Oil Spill fall out: armchair activist temper tantrums

[Themightytom]

Has anyone noticed a suspiciously repetitive sentiment regarding the BP crisis lately?

I have been hearing from multiple sources the sentiment that seems to express an indignation that not enough is being done at both a grassroots level, AND a government level to help the fishermen in the Gulf, or to clean up the mountains of oily animals that the news is allegedly ignoring. It seems like social media is being used to play Telephone

One particularly annoying sentiment which I saw pass by on facebook

So where are all the "Save the Gulf" concerts?? Where are the TV benefits with celebrities and musicians giving heart felt speeches on the poor fishermen, wildlife, beaches, loss of income and sabotaged gulf economy?? I find it rather strange how these people (including our own government) are so quick to help Haiti an...d other countries...but sit on their asses for this one. Just the facts. Re-Post this if you agree!

I ran up and down this particular statement when I saw it start to spread because in my mind it seems somehow resentful that Americans made a "big deal" out of Haiti and aren't doing enough to satisfy the author in the Gulf. I mean I'm not posting for rebuttals to this stupidity, I pointed out that obviously Americans might have reacted more strongly to a natural disaster, injured and orphaned children and an immediate humanitarian crisis as opposed to what is happening in the gulf, which is an ecological crisis, but isn't quite as photogenic. The most prominent rebuttals were

"The media isn't covering the spill"

Spoiler

I immediately presented 18 links to major news organizations with stories on the spill updated within a half hour of the statement, and the argument was revised to:

The media isn't covering the ecological damage

Spoiler

some what true because the media was concentrating on efforts to stop the spill, logically, before dealing with recovering from it.

"BP isn't paying the price, the environment is."

Spoiler

BP is footing the bill for the efforts to stop the spill, they are probably going to be billed for whatever course off action is taken to limit ecological damage and while they are being evasive they will most likely have to pay reparations to local business owners for loss of revenue. these are issues being covered in the news as the government haggles with BP.

What do people make of this in terms of strategic propaganda. It seems to encourage isolationism, demonize the current administration for not issuing harsh enough penalties for BP, and it seems to trivialize the organizers of humanitarian aid as somehow flighty and lacking in priorities. All of this could be handy in upcoming elections, as it puts a spin on current events, benefits from a source which is simultaneously unverifiable, but trusted, as it comes through social networking.

[CaptainChewbacca]

I don't know what more the media could be doing, I was at the gym yesterday and for 20 minutes CNN ran a segment just about cleaning oil off adorable animals. Seems to me when you're upset as these folks get, nothing is ever enough.

[Coyote]

Right-wing spin I've heard murmers of now is that Obama is half-stepping on clean up and recovery efforts because the damage is hitting Red States.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Right-wing spin I've heard murmers of now is that Obama is half-stepping on clean up and recovery efforts because the damage is hitting Red States.

Some of the bigger nutters on Fox have "hinted" that Obama actively cause the spill (somehow) in order to destroy the southern Red States economies.

Once again I think we see what happens when the Right Wing watch only a single news channel (fox) At a local cafe yesterday I listened to two Right Wing nutters discuss the "Big Conspiracy" by the Liberal Media to "Hush Up" the oil spill. Again one of them argued that "Something blew up that rig, and it wasn't an accident" and went on to say that, if it had been BP's fault the Liberal media would have been all over it...

Again, you realize what happens when people never watch any "Liberal Media"

[Themightytom]

Right-wing spin I've heard murmers of now is that Obama is half-stepping on clean up and recovery efforts because the damage is hitting Red States.

come ON people the best way to undercut Republicans is to get their constituents jobs so that its more difficult to get out to vote, I thought that's what Senior Corps and Able network were all about.

As a strategy that works though, because as I observed in my OP, this is far from an objective assessment off the situation, its typically an emotional frustrated response. I hear ad nauseum from my conservative friends that Obama is attacking their ideology on purpose when he does things like sponsor universal health care, permit stem cell research or make efforts to de escalate the war in Afghanistan.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Right-wing spin I've heard murmers of now is that Obama is half-stepping on clean up and recovery efforts because the damage is hitting Red States.

come ON people the best way to undercut Republicans is to get their constituents jobs so that its more difficult to get out to vote, I thought that's what Senior Corps and Able network were all about.

