Funny thing about information: It can seem incoherent when you don’t take any of it into account. Would you browse a textbook then blame the teacher for your failure to understand the material? If you’re not gonna watch clips at the crux of the story, what’s the point? That the decline of America over the last 30 years in the Gutter Games of Government — doesn’t unfold for standard scrolling with ease, is not a flaw in my argument and array of illustrations:
It’s a flaw in your willingness to work through it — absorbing each building block of information your brain is well-equipped to handle.
Or at least it used to be before information became so funneled in a fashion to your liking — you don’t even know what to do with anything that isn’t. It astounds me that wading through unfamiliar territory on this site is somehow seen as complicated as quantum physics.
I assure you: What it took to acquire this information was infinitely more demanding than anything you face here — let alone the complexities in exposing systematic deception at the core of our country’s ills.
This — is not that
Compelling Sowell to admit where he’s wrong will work wonders for where he’s right. The only way to see that is to understand the space he occupies and the influential figures within it. Even in the face of overwhelming and irrefutable evidence, some of them would forever deny reality on Sowell — but not all of ’em.
And all I need is one!
To the uneducated, abstract ideas are unfamiliar; so is the detachment that is necessary to discover a truth out of one’s own knowledge and mental effort. The uneducated person views life in an intensely personal way — he knows only what he sees, hears or touches and what he is told by friends.
As the unknown sage puts it, “Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.”
But more than ever, even the most educated minds act in an uneducated manner in service of their interests — and do catastrophic damage by doing so.
Even the best of the bunch are part of the problem they’re trying to solve.
Which direction you think this person’s going?
So, on an issue involving the separation of uranium isotopes: You wanna ignore the evidence to show off your math skills by splitting hairs over the meaning of “mathematical certainty”? By the way: Decorating your points with special punctuation does not make meaningless crap magically have merit.
What I have in mind is far more fruitful and fulfilling than that lickety-split, self-satisfied crap flooding the internet daily. All ya gotta do — is do what you say you do. And my idea is a framework for debate that boxes you in to do exactly that. You won’t like it — but here’s the deal: Your opposition won’t either.
And who knows, you might learn to love embracing challenge, changing your mind, and the fruits from demanding across-the-board accountability.
This — is not that
This — is Broadcasting Beliefs About That
About that fact-finding from the “authoritative and familiar”:
We’re not talking about your love of talking about your love affair with facts — we’re talking about having a history of objective scrutiny that shows your commitment. And for people who flaunt their love for facts — you sure have a helluva lot of hate for irrefutable facts that fly in the face of your calcified convictions.
About those results:
If you’d take a break from broadcasting your beliefs once in a while, you might take notice of the unintended consequences that come with pursuing values in a manner devoid of virtue. The Yellow Brick Road is the path of America’s predictably counterproductive pursuits.
Sowell’s second article on the subject is 2-minute read is 752 words — not one of which addresses the tubes that took us to war. And yet this mountain of information was publicly available before he wrote that article:
How do you reconcile that?
By the way, the Senate Report on Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq was released on July 9, 2004 — one day before Sowell’s Weapons of Crass Obstruction. That report didn’t appear out of nowhere — it was known to be coming. Even if the timing was a coincidence: What does it say to you that he never addressed the evidence presented by Powell?
Ignoring every substantive argument on the matter (on matters of mathematical certainty, no less).
If the answer is “No”:
Then just say so and be done with it. But if it’s “Yes” — now ya gotta do the work to follow the facts (not just Tweet about it). Since I put it all on a silver platter, it ain’t that difficult.
And for anything unclear — you could try asking some questions.
At every turn . . .
The faithful tap dance around reality — oily evading anything that requires them to hold Sowell to his own standards.
Hard to Imagine:
That I have to explain that quote to people who seemingly live to flood the internet with his words.
He and his flock incessantly complain about the media — and they don’t make policy. But the second I scrutinize Sowell — suddenly you have new standards.
180 — how fitting
When you have no idea what the argument is:
Making no effort or inquiry to understand, no less: Wrapping quotes around “argument” is as ridiculous as using air quotes incorrectly. If you make an attempt to debate in good faith, I don’t can’t if you can’t spell your arguments.
But Jesus, just act your age — because this childish crap is killing us (and countless are already dead because of it).
That you even think that a story so complex and convoluted could be explained away so easily — is a monumental problem all by itself.
That you even think that a story so complex and convoluted could be explained away so easily — is a monumental problem all by itself. And without even the most basic insight into anything on this story:
That camp has a habit of glossing over global issues of catastrophic consequences with . . .
