Archives

Categories

My Own Grid of Disputation, Modified to Accommodate Medical Cases

Since RW isn’t familiar with Beck, I thought an illustration would be in order… The idea and template ripped shamelessly from Cosmic Variance.  I’ve indicated approximate values for a number of other figures to give a baseline against which to measure GB’s rating.  And, yes… I had to extend the chart a touch to fit him on it.

Grid of Disputation, with index cases and Medical Case extension

24 comments to My Own Grid of Disputation, Modified to Accommodate Medical Cases

  • I think I would have slid Hannity over into the crackpot side. He should not even be in the same zip code as Say Uncle and RW

    John Cole. God I love Cole. I found him through this blog and have read him every day that I have had computer access since 2004.

    Beck is just Beck. On television and radio he is as crazy as a shithouse rat but I think in real life he would be tolerable enough. I figure he is just doing what he has to do to get ratings and make his mortgage payments.

    I don’t have any problem with that.

  • I think in real life he would be tolerable enough. I figure he is just doing what he has to do to get ratings and make his mortgage payments.

    In other words you think he deserves an Oscar? I don’t think there has been an actor born that could play the role of GB on television and yet be a sane individual in real life. (Meryl Streep could do it, maybe). I’m serious when I think he has some issues that should be looked at by a doctor. I’m not talking about straight-jacket material… but some therapy and maybe a mild mood stabilizer is probably in order for the dude.

  • The funny thing is that I have a soft spot for him.. He has that baby face, and he comes across as so open and sincere… he just wants you to love him. And for the voices to go away.

  • The funny thing is that I have a soft spot for him.. He has that baby face, and he comes across as so open and sincere… he just wants you to love him. And for the voices to go away.

    Yeah. Kinda like some of my kinfolk. The crying and the hysteria does have some kind of weird allure. But I guess that explains the ratings.

  • RW

    Unless there’s been a revision to the definition, saying stuff that you disagree with doesn’t make one a crackpot. The people who think Obama is a secret muslim, the people who thought Bush knew about 9/11 beforehand, the people who think 9/11 was an inside job, the people who think Bill Clinton had his enemies killed; crackpots. Same with Glenn Beck: just because someone says stuff that you disagree with vehemently, it doesn’t make them any less intellectually plausible than you, as long as they have something to back up their contentions besides “well, I just feel that….”.

    I’ve met Hannity (loooooong before anyone had heard of him) by chance. Nice guy. I haven’t watched his show since Colmes left, though; I don’t care to set aside an hour just to hear the party line talking points. Likewise, I didn’t set aside time for Air America radio. I know where to get the Dem talking points. But, that doesn’t make AA hosts ‘crazy’ or ‘crackpots’.

    I figure he is just doing what he has to do to get ratings and make his mortgage payments.

    Ironically enough, I remember when some guy named John Cole was sending a lot of us righties e-mails on a rather regular basis, hoping to get links to his posts, to go along with his weekly “will someone please sign up for blogads on this site?” entries. And then, Markos noticed. And the advertising revenues started to flow in). Like the many millions of others out there, Terri Shiavo caused a sea change in philosophy (we all remember burning of GOP registration cards all across the land & the avalanche of resignations from GOP stalwarts due to that issue, don’t we?), so there’s no chance that, like Arianna Huffington & David Brock & Meghan McCain, the newfound attention that arrives 10 seconds after deriding Republicans after trying your best to get attention by promoting Republicans and, well, not faring very well, it’s anything other than authenticity at it’s finest, huh?

    ————–

    Thanks for thinking that I’m reasonable, btw. I really appreciate that.
    I’ll add that I don’t think Olbermann is anywhere near crazy (self-obsessed and an egomaniac? yes. A joke who has turned his network into a near laughingstock & unofficial house organ for a political party? Yes) & that the DUers are mainly hateful & ignorant party-liners just as many GOPers are….everyone has them. Oliver certainly isn’t anywhere near crazy – he and I used to be friends like you guys & I are, but when I found three separate instances of his lying about me in various comments sections I immediately ended any communication, as I should’ve – he’s just a tool who works in a Soros funded organization that passes along the talking points. I’d say there are few “crazies” out there; there are just plenty of people who hold views that are so against-the-grain of those that we (individually) hold, that we think that “no sane person could possibly think that”.

