tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post827791105087906679..comments2023-12-13T16:57:33.142-06:00Comments on Blogodidact: Bill Moyers Thugocratic Speech - UpdatedVan Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comBlogger55125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-51632052590695680552008-07-04T06:30:00.000-05:002008-07-04T06:30:00.000-05:00Susan is my sister.I was working on your 'looniver...Susan is my sister.<BR/><BR/>I was working on your 'looniversities' comment but Van took all the wind out of my sails.<BR/><BR/>I'll get back to it soon...John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-84978224851671732512008-07-02T19:25:00.000-05:002008-07-02T19:25:00.000-05:00I had similiar symptoms to aphasia for several mon...I had similiar symptoms to aphasia for several months, when I was supposed to die the second time.<BR/><BR/>I couldn't read, talk, walk, or even think nearly as well as I used to during that time, and the recovery, which included many seizures (the cause, although by AIDS, is still specifically unknown).<BR/><BR/>I still can't recall many things I used to know, including some words (which I still hafta look up more than a few times), but I am thankful I have recovered a lot.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I do know how hard that is, John, and I'll definitely be prayin' for you.USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-58414351138967724762008-07-02T18:51:00.000-05:002008-07-02T18:51:00.000-05:00NOTE: Regarding John's responses... I received an ...NOTE: Regarding John's responses... I received an email from Susan (Sorry John, not sure if she's your wife or sister...) which goes along way to explaining what I'd been taking as 'cutsey' and baffling... such remarks were just so out of character to who I knew John to be, I though he was 'dis'n' me... and I feel a fool for not picking up on nature of the situation earlier.<BR/><BR/>I was aware that John has had a few strokes over the last couple years, and was glad to see that he was keeping involved with people via email... what I wasn't aware of, was that as a result of the strokes, John has some degree of <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphasia" REL="nofollow">Aphasia</A>, which in his case, makes it difficult to track and respond to complicated arguments ("convoluted" arguments are mentioned... but I'll just try and avoid that...).<BR/><BR/>I know John to be a very intelligent guy, and I expect it's got to be frustrating as all get out to engage a contrary point of view, want like hell to respond, and not be able to get the thoughts out of your head and into the debate. <BR/><BR/>I can't imagine.<BR/><BR/>In light of that, I'll agree to disagree with John on the more indepth issues, and go on from there.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-8734632438283244422008-07-02T17:13:00.000-05:002008-07-02T17:13:00.000-05:00John-What do I think? I think we are screwed with ...John-<BR/>What do I think? I think we are screwed with the choices we have for President, although, considerably less screwed with John McCain than Obama, but both choices suck.<BR/><BR/>As far as Annapolis goes, I do know this: even the Officer who comes in last place is smarter than the majority of anyone graduating at any of our looniversities, so that isn't an issue for me. <BR/><BR/>Also, contrary to popular belief, a chimp can't operate fighter aircraft (or any aircraft for that matter), let alone land on a Carrier out at sea at night in sea state 3.<BR/><BR/>So yes, I believe that McCain definitely is intelligent enough to be qualified as President, and he isn't lacking in courage either.<BR/><BR/>As for whether he is an Ace, clearly he isn't, and even had he not gotten shot down, it's unlikely he ever would've achieved Ace, because the Vietnamese and Soviets learned early on not to mix it up with our fighters, so getting the opportunity to shoot one down was rare indeed.<BR/><BR/>Frankly, I have no idea why that is important to you, John, or anyone else, for that matter. <BR/>Whether one is an Ace or not has no bearing on Presidential qualifications whatsoever.<BR/><BR/>But again, I like neither candidate, although I dislike Obama far more than I do McCain.<BR/><BR/>Now that I have answered your questions, perhaps you can answer Van's.<BR/>Do you want a straight-forward and honest debate about what Van wrote about or not? If you don't, then fine, but please let me know.<BR/>Thanks.USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-11284743866784794782008-07-02T10:28:00.000-05:002008-07-02T10:28:00.000-05:00Oops… I said, "And also, he an ace pilot wasn't he...Oops… I said, "And also, he an ace pilot wasn't he?"