“Seems”
Such “hatred” in my heart . . .
Speaking of the moon
Not the tiniest trace of reasoning or molecule of courtesy can be found in anything I’ve come across in decades of dealing with the doubt-free on WMD. And of all those I’ve challenged — their knowledge combined could fit into a thimble with space to spare.
I’d suggest heading on back to that backwater school, Purdue, for a little more indoctrination, er, I mean education.
“BACKWATER SCHOOL“
To call the Cradle of Astronauts “backwater” is award-worthy for asinine statements.
The “arguments” of “Expert” By Association — taking cue from his kin on Rolodex of Ridicule:
- “You use words like honor, courage and commitment as punch lines at liberal cocktail parties” — ripping off A Few Good Men and thinking I wouldn’t notice
- The “Get help!” routine
- “Academia”
- “I’ve stood on the wall — have you?” — Jesus, why not toss in “You weep for Santiago” while you’re at it?
What does any of THAT have to do with the price of tea in China — or THIS?
Or Not . . .
Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party
Stirring Defense
Anything Goes for apologists trying to preserve what they perceive. I know their Rolodex of Ridicule rabbit-hole routine — all too well:
And Now for the Weather . . .
The “Promotional” Program
Ah yes, the “promote your little video” ploy:
Every single thing we share on social media is promoting something (even if it’s cupcakes you just baked). Nothing wrong with promoting a little goodness — whether it’s right out of the oven or white-hot truth.
And steel is strong because it knew the hammer and white heat
About those NAVY Core Values
That “Expert” By Association holds so dear:
I point you to a 7-part, 2 hours and 40 minutes doc — that distills a story that demanded a massive amount of effort, thought, research, and writing: And you tap a Tweet with a talking point or two — thinking you can inform me. As disgusted as I am by it all:
I feel sorry for the lives of hermetically sealed minds.
You’ll never know how much more the world had to offer you — and how much more you had to offer it.
I wonder if anyone wonders why I blur out their names. This is about accepted behavior across the country — not targeting these people. My aim isn’t to make you look bad — it’s for you to stop looking bad. Ridicule just rolls right off me anymore. I’m not dealing with individuals — I’m dealing with a collective machine that’s been programmed to put me down.
My job is to jam up the gears — and get these gears going again:
I like the cut of your jib, sir
And then there are those memorable moments when someone surprises you with the simplicity and elegance of a line like that.
In a sea of insults, one kind comment is like wind in your sails.
The second you’re questioned, those precious virtues you peddle in the Facts Over Feelings Parade — are rolled right over with your feelings. It would be unthinkable for me to refuse to look at someone’s work — and fire back with your “Where’s your facts?” refrain of an automaton because they don’t instantaneously appear.
Let’s get real . . .
That’s a stunt (like smugly slinging “I’ll wait”) — not a gesnuine inquiry in the interest of truth. And the only thing you’re “waiting” for is fodder to fuel your next fix. If you operated anywhere in the same galaxy of “facts over feelings” — the mountain of material I’ve written over decades wouldn’t exist.
It’s all marketing
If he were the genuine article — those books would not be so one-sided.
The notion that feelings over facts is limited to the Left is ludicrous. If you were trying to solve a problem instead of sell books and boost your popularity — you’d be fair-minded by addressing how this behavior applies across-the-board. If it were truly about following the facts, you wouldn’t need slogans and wouldn’t want ’em. Your record would speak for itself. Then again . . .
Do these people really wanna solve problems anyway? Do you?
Man is at least as much a problem-creating as a problem-solving animal. Better a crisis than the permanent boredom of meaninglessness.
— Theodore Dalrymple, Life at the Bottom
If you can’t see something’s not right with Sowell by now, I don’t know what to tell ya. But I suggest you start putting some faith in people who have integrity instead of buying it from those who sell it. The likes of Sowell conditioned you to believe things to be true that are demonstrably false. No matter how many times he’s lied, that doesn’t change the truth in the times he didn’t. That truth should be honored, but Sowell should not.
You have a chance to change all that.
You have a chance to change all that: And all ya gotta do — is do what you say you do.
I’m not just taking Thomas Sowell to task because he’s got it comin’ — I need this guy for what I have in mind to right this ship. The ultimate irony is that blind loyalty limits him — while my criticism could elevate him to heights your hero-worship ensures he’ll never go.
So, you’re saying that your plan will elevate Sowell to worldwide recognition — by holding him accountable? That if he comes clean — he could be the catalyst to turn the tide?