The thing is you have to understand is that the Mind of a Right Wing nutter simply doesn't work like that. Remember, it isn't about what they think Liberals would "really" do, its about what they would do to Liberals given the chance.

These people really and truly believe Obama and the current Progressive movement is out to "Destroy America™" I posted a thread in testing with comments from a similar story where person after person basically state, Obama is a Cartoon Villain out to ruin America for a new World Order!

Contrast this for a moment with Bush and Co. At the hight of my hatred and loathing of him, Cheney, and the others, I thought they were callous, heartless, power made bastards... But I never thought they were EVIL As mucxh of a bastard as Cheney was, I could never picture him sitting up in some bunker going:

"Mwa Ha Ha! First I'll take Americas freedoms! then destroy Liberals! then Rule Iraq with an iron fist! Mwa ha ha!!!"

Yet that is EXACTLY how republicans view Obama. And in truth THAT is a scary thought and explains much of the lunacy we see. For many Right-Wingers, it isn't a matter of different ideologies, or different parties, it is Good vs EVIL! This is a battle for the very Soul of America! They look at Obama and believe, truly believe that he starts every day with the active intention of "Destroying America"

They don't always know 'how' he will do that, or to what end blowing up the gulf on purpose would do, they just "Know" that Obama is out to Destroy America.

Read some right wing blogs, read the comments, and realize just how brainwashed the Right wing truly is.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Yeah, because nobody would ever accuse republicans of intentionally doing harm to liberal or minority areas. And Spike Lee CERTAINLY wouldn't make a movie about such an occurrence, no siree bob! I'm glad that no left-wing blog ever made such a claim, and that they're all level-headed and pure of heart, without ever wishing ill upon George Bush.

Clearly, my party is the only one to ever delve into hatred, vitriol, or paranoid fantasy. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways.

[Illuminatus Primus]

What do people make of this in terms of strategic propaganda. It seems to encourage isolationism, demonize the current administration for not issuing harsh enough penalties for BP, and it seems to trivialize the organizers of humanitarian aid as somehow flighty and lacking in priorities. All of this could be handy in upcoming elections, as it puts a spin on current events, benefits from a source which is simultaneously unverifiable, but trusted, as it comes through social networking.

I do not think it is unfair to imply the media is often grandstanding with emotionalism over reporting BP's immediate resorts to silence or quash any openings for lawsuit, that much of its response was tacitly absurd and obviously for the purposes of PR over utility (the dispersant sprays, the completely useless booming seen on TV, great for journo school majors and ass-covering politicos, but functionally irrelevant for the technical challenges of managing an oil spill), and that BP will almost certainly not pay the cost of its actions and negligence in the same exact analogous manner that you or I or any ordinary citizen would be required for directly causing or being responsible for damage or costs inflicted on a neighbor or bystander, despite BP claiming for itself all the privileges and rights we enjoy as persons under the law.

Yeah, because nobody would ever accuse republicans of intentionally doing harm to liberal or minority areas. And Spike Lee CERTAINLY wouldn't make a movie about such an occurrence, no siree bob! I'm glad that no left-wing blog ever made such a claim, and that they're all level-headed and pure of heart, without ever wishing ill upon George Bush.

Clearly, my party is the only one to ever delve into hatred, vitriol, or paranoid fantasy. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways.

The tu quoque and false dilemma are both logical fallacies, and this post is thus devoid of content.

[Terralthra]

Yeah, because nobody would ever accuse republicans of intentionally doing harm to liberal or minority areas. And Spike Lee CERTAINLY wouldn't make a movie about such an occurrence, no siree bob! I'm glad that no left-wing blog ever made such a claim, and that they're all level-headed and pure of heart, without ever wishing ill upon George Bush.

Clearly, my party is the only one to ever delve into hatred, vitriol, or paranoid fantasy. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways.

The tu quoque and false dilemma are both logical fallacies, and this post is thus devoid of content.