<BR/><BR/>That was incorrect. I'd like to rephrase that… "And also, he <B><I>was</I></B> an ace pilot wasn't he?"<BR/><BR/>What do you think Ben?John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-51451928166252659872008-07-02T08:41:00.000-05:002008-07-02T08:41:00.000-05:00On another subject...John McCain is a patriot. Ful...On another subject...<BR/><BR/>John McCain is a patriot. Full stop.<BR/><BR/>But I heard somewhere that he graduated from Annapolis at the head of his class? And also, he an ace pilot wasn't he?<BR/><BR/>It seems no one talks about his full military record. I could be wrong about all this but I think it deserves a full discussion.<BR/><BR/>JohnJohn Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-17547821351752976212008-06-22T16:04:00.000-05:002008-06-22T16:04:00.000-05:00John said “Well that's perfectly muddy. mushroom, ...John said “Well that's perfectly muddy. mushroom, Jim, lance, USS Ben USN (Ret)… I tried to give Van a lifeline but apparently, he'd rather drown”<BR/><BR/>My guess is, that they, like I, are looking at what you’ve written and are wondering “What in the hell is it that John thinks he has said?”<BR/><BR/>Spit it out man! Cut the cutesy crap and say what you have to say!<BR/><BR/>(Is that clear enough for you?)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-56861011022388089022008-06-22T14:51:00.000-05:002008-06-22T14:51:00.000-05:00John, If your posturing helps you feel as though y...John, <BR/>If your posturing helps you feel as though you aren't evading the issues... well good luck with that.<BR/><BR/>People can easily examine what I've said and what you haven't, and make up their own minds.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-25593886135346212472008-06-22T14:22:00.000-05:002008-06-22T14:22:00.000-05:00Well that's perfectly muddy.mushroom, Jim, lance, ...Well that's perfectly muddy.<BR/><BR/>mushroom, Jim, lance, USS Ben USN (Ret)… I tried to give Van a lifeline but apparently, he'd rather drown. Maybe one of you would like to help him.<BR/><BR/>I know I'm mixing metaphors (drowning v. digging) but I can't help myself. When someone is digging himself further into a hole, the first thing he <B><I>should</I></B> do is <B><I>STOP DIGGING</I></B>. Asking his friends for help is also helpful.John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-55541378058347837752008-06-22T13:26:00.000-05:002008-06-22T13:26:00.000-05:00"Are making a rational argument or an emotional on..."Are making a rational argument or an emotional one?"<BR/><BR/>Not biting on the premise John, or granting your implied attempt at taking the high ground. Rationality, doesn't exclude emotion, and to try would be irrational.<BR/><BR/>My arguments, and specifically my criticism's of Moyers, are based on reasoned analysis of the facts, principles and ideas involved, and that is what drives my arguments. I will however, not posture as a Mr. Spock. To imagine you can exclude your emotions, or that your arguments should be devoid of emotion, is foolish. My emotions are intact, and they will show in respect to either the nature of the taunt or violation of principles involved, but they are harnessed firmly to the facts.<BR/><BR/>Now you have a choice to make. Do you want to be a troll, or do you want to debate (try to quell your teenage anxiety) the issues.<BR/><BR/>A troll is someone who merely insults or taunts, never advancing an idea of his own, only attacking others. If that's what you want to be about, I have no further interest in you. <BR/><BR/>I hope that is not the case.<BR/><BR/>If you want to debate the issues, if you have a belief you think I've criticized unfairly or mistakenly, lets hear your reasons for that. State them and advance them as a Man. If you want to try to create some bloodless playing field... I've no interest. If you expect to enter the blogosphere devoid of any banter at all... I suggest you pack up your blog and return to your email lists.<BR/><BR/> If you want to tweak me, I'll respond in kind, and though my arguments are not based in, or led by emotion, I'll not posture as some milque toast ideal of British reserve. I know Reason, as the Greeks did, to be the orderly and systematic direction of the mind towards a goal; based in facts, honed by logic, and above all else, reflecting reality.<BR/><BR/>If you're up for a good argument, one which we might both benefit from, I welcome it. If all you want to do is make half statements and silly quips, be gone.<BR/><BR/>We've got 45 comments here John, in you have yet to state or advance an argument.<BR/><BR/>Do it, or drop it.