I am like the rest of the new blog-reading public in that I investigated the blog world only recently, this year. I heard so much about it that I finally decided to see what it was all about. Since then, I am hooked. I’ve found so many interesting blogs that it’s astounding to me. There are myriad intelligent and creative people in this world of ours. It’s fun to know that the arts of writing and reading have made significant comebacks, not only with books, but also on the internet.
Every blogger has a message, whether it’s serious or fun or irreverent. They all want to communicate something they see as vital to the world. It ranges from a personal diary to hobbies, to political rants to serious news. It’s all fair game.
My goal is to communicate THE TRUTH in the realms of politics, news, and entertainment. Not my truth, but the truth. This might seem rather arrogant to some of you, and I’m sure that every person alive feels they have a corner on the truth. The Jews feel they have the truth, and Hezbollah reckons they are on the path of truth. The conservative perceives she has the truth, and the liberal knows he owns the truth.
The standard liberal worldview, which has been swallowed whole hog by the liberal media, is that there is always moral equivalence. There are two sides to every story. I say that this law applies in many instances, but a lot of the time it doesn’t.
There might be two sides to a story about a traffic accident, or what constitutes good music, or even which political party should be elected. There is, however, a truth, or the truth, when talking about several important issues.
For example, there either is or is not a God. If there is a God, He is of a certain nature. This is the truth. Something is true. There are not two sides of this issue. There ultimately is not your God and my God. The truth might be that your conception of God and my conception, in reality, are part of a larger truth—but whatever that truth ultimately is, that’s what it is. The truth.
So too with good and evil. There is no moral equivalence, as liberals would have you believe. The theory that all people are good is simply untrue. There are good people and bad people, and those in-between. There are good countries and bad countries, and those in-between. There are good cultures and bad cultures, and those in-between. I will agree to the everyone-is-good theory when it comes to such things as race. There is no such thing as a good race and a bad race. All races are good. God or the universe made every human being in His or Her image. I love people of every ethnicity and background.
On the other hand, there are, I believe, good religions and bad religions. Good cultures and bad cultures. Good political movements and bad political movements.
There is no moral equivalence, for example, between the state of Israel and Hezbollah. Israel is a good country, and Hezbollah is an evil political movement. I know this kind of thinking offends liberal sensitivities. I’m sorry, but you are just plain wrong on this. Black and white thinking is appropriate in some areas of life. There are two sides to the stories, to the history, to the claims on the land in this region of the Middle East, and so on, but there is only one truth about the basic mentalities and ways of life. One side is a peace-loving country that is tough enough to defend itself when they must. The other side is a death-loving movement that hates so much it will send its own children to martyrdom with glee. The adage applies here, that there will be peace in the Middle East only when the Palestinians learn to love their own children more than they hate the Israelis.
This leads me back to the tone of this blog. I’ve seen all kinds of approaches to how to present your opinion to the public, ranging from Fox News to CNN to Air America Radio. From Rush Limbaugh to Michael Savage to Tony Snow to Chris Matthews to Noam Chomsky. The hate-Bush crowd with their MoveOn.org’s to the hate-Clinton people with their Ann Coulter’s.
I am not better than any of these people. I am a part of the fabric of America, just an ordinary guy with an opinion. I do have quite an education and background. I am well traveled and exposed to many cultures. I have an intimate knowledge of several of the world’s religions. I’m well read, and a news, history, and political junkie—enough of an insider to feel a part of the people, and enough of an outsider to have some objectivity. I am brilliant about most things, and stupid about some things. When I’m wrong, I admit it.
My approach, my tone, for this blog, will be to tell the truth. Since I love people, and I love connecting with them, I want to be as respectful as I can with every individual, reader, or commenter. On the other hand, I will not be respectful to non-truth. I will be irreverent when speaking of movements, political parties and philosophies that promote untruth, and of any hypocrisy or demagoguery.
For example, I respect all of my commenters so far except one. With this one exception, everybody has been respectful and conducted a civilized discussion even about subjects on which they passionately disagreed with me. I hope to return the favor. I want to be respectful of you even though I might abhor what you believe in. So, I might ridicule your party, your philosophy, your political leanings, even your logic, or your worldview, but I know down deep that you have a right to believe whatever you believe. I respect you for getting educated on the issues, wrestling with your conscience, and taking the time to share your beliefs with me and the public. You are doing your part in a democracy of well-informed and contributing citizens. Bravo to you!
So, the final words are truth, irreverence, and respect. I seek the truth. I may be irreverent at times. I respect your right to your own opinions, even when they differ from mine. I do respect you. In some areas of life, I agree that there are two sides to every story, but in other areas, there is no such moral equivalence. Just realize that, more often than not, when speaking on areas where there is no moral equivalence, I am right, and you are wrong. Are you smiling? I hope so. Have a great day!
