Difference between revisions of "User:Woozle"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (→‎Notes to Myself: war on family update)
(moved a lot of stuff to subpages)
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
[[htwiki:User:Woozle|My central home page]] is on [[htwiki:Main Page|The Hypertwins Wiki]]. Visit early and often. ^_^
 
[[htwiki:User:Woozle|My central home page]] is on [[htwiki:Main Page|The Hypertwins Wiki]]. Visit early and often. ^_^
−
==Questions==
+
==Subpages==
−
* '''2006-12-21''' Does anyone have any information about the demonstrations OSC mentions [http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2006-12-17-1.html here]? If they actually took place as described, then they're dispicable – but we heard much the same about [[Vietnam War|Vietnam]] soldiers being spat at, and my understanding is that that was later revealed to be propaganda and not something that actually happened. ("The anti-war sentiments gave reason to those that believed returning soldiers were 'spat on' or otherwise abused." is all I can find in {{wikipedia|Opposition to the Vietnam War}}.)
+
* '''My [[/Position Statement|Position Statement]]''' on a number of issues
−
** The documentary "{{wpbackup|Sir! No Sir!}}" examines the anti-war activites of American GIs during the Vietnam war period, has an interview where the spitting on GIs at airports is repudiated as fabrication. The person being interviewed had done research and published a book or article on exactly this topic. What worries me about Orson Scott Card's article regarding the egg throwing is that he has not talked to the family directly rather someone (the soldier on the plane) who knows someone (the brother of the soldier that died). Nor does he supplies the names of the soldiers, so fact checking could be done. It more diligence on his part would confirm these events. [[User:Jsrrts|Jsrrts]] 17:43, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
+
* [[/JLF]]: my interactions with the [[John Locke Foundation]] (mainly on the Right Angles Blog)
−
 
 
−
==Writings==
 
−
''(aside from 99+% of the contents of this site...)''
 
−
 
 
−
'''Continuously updated pages''':
 
−
* My [[User:Woozle/Position Statement|Position Statement]] on a number of issues
 
 
* [[/annoy a liberal]]: answers to a popular conservative bumper-sticker
 
* [[/annoy a liberal]]: answers to a popular conservative bumper-sticker
−
 
+
* [[/Darwin's Dangerous Idea]]: eventually to be organized into [[Darwin's Dangerous Idea|critique page]]
−
'''Dated items''':
+
* [[/2007-07-03 chat]] on the subject of why atheists might avoid trying to de-theize their friends
−
* '''2007-10-15''' [[/2007-10-15 open letter to GWB]]
+
* At its best, religion seems to provide a shield against cynicism. This seems to be the real reason why any intelligent people become religious at all; they care about other people, so they want to be "[[good]]", and in their experience only religion offers any guidance on that topic. This seems worth an essay, or at least some discussion inside an existing essay.
 +
===Dated Writings===
 +
* '''2007-10-15''' [[/2007-10-15 open letter to GWB]]: never finished. Bah. (I wanted to find more about this "list" so I could be specific.)
 
* '''2007-09-30''' [[/United Members of Civilization]]
 
* '''2007-09-30''' [[/United Members of Civilization]]
 
* '''2007-08-11''' [[/How to Argue with a Liberal|How to Argue with a Liberal]], aka how to write like a neocon
 
* '''2007-08-11''' [[/How to Argue with a Liberal|How to Argue with a Liberal]], aka how to write like a neocon
Line 30: Line 26:
 
* '''2005-09-06''' [[/2005-09-06 Thoughts on the Divide|Thoughts on the Red-Blue Divide]] (need to revise this)
 
* '''2005-09-06''' [[/2005-09-06 Thoughts on the Divide|Thoughts on the Red-Blue Divide]] (need to revise this)
 