Given he was replying to a post which asserted "The GOP acts like x, and the Democrats don't act like x," pointing out a bunch of Democrats who have, in fact, acted like x, is a rebuttal of fact, not a tu quoque.

[Crossroads Inc.]

I will gladly concede my point Terralthra to Chewie indeed if proof is provided. That proof being in the form of Progressive columnists or commentators actively stating that GW Bush and co was/is "Evil" and actively sought to undermine America in a way similar to what High Ranking republicans are currently saying about Obama.

[SirNitram]

Yeah, because nobody would ever accuse republicans of intentionally doing harm to liberal or minority areas. And Spike Lee CERTAINLY wouldn't make a movie about such an occurrence, no siree bob! I'm glad that no left-wing blog ever made such a claim, and that they're all level-headed and pure of heart, without ever wishing ill upon George Bush.

Clearly, my party is the only one to ever delve into hatred, vitriol, or paranoid fantasy. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways.

I mean, it's not like the GOP actively runs up deficits while in office(W, Reagan) and only becomes aware of debt as an issue when the Dems are in charge, refusing any tax increases! Slashing COBRA, Unemployment insurance like they did in the last bill certainly won't hurt ANYONE. It's not like they don't viciously oppose regulation over deadly industries. It's not like they repeatedly get caught with voter denial plans in action.

One side makes up loony-tune bullshit about someone mysteriously blowing up a rig and not doing enough, the other actively does it, gets recorded doing it, repeats.

[CaptainChewbacca]

One side makes up loony-tune bullshit about someone mysteriously blowing up a rig and not doing enough, the other actively does it, gets recorded doing it, repeats.

Exactly. Both sides do it, and its horrible when they do.

will gladly concede my point Terralthra to Chewie indeed if proof is provided. That proof being in the form of Progressive columnists or commentators actively stating that GW Bush and co was/is "Evil" and actively sought to undermine America in a way similar to what High Ranking republicans are currently saying about Obama.

I'm tired and already over this election season, can we just agree that 90% of political columnists and operatives are shitheads and call it a day?

[Themightytom]

One side makes up loony-tune bullshit about someone mysteriously blowing up a rig and not doing enough, the other actively does it, gets recorded doing it, repeats.

Exactly. Both sides do it, and its horrible when they do.

will gladly concede my point Terralthra to Chewie indeed if proof is provided. That proof being in the form of Progressive columnists or commentators actively stating that GW Bush and co was/is "Evil" and actively sought to undermine America in a way similar to what High Ranking republicans are currently saying about Obama.

I'm tired and already over this election season, can we just agree that 90% of political columnists and operatives are shitheads and call it a day?

Well I do remember some pretty pithy anti Bush rhetoric back in the day...



but that doesn't mean a good idea wasn't recycled

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a61fPIgJfgs
[/youtube]

Edit, I can't get the Obama borg link to work

Which still fits in somewhat with my OP, rather than a straightforward article, opinion is slipped in sideways through social or informal media.

[mr friendly guy]

Yeah, because nobody would ever accuse republicans of intentionally doing harm to liberal or minority areas. And Spike Lee CERTAINLY wouldn't make a movie about such an occurrence, no siree bob! I'm glad that no left-wing blog ever made such a claim, and that they're all level-headed and pure of heart, without ever wishing ill upon George Bush.

Clearly, my party is the only one to ever delve into hatred, vitriol, or paranoid fantasy. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways.

The tu quoque and false dilemma are both logical fallacies, and this post is thus devoid of content.

Given he was replying to a post which asserted "The GOP acts like x, and the Democrats don't act like x," pointing out a bunch of Democrats who have, in fact, acted like x, is a rebuttal of fact, not a tu quoque.

Er no. Crossroads blatantly accused Republicans of viewing Obama as a cartoon villain. He pointed to right wing blogs as his evidence, albeit without any links and such, but if anyone doubts it they can challenge him to post such links. He never said the left or the Democrats (who are right wing anyway, just less so than Republicans) doesn't act like this, although I am willing to bet that if push comes to shove we will find that one side does it soooooo much more because the right wing have an entire news station dedicated to it while the left has... what exactly do they have? Michael Moore?

