Green politics

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

I for one welcome the Sarah Palin Party for the new dimension it adds to American politics. Most assume it will split the right with many extreme right flocking to her cause, much like Ralph Nader split the left. Leaving the two natural governing parties with a more moderate approach to the issues.

Sensible people don't buy into the marketing of politics, where we're given a false choice of being either with us or against us. After all, we're all in this together. Neither the American left (socialists) nor the American Right (war mongers) desire to ruin the country. Extremists are quick to dismiss opposition as invalid and simply wrong. Their position is always correct.

This is also true of the global perspective. The Islamic terror cells have their heart in the right place, trying to improve the world even if it's at the expense (death) of others. They see sacrifice as benefiting the world, a world made better and safer in it's lack of diversity. Only the moderates have some respect, consideration and understanding of the other point of view.

Global warming people would have us believe that theirs is the correct position. They warn us the apocalypse is coming by way of melting ice caps caused by gas guzzling SUV's. They dismiss any science to the contrary as being paid for by the oil companies rather then see anything valid.

Meanwhile I'm just seeking solutions. I don't see an emissions cap as any solution if the situation is as dire as some say it is. Cap and trade such as Obama suggests or as Kyoto mandated only seem to serve the business and taxation sectors. A real solution would turn off the lights of industry instead of encouraging growth. While that's pretty extreme it can be done through the real green issue, which is population control.

The elephant in the room where green issues are discussed is the exponential population explosion. There's nothing really extreme about using birth control but most people act extremely sensitive whenever the topic is brought up. But it's becoming less of a fringe green topic, and more mainstream moderate.

Parenting is the most selfless acts one can take. But deciding to be pregnant can only selfish. I mean think of a reason why you should want to have a kid without saying "I want"or "we want". There's no guarantee the world will benefit from your parenting skills. But there's every guarantee the world will benefit from less population. Peak oil will arrive later. Less pollution emitted on a daily basis. Less need for more industry.

If we let the Palin-type right enjoy their independent party status on the one extreme, and the AlGore/RalphNader types at the other end of the spectrum, we can start to have sane conversations about what's going on, and how to fix it.

Live simply so that others can simply live.

The baby and the bathwater

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

A common strategy we've seen in political discussion is the baby and the bathwater technique, which is a logical fallacy, but a common technique.

We see it in arguments such as attacks on global warming where deniers will claim that scientists may be arguing over the details and therefore we need to disbelieve the entire thing.

Its also a common one in evolution debate. We don't know exactly how some protein interracts with RNA therefore we should conclude that the flying spaghetti monster did it all.

Now of course this isn't restricted to conservative strategy, we see it in arguments against Christianity too. How can god be omnipotent and all good? If you can't answer it than you shouldn't believe in Christianity at all. Or maybe you're supposed to become a Christian Atheist, I don't know.

Most recently though, we've seen this technique used with the idea of public healthcare. The most common attack seems to be that some element is questionable therefore we need to not pass the bill until it is perfect. (Of course we know that it will never be perfect, and this is just a strategy to make it never happen).

Anyways, the point of this is to point out a common fallacy that often gets passed as legitimate argument when it shouldn't.

What are a few others that bug you when you see them yet people use them all the time?

My Two Cents on a Tempest in a Teapot

[inibo.livejournal.com]

I happened to catch NPR's coverage of today's Senate conformation hearing on the drive home from work (I managed to avoid the traffic from the shootout on Capitol Hill today).

Being convinced that it is all a festering cesspool of corruption allows me a bit of detached objectivity, I think, since I'm not carrying water for either side.

All that being said, Sonia Sotomayor pretty much showed John Cornyn to be a pandering, finger in the wind demagogue. Everybody knows she is going to be confirmed unless she confesses to sleeping with 14 year old boys or something, what's the point of stirring up shit that's already been flushed? She is a smart strong accomplished woman (regardless of whatever things we might disagree on) and he looks to be qualified to the be the anchor man on a local news program. If they had had that conversation in private I believe he'd have come away with his eyes clawed out and possibly his balls in his mouth.

More human rights

[kunaifusu.livejournal.com]

With all the hype around marriage and its related horrible, horrible rights violations I am surprised an even older and much more oppressive institute is overlooked. I am talking about motherhood. Something has to be done about it and soon because its atrocities are going on a much wider scale and affect more than 3 billion people right now. Yeah, I am talking about men and infertile women. Motherhood is a human right yet it is denied to more than half of a population by religious bigots and other geppettophobes. Why would they care how a man or a woman makes their offspring? Does it harm anyone? It does not, of course. The only thing opposing man-mothered children (aka pinocchios) is the crazy religion. All through the history of humankind brave souls were giving birth to man-mothered children be it in a form of a statue, an effigy or a doll, yet the fate of those children was cruel, they were denied all human rights, taken away from their parents, left without proper care or education.

Now, with the black president, human rights and the global warming the time is right to give the long overdue rights both to the man-mothered children and their proud parents! I know that at first proles will oppose this but look what happened with Negroes? In a very short time after the integration people forgot about racial differences and all the races live in a perfect harmony ever since. We should demand all the benefits of traditional motherhood for the man-mothers and give their children the same support we give to traditional ones. In fact, being oppressed for so long, they deserve more protection, for example, against hate criminals and their ilk. Pinocchios have to get proper education, medical care and Affirmative Action. Government has to add them to the protected classes so they get their quota of jobs and pinocchio businesses are properly subsidized. Then, there is no doubt that someday a first pinocchio president will be elected, may be even sooner than the gay one.

National Health Care Debate: time for some humor

[telemann.livejournal.com]

The sad thing about this SNL parody ad: it's not really that far off the mark. One of the biggest issues raised by Republicans, and I believe it's a fair one, is our personal responsibility in taking care of ourselves. The national fast food diet, and how poorly American's eat is having a big impact on health costs. That being said, it's ironic that some of the most unhealthy regions in the United States are red states.