** '''2005-09-09''' [[/2005-09-09 More Thoughts on the Divide|More Thoughts on the Divide]]
 
** '''2005-09-09''' [[/2005-09-09 More Thoughts on the Divide|More Thoughts on the Divide]]
−
===comments===
+
==Questions==
−
* The [[John Locke Foundation]] blog apparently provides no way of finding out when your comments are responded to (short of opening a new RSS feed for each entry) and no way to keep track of all the comments you've made, so here are all the JLF blog entries I've commented on:
+
* '''2006-12-21''' Does anyone have any information about the demonstrations OSC mentions [http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2006-12-17-1.html here]? If they actually took place as described, then they're dispicable – but we heard much the same about [[Vietnam War|Vietnam]] soldiers being spat at, and my understanding is that that was later revealed to be propaganda and not something that actually happened. ("The anti-war sentiments gave reason to those that believed returning soldiers were 'spat on' or otherwise abused." is all I can find in {{wikipedia|Opposition to the Vietnam War}}.)
−
** '''2008-03-30''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1902 Why I don’t trust the Obama candidacy]: the right-wing phantom attack on Obama, part 2 (much discussion)
+
** The documentary "{{wpbackup|Sir! No Sir!}}" examines the anti-war activites of American GIs during the Vietnam war period, has an interview where the spitting on GIs at airports is repudiated as fabrication. The person being interviewed had done research and published a book or article on exactly this topic. What worries me about Orson Scott Card's article regarding the egg throwing is that he has not talked to the family directly rather someone (the soldier on the plane) who knows someone (the brother of the soldier that died). Nor does he supplies the names of the soldiers, so fact checking could be done. It more diligence on his part would confirm these events. [[User:Jsrrts|Jsrrts]] 17:43, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
−
** '''2008-03-29''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1898 The chickens have indeed come home to roost]: the right-wing phantom attack on Obama, part 1
+
==Dialogues==
−
** '''2008-03-28''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1897 Religion of Peace strikes again]: about ''[[Fitna]]'' being removed from [[LiveLeak]]
+
* [[Issuepedia:Ethics channel/religion]]: key points from a conversation with Vee about the nature of [[God]]
−
** '''2008-03-21''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1876 No conservatives in network TV]: [[Jon Ham]] tries to claim there are no conservatives on network TV; I point out that this is total BS. Ham changes the definition of "network" to nullify my answer, and I again point out that this is total BS, and get in a dig about [[media consolidation]].
 
−
** '''2008-03-20''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1868 It gets better and better]: head-to-head against [[global warming denial]], albeit rather diplomatically
 
−
** '''2008-03-19'''
 
−
*** [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1863 Pigs fly]: [[Jon Ham]] comments on the upholding of a Michigan law "prohibiting race and gender preferences in government hiring and public university admissions"; I reply approvingly. I hope I'm not overstating the case against "[[Affirmative Action]]", but really I've never come across a good argument for it. Sure, even now you have poor black people -- so discriminate on the basis of past income or something, not on race or gender; otherwise people assume "minorities" in a given job may be less competent than non-minorities, perpetuating the [[ghettoization]] (aka [[glass ceiling]]) which we're trying to get rid of. (I remember hearing/reading that [[Richard Nixon|Nixon]] actually came up with Affirmative Action as a kind of early version of [[Culture War]], but I haven't found any confirming sources for this.)
 
−
*** [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1866 It just keeps getting better]: [[Jon Ham]] crows over the finding that compact fluorescent bulbs may be bad for the ecology due to the mercury they contain. I wonder aloud what ever happened to the [[Office of Technology Assessment]].
 
−
** '''2008-03-10''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1811 Chicken coops in Trinity Park?]: author writes against the idea of keeping chickens in suburbia, and in favor of making it illegal; I ask how this is consistent with "my propery, my rules". (posted 2008-03-16; no response as of 2009-03-19)
 
−
** '''2008-03-06''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1796 So much for "Big Brother"]: author complains about "lefties" complaining about surveillance; I bring up ''[[The Transparent Society]]'' and mention life documenting; another commenter comes back with Clarke/Baxter's ''[[The Light of Other Days]]''. Another poster comments that currently nobody can be dragged off to [[Gitmo]] but predicts this will change if [[Hillary Clinton]] takes office; this gives me an opening to say something about [[Bush's elevation of presidential power]] in a positive way. (I ask incidentally if anyone can explain why conservatives hate Hillary.)
 
−
** '''2008-02-26''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1763 Clever civil disobedience]: tentatively agreeing that selective bans on smoking aren't a good way to solve the problem but pointing out that conservatives endorse the war on drugs using much the same reasoning; much dialogue ensued
 
−
** '''2008-02-21'''
 
−
*** [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1754 More of Messiah’s borrowed rhetoric]: [[Jon Ham|Ham]] is really starting to get to me with this whole "empty Barack" thing; I hope I didn't get too snarky in my response. But I mean, really -- get a life, Jon. Oh, wait, you have a life, don't you -- writing blog entries to reinforce the JLF's party line. Sorry, forgot! That must be the "be happy" part; what do you do for the "work hard" bit?
 
−
*** [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1747 McCain’s press conference]: The ''New York Times'' publishes a piece mentioning the possibility that a rumored affair ''might'' have a negative impact on the voters in McCain's support base (i.e. conservatives who love to jump all over that sort of thing); this is BIG NEWS, because it means the [[liberal media]] is being ''hypocritical''. Again, the phrase "get a life" comes to mind -- leading again to the same thought about what these people do for a living.
 