So yes it is a tu quoque. And if we view this argument through one side does this, the other side also does it, so they are just as bad, rather than focusing on whether one side does it more, then it is also a false dilemna. So IP was correct in that regard as well.

[Terralthra]

He accused Republicans of viewing him as such, while making the point that Liberals don't view things that way. Go back and re-read his post.

[Straha]

I will gladly concede my point Terralthra to Chewie indeed if proof is provided. That proof being in the form of Progressive columnists or commentators actively stating that GW Bush and co was/is "Evil" and actively sought to undermine America in a way similar to what High Ranking republicans are currently saying about Obama.

I can do you one better, because this isn't just a few pundits but a large majority of the Democratic party:

Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.

Taken from a Rasmussen poll. In otherwords, 61% of Democrats believe that George W. Bush (and, presumably, his administration) could have known about 9/11 but did nothing to stop it. Little more than a third know for certain that he didn't.

Concession accepted.

[Illuminatus Primus]

"Bush Knew" is a much more credible form of Trutherism than "THEY BLEW UP WTC7 THERMITE LA LA LA". And depending on how loosely you defend "knew about 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance," it is literally true. Bush was given a brief that underlined Bin Laden active attempts to organize terrorist attacks on American soil, and it specifically stated IIRC that major landmarks were likely targets, and they were examining the possibilities for using hijacked planes for improvised kamikaze attacks against fixed targets.

[Straha]

"Bush Knew" is a much more credible form of Trutherism than "THEY BLEW UP WTC7 THERMITE LA LA LA". And depending on how loosely you defend "knew about 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance," it is literally true. Bush was given a brief that underlined Bin Laden active attempts to organize terrorist attacks on American soil, and it specifically stated IIRC that major landmarks were likely targets, and they were examining the possibilities for using hijacked planes for improvised kamikaze attacks against fixed targets.

IP, normally I find your Hart/Negri act mildly amusing, quixotic and even laudable. This is just twisting yourself like a post-modern pretzel.

The question is "whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance."

Your response is "Well, that's more credible than other Truthers!" (Strawman) and "If you define the terms very very loosely, and say that the question was really asking 'Was George Bush warned about a number of potential terrorist targets and methods some of which were used on 9/11" then their answers are literally true!"

I've seen better argumentation, first-hand, coming from Liberty University students.

Look, at the end of the day Republicans and Democrats are largely the same, and are infected and infested with the same idea that the opposing party is the unspeakable, unknowable "other" who does not deserve consideration, and who is capable of all the most devious traits imaginable because they do not belong in our society. The Republicans treat the Democrats like that, and the Democrats treat Republicans the exact same way. Just because I think that the Republicans are a bunch of money grubbing bastards who would sell the country to the Saudi royal family if they thought that it'd get them five more years of economic growth, doesn't mean I'm going to cut the Democrats any slack for their insanity, and neither should you.

That's what annoys me about Crossroads' post, it's him treating the Republicans as the grand old bogey man of American politics and declaring, falsely, that his party would never ever act the same way because only a Republican could possibly believe something so mind-numbingly stupid like the sitting president countenancing a catastrophe on the United States and doing nothing about it. That mindset, wherever and whenever it comes up, needs to be opposed and corrected by any means necessary. I'm sure you can agree to that.

[Straha]

edit: It should be Hardt/Negri. My bad, my laptop keyboard needs to be cleaned.

[Illuminatus Primus]

"Bush Knew" is a much more credible form of Trutherism than "THEY BLEW UP WTC7 THERMITE LA LA LA". And depending on how loosely you defend "knew about 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance," it is literally true. Bush was given a brief that underlined Bin Laden active attempts to organize terrorist attacks on American soil, and it specifically stated IIRC that major landmarks were likely targets, and they were examining the possibilities for using hijacked planes for improvised kamikaze attacks against fixed targets.

IP, normally I find your Hart/Negri act mildly amusing, quixotic and even laudable. This is just twisting yourself like a post-modern pretzel.

The question is "whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance."