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-30815399069592521712008-06-22T12:05:00.000-05:002008-06-22T12:05:00.000-05:00Let me restate that… Are you making a rational sta...Let me restate that… Are you making a rational statement/argument or an emotional one?John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-31493902273305328172008-06-22T11:30:00.000-05:002008-06-22T11:30:00.000-05:00Are making a rational argument or an emotional one...Are making a rational argument or an emotional one?John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-10675797537067103602008-06-22T10:10:00.000-05:002008-06-22T10:10:00.000-05:00I expected better from you John.My mistake.I expected better from you John.<BR/><BR/>My mistake.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-51752315006592957312008-06-22T04:09:00.000-05:002008-06-22T04:09:00.000-05:00Why should I have to make "a clear statement or ar...Why should I have to make "a clear statement or argument," when you keep doing it for me?John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-20609724791232456552008-06-21T22:06:00.000-05:002008-06-21T22:06:00.000-05:00Or maybe ... here's an idea... how about you pick ...Or maybe ... here's an idea... how about you pick a few of my points about Moyers' speech, and explain to my how they are not the problem I see them as?<BR/><BR/>You've accused me of being obscure... but I've yet to see a clear statement or argument from you. Care to clear that up?Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-60553769348969888632008-06-21T21:48:00.000-05:002008-06-21T21:48:00.000-05:00John said "You keep proving my point, Van."Ok... i...John said "You keep proving my point, Van."<BR/><BR/>Ok... indulge me... what was your point again? Maybe if you actually came out and said what your point was, you could save me from missing it.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-38977947369709722232008-06-21T21:28:00.000-05:002008-06-21T21:28:00.000-05:00You keep proving my point, Van.You keep proving my point, Van.John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-13710892403962870762008-06-21T20:23:00.000-05:002008-06-21T20:23:00.000-05:00John,“Your problem is I know you and I've learned ...John,<BR/>“Your problem is I know you and I've learned even more in the last week. Your entire premise, that I am ignorant, is false.”<BR/><BR/>Since I do know you, I’ll assume that we’re sitting around the virtual BarBQ, having a good loud argument, smiles on both faces and good natured ‘Yikes!’ sounding out on each landed zing.<BR/><BR/>I did try to stop short of calling <I>you</I> ‘ignorant’… though maybe you’ll excuse me if I leaned into delivering it, in response to your “You, yourself, have proven the point of the saying, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit." And ‘Rainman’ casts – that’ll raise my Irish (or Scottish… much the same).<BR/><BR/>(psst… you won’t find ‘Thugocratic’ in the dictionary… bit of blogodidactic license with the language for illustrative purposes there)<BR/><BR/>“…Since it is false, everything following from it is also false.” <BR/>No, not the entire premise, that is sound, and what follows from it is sound, only attributing it to you is unsound (I hope).<BR/><BR/>“We talked some more. When I finally wound down, both Dagmar and Dottie said, "Sounds like Van is dumb."”<BR/><BR/>Lol. John, I would have liked to have been there, it would have been fun! I wish I could write myself off as dumb, but I don’t see any way to let myself off that easily. I don’t expect you to say something along the lines of <BR/>“Wow! Van sure referenced a bunch of high falluting stuff there… I’d better go along with him on that!”<BR/><BR/>Not only would that (knowing you) be an <I>exceedingly dumb</I> expectation, but I wouldn’t want such an agreement under any condition, it would be a betrayal of everything I know and believe.<BR/><BR/>Where you have reason to challenge what I’ve said, please, challenge me – with the ideas. I don’t think I’m letting any secrets out of the bag to say that I have been wrong before, but when I have, no matter how far I had to reach in to pull my foot out of my mouth, I’ve been thankful for being corrected, being better off that way, than by believing something in error.<BR/><BR/>I just ask that you don’t say (not that you would, just an example) “Moyer’s is a good guy! I believe him!”, find a point, show me the principles behind it, lets look at what those rest upon… if we do that, at the very least, one of us is going to come out the better for it.