(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.) This Post’s Technorati Tags: blogoshpere, blog, electorate, blogger, Hezbollah, liberal, moral equivalence, political party, God, good and evil, ethnicity, liberal sensitivities, Middle East, Israel, martyrdom, Palestinians, Israelis, Fox News, CNN, Air America Radio, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Tony Snow, Chris Matthews, Noam Chomsky, MoveOn.org, Ann Coulter, political junkie, demagoguery, truth
Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site! Wanna swap links? It’ll help us both. Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone
Subscribe to my feed
Join Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome. (see left side bar or below this post)
5 comments:
I am indeed smiling rock!! :)
You are irreverent, articulate, respectful, witty, unashamedly opinioned and so black and wite in your thinking it is untrue - I love it!!! Few people have the capacity/will/energy/intellect to offer so much - i thank you for putting it out there for us to debate, mock, scream at, agree and disagree with and ultimately think about...
Because isnt that what its all about - thought... Actually lets take a step back, its actually about beliefs. Its pretty accepted in most schools of psychology that Beliefs preceed thoughts, thoughts give birth to actions and actions generate the results we see in the world. Thats why its so important to pay attention to our respective beliefs and thoughts as they lead us to take actions - actions which generate whatever results the human mind can concieve, whether harmful, giving, kind, harsh, neutral, stimulating, boring or whatever...
... so, some beliefs. "Some people are just good, and others are just evil" (I paraphrase because I dont have your post directly up before me). I wonder if this can actually be determined as a "truth" as you advocate or rather this is a belief ... a belief that has arisen from following a life path which has provided the perceived reinforcement for that belief but a belief none-the-less...
Because looking around I wonder if there is some evidence that may challenge that belief. Stanley Tookie Williams may be a popular case to quote. Heres a guy who 20 years ago most people would have labelled as totally evil - founder and leader of the Crips, one of (if not the most) violent gangs in modern American history. However without going into all the detail (a lot of which can be easily found online) reforms inside of prison. With no expectation of clemency even he took it upon himself to spread a message of good. The reason he was executed is because he refused to ask for mercy for the murders for which he was incarcerated as he asserted that he had not killed those victims. He DID state that his execution was karma for his other perpetrations however, his value set prevented him from taking the easy option.
Now is a man like Stanley Tookie Williams inherently good or evil?
Doesnt this depend upon a multitude of factors? Might it not be overly presumptious to label this man or anyone as inherently good or evil with no chance of switching the other way???
I know (and Im sure everybody in the world) knows people in their own lives who have gone through change - some massive, some minor - yet change none the less. It seems more truthful to say that everybody has the capacity for change... I know I do, you do, we all do. I could (with persistent trying and reinforcement) become a staunch right-winger! :) I could become an evil bastard that goes and kills his mother and sisters in a rage. Now its MASSIVELY unlikely (before the police bang down my door) that I become either of those things - but the possibility is there.
The human psyche is a construct of 3 elements - genetics, social conditioning, and choice. I wonder if choice could be the dominant part given the chance. Is it truth that people are "good" or "evil" with no hope of change...? The evidence might assert that this notion would be better described as a belief and not a factual truth.
Love and respect
Sean
http://seansankey.blogspot.com
PS. Many thanks for your kind response to my other comment. Look forward to your thoughts.
PPS. The text of your blog is very difficult to read as it jumps around a fair bit as advertising appears I assume. Could the layout maybe be altered to keep the text in one stable place - my eyes aint all that good!! :)
Ah "truth"- the million dollar word. I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment that there is one "truth" about everything. I would instead argue that based on the array of perspectives on any one issue, no one is completely right and no one is completely wrong- thereby eliminating any possibility of there being one "truth" about anything. You say Hezbollah is a terrorist group that needs to be destroyed, but for the thousands of people in S. Lebanon who've benefitted from their schools and hospitals, they were doing things the government can't. To you, Iraq is a just and noble cause intended to kill terrorists, eliminate a threat to the US and make the world safer. To me it is and always has been a misguided excuse to flex some American muscle and make Saddam pay for sitting on top the world's third largest oil reserve. Who's right? Though we both think we are correct, my truth is no more valid than yours. So who's right?
By the way, I've heard several claims that WMDs have been found and every time I've asked someone for documentation I literally get no response. You say they found some recently but the "liberal" media has overlooked it. Fox "news" has said nothing about it and they're far from liberal- by their own admission. The Bush administration would get a nice boost in the ratings if he made that announcement- but he hasn't. Why? Can you provide some link or something that would add some fuel to your assertion...
Nice post by the way!