Your response is "Well, that's more credible than other Truthers!" (Strawman) and "If you define the terms very very loosely, and say that the question was really asking 'Was George Bush warned about a number of potential terrorist targets and methods some of which were used on 9/11" then their answers are literally true!"

I've seen better argumentation, first-hand, coming from Liberty University students.

Look, at the end of the day Republicans and Democrats are largely the same, and are infected and infested with the same idea that the opposing party is the unspeakable, unknowable "other" who does not deserve consideration, and who is capable of all the most devious traits imaginable because they do not belong in our society. The Republicans treat the Democrats like that, and the Democrats treat Republicans the exact same way. Just because I think that the Republicans are a bunch of money grubbing bastards who would sell the country to the Saudi royal family if they thought that it'd get them five more years of economic growth, doesn't mean I'm going to cut the Democrats any slack for their insanity, and neither should you.

That's what annoys me about Crossroads' post, it's him treating the Republicans as the grand old bogey man of American politics and declaring, falsely, that his party would never ever act the same way because only a Republican could possibly believe something so mind-numbingly stupid like the sitting president countenancing a catastrophe on the United States and doing nothing about it. That mindset, wherever and whenever it comes up, needs to be opposed and corrected by any means necessary. I'm sure you can agree to that.

I'm not a Democrat, as should be obvious if one wishes to compare me to a pair of neo-Marxist theorists. Anyway, I'm well aware the public is degraded and typically often has at best an urban legend familiarity with politics, history, and current events. I felt like your post was essentially an equivocation of the broad existence of overt Trutherism on the left-liberal end of the spectrum with stuff like Birtherism and such on the far right end (yes, I'm aware you didn't explicitly say that, I just felt like there should be some clarification). Otherwise, you're completely right. Though I do believe fanatic anti-humanist ideology is much more rife on the reactionary statist wing of American formal politics, and therefore its insane mythologies and fanatic Manicheanism is in many ways more dangerous and harmful.

[Straha]

I'm not a Democrat, as should be obvious if one wishes to compare me to a pair of neo-Marxist theorists.

I know, but a lot of left leaning thinkers will make instinctual excuses for the Democrats simply because they feel that they're less bad. (Have you ever read Empire?)

Anyway, I'm well aware the public is degraded and typically often has at best an urban legend familiarity with politics, history, and current events. I felt like your post was essentially an equivocation of the broad existence of overt Trutherism on the left-liberal end of the spectrum with stuff like Birtherism and such on the far right end (yes, I'm aware you didn't explicitly say that, I just felt like there should be some clarification).

If that's how you feel then you should have said so, and not made a mind numbingly twisted excuse for the people who believe Bush knew about 9/11. I'm not going to equivocate between the two, there are similarities but to make X=Y about different positions/groups on opposite sides of "the spectrum" is almost always problematic, to say the least. However, I will attack stuff like Crossroads was pulling as willful ignorance that does far more damage to the politics than most of what he's harping about in his post.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Given recent events I will fully concede my original point.

In truth I should have clarified my position from the start. My original statement,

Contrast this for a moment with Bush and Co. At the hight of my hatred and loathing of him, Cheney, and the others, I thought they were callous, heartless, power made bastards... But I never thought they were EVIL As mucxh of a bastard as Cheney was, I could never picture him sitting up in some bunker going:

"Mwa Ha Ha! First I'll take Americas freedoms! then destroy Liberals! then Rule Iraq with an iron fist! Mwa ha ha!!!"

Was that Inever thought the way I see 'some' Right wingers think about Obama. Originally I did not state "ALL" Democrats were in the same boat, though I made comments to that effect later and am standing down from it as, yes, lots of Democrats thought/think that Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened, which I 'suppose' could be in the same boat as Many on the right saying Obama is a Muslim puppet working to actively destroy America.

That's what annoys me about Crossroads' post, it's him treating the Republicans as the grand old bogey man of American politics and declaring, falsely, that his party would never ever act the same way because only a Republican could possibly believe something so mind-numbingly stupid like the sitting president countenancing a catastrophe on the United States and doing nothing about it. That mindset, wherever and whenever it comes up, needs to be opposed and corrected by any means necessary. I'm sure you can agree to that.