−
** '''2008-02-19''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1740 Line of the day]: author picks up on the whole Obama "line stealing" thing; I point out that he "stole" the line at the suggestion of its author, and ask just what this proves anyway; author says it proves that Obama is an empty shell. I ask what evidence of substantiality the author might accept.
 
−
** '''2008-02-18''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1725 Trial lawyers and terrorism]: author identifies "trial lawyers" as a special interest group to which the Democrats are kowtowing, which explains why they don't want to give the telcoms immunity for cooperating with Bush's illegal wiretaps
 
−
** '''2008-02-12''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1699 Alamance school board wants ‘04 school calendar law repealed]: author Donna Martinez seems to feel that the 2004 calendar law was a win for "the coastal tourism lobby" at the expense of education. I belatedly disagree. (posted 2008-03-19)
 
−
** '''2008-01-17''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1553 Liberals hate more, says survey]: author changes meaning of the word "hate" and uses it to condemn liberal hypocrisy. (I belatedly commented on 2008-03-12, after finally figuring out the distortion.)
 
−
** '''2008-01-04''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1451 It can’t happen here... or could it?]: author comments on the growing tide of [[Islamofascism in Europe]], and suggests that someone needs to write an update of [[Winston Churchill|Churchill]]'s ''[[While England Slept]]''; I suggest [[Bruce Bawer|Bawer]]'s ''[[While Europe Slept]]'', belatedly followed by some [[Pat Condell]] videos and then pointing out that the author is standing up for [[civil rights]], which I thought was lately a discredited concept in [[US conservative|conservative]] circles. Darn it, I should have also pointed out that both Lionheart and Condell are - gasp - [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1440 dissenting] (against the government, no less)! ...makes one wonder how "liberals" and "conservatives" can be so opposed to each other's views when we keep standing up for the same principles.
 
−
*** ''other, more sarcastic retorts'': (1) Aren't you going to ask Lionheart and Condell why they hate their country so much? (2) Haul 'em both off to gitmo! They want England to lose!
 
−
*** Seriously, though, I think this may reveal how "liberals" and "conservatives" perceive these issues differently. Further conversation on this topic could be useful. Why is it ok for an Englishman to criticize ''his'' government, but not ok for an American to criticize the ''American'' government? Is it a case of America just being always right while England is one of those lesser, "other" countries? (Can the conservative even see how this won't work as a global philosophy?) Or is it because the Englishman is objecting to an external threat ([[Islamofascism]]), while the American's complaint is more subtle ("the Islamofascists are a problem, but the real problem is our own government which is handling the situation badly and making the external problem worse!")? How does the conservative see the dichotomy here?
 
−
** '''2008-01-03''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1440 Sometimes the press really IS the enemy]: the old "dissent is making us lose" meme... I couldn't let that pass uncommented. In case it gets deleted, a copy is [[/2008-01-03 JLF|here]].
 
−
** '''2008-01-01''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1423 Is Al Gore visiting N.H.?]: I decided ''not'' to post this (I think I'll try to turn it into a Buzz Clearcut piece):
 
−
*** Right. Some places in the world are having record cold winters, so that *proves* global warming is a load of hooey. And don't let those wacky liberal coneheads try to sell you any baloney about "regional deviations from the mean", either. They're just a bunch of sore losers who can't be bothered to look outside the hermetically-sealed windows in their ivory towers and notice that winter has, in fact, arrived on schedule, despite the heat-retaining effect of Al's jet trips and the hot air from his ceaseless campaigning against the few remaining pieces of domestic industrial productivity that once made our country great. (Hey, it's practically an endangered species -- can we get a ruling from the EPA on this?)
 
−
** '''2007-12-31''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1415 Giving even lefty lawyers a bad name]: author shoots fish in a barrel and calls them lefties; also criticizes liberal blogs for their intolerance of the "diversity" of the ''[[New York Times]]'' hiring [[neocon]] mouthpiece [[Bill Kristol]].
 
−
** '''2007-12-28''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1408 Obama thinks I’m qualified to be president]: author takes weak, overstated potshot at [[Barack Obama]]; I don't really care, but take the opportunity to make some points about corruption of the political process (and a much-too-diplomatic pot-shot back at [[George W. Bush|GWB]])
 
−
** '''2007-12-21''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1384 Four N.C. Democrats vote against war funding]: it's completely not clear whether the author is for or against the war; I tried to make my position clear while agreeing with the underlying accusation of corruption.
 