That’s exactly what I’m saying
It won’t matter that he blew it on WMD or why — all that matters is having the guts to say: “I was wrong and I’m trying to make it right.” In a culture consumed with feeling right, wouldn’t it be refreshing to talk about the immeasurable value in the willingness to be wrong?
Don’t just tell people how to behave: Lead by example — especially when it comes at a cost! There are far worse culprits on all-things Iraq, but I’ve been down that road for decades. Discovering Sowell and the underworld of absurdity that shields him — makes him ideal to put these lies in their place once and for all:
And change the dynamic of debate to boot.
Elevating him is not my aim, but I can live with it to stem the systematic self-delusion that’s taken this nation totally off the rails: Left & Right:
An intelligence analyst who worked at the D.O.E’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory later noted that it was absurd that the D.O.E. experts had been trumped by a C.I.A. analyst. The Energy Department’s nuclear scientists — this analyst said, “are the most boring people. Their whole lives revolve around nuclear technology.
They can talk about gas centrifuges until you want to jump out of a window. And maybe once every ten years or longer there comes along an important question about gas centrifuges. That’s when you really should listen to these guys.
If they say an aluminum tube is not for a gas centrifuge — it’s like a fish talking about water.
“The A-Team”
How Nuclear Experts Were Trumped by “One Stubborn CIA Analyst”
Oh, how birds of a feather flock together:
I’d love to . . .
And I’d ask her to explain this — and a great deal more:
Associated Press, October 3rd, 2004: Rice said she learned of objections by the Energy Department only after making her 2002 comments.
Richard W. Memmer: Are we to believe that the National Security Advisor of the United States was unaware of an intelligence dispute of this magnitude that had been going on for well over a year?
One Congressional investigator went so far as to call it a holy war. And doesn’t it strike you as suspicious that she didn’t bother consulting the D.OE. before serving up images of a nuclear detonation?
— Act II
“Holy War”
It’s pure fantasy to think that you can ignore key dimensions of a problem and magically solve it. The problems that plague America are interrelated, and anything short of addressing that is going nowhere. But everyone’s wrapped up in their wheelhouse — operating under umbrellas of interests that don’t account for complexities outside of them. Conventional methods have repeatedly failed and won’t put a pinprick in the atmosphere of absurdity suffocating the country.
But no one seems to even care about the efficacy of their efforts, as failure is a pretty profitable enterprise these days. Just picking the “root cause” that works for you doesn’t cut it.
You’ve gotta look at interconnected causes across-the-board.
It astounds me that some of the most brilliant minds in the world seem incapable of correlating how “unrelated” issues impact one another. The most harmful pollution on the planet is noise — narrative that drowns out sensible discussion. You could blame those who amplify that deafening noise with delight — or be smart by not doing dumb things that drive the narrative in the first place.
Pursuing aims in ways that predictably damage your cause is bad enough. But once the outcome becomes clear, it’s beyond belief that you refuse to reflect on your methods. Even if you’re right and have the best of intentions:
If you’re not smart in making your moves, you can exponentially worsen the problem you’re addressing — along with seemingly unrelated ones.
And already have — again and again:
Like many alternatives, however, it was psychologically impossible. Character is fate, as the Greeks believed. Germans were schooled in winning objectives by force, unschooled in adjustment. They could not bring themselves to forgo aggrandizement even at the risk of defeat.
— Barbara Tuchman
Unschooled in Adjustment
Putting aside Bill Cosby’s fall from grace . . .
He was a universal icon of goodness growing up. In just this 5-second scene from Picture Pages — a parallel can be drawn to everything I advocate:
The.Deal.Is.That.We.Connect.These.Dots . . .
You see
There are powerful forces that make damn sure you don’t . . .
And it shows!
“Wut?” — reflects a society tuning in to people who perpetuate problems under the pretense of seeking to solve them. Some are sincere (or at least started out that way). But they all lose their way in the adulation and rewards from feeding the frenzy. I coined Star Wars Syndrome to capture the plague of allowing nostalgia to create the illusion that a movie is far better than it actually is. In and of itself, wildly exaggerating the quality of movies is harmless.
But when it becomes habit in how you see everything: Either gushing with over-the-top praise or seething with over-the-top scorn:
That’s a plague!
Echo chambers across social media worship channel hosts as “National Treasures” — treating them like they’re some of the greatest minds to ever live. At the helm of these cesspools of certitude — are people who peddle repeatedly rehashed insight their followers praise like they split the atom. To be sure, some of it is insightful. But these “geniuses” are so full of wisdom that they’re oblivious to how they’re feeding the very problems they’re ostensibly trying to solve.