  • Yeah, RW – I think you’re saying in words what I’m saying in my chart. If disagreement was enough to make you crackpot, then you & Hannity would have both been listed that way.

    Yes, Olberman & O’Reilly – I think they were separated at birth – a lot of their craziness is attributable to delusions of grandeur. But they do have a flattering self-image to a degree that cannot be healthy. They don’t think straight – it isn’t just that they say things I disagree with… it’s that their thinking is so unreliable – if the right “source” told them that 2+2=5 and liberals were for 4 and babykilling, they’d believe that 2+2=5. That’s crackpot territory. Screeds and rants as sole means of communications – that’s crackpot territory.

    And then there are the ones that you really feel sorry for – the ones who actually do need help. The reason I put the Nirthers and Truthers on the borderline is because both groups include people who fall on both sides of it. I figure they “average” right at the line. There are nirthers and truthers out there that actually need help. And then there are the run-of-the-mill crackpots who listen to a little too much Art Bell.

    Beck is among those that you feel sympathy for. He could use some help.

  • I think John Cole really did get discouraged and disillusioned with the GOP. Frankly I cannot see how any Republican can proudly call themselves a Republican.

    Is it the limited government? Is it the fiscal sanity?

    Maybe it is abortion and gays.

    I don’t know what it is but I have more respect for libertarians and anarchists.

  • Yeah – I’m trying to think of something that the Dems have done in the last couple of years that approaches what the GOP did with Schiavo. If anyone has a suggestion… I’m trying to imagine how it feels to have your own guys doing something that awful.

  • RW

    I think John Cole really did get discouraged and disillusioned with the GOP.

    According to the polling data, most Republicans got discouraged and disillusioned with the GOP, myself included (I’ve been polled a few times, several by Zogby. Gave Bush horrible grades during his second term). The USA is 40% GOP and ~40% Dem, give or take. When Bush’s approval ratings went the way of Dennis Rodman’s (IIRC, it was in the high teens) simple mathematics tells us that more than half of the Republicans out there viewed Bush negatively. Now, that’s just Bush, people viewed the Republican party negatively, as well. My best evidence: the elections. Elizabeth Dole lost North Carolina, for goodness sakes.

    What most Republicans didn’t do, however, was to claim that they’re still conservative while at the same time adopting nary a single conservative stance on any issue. “Single payer health care? Eh, it’s inevitable. Tax rates? Those buffoons spent so not it’s time to pay the piper. Scandals? But what about Republican X?” You know who else says all those things? Democrats. Liberals. Progressives. You know who never – ever – says those things? Conservatives (save for scandals, where conservatives will condemn unseemly actions of any person, party be darned). There are and were plenty of vocal conservatives/Republicans out there who were criticizing the party for its ways. In the blogosphere, Michelle Malkin springs to mind (oh, yeah, she’s crazy. The lefty blogs said so, so it must be true) who never wavered. But, you know who the “principled conservatives” out there are? Chris Buckley. John Cole. Scott McClellan. Colin Powell.

    Yep, the “principled conservative” is one who votes for Barack Obama. Like ‘helping the poor’, it doesn’t matter if you donate jack squat to charity from your own pocket, you’re “for the little guy” if you vote Democratic. Actually being conservative or pushing for conservative principles doesn’t matter; just pull the lever next to the (D). Well, plenty of GOPers & conservatives still believe in as small centralized government as possible so that state & locals can do what they’re supposed to do and Uncle Sam should handle the necessities & then stay the heck out of our lives (and by “lives” I mean something other than just a uterus).

    Frankly I cannot see how any Republican can proudly call themselves a Republican.

    Not as many did in ’08. For good reason.
    I’m under the ‘barely’ category. My alternatives continue to be the sticky wicket. Case in point…

    Is it the limited government? Is it the fiscal sanity?

    Looking back on the $400 billion deficits…..they sure do look frugal, by comparison.

