Skip to main content

Progressives love the Argument from Intimidation

Again, the liberal elite attempt to intimidate the free discussion of views
that oppose them:

"FOX Like Hitler?

CNN founder Ted Turner is comparing FOX News Channel to Adolph Hitler, insisting that while FOX News may be popular, Adolph Hitler was also popular when he came to power 'was elected to power just before World War II'.

Speaking to the National Association of Television Program Executives earlier to day, Turner also accused FOX News of being the Bush administration's propaganda tool. Insisting, "it's certainly legal. But it does pose problems for our democracy. Particularly when the news is dumbed down."

A FOX News spokesperson says, "Ted Turner is understandably bitter having lost his ratings, his network and now his mind. We wish him well."

Amen, Fox.

In one quote Turner says that Fox and its viewers are Nazis. Way to go, Ted. That kind of high-brow thinking will get you a gold medal in Philosophy 101 - but only at Harvard. It will get you flunked out of any other institution of higher learning, including Thomas Jefferson Elementary school in Mt. Vernon, IL.

For the philosophically uninitiated: What Ted Turner did here is called "argument from intimidation" - asserting that believing or arguing for a certain idea indicates immorality, in an attempt to intimidate a person into renouncing the idea without discussion.

Nobody wants to be seen as supporting something horrible - such as Nazis - so if you associate your opponents' arguments with the Nazis.. well you get the point.

One of my favorite authors has this to say about Ted's argument from intimidation:
"The Argument from Intimidation is a confession of intellectual impotence."
Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness, 1964
That seems to fit Ted pretty well.

Well, we know that Ted is the propaganda tool of the liberate elite - including his traitor wife, Hanoi Jane. Ted went to Cuba to make friends with the murderous tyrant Fidel Castro. He's giving $1B to the UN, the organization whose sole functions are to bash the United States, and to provide a forum for bloody dictators to feel important. Ted, we know what side you're on - and it's not the side of freedom and liberty. Ted wants us to think he is a good guy and by comparison to Fox, surely you can see that his CNN is not biased! Har de har har.

In my experiencethe news outlets with the most balanced, fact-based reporting are:

#1: Christian Science Monitor
#2: Fox News

News outlets with obvious socialist bias in terms of stories chosen, and loaded
words used:

#1: NPR
#2: CNN
#3: CBS

Anyone who is serious about keeping up with the news simply must read the Christian Science Monitor. Their work is in-depth, not written to the level of morons, and presents balanced (i.e., inclusive of alternate viewpoints in contentious issues) reporting. (Of course, the Christian Scientists are somewhat kooky, but they make a great paper nonetheless).


Popular posts from this blog

Murder in the US

In 2011, I calculate the overall US murder rate as 4.6 per 100,000 population.

But if you recalculate this, and assumed that black men murdered at the same rate as everyone else, the overall rate would drop to 1.9 out of 100,000 population. That would give the United States the 147th highest murder rate in the world - or, the 60th best.

The insane disproportionate murder rate among US blacks is why the overall US murder rate seems so high.

I don't understand why liberals refuse to talk about this. I don't understand why blacks refuse to talk about this. Blacks are just as often the victim as the offender - almost SIXTY PERCENT of murder victims in the US are black. Shouldn't they care about this? Where are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to talk about this? Yet they are silent.

And it's not like this is any secret. This culture of violence, abuse of women, and plain thuggery is paraded around daily in pop music. It's glorified on TV shows like "The Wire…

The Root of Violent Extremism

We are too flippant about writing off violent extremists as "crazy", "psychopathic", etc.

Just because *we* have a hard time conceiving of doing violence to others, does not mean that those who do are insane.

Hitler was not insane. Hitler was evil. There is a distinction.

To be insane, to be "crazy", means you cannot understand the difference between right and wrong.

People like Hitler, like ISIS, these people are *evil*. They have, in what they believe to be a rational process, *chosen* to embrace a death-worshipping morality.

Such thinking is going to lead us down wrong alleys in dealing with violent political extremism.

Unless we understand the various reasons why such people embrace philosophies of death, we cannot combat the root causes and defeat violent extremism.

Obama's "they need jobs" is a juvenile approach at this. But you simply cannot ignore and dismiss the reality of life in the countries that are the flash-points of extremism…

Is Government "just the name we give to things we do together"?

"Government is just the name we give to the things we do together." Well, no. This is a truly deceptive statement. Because look here, there are many, many human institutions where people get together to do things. Churches.
Families. And these all have their own unique characteristics. If government was simply a variety of these, or vice-versa, why would we bother to have a unique word for it? If government were *merely* a charity, wouldn't we just call it a charity? What is it about government then that makes it unique? I'll tell you. It's the use of force. Government is the sole human institution that legitimately exercises physical force against others. Churches don't commit violence. Corporations don't use physical coercion to get you to buy their products or to work for them. Families don't (shouldn't) do that. BECAUSE government's essence is the use of force, government simply should not do many things, eve…