Isaac Newton and Einstein were brilliant — partisan hacks and high-minded influencers telling you what you wanna hear every goddamn day, are not.
You know what they say: Fail, fail again, fail better, succeed
They say other things too – like “work smarter, not harder.” By all means, keep trying — but examine the efficacy of your efforts and adjust accordingly.
This nation has no such notion . . .
True folly, Tuchman found, is generally recognized as counterproductive in its own time, and not merely in hindsight. In Tuchman’s template, true folly only ensues when a clear alternative path of action was available and ruled out.
Then there’s this jazz:
Until the rise of podcasts, twitter, and the various forms of independent media / journalism, people weren’t really aware how legacy media was influencing their thinking. I think people are finally waking up and may surprise you here, especially if more talk about it.
New formats for funneling information that caters to your cravings is not what I’d call enlightened. And those who couldn’t spot clearly dishonest actors before — think they’re wide awake now? The Twitter bio behind that quote begins with “Groupthink averse.”
It would never occur to him that everything in that Tweet is Groupthink 101.
How do we make people realize they’ve been lied to? You have to knock down one small pillar that’s easier to reach.
The people who Tweeted those lines I combined from a conversation I came across — had no idea that they perfectly captured the principle of my Clear the Clutter plan.
I’ve got the perfect pillar
As Exposing Sowell is My Bridge to Expose It All
Talk about Thomas Sowell’s vast history of continuously demolishing leftist nonsense.
First off
We’re not talking about THAT — we’re talking about THIS:
Secondly
I’m reasonably certain I’ve written a helluva lot more about that “Leftist nonsense” than you have — so don’t even think about pulling that whataboutism bullshit with me.
And lastly . . .
Then tell me how he was wrong about one thing that he has no expertise in.
lemme get this straight
A layperson with limited resources and no connections:
- Can do countless hours of research & writing
- Interview a world-renowned nuclear scientist
- Correspond with Colin Powell’s chief of intelligence — along with a key physicist
- Spend $15,000 of his own money to write & produce the most detailed documentary ever done on WMD (taking both parties to task for it)
Qualifying me to exhaustively explain how half the country could not be more wrong on this issue of world-altering consequence.
But it’s all good . . .
That Sowell cranked out this crap that any Iraq War cheerleading jackass could issue in chain-letter lies — topped off with smug sloganeering.
After all — he doesn’t have any expertise in it.
“It’s indefensible!
Don’t you know that?”
Take note of the trite & trendy language that follows: Strikingly in sync with Sowell’s, don’t ya think?
CIA is not the all knowing God of the Bible. The CIA could do everything 100% correct but still not know everything.
There’s another reason why they wouldn’t know everything: Nuclear scientists don’t work there — they work at the Department of Energy: And that — is what this is all about. You’d know that had you watched Trillion Dollar Tube instead of trying to educate me on things you know nothing about.
Note:
I modified the Intelligence Community image above by overlaying CIA on top of Director of National Intelligence — to show how the IC effectively operated pre-9/11 and before DCI took center stage.
Mr. Sowell:
Could you tell me why the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) — got an equal say on the aluminum tubes for the NIE vote?
An agency that does imagery analysis of the Earth . . .
Same for NSA . . .
And other agencies that had no expertise in centrifuge physics. And why wasn’t JAEIC allowed to weigh in?
What’s JAEIC? Allow me.
These lies live on because people protecting their interests contained the “conversation” by refusing to even have it. But get this story in the right hands and the jig is up. His followers will go out of their minds defending the indefensible — it’ll spread like wildfire. And that’s just the beginning for what I have in mind. All ya gotta do — is do what you say you do. And my idea is a framework for debate that boxes you in to do exactly that. You won’t like it — but here’s the deal: Your opposition won’t either.
And who knows, you might learn to love embracing challenge, changing your mind, and the fruits from demanding across-the-board accountability.
This — is not that
This — is Broadcasting Beliefs About That
Repeatedly rehashing issues is not the mark of problem solving: It’s the mark of a market. All these channels are blunt instruments (including those I agree with). Like Black Lives Matter, you’re just pounding away at problems without any examination of the efficacy of your efforts.
If you think you’re making progress because of ever-increasing attention to your concerns, I suggest you reconsider.
I’m sure it’s intoxicating to amass a following and feel like you’re making a difference. But I’m gonna weigh your impact partly as a reflection of your community: How people behave, not what they believe. If you can’t get that right, I don’t care how big your following gets — you’re taking this nation nowhere.
What’s more, you’re making matters worse and being rewarded for it.