    If you want to know why there is outrage at these townhalls and are NOT of the mind that a bunch of people have been waiting by their phones for the insurance industry to call them and tell them to leave their houses & go scream at a congressman, it would be that “fiscal sanity” is not what is being bandied about. People are scared that we’ve gone from $3 trillion in spending to $4 trillion in spending without most congressmen reading the spending bills. They’re scared to hear about $2 trillion deficits this year & unemployment projections showing little change in the future in one ear and watching the leadership in congress & the president tell them that they plan going further & adding > 40 million people to each of our personal health care tabs (personally, I can’t wait to go to the gym for an hour and bust my a$$ in order to stave off the inevitable while preparing to pay – from my pocket – for Oliver Willis’ impending heart medication because he lacked the self discipline to take care of himself). They hear that the gov’t is going to have a larger role in health care, that the government is going to add oversight and the government is going to become a major player in distributing claims, on top of adding 40 million people to the tally, and they’re upset. Oh, and the reason we’re going to do that: because, of course, it’ll save us money.

    There is anger because that kind of snake-oil pitch isn’t selling. People are mad because it insults their intelligence to hear “we need the government to do it instead of the insurance companies”, as we all know about the renowned efficiency and customer appreciation that the federal government provides. The $200 hammer & $400 toilet seats aren’t urban legends, after all. I’m aware that in the reality-based-community the thought that the federal government getting involved will streamline things and make them cheaper, but hopefully you guys are aware that not everyone accepts the notion that “federal gov’t = cost savings”.

    The GOP has surely insured disdain for their recent history of spending measures, especially under Bush 43. Folks supporting Barack Obama’s spending measures can go to the back of the line when it comes to critique, however. I’ll listen to advice on fiscal sanity from an Obama admirer around the same time I read a treatise on how to treat a lady written by Chris Brown, or “proper weaponry storage secrets” authored by Plaxico Burress. Lots of people can complain about out of control spendings. Democrats who are mad that the blue dogs aren’t on board yet? Not so much.

    Maybe it is abortion and gays.

    Of course, it is. And blacks & chinks & pollocks, too [in my best Archie Bunker voice].
    Nothing says “I’m secure in my argument” like assuming that your opposition is a bunch of bigots.

    After all, there’s no reason besides dislike for gays & the rights of women for any thinking person to disagree with Black Jesus & Nancy Pelosi.

    I don’t know what it is but I have more respect for libertarians and anarchists.

    I love Libertarians. Aside from that aforementioned 30%, of which there will neve be any agreement on my part, I’m more aligned with the Libertarian principles than I am the GOP. Individual liberty, after all, was one of the principles that our founding fathers felt so precious. But, being a Libertarian in America also means that you get to complain about everyone, since you’ll have no legislative responsibilities to be held to account for. And I love anarchists; once they mouth-off too much (and they always do, being snot-nosed college punks that they are) you get to beat the crap out of them and suffer no consequences since good little anarchists don’t call the polics. :)

    Hopefully, this will show up correctly.

  • RW

    I’m trying to imagine how it feels to have your own guys doing something that awful.

    Approaching it from the standpoint of a lefty Dem, I’d say that voting for the war in Iraq would be near the top of the list. I know that modern dogma dictates that it was a GOP war, but it truly was bipartisan. I remember Tom Daschle (who was the SML at the time) forcing more than one vote on the measure, to make sure that the nation knew that the Dems also were on board.

  • smijer

    Yeah… Good pick.

    The War vote is similar in the sense that the offense was just as great. But even while Hillary, Tom & JFK were voting for the war – and I was disgusted with the party generally – there really were some “principled liberals” (to paraphrase you) who didn’t jump on the bandwagon. Russ Feingold led a principled opposition including almost half of the Senate dem caucus, and substantially more than half of the House dem caucus.

    It was also dissimilar in that the “principled” guys were “further from the center” than the establishment guys. In Schiavo, the principled guys were “closer to the center” than the establishment guys.

    Howard Dean’s entrance to the party is probably what kept me able to identify with it… JFK’s primary win swung me somewhat back the other way.