<BR/><BR/>And btw, I didn’t rip Moyers speech because he’s <I>‘Bill Moyers’ member of MSM</I>, etc. I have and do watch and re-watch his interviews with Joseph Campbell, I’ve got his (BIG) book, “A world of Ideas”, a compilation of his interviews which I’ve heavily thumbed and commented in, I’ve enjoyed (with some argument – half the fun) his pieces on Poetry and the Book of Genesis.<BR/><BR/>My problem with his speech, is the ideas underlying his speech, the thinking beyond stage one which is nowhere in evidence, the conflicts and contradictions and violence those ideas, if enacted (those which haven’t already), could not avoid inflicting upon the Constitution, upon freedom and Reason.<BR/><BR/>You can certainly disagree… I welcome it.<BR/><BR/>Cheers.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-6041051666100259502008-06-21T18:55:00.000-05:002008-06-21T18:55:00.000-05:00Van—you are so right; it is a common tactic of the...Van—you are so right; it is a common tactic of the ignorant and it would work if I were ignorant. I think I'll try a <A HREF="http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/MWOL-home.htm" REL="nofollow">dictionary</A> to find the word I need…<BR/>________________________________________<BR/><I>"Thugocratic" -- The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search bar above.</I><BR/>Let's try a different tact… <I><A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?q=Thugocratic+&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a" REL="nofollow">Google</A></I>. Looks like there is a small problem... you haven't received proper credit. Your problem is I know you and I've learned even more in the last week. Your entire premise, that I am ignorant, is false. Since it is false, everything following from it is also false.<BR/>________________________________________<BR/>Now let's talk about "thing" you and I call "Bill Moyers Thugocratic Speech." It's misnamed. It <B><I>should</I></B> more correctly be named "Van's Thugocratic Interpretation of Bill Moyers Speech." It has a fundamental problem though; it's rather unwieldy. How about something short and to the point but still totally encompassing both your and my understanding of this concept – "Van's Thugocratic Tirade."<BR/>________________________________________<BR/>Van… I'll say this nicely as I can. You are, without doubt, head and shoulders above me in your scholarly achievements.<BR/>This morning; my mother, two of her friends, and I went to <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?q=HyVee+Belton&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a" REL="nofollow">Hy-Vee</A> for breakfast. We talked about "this and that" for a while.<BR/>Finally, Dottie said, "What's ya been doing this week, John."<BR/>So I started talking about my friend Van.<BR/>"I got that email from Tom about 'Bill Moyers Speech'," Dagmar said.<BR/>We talked some more. When I finally wound down, both Dagmar and Dottie said, "Sounds like Van is dumb."John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-88890975173639240552008-06-21T13:07:00.000-05:002008-06-21T13:07:00.000-05:00John,Or maybe this works better than what I said l...John,<BR/>Or maybe this works better than what I said last, partly because it's said much better, and partly because it involves a reference which you can get all worked up over as being irrelevant, and B.S. for using more than your preferred chump change words. <BR/><BR/>From Alexander Popes <A HREF="http://poetry.eserver.org/essay-on-criticism.html" REL="nofollow">'Essay on Criticism'</A>, Part II<BR/><BR/>(lines 1-4)<BR/>Of all the causes which conspire to blind<BR/>Man's erring judgment, and misguide the mind,<BR/>What the weak head with strongest bias rules,<BR/>Is pride, the never-failing vice of fools.<BR/><BR/>(lines 15-18)<BR/>A little learning is a dangerous thing;<BR/>Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring;<BR/>There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,<BR/>And drinking largely sobers us again.<BR/><BR/>(<I>psst! You can either decide to drink deep, or you can run away from it and maintain an opinion with no known basis and even practice your blustering by trying to turn the quote back on me... won't that be fun!</I>)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-24082557261773151692008-06-21T12:14:00.000-05:002008-06-21T12:14:00.000-05:00John said "You, yourself, have proven the point of...John said "You, yourself, have proven the point of the saying, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.""<BR/><BR/>John, there's also a common tactic of the ignorant - when confronted with something you don't know, rail and bluster about that it isn't worth knowing, and is all B.S.!<BR/><BR/>Works great with those who believe what they want and know even less than the ignorant blusterer.