I’m going to show you how to fix the problem you don’t even know you have. And I assure you — the gains you get now pale in comparison to what awaits you. As Loury once called my writing “brilliant,” was “honored by it,” and “blown away” by my site and signed up — I suggest you refrain from assumptions. And if you were abiding by the principles they preach, should I really have to remind you of that?
You think I just came up with this imagery out of thin air?
Maybe when you’re done talking race, woke, and CRT for the ten-thousandth time — we can consider approaching problems in a more multi-dimensional manner?
Just a thought!
Alas, Loury wasn’t too keen on the truth when I took his hero to task (more on that in Part 2). You said they had no argument against your [R]ebuttal to Brown University’s letter on racism in the United States. Neither do you on your National Treasure. Instead of listening and learning on things you know nothing about — you let pride consume you. Maybe you don’t know Sowell as well as you thought you did:
And heaven forbid you hold him to the same standards pushing your popularity. Loury wasn’t about to look at undeniable evidence warranting that he change his mind:
So he changed the rules . . .
Right on cue | Never fails
Living up to his hero who did the same:
A Conflict of Visions
And then some . . .
That the reaction is not to think it through, not to question, not to assemble facts, not to make arguments — but instead to wave banners and spout slogans such that you could hardly distinguish what they were doing from a manifesto that would come out of [does it matter?]
— Glenn Loury, Tucker Carlson Today
When the context suits you, such words are solid gold. What you do when it doesn’t — determines the worth of your word.
Ripping on woke is all the rage . . .
And outrage industries of dish it but can’t take it — would talk about race and responsibility till the end of time. But heaven forbid we have a single conversation about war and responsibility.
Consequences matter or should matter more than some attractive or fashionable theory.
— Thomas Sowell
I couldn’t agree more
Except there were no consequences on the fiasco for the ages driven by this manifesto: The outcome of which fashioned a culture of no consequences.
At what point does it dawn on you and your beloved genius — that blind loyalty to that cause would be colossally counterproductive to your others? I’m not brilliant and I figured that out all by myself. The Right treating Bush like the Second Coming of Christ — set the stage for the rise of the Rock Star they spent the next 8 years railing against.
That doesn’t strike me as sound strategy. Dumb, dishonest, and delusional wars don’t either.
Nice work!
Sowell’s hailed as a folk hero for calling out problems he helped create (and takes no responsibility for any of it) — which flies in the face of the principles upon which he’s put on a pedestal. This man has a patently obvious history of hypocrisy & lies — and yet he’s worshipped as some kind of saint-like Sherlock Holmes.
Even in the most unsophisticated years of my youth, I would have never bought something so impossibly simplistic as Sowell’s “said so and so” — and the Right’s ubiquitous belief that “everybody believed Iraq had WMD.”
My mind would never allow me to accept something so easily (thank God).
I don’t know how people find the path of least resistance so satisfying — as I love the demands of difficulty and discernment. To not step up my game in the midst of opportunity or challenge — would be tantamount to treason upon my very existence.
Sowell’s disciples have no interest in such a demanding way of life — as defending the faith is all that matters in the religious-like following around Sowell. They spread the gospel by mindlessly countering with boilerplate beliefs that have no bearing on the issues in question.
What works with them would never fly with me.
If you oversimplify an issue that clearly calls for careful examination, I know you’re hiding something. If you constantly complain about the other side and defend your own at every turn — you’re not playing by the rules you rail on others for failing to follow. Occasional criticism of your own party doesn’t qualify as having a history faithful to objective scrutiny.
Speaking of not playing by the rules . . .
I’m not just taking Thomas Sowell to task because he’s got it comin’ — I need this guy for what I have in mind to right this ship. The ultimate irony is that blind loyalty limits him — while my criticism could elevate him to heights your hero-worship ensures he’ll never go.
So, you’re saying that your plan will elevate Sowell to worldwide recognition — by holding him accountable? That if he comes clean — he could be the catalyst to turn the tide?
That’s exactly what I’m saying
It won’t matter that he blew it on WMD or why — all that matters is having the guts to say: “I was wrong and I’m trying to make it right.” In a culture consumed with feeling right, wouldn’t it be refreshing to talk about the immeasurable value in the willingness to be wrong?
Don’t just tell people how to behave: Lead by example — especially when it comes at a cost! There are far worse culprits on all-things Iraq, but I’ve been down that road for decades. Discovering Sowell and the underworld of absurdity that shields him — makes him ideal to put these lies in their place once and for all:
And change the dynamic of debate to boot.
Elevating him is not my aim, but I can live with it to stem the systematic self-delusion that’s taken this nation totally off the rails: Left & Right:
One Voice Became Two 