Values: Why debate and discussion are so difficult

Republicans care about voter fraud; Democrats want to come out ahead, says study By Stephen Dinan – “When it comes to voter ID laws, Republicans care intensely about fraud while Democrats worry more about whether their own party will come out ahead, according to a provocative new academic study.” This is a difference in values study that is something to think about.

“Voting-rights activists have long accused GOP officeholders of racism or political expedience in fights over voting laws, but the study suggests that at least for average voters, Republicans’ support is a good-faith assessment of dangers they see in illegal voting.

Democrats, meanwhile, generally support voter-ID but their support is less firm. If told the GOP would suffer from stricter voter-ID laws, Democrats become more supportive, Mr. Kane found.

The dangerous world of Donald Trump By Clifford D. May – “A National Security Strategy is less a plan of action than an attempt to prioritize. Who, in the president’s judgment, most threatens America? What means do we have and what capabilities must we develop to defend the homeland and protect our freedoms?” This is another ‘difference in values’ exposition.

“Though well into his second term, Mr. Obama couldn’t resist the temptation to criticize his predecessor:

Last week, President Trump delivered his National Security Strategy, an attempt to “rethink the policies of the past two decades — policies based on the assumption that engagement with rivals and their inclusion in international institutions and global commerce would turn them into benign actors and trustworthy partners. For the most part, this premise turned out to be false.”

America’s sovereignty is not to be surrendered

Comforting as it might be to think we live in a global village, in reality we are surrounded by an encroaching global jungle where only the fittest survive.

Unlike Mr. Obama, who believed the arc of history bends toward justice, the current occupant of the White House believes history’s arc will be bent toward tyranny by America’s enemies — unless we grab it firmly and bend it ourselves.

California Parents Barred from Opting Kids Out of Mandatory LGBT-Inclusive Textbooks by Trey Sanchez – “And still, the Democratic Party claims to be the party of “choice.” More values differences and now enrolling the state in the Propaganda effort.

“California rejected any publisher that didn’t mention the homosexual preferences or claims against historical figures in their textbooks. In one textbook, the state forced the publisher to add “lesbian” to describe NASA astronaut Sally Ride.

And here we thought the Democratic Party was the party of “choice.” Clearly the state knows better than the parents what children need to learn.

Trump on the Rampage By Tim Mostert – noting another ‘values difference’ that is being underscored by actions.

“I don’t know what it is with the Left, but they love to put ballast on any potential successes, if they’re not part of the government system. It’s not worth the time speculating why these things go on in their little heads. They just do.

Special Presidential Envoy Brett McGurk Provides Update on D-ISIS Campaign (Video)… by sundance – “If you watched the prior two updates from Brett McGurk you’ll note he does an exceptional job explaining how the administration is coordinating with multiple partners to defeat ISIS.” There are a number of accomplishment lists showing up. This briefing is a specific example that shows how things get done.

My oh My, Latest Reports of FBI/DOJ Counterintelligence Operation Give Evelyn Farkas Statements New Light… by sundance – another backgrounder with resources and cites.

“In the past six weeks a stunning amount of evidence has been accumulating that shows how the Obama Administration weaponized the FBI and DOJ and launched a political campaign spying operation into candidate Donald Trump.

All of the evidence points in one transparently obvious direction; toward a 2016 collaborative effort structured to use a counterintelligence operation to conduct wiretaps and surveillance on the presidential campaign of candidate Donald Trump.

Accepting all of that mounting evidence, does this March 2017 interview with former Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas (Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense), appearing on MSNBC, make more sense now?

Why would anyone trust Paul Krugman as a prognosticator? By neo-neocon – “my question is why Krugman’s bad predictions haven’t seemed to hurt him with either the NY Times or his wide audience.” This one provides a bit of background trying to understand a difference in values.

“Krugman is (or used to be, anyway), an economist. Now I know that he had other economic specialties than predicting the stock market’s reaction to an election. But one would think that as a Nobel Prize-winning economist and political pundit he should have at least a trifle more ability in predicting such a thing than some random blogger or the man in the street. And one would think that this failure would invalidate his writings in the minds of a significant number of his readers. But I don’t see it happening.

Krugman is by no means unique in this disconnect. It’s actually a common thing. It’s as though pundits (and not just of the liberal variety, either) exist in another world, a fantasy one in which a clever and/or emotionally satisfying turn of phrase is the goal. If it resonates with the reader at the time—mirrors what the reader is feeling or thinking—that’s good enough. Perhaps that’s the real function of Krugman in his pundit incarnation: to reflect what his readers think and whip them up into greater heights of outrage, rather than to be correct.

Another example at memorandum: Does Trump have a grand strategy for foreign policy? Dream on. (Gabriel Schoenfeld/USA Today). A daily review of headlines will reveal many such anti- Trump, and usually anti-reality headlines. Why?

Comments are closed.