−
** '''2007-12-06''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1321 Talk about scary times, these ain’t it]
 
−
** '''2007-12-05''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1319 Walter Cronkite]
 
−
*** related: [[2007-12-06 Time to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq]]
 
−
** '''2007-12-02''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1299 To the Left, “power grab” means “reform”]
 
−
** '''2007-12-01''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1294 Inmates have taken over the asylum, part whatever]
 
−
*** related: [[2007-11-21 O'Reilly says War on Christmas part of secular progressive agenda]]
 
−
** '''2007-11-21''' [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1260 Barbarians] (posted reply as Buzz Clearcut)
 
−
*** related: [[2007-11-29 Teddy bear teacher gets 15-day prison term in Sudan]]
 
−
 
 
−
===notes===
 
−
* ''[[/Darwin's Dangerous Idea|Darwin's Dangerous Idea]]'': eventually to be organized into [[Darwin's Dangerous Idea|critique page]]
 
−
* [[/2007-07-03 chat]] on the subject of why atheists might avoid trying to de-theize their friends
 
−
* At its best, religion seems to provide a shield against cynicism. This seems to be the real reason why any intelligent people become religious at all; they care about other people, so they want to be "[[good]]", and in their experience only religion offers any guidance on that topic. This seems worth an essay, or at least some discussion inside an existing essay.
 
−
 
 
 
==Petitions I've Signed==
 
==Petitions I've Signed==
 
(a partial list)
 
(a partial list)
Line 80: Line 38:
 
* '''2007-07-07''' [[/2007-07-07 webmail to congress]]
 
* '''2007-07-07''' [[/2007-07-07 webmail to congress]]
 
* '''2007-05-09''' [http://johnedwards.com/r/13182/931367/ post-veto request to stand firm against Bush pressure]: "As your constituent, I'm asking you to stand up to President Bush and not write another blank check for [[endless war]] in Iraq. The president has vetoed funding for the troops, and he's the only one responsible for blocking the resources they need. Please stand firm – support the troops with a plan to end the war and the funding they need to do it."
 
* '''2007-05-09''' [http://johnedwards.com/r/13182/931367/ post-veto request to stand firm against Bush pressure]: "As your constituent, I'm asking you to stand up to President Bush and not write another blank check for [[endless war]] in Iraq. The president has vetoed funding for the troops, and he's the only one responsible for blocking the resources they need. Please stand firm – support the troops with a plan to end the war and the funding they need to do it."
−
 
−
==Dialogues==
 
−
* [[Issuepedia:Ethics channel/religion]]: key points from a conversation with Vee about the nature of [[God]]
 
−
===John Locke posting===
 
−
* response to [http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1260 Barbarians] (2007-11-21) and the one other reply
 
−
 
−
Yes, the culture is barbaric and there are barbarians who help maintain the status quo, and we owe it to ourselves (and to all civilization) to stop it.
 
−
 
−
What I’m wondering is whether the use of torture isn’t doing more harm than good towards that end.
 
−
 
−
My admittedly limited reading on the subject has found little or no evidence that torture has a high rate of success at extracting accurate information, and runs considerable risk of obtaining information that is just plausible enough to convince the HWT (hydrated washcloth technician) and yet remains, somehow, inaccurate and hence useless — a senseless waste of a perfectly good washcloth.
 
−
 
−
Intuitively, as well, it would seem obvious that if a certain percentage of wet washcloth encounters involve a person who is not in fact in possession of the needed information, the sheer agony of non-consensual facial cleanliness might be sufficient to inspire — shocking though it may seem — a momentary, unthinking lapse into falsehood. I know, it seems difficult to imagine that even hardened jihadis fully deserving of a complete rubdown and massage-with-facial — never mind a little washcloth action — could stoop to such depths, but these are of course terrorists we are dealing with… and we know how they are.
 
−
 
−
But seriously… where might I find more data on torture effectiveness? If nothing else, we should be sure that America uses only the very best, proven and state-of-the-art interrogation techniques. It wouldn’t do for our position as leaders of the free world, the beacon of liberty and justice, to be seen using outdated or ineffective methods for anything, much less the time-honored discipline of hurting people to get information. If we can’t even get *that* right, surely we deserve to lose. (And don’t let any of those wacko liberals try to tell you that there are better ways of getting information. I don’t care how “accurate” the data you might get by any namby-pamby alternatives; there is simply nothing as satisfying as information you get after hearing someone scream for mercy. …oh wait, did I say that out loud? Sorry, I sometimes say things I hear everyone thinking.)
 