    I often wonder what the Democratic Party would look like today if Howard Dean hadn’t come along when he did. I think that you picked a pretty good issue to help me empathize with Schiavo era sane Republicans.

    So, where are the sane Republicans today? Well.. you know Cole flipped – he ain’t republican in any sense any more. So that doesn’t count. Colin Powell? If I were GOP I wouldn’t be quick to throw him off the boat. And I wouldn’t claim Trent Lott or Rick Santorum – if they are “principled” then why would you want “principles”???…

    But… really… from my perspective…

    My perspective (this is truly my perspective – not concern trolling) is that conservatism is in need of a paleo revival. I think that’s where you guys make your strongest cases… I know that’s where I take you guys the most seriously. I know you disagree with Daniel Larison on foreign policy no less than you do Barack Obama on domestic policy. But he’s sane and thoughtful.

    Front Porch Republic isn’t exactly “paleo”. They’re more “Catholic”… but they bring with them a sense that they care passionately about people and about building up and empowering individuals and small, local communities – not just tearing down the fed to leave a power vacuum for WalMart to exploit.

    So, yeah – they can be taken seriously even when I disagree with them. I recommend you add them to your RSS reader.

  • RW

    But even while Hillary, Tom & JFK were voting for the war – and I was disgusted with the party generally – there really were some “principled liberals” (to paraphrase you) who didn’t jump on the bandwagon.

    And in 2004, the Democratic ticket comprised of the pro-war John Kerry and the pro-war John Edwards were the nominees for going up against Bush/Cheney. I’m simply using the same standard in my argument as the one used “against me” (for lack of a better phrase as a retort to Buck’s contention that a Republican cannot possibly discuss fiscal sanity after Bush was such a spender). I know you & the online left was for Dean…trust me, much of the online right was not for McCain. In much the same manner, much of the online right was against Bush’s spending; it’s just that so many people don’t remember it. Well, it was there, it was just wrapped around responding to the “war for oil” stuff & the Michael Moore movies & the 60 Minutes book-of-the-month club that was intended to hurt stature of the oval office. Just like there are/were plenty of liberals who were against the war, there were/are plenty of conservatives who were against Bush’s/congress’ spending. That’s what I’m trying to get at. Add in that the last congress during Bush’s tenure was that of Nancy & Harry (funny how many people forget that) and you have even more wrinkled brows at spending levels.

    In Schiavo, the principled guys were “closer to the center” than the establishment guys.

    I know that I played the role of coward & didn’t give my opinion of the Schiavo case. (yep, time to fess up). I think I simply said something like “I can understand why….” or whatnot. Slippery, Clintoney. Even in retrospect, I churl when contemplating that members of congress would step in to a family’s tragedy. Then again, I can look at my 11 year old daughter, about to turn 12, and look into the future and consider the prospect of having to let her go and I can imagine that I’d do everything that I could – including cheating, lying, stealing, hurting, whatever – to keep my little girl from being starved to death. It’s a lot like the father of Daniel Berg (the guy who was beheaded & who went off blaming Bush for it); if you’re losing your kid, you can do or say whatever you want, IMO. If you’ve earned anything as a parent, it’s the right to grieve however you wish when something like that happens. So, personally, I was about as upset with the GOP congress over that as I was when my mower blade hit a rock last week (“what? Crap, that sucks. I’m going to have to fix that down the road”) and wasn’t very mad, at all. I was more upset with the health care prescription plan that I was with Terry Schiavo. I was more upset with Ted Kennedy’s education bill than I was with Terry Schiavo (funny, you never hear Dems complain that the spending from Bush included massive education budgets that should be cut). My guess is that the number of people who honestly jumped parties over Terry Schiavo equals the number of white guys who have won the NBA slam-dunk contest.

    Colin Powell? If I were GOP I wouldn’t be quick to throw him off the boat.

    Gen. Powell voluntarily left the boat and it won’t be forgotten (and I suspect I know why he did), but I welcome Gen. Powell and anyone to the fray. Remember, I was a Giuliani guy, so I’m a big-tent type who disagrees with all the “if they’re not purely conservative, let’s vote them out!” stuff. A stiff conservative wouldn’t be Governor of California, right now. A stiff Governor wouldn’t have been governor of Massachusetts.