<BR/><BR/>Problem is, that those who do know and understand what they are talking about can easily spot it. It's not just a difference of opinion, it's a cowardice, a fear of the unknown, and a sad sight to see.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-57450172716216949452008-06-21T11:19:00.000-05:002008-06-21T11:19:00.000-05:00Van—There is another, I think, pertinent saying… "...Van—<BR/>There is another, I think, pertinent saying… "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."<BR/><BR/>What I said; was not said nicely.<BR/><BR/>Or at least long enough to fully respond to your "6/20/2008 8:45 PM" comment. I'm working on that now.John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-63984299027584250522008-06-21T10:25:00.000-05:002008-06-21T10:25:00.000-05:00You've said it better (or should I say worse) than...You've said it better (or should I say worse) than me -- and in your own words.<BR/><BR/>I'll say it now and <I>any time</I> I ever come across <I>any post</I> you make <I>anywhere</I>. You, yourself, have proven the point of the saying, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit."John Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-76246834888672484512008-06-21T07:20:00.000-05:002008-06-21T07:20:00.000-05:00Van said... BTW, you never explained the 'Rainm...Van said...<BR/><BR/> BTW, you never explained the 'Rainman' question. I suppose there's an obvious, not so flattering jab that can be taken from it... or did you have a different idea in mind?<BR/><BR/> June 20, 2008 6:42 PMJohn Chamblesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400194619856292602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-52861096803836882452008-06-20T20:45:00.000-05:002008-06-20T20:45:00.000-05:00(I responded on John's site with this)John,I'm not...(I responded on John's site with this)<BR/>John,<BR/><BR/>I'm not aware of any bloggin etiqquete you've broken, and regarding, "...maybe I was supposed to blow-off Van.", no, you weren't supposed to. Assuming you have some interest in the matter, I'd appreciate and look forward to any comments and challenges you might have. And unless someone is inserting only thoughtless vitriol or some such equivalent, I wouldn't delete any contrary comments.<BR/><BR/>"Some of what Van says even makes sense… until I reach his conclusions”, and those of his surrogates [This one was excellent: ...I must say that Van masterdebates better than me. LOL!]. Van should know about the company he keeps. "<BR/><BR/>Heh. I’ve ‘known’ Ben for over 2 years now, and exchange with him daily, and his comment should be marked up to light hearted recreational slamming and punning... picture it as friends by the BBQ, needling each other tongue in cheek... sort of the blogging equivalent of a jocks insult meant and taken as a compliment.<BR/><BR/>"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit"<BR/>Honestly, I never (intentionally) engage in B.S. I do take ideas seriously, and the time invested in my posts, and though not always polished I do put quite some time into them, is a serious effort on my part to work through the issues. And even when in complete disagreement with someone’s comments, I still get a lot out of them, and appreciate their engagement. I fully understand that people can honestly come to completely different conclusions; part of my fascination with this is examining how thoughts can begin at the same point, seek the ‘same destination’, yet still travel entirely different paths and conclusions.<BR/><BR/>"....Unfortunately, I couldn't allow myself to read all his posts in their entirety..."<BR/><BR/>I feel your pain. As one of the Commenter’s, Lance (whom I enjoy disagreeing with), mentioned, I do tend towards long windedness, but believe it or not, by the time my posts reach the page, they've been edited down substantially.<BR/><BR/>The last ref's to Smoov, don't relate to this discussion, but are regarding a blog-friend at another site; normally a very level headed person, who within the last year has reached a high in professional success, but within the last couple weeks, had a friend killed in Afghanistan (in this context, I'd appreciate no Bush comments), his sister discovered to have cancer, and his serious girlfriend left him. He was making some erratic and out of character remarks at that site, and those comments were immediately following that episode.<BR/><BR/>John, I don't soft peddle my comments, and sometimes I can be rather tactless, but I've no problem admitting when I've gone too far, or admitting when I'm wrong (that of course assumes that I agree that I am wrong ;-) ) if that doesn't bother you, I look forward to hearing more from you.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.com