I am indeed smiling rock!! :) You are irreverent, articulate, respectful, witty, unashamedly opinioned and so black and white in your thinking it is untrue - I love it!!! Few people have the capacity/will/energy/intellect to offer so much - i thank you for putting it out there for us to debate, mock, scream at, agree and disagree with and ultimately think.
I really appreciate your comments and compliments. I continue to have fond feelings about you and know that you are one of the good guys, and smart guys, in the world. This kind of communication makes me not care so much what people believe, to a point. I wouldn’t be so clear about my communications if it weren’t important, I believe, that we consider what we’re doing very carefully. I’m sure you will convince me on some arguments, and maybe I will at least make you think on others.
Because isn’t that what its all about - thought...
How right you are.
"Some people are just good, and others are just evil" I wonder if this can actually be determined as a "truth" as you advocate or rather this is a belief.
I seem to have mis-communicated, or maybe I wasn’t clear. I do believe in the capacity to change. I’ve done it myself. Some people, though, I believe, are so evil to the core, like Hitler and Saddam, that only a miracle could get them out of their dark space. Terrorists are in a dark space. They have convinced themselves that their cause is so important that it’s worth killing women and children. These people probably will never change. They are lost.
Stanley Tookie Williams may be a popular case to quote. Here's a guy who 20 years ago most people would have labeled as totally evil - founder and leader of the Crips, one of (if not the most) violent gangs in modern American history. However without going into all the detail (a lot of which can be easily found online) reforms inside of prison. With no expectation of clemency even he took it upon himself to spread a message of good.
I can never figure out why the left is so eager to forgive murderers and dictators, and at the same time hates Bush, a good guy. It doesn’t make any sense to me. In the case of Tookie, all the evidence I’ve read points to his guilt. Yet he went to his death claiming he was innocent. A confession would have been a good first step towards redemption. The fact that he did good deeds before his death is a good thing. I know many of my compadres on the right are suspicious of his motives. Every person on death row is doing good things. They don’t want to die. They want to receive a pardon, or even parole eventually. So, they go to church, and do good things. Me, I don’t care about the reason. If he’s doing good things, I give him credit. On the other hand, and you will think this is cold, he committed horrendous crimes, and if anyone deserved the death penalty, he did.
It seems more truthful to say that everybody has the capacity for change... I know I do, you do, we all do.
Yes, again, I agree with you. I won’t go into all the changes I’ve made, hopefully most of them for the good. I still believe that at any moment in time, there are good people and bad people. People who are blowing up families are bad. People who are defending the world from people blowing up families are good. Can the bad ones change to good? Yes. The IRA in Ireland evidently transformed from a terrorist organization to a law-abiding political force. Even the Israeli’s made this transformation. They were terrorists in the beginning, with the Irgun, against Britain, bombing the Kind David Hotel. One difference, though, they warned the British to leave before they bombed it. Now, Israel does not engage in terrorism. The United States even, used the tactic in WWII of killing civilians, with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We don’t do that anymore. We’ve changed.
The Muslim fundamentalists, however, won’t be changing anytime soon. They believe their killing is blessed by Allah. They don’t do it to survive, or in defense. They do it to harm people, to massacre people, to annihilate people.
I could (with persistent trying and reinforcement) become a staunch right-winger! :) I could become an evil bastard that goes and kills his mother and sisters in a rage. Now its MASSIVELY unlikely (before the police bang down my door) that I become either of those things - but the possibility is there.
Now if you become a right-winger, I’ll really believe that people can change! :)
The human psyche is a construct of 3 elements - genetics, social conditioning, and choice.
Yes, I agree.
I wonder if choice could be the dominant part given the chance. Is it truth that people are "good" or "evil" with no hope of change...? The evidence might assert that this notion would be better described as a belief and not a factual truth.
I don’t think it’s ever truth to say that Hitler was just a misunderstood painter. One difference in the left and right today, and between the left in their glory days, the days of Roosevelt, Truman, and Kennedy, and the left of today, is that the left now cannot bring themselves to say that anyone is evil. Respectfully, I see this as a huge moral failing. We are obligated, I believe, to distinguish between good and bad, and to recognize evil.
The left by the way, always returns to this kind of mistake. They did it with McGovern in 1972, the anti-war liberal who got clobbered by Nixon in that election. The left will get clobbered again if they make the mistake of abandoning a rational approach to the dangers in our world.
Love and respect.
Right back at you!
The text of your blog is very difficult to read as it jumps around a fair bit as advertising appears I assume. Could the layout maybe be altered to keep the text in one stable place - my eyes aint all that good!! :)
Thank you for telling me this. I have only one ad that moves, so I’ve transferred it to the right sidebar at the bottom. Let me know if this helps.
Thank you Sean for your insightful comments, and have a great day!
Nice post by the way!
I’m starting with this, I wonder why? Thank you very much.
