rationalizations based on intellectual hubris is what being a Utilitarian is all about.

I LOL'd. Typical elitist asshattery.

It's amazing to me how much many of us do agree on, and let the radical stuff divide us.

I enjoy the debate and staying sharp part of these conversations. You guys seem to have gone a little more in the H8 direction that I remember.

Respectful debate is what I enjoy.

Noone has addressed my points yet. It is hard for me to see you all jumping on the Paul and Cruz bus when they are so wrong on so many fundamental issues. Here are a couple.

1) Gay Marriage
WHY DOES ANYONE CARE who marries who? How does it hurt anyone? Why would you want to get in between two people that love each other? Amazing.

2) Abortion
SMALL GOVERNMENT except for the most intimate decision a woman could make about HER body. You talk about intrusiveness? There is nothing more intrusive than making a woman have the baby of the man who RAPED her.

I just cant take these people serious on any point when they take this kind of stance on these issues. I mean denying science, and thinking that default would not tank the world economy is just plain ignorant in my honorable opinion.

1) I may be wrong but no one here has said they were against gay marriage.

2) I may be wrong but no one here has said they were against abortion in cases of rape.

I didn't see anyone deny science, as science is fact not theory.
Please prove the fact the world would have tanked if we went into default.
Please use the science you think we do not believe in.
Its hard to take people serious when they keep saying lies.

Actually I prefer it myself. But im bored so I play the game available. /shrug

Paul thinks those should be decided at the State level. Personally I dont care who marries who and have always leaned pro choice.

I just think that beside things like intentional wealth transfer, regressive taxation, and surveillance/police state.. those issues fade to literally nothingness in relative importance.

You say that you cannot take anyone serious who has certain stances on those issues. You, and, unfortunately a lot of people. Thats why they are called wedge issues, and are spotlighted so hard by the Karl Roves of the world. Because they place a wedge between otherwise reasonable people on meaningless issues that are intended to be a distraction away from important issues.

Its the most blatant, yet most effective political sleight of hand play.