11 Feb  06

Previous Edition
Current format:

Pseudo-blog
   
7 Nov '05 thru Now

Previous  formats:

Conceptual crap
24 Jun '05 thru 21 Sep '05

"Satire"
April '03 thru July '05

Commentary
January '02 thru March '03

Political Cartoons
Late '00 thru Dec '01


FOX News Resources:


Newshounds


Sweet Jesus, I
Hate Bill O'Reilly



Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting


Media Matters
for America



My Favorites:


Daily Kos


Consortium News


The Huffington Post


Randi Rhodes


Air America Radio


Ed Schultz


Steve Bradenton's Political Art

Previous Edition
11 February 2006
The Most Powerful Smell in News.
Republican Fantasy World
That Maureen Dowd Title is Making More Sense Every Day

With revelations about Dick Cheney's role in the Valerie Plame leak, and Mike Brown's warnings to the Whitehouse about flooding in New Orleans, one thing is very clear: 2006 ain't gonna be easy for the GOPhers.

Things were already crumbling for our neoconanderthal friends as 2005 was wrapping up.  Abramoff yipping like a chihuahua in heat.  Half a dozen indictments looming over prominent Rapture-ublicans' heads.  Veterans of the war in Iraq rebelling against Bush in unprecedented numbers.  New tapes of Al Qaeda's leaders surfacing more often than tapes of Tom DeLay drunk (and it seems in just about every one, DeLay is -- excuse the obvious tongue-in-cheek reference -- hammered).

Better still, it's not just stuff the GOP has wrecked in the past, and now have no control over; they're actively doing it to themselves.  They're content to jabber about the wiretap scandal on a daily basis.  Many evangelicals are now rejecting the standard neocon argument on global warming.  And the party is split on immigrants.  The unraveling of their "unity" seems inevitable; just a dainty tug by the dainty Dems, and 2006 could be a very good year for the progressive movement.

I think, despite the increasingly robust array of fantasy-land media outlet nipples to pacify their philosophical wants (NY Post, FOX News, Limbaugh et al, and so forth), more and more Republicans will recognize how horrible an administration this country is currently suffering.  Maybe I'm being naïve, but as someone who thinks people are basically good, I have to conclude folks eventually recognize this stuff, and refuse to sell out their personal philosophy for a name.
Americans will reject Bush's Tort Reform
But not necessarily because
they're smart.


Although I do believe people are inherently good, I don't believe people are inherently smart.  Maybe that's the simplest distinction between the left-leaning mindset and that of those on the right.

Of course, many people have the good in them chased away by some unfortunate set of circumstances.  Likewise, a good education can do wonders for those otherwise prone to superstition and ignorance.

However, the U.S. education system is inadequate in some areas, two of which are science and math.  Both areas, in the American school experience, are too focused on results, and not sufficiently focused on the subjects' foundations.
In science class we learn about lots of theories, their discoverers, and the histories and biographies behind each, respectively.  However, we learn little of the function of scientific inquiry itself, and therefore aren't given the tools to really appreciate the extent of the validity of mankind's scientific triumphs.  We're not fully exposed to the notion of uncertainty, a central tenet of prudent scientific inquiry, and so we mistakenly think anything not absolute is - in some way - a 50/50 proposition.  Most Americans, I think, don't realize there is no such thing as scientific proof.  Evolution, I think most of us would agree, is a victim of the American education system's screwy priorities.

Math, on the other hand, seems to be centered around specific functions.  We're not really taught much about probability; a proper education on something that affects everyone would convey an invaluable sense of what life's daily statistics really mean to everyday Mr. and Mrs. Smith.  As a result, many educated people walk around with a convoluted idea of the "law of averages," and too many lack the logic to correctly interpret astronomical odds that characterize their daily choices.

For example, a man loses thousands betting on Red because the Roulette wheel just landed on red four times in a row.  "Surely," he thinks, "the odds against it landing on Red this time around are next to nothing!"  A prominent businessman spends sixteen hours on a train rather than 2 in a plane because, numbers be damned, he could die in that airplane!  A poor lady with children to feed spends her last 20 bucks on lottery tickets, because to her, twenty times the chance of winning seems huge.

People don't understand the odds.  If they did, state lotteries would vanish, Vegas would wither away, and the airline industry would be more lucrative than porn.
Melmen et al have chosen Tort Reform as 2006's domestic priority because they believe the greed of Americans, along with their suggestibility and gullibility, will make the reform an easy one to realize.  But Bush's Tort Reform will fail, not because more Americans can see around Rove's BS than those who cannot.  Not because the vast majority of Americans are compassionate and willing to endure a handful of frivolous lawsuits to keep a system in place that usually finds the best possible facsimile of "justice" for those who genuinely got fucked over by negligent and/or greedy bastards.

No, the reform will fail because most Americans are blind to the implications of hard statistics.  They will fail to see themselves as anything but potential plaintiffs in multi-gazillion dollar lawsuits.  Although the intelligent Republicans (all six of them) will point out you're more likely to end up in Michael Jackson's bed than filing a medical malpractice suit, people will, by and large, be unable to see their existence as dwarfed by even the most astronomical of odds.
All images, music, ideas, and nonsense herein © 2001 - 2006 P. Thompson
Original Faux News Logo © 2001  (read it and weep)
'Spinner' Logo © 2003;  'Swastika' Logo © 2005

This hilarious, satire-rich web site chock full of full political mockery is in no way associated with the Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Brit Hume, Tony Snow, Oliver North, Geraldo Rivera, John Gibson, FOX & Friends, Greta von Susteren, or any other part of the idiotic Fox News Channel. All material herein is intended as parody. Similarities in format or "personnel" are satirical. If you're looking for good a case of bitch-slap-itis, sue away, you neoconservative wing nut.  I could use the material.

Contact me.