Ah "truth"- the million dollar word. I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment that there is one "truth" about everything.
pas y amour, I don’t think there is one truth about everything, but that there is one truth about some things. As I said, which political party to elect will depend on the voters, and there is no absolute truth involved. Even though you and I would believe that truth lies on our side. I am humble enough to admit that even a liberal might not do as much damage as I imagine were he or she elected president. I don’t believe it, but I concede the possibility.
On the other hand, there is no argument, I believe, that Hitler was bad, and evil. So, too, there is no rational argument that Hezbollah is good. The Mafia does good things too, so does that make them good? This is the whole point of my post. The left believes in moral relativism and moral equivalency, and the right doesn’t. We, being the right, are right of course. :)
To you, Iraq is a just and noble cause intended to kill terrorists, eliminate a threat to the US and make the world safer. To me it is and always has been a misguided excuse to flex some American muscle and make Saddam pay for sitting on top the world's third largest oil reserve. Who's right?
I am. Next?
By the way, I've heard several claims that WMDs have been found and every time I've asked someone for documentation I literally get no response. You say they found some recently but the "liberal" media has overlooked it. Fox "news" has said nothing about it and they're far from liberal- by their own admission. The Bush administration would get a nice boost in the ratings if he made that announcement- but he hasn't. Why? Can you provide some link or something that would add some fuel to your assertion.
Sorry, I can’t help you unless I do some heavy research. Maybe one day I’ll have time for such things. I did hear it on Fox News, though, as opposed to what you said in your comment. I heard it mentioned several times for about a week. Fox was the only network covering it, and it wasn’t even mentioned in any of the major newspapers. I’ve been stunned at the lack of follow-up on this. Is it the usual liberal bias, or are the facts not yet certain, I don’t know.
As far as Bush’s handling of this news, he’s woefully inadequate at communication and PR. Thank God for Tony Snow, a real change for the better. You are so “respectful” of Karl Rove as a genius, yet Rove must be partially responsible for the dismal communication record of the Bush White House. Reagan would have had a higher approval rating even with Iraq. In fact, he could have, I believe, convinced a lot more moderates of your party, and independents, to back him in this war effort.
Thank you again, paz y amour, for your great comments. You continue to articulate your side’s views with class and dignity.
I remain yours, respectfully right, and on the right.
Have a great day!
When did you get so humble? (just kidding...)
First thing's first. Bush's inadequacies with the press aren't due to Karl Rove. Granted, Bush is not the brightest candle in the public arena- nor is he a good public speaker but he's the p-p-p (can't say it today!) I say Rove is a "genius" because he is the mastermind behind the presidency and all it encompasses. I would argue that he's brilliant enough to be president himself but he's a bit too radical, too unattractive and is better at pulling strings behind the scenes as opposed to public leadership. His ideas led to Bush's ascent to the Oval Office, the subsequent foreign and economic policies and the "war on terrorism", however, the events that he helped create are now beyond his control (i.e. it's biting him in the ass!) and as I said before, they are trying to figure a way out of the mess as we speak. Since I won't ask you to take time out of your busy day to do research, paraphrase for me- What were the details you heard on Fox "news" regarding the said WMDs? I looked on their website and typed in "WMDs found in Iraq" and I got a few articles from 2004 about an artillary shell found with sarin gas that was built BEFORE 1991. Sorry my man, you can't blame the "liberal" media for neglecting the newest WMD "discovery" when the GOVERNMENT isn't saying anything about it either.
Secondly, my main point was not whether your truth is right over mine or vice versa (even though I'M right). My point was simply that one's "truth" is based on a person's experiences and perceptions. If you were born and raised in poor areas of S. Lebanon, Mexico or Indonesia, your ideals would be completely different (that goes for me as well!). You and I both think Hitler was evil (perception) because we were educated (experience) on what he did- not because we instinctively feel he was eviil due to his German heritage. Let's say hypothetically that the US stayed out of WWII and Hitler is able to take over the whole of Europe, rewriting history as we know it- no concentration camps, no gestapo, no persecution of Jews, Russians, gays, Blacks, Poles and gypsies. He wins "fair and square" and brings all Europeans together under one German flag. Given that alternative situation, would Hitler be viewed as an evil tyrant or the "uniter of Europe"?
Today, we view the anicent Romans as great, innovative and masterful- not greedy, tyrannical, oppressive and bloodthirsty. Who wrote Roman history? Romans.
Experience and perception....
Lastly- I have no "party". I would vote for ANYONE if I agreed with most of their philosophies- regardless of their political affiliations. I'm "conservative" on some issues (criminal punishment, defense, welfare), yet "liberal" on others (immigration, taxation, education, abortion, environment, jobs). Neither party (again, we can only manage two?!?!?) nor polarized philosophy stand for what I believe in wholeheartedly so I vote across party lines.
Post a Comment