    And I wouldn’t claim Trent Lott

    I don’t have to search my archives of my old site, the one in my brain knows that I’ve long despised Trent Lott. He, Ted Kennedy, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Strom Thurmond, John McCain, Robert Byrd, Jay Rockefeller, Jesse Helms & many other illustrate the necessity for term limits, IMO.

    I know you disagree with Daniel Larison on foreign policy no less than you do Barack Obama on domestic policy. But he’s sane and thoughtful.

    Don’t read him, so I don’t know if I disagree with him. I know that Andrew Sullivan linked to him constantly during the waning days of the Bush admin (before I stopped reading a lot of blogs), so that tells me a lot. But, I’ll check him out based on your recommendation. The Republican party is in the wilderness. It’s up to the party to field candidates who can put forth a cohesive set of ideals for the ’10 elections & then move on from there. At this point in ’93, no one thought that Bush 41′s partying son would amount to anything poilitically, so anything can happen. But, I’m a practical realist: the Republicans don’t count, right now. It’s all at the lap of Barack Obama. He has huge majorities. If America likes what he does, the Dems will stay in power for a while. If America doesn’t like what he does, he’ll find out in about 15 months. I’m not very concerned about the Republican party, personally. I’m more of an ideologue & rarely vote straight ticket. Of course, that’s easy to do in GA, where local Dems are of the conservative bent.

    BTW, speaking of your guy stabbing you in the back: 200 days into his admin, I’m not all that displeased with Barack Obama’s foreign policy initiatives, so I can’t imagine that you’re very giddy.

  • BTW, speaking of your guy stabbing you in the back: 200 days into his admin, I’m not all that displeased with Barack Obama’s foreign policy initiatives, so I can’t imagine that you’re very giddy.

    Not giddy… Extremely peeved on some points… but I’ll take what he’s done over the alternative any day of the week.

    Yeah.. RW – you are one of the principled guys. I don’t know if I’d call Colin Powell that. I’ll never scrub the image from my mind of him pointing to tractor trailers of mass destrcution and telling the UN they might as well not inspect because we were going in and anyone who doesn’t like it be damned. But… He “switched” to support the opposition – it doesn’t mean he flipped or left the party. He’s trying to make room for moderates in the party.. I don’t think you guys (plural / general) would be wise to cut him loose quite yet.

    I don’t know. I do know this: our political system in this country is sick. Instead of pushing the cream to the top, it rewards craziness, stupidity, anti-intellectualism and tribalism. Instead of fostering moderation, it fosters extreme polarization.

    I guess my mind is wandering now. I think it’s nearly time for a rambling blog post about American political identity.

  • Jan

    When you brought up Schiavo, are you referring to the starvation and dehydration of a young brain injured woman? Not a removal from life support unless food and water are now considered “life support”. If so, then we could remove life support from anyone who can’t lift a spoon and a bottle of water and be legal? Right? What do you call that ‘mercy killing’? I suppose it isn’t euthanasia, so what the heck is it?

  • smijer

    BTW – the stupid thing is… The GOP secured disdain for their spendiness almost exclusively from among those who voted for them in 2008. Yeah, they lost some of their ability to make a believable case against our side’s spendiness… but what really hurt them was that people were generally dissatisfied. Not from the state of the deficit, but from the state of the super-deregulated economy. Not from the record-setting spending (and yes, Obama is setting new records… Bush set new records himself… it’s a continuum) – but because they couldn’t afford to see their insurance premiums go up again.

    The people that were upset with the caucus of Republicans that were moderate on immigration voted for John McCain. Latinos and their sympathizers voted Democrat because they were turned off by immigration hard-liners.*

    But you know… Big tent politics is fine … the problem is only having two tents, situated virtually identically on the ideological spectrum (and in not a very good spot on it), but as polarized as conceivably possible on the political spectrum. The other problem is having two ginormous echo chambers… The problem is mutual demonization to the point that nobody trusts anyone outside their own echo chamber.

    Solve those problems… and then the political, social, and international problems will be easy by comparison.