−
 
−
Buzz Clearcut
 
−
 
−
''I was going to refer to torture as "AMPKR (aversion-motivated personal knowledge research)", but decided it would be lost on the audience... even if the rest of it isn't also lost. The blog post was regarding this article: [http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/21/husband-of-saudi-gang-rape-victim-you-could-say-shes-a-crushed-human-being/ Husband of Saudi gang-rape victim: “You could say she’s a crushed human being”], about a Saudi Arabian woman who was sentenced to 90 lashes for being the victim of a gang-rape, and then threatened with having that raised to 200 lashes for complaining. I found it admirable that the blog author called this barbarous, but ironic that this is much the same behavior exhibited by the Right here in the US whenever anyone disagrees with them (dissent is treason, and traitors should be shot!). I didn't want to assume the blog author agreed with the Right on that particular topic, so I didn't address it. You have to wonder how anyone can criticize this sort of thing and still proudly call themselves right-wing.''
 
−
 
 
==Notes to Myself==
 
==Notes to Myself==
 
* Need to write: [[war on the extended family]] -- part of the [[war on the family]], in that tightly constraining the acceptable model for a family weakens the family itself
 
* Need to write: [[war on the extended family]] -- part of the [[war on the family]], in that tightly constraining the acceptable model for a family weakens the family itself

Revision as of 17:25, 6 April 2008

I originally created Issuepedia as a way of dealing with the confusion (shall we say) I and a lot of other people felt after the 2004 presidential election. How could a man be so clearly dishonest and still get elected? Or were we the ones who were wrong, and he actually wasn't that bad?

Issuepedia's first project, then, was to collect information relating to George W. Bush, his past performance, his views, the views of his party, the issues upon which I and my friends are at odds with his party, and so on. If we were right, this would make it clear to his supporters just what he was supporting. If we were wrong, it would become clear as the facts accumulated. This methodology could then be used to help resolve (or at least understand) all kinds of contentious issues.

The methodology seems to work quite well; the main problem has been a lack of interest from anyone else. As such, it is still of use to me, as it serves as a filing place for facts and cross-references which I otherwise would be unable to remember, thus making it possible for me to have a reasonable grasp on the issues I've been studying. Hopefully others will soon see the value of it. I have ideas for publicity campaigns ("Issuepedia: no more sound bites"), and will get around to working on that eventually.

My central home page is on The Hypertwins Wiki. Visit early and often. ^_^

Subpages

  • My Position Statement on a number of issues
  • /JLF: my interactions with the John Locke Foundation (mainly on the Right Angles Blog)
  • /annoy a liberal: answers to a popular conservative bumper-sticker
  • /Darwin's Dangerous Idea: eventually to be organized into critique page
  • /2007-07-03 chat on the subject of why atheists might avoid trying to de-theize their friends
  • At its best, religion seems to provide a shield against cynicism. This seems to be the real reason why any intelligent people become religious at all; they care about other people, so they want to be "good", and in their experience only religion offers any guidance on that topic. This seems worth an essay, or at least some discussion inside an existing essay.

Dated Writings

Questions

  • 2006-12-21 Does anyone have any information about the demonstrations OSC mentions here? If they actually took place as described, then they're dispicable – but we heard much the same about Vietnam soldiers being spat at, and my understanding is that that was later revealed to be propaganda and not something that actually happened. ("The anti-war sentiments gave reason to those that believed returning soldiers were 'spat on' or otherwise abused." is all I can find in Wikipedia.)
    • The documentary "Sir! No Sir! [W]" examines the anti-war activites of American GIs during the Vietnam war period, has an interview where the spitting on GIs at airports is repudiated as fabrication. The person being interviewed had done research and published a book or article on exactly this topic. What worries me about Orson Scott Card's article regarding the egg throwing is that he has not talked to the family directly rather someone (the soldier on the plane) who knows someone (the brother of the soldier that died). Nor does he supplies the names of the soldiers, so fact checking could be done. It more diligence on his part would confirm these events. Jsrrts 17:43, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Dialogues

Petitions I've Signed

(a partial list)

Notes to Myself

Morality Quiz Notes

A deadly natural disaster (hurricane, tsunami, whatever) is about to strike. A man goes swimming in the ocean, despite all warnings to leave town and especially to stay away from the water. He is arrested by the police. Is this right, or wrong? (Source: http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110007328)

Same natural disaster. A teenage boy steals a bus, picks up refugees, and drives them to safety. He is arrested. Is this right or wrong? What should the boy have done? What should the police have done?

...I wanted to have a scenario involving missionaries, but I find it difficult to phrase in a neutral-ish way since the concept of missionarying bothers me all by itself.

2007-02-25 update: Although I came up with those questions independently (in 2005 or 06), they are very similar to the questions used in the surveys described in The Authoritarians.

Links to File

Retrieved from "https://issuepedia.org/mw/index.php?title=User:Woozle&oldid=9992"