I started this morning with a link to this post. In it, I see that my post, “Where Is He Wrong?” is linked. Why? According to the title, “Right-wingers mistake humorous Audi ad for Obama policy; embarrassment should follow.” It’s about a link to here, that I got from here, concerning Federal policy with regard to “environmental justice,” and it was one of seventeen distinct links in my post above concerning the sorry state of our current society, caused largely by government encroachment into private lives.
So what does the author say? Nothing, of course. Like everything else in the world babbling from the mouths of “thought leaders,” it says nothing, or it says lies. This is exactly what Greg’s book deals with, and one could hardly ask for a better example. Words are thrown out there, declarations are made, conclusions are implied, but no facts.
I could write a whole essay just on the title. “Right-wingers”…moi? No right-winger here, just a guy looking to live his own life. Maybe that’s “right-wing” compared to the commie-libs who want to live everyone else’s life, but I think that just makes me a person.
“Mistake”? What mistake? The link was to a site which I believe was the source of this story, but it wasn’t the story itself. The story is in a pdf document, put out by the government. No mistake — the document exists and it says what the source says it says.
“Humorous Audi ad”? The story, nor the pdf document, is about the Audi ad; it’s about government policy and it’s a direct cite of government policy.
Get it? Even in the title, words are bandied about as if they create reality, rather than reflecting reality. Here we have another “profound thinker,” who will tell you what to think, the facts be damned. Check out some of this “support” in the essay…
“…dull, run-of-the-mill document out of the Department of Homeland Security.” See, there’s nothing there, so move along folks. It’s just a “dull, run-of-the-mill document.” Well, what does that mean? How many people — how many millions of dollars — were involved in this? How many regulators need to follow up on it? How much will be sucked out of the economy in the name of “environmental justice for minorities?” The author will tell you; it’s just “dull, run-of-the-mill.” There’s nothing for you to think about.
“In contrast, environmental justice is, by now, a rather well-established movement…” This is covered extensively in Greg’s book. It’s “well-established,” so once again, there’s nothing for you to think about.
“…to marry civil rights laws and anti-pollution laws to prevent poor neighborhoods from being unfairly burdened by pollution, in a drive to clean up pollution for the benefit of all.” There it is — “benefit for all.” Not benefit for you, since you have to pay for all this waste, but somehow a “benefit for all.” Who’s “the public” — everyone but you, of course.
“It’s an old enough concept that it goes by its initials…” Once again, an “old concept,” so there’s nothing for you to think about.
“Could a serious-minded American citizen disagree with anything in those two definitions?” Get the “argument”? If you’re a “serious-minded American, then you couldn’t possibly disagree…nothing to think about.
Naturally no screed of anti-thought like this would be complete without some good shots of hypocrisy. “More than a dozen blogs, operated by at least a dozen bloggers — all of whom conserved a great deal of energy by failing to use any of their gray matter neurons before parroting a hoax.”
“Failing to us any of their gray matter neurons”? Too funny. What hoax? The relevant document exists. This author’s entire post is a plea for you to not use your gray matter, yet look at the charge here.
“My experience is that most of those blogs are terrified that someone will leave an opposing opinion in comments…” Ha…Greg and I have been practically begging for comments. Not only are comments allowed in each and every post, there’s even a link at the top for disagreements!
Alright, ’nuff said. I thought I was going to have to offer a retraction because I thought maybe I was snookered by an actual hoax. And of course, since I care about nothing but the facts, that’s what I would’ve done. But now I see it’s just more of the same, which is nothing. It’s just words bandied about, with no care whatsoever about the truth of the matter…just more implied accusations and more fallacies, all with the express purpose that you don’t think. That way you might not notice what’s happening to you.
That is the purpose of this site. This is the one place where you must think, which is to say that you must live. Your choice — death by nitwits like this guy, or the life of Splendor that you dreamt of as a child.