    *It was kind of like how Democrats’ hawkishness didn’t hurt them in the 2004 general election. The people turned off by their sabre rattling wound up voting for them anyway. They lost not for being untrue to their base, but for not satisfying joe sixpack that they were serious about “national security”.

  • smijer

    Then again, I can look at my 11 year old daughter, about to turn 12, and look into the future and consider the prospect of having to let her go and I can imagine that I’d do everything that I could – including cheating, lying, stealing, hurting, whatever – to keep my little girl from being starved to death.

    Yeah, of course you would. But, at the same time, you’d a) want the best for her, including the honoring of her own wishes, b) be smart enough to educate yourself thoroughly on the issues involved and come to terms with the fact that removing forced feeding/IV fluids from someone who isn’t there isn’t actually “starving them to death”.

    Yes, like you, I had huge pangs of sympathy for her Mom & Dad, despite feeling like they were caught up in a lot of bad choices and were having a lot of things whispered in their ears by the likes of Randall Terry causing them to do things they shouldn’t… I felt huge pangs of sympathy for them when their efforts failed. I even felt sympathy for the ordinary Americans who watched the media circus, had their heart strings pulled, and forgot to pull their brain-strings. Bill Frist, on the other hand… that’s unforgiveable. Jeb Bush – unforgivable. All the rest of the assholes who tried to capitalize on this family’s tragedy – unforgivable. Like you said..

    Even in retrospect, I churl when contemplating that members of congress would step in to a family’s tragedy.

    You know, I didn’t switch parties when the Democrats chose to sponsor the Iraq war… because there wasn’t a party to switch to. JC had an alternative to the party of Bill Frist and Rick Santorum. I certainly understand why that incident was enough to push him out of the GOP.

  • Jan

    I would hope, that given similar circumstances, those who love me will require a signed document with my wishes rather than the word of someone who would benefit from my death.

    The only person who capitalized on the death was her husband and his lawyers. Those who attempted to help the mother when requested were not paid, but the lawyers of her estranged husband certainly were and he was the only person who had anything to gain from her death.

    Yeah, of course you would. But, at the same time, you’d a) want the best for her, including the honoring of her own wishes, b) be smart enough to educate yourself thoroughly on the issues involved and come to terms with the fact that removing forced feeding/IV fluids from someone who isn’t there isn’t actually “starving them to death”.

    Her parents deserve more credit than you and others, who let political allegiance drive you to take positions, give them. To suggest they did not want what was best for Terry is cruel, unfair, and inhumane. They took the battle to the public arena because they needed assistance keeping their daughter alive. They knew exactly what they were doing and why. In all fairness to you, you probably did not read their side of the story or you would understand their position better.

    Terry was sentenced to death by starvation and dehydration. How “there she was” doesn’t actually have any bearing on the case, but certainly those who tended her daily knew how “there she was”.

    By the way, what do you call her death, assisted suicide, euthanasia, mercy killing…. what?

  • Jan

    Barney Franks???? Really???

  • smijer

    Frank – no ‘s’. Yeah. He’s done & said a few things I disagree with, but he is smart and usually reasonably thoughtful. Definitely not a crackpot… I feel no embarrassment about him being on our side.

    By the way, what do you call her death, assisted suicide, euthanasia, mercy killing…. what?

    “Natural causes” is the most comprehensive and accurate characterization.

    BTW, I don’t have any written documents, but I trust the person who knows my wishes to convey them accurately, and if they are disputed I trust the courts to apply the criterion of reasonable standard of evidence to determine whether she is lying…

    I trust her much more than I trust the wicked people who tried to intervene in Terry’s family.

  • RW

    I feel no embarrassment about him being on our side.

    Just stay away from the gay prostitution ring in his basement & you’ll be fine. :)

    [amazing that anyone would be able to withstand that]

  • Cute… I’m assuming this is all joke & you know the truth of the matter and I’m LOLing.

  • RW

    Oh, yeah, I know, it was the boyfriend. He was Glen Greenwald before the internet was cool. :)

  • Valet – that’s who made the claim, anyway. No proof that he didn’t make it all up.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>