I will defend myself here in my original statements, because I feel I am being forced into a false dilemma and a bit of a Double standard. Yes not all Republicans are wing nuts, yes not all Democrats are boy-scouts. But the list of really crazy stuff the RightWing does far exceeds the list of stupid stuff the Left Wing has done in this country. For the past 30 years the Republican party is painted as a Grand Old Boogey Man because by and large they stopped being an effect force for benefiting America.

The Economic crises we have had in the last 30 years have been because of Republican policies and deregulation. The continuing sucking up to the Religious Right and jamming religion down our throat has been on the right. And do I need to go into the past Eight years of Bush who took a surplus and turned it into a deficit as well as getting us into a war based on Lies (weather or not Bush actually knew they were lies is disputable, but all his reasons turned out to be based on lies).

So yes Straha, I do have a bit of a sore spot and will freely admit that "I" consider Republicans responsible for much that is wrong is this country. Now that is "Me" I will not make that a blanket statement on all Democrats, nor will I say that ALL republicans are equally at fault.

SO I hope that clarifies things and I apologize for making the blanket statements earlier.

[Straha]

Was that Inever thought the way I see 'some' Right wingers think about Obama. Originally I did not state "ALL" Democrats were in the same boat, though I made comments to that effect later and am standing down from it as, yes, lots of Democrats thought/think that Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened, which I 'suppose' could be in the same boat as Many on the right saying Obama is a Muslim puppet working to actively destroy America.

Translation: I "suppose" that thinking George W. Bush knew about a muslim extremist plot to kills thousands of Americans and cause massive damage to the American economy could be similar to thinking that Barack Obama is part of a muslim extremist plot to cause massive damage to the American economy.

Pull your head out of your ass and get off your high horse, it's the same damn thing.

I will defend myself here in my original statements, because I feel I am being forced into a false dilemma and a bit of a Double standard. Yes not all Republicans are wing nuts, yes not all Democrats are boy-scouts. But the list of really crazy stuff the RightWing does far exceeds the list of stupid stuff the Left Wing has done in this country. For the past 30 years the Republican party is painted as a Grand Old Boogey Man because by and large they stopped being an effect force for benefiting America.

The Economic crises we have had in the last 30 years have been because of Republican policies and deregulation. The continuing sucking up to the Religious Right and jamming religion down our throat has been on the right. And do I need to go into the past Eight years of Bush who took a surplus and turned it into a deficit as well as getting us into a war based on Lies (weather or not Bush actually knew they were lies is disputable, but all his reasons turned out to be based on lies).

So yes Straha, I do have a bit of a sore spot and will freely admit that "I" consider Republicans responsible for much that is wrong is this country. Now that is "Me" I will not make that a blanket statement on all Democrats, nor will I say that ALL republicans are equally at fault.

I'm going to ignore your factual inaccuracies and mis-attributions (who started deregulation, the surplus, etc.) and chalk it up to ignorance, instead I'm going to ask you this:

What did the democrats do to stop any of this? For half of the Bush presidency the Democrats controlled the Senate, and for two years they controlled all of Congress. Same with the Clinton years (where they had the White House as well.) To top it off the Democrats had solid control of the House (with a solid majority) for ALL of the Bush Sr. and Reagan presidencies, and controlled the Senate for all of Bush Sr. and a good portion of Reagan. They had a voice, they had power, so what did they do to stop the Economic crises, the imperial overreach, Iraq, etc.?

Or, to put it another way, what makes it so that every criticism that you throw at the Republicans doesn't apply equally well to the Democrats?

[SirNitram]

(Have you ever read Empire?)

To step in briefly.. Please tell me you don't mean Card's ridiculous bit of red-wring Red Dawn esque wankery? With the evils of a protractor as how the villains destroy the President and many others, with rocket launchers, from the tidal basin, to fire over the hill. If you're wondering, like many who know D.C., what hill, the answer is the one in Card's head from too much LDS.

[Straha]

No, I was referring to Hardt and Negri's book Empire. It was more of an aside than anything else.