SteveG

Burning of Korans in Afghanistan

This entry was posted in Greenberg’s Law of Inexplicable Behavior on by

Truthout has an essay Burning of Korans in Afghanistan. Near the top of the essay is the following startling statement:

This past weekend, two senior American military officers were shot and killed within the Interior Ministry in Kabul by an Afghan colleague, who was allegedly provoked, according to Afghan government sources, by the Americans’ open mockery of the protests.

I have not heard such an allegation reported in the lame stream press.  If true, it would go a long way to explaining some of what is happening.  (I said explaining, not condoning.)

This definitely falls under Greenberg’s Law of Inexplicable Behavior, “When the media report on the existence of some seemingly inexplicable behavior, they owe us a report on what are the reasons that the actor uses to justify this behavior. Until you are able to read such an explanation, you have to realize that the media is not reporting the whole story.”

With a lot of justification in the intervening parts of the essay, it concludes with the following:

We are staring into a terrifying abyss of our own making. Were the Korans burned by accident or not? Does that really matter anymore? The following truism is all that matters; any sufficiently advanced incompetence is completely indistinguishable from malice. Ten years of brutal war, hundreds of billions of dollars expended, thousands of lives lost and destroyed, and we still have not learned the sine qua non of that most basic maxim.

And I don’t want to hear any rejoinders that the Afghanis or Muslims are just as intolerant.  We can’t control how other people behave (Duh!! isn’t that obvious now?), so we rightly need to concentrate on controlling our own behavior.

Israel’s Last Chance to Strike Iran

This entry was posted in SteveG's Posts on by

The New York Times has chosen to publish the op-ed piece, Israel’s Last Chance to Strike Iran.

I won’t bother to quote anything from the op-ed.  You can read it yourself if you are so inclined.

I don’t know why the newspaper doesn’t just change its name to The War Mongering Times.

I suppose publishing such pieces would be a service in the name of balance if it weren’t for the fact that I don’t think The War Mongering Times ever missed a chance to goad and lie the U.S. into some war.

Obama heckled over Iran war threat

This entry was posted in SteveG's Posts on by

The Tucson Citizen carried the story Obama heckled over Iran war threat from USA Today.

“Use your leadership!,” a woman yelled at Obama. “No war in Iran!”

There is not much to the story, but I note it as perhaps the first public protest that has come to my attention.

It seems like yelling at public figures at public appearances is the only thing we have left to do to get their attention.  Obama’s defenses against hearing a message are well honed.  Maybe he was hoping the deep bass of the rumbling drums of war would be inaudible to most people and he could silence the few people who can see what is going on.

Readers of this blog might be able to think of another public figure whose attention I have been trying to grab without any success.  It makes you wonder if a person has to go through an operation to disconnect the auditory nerve (if there is such a thing) before they can run for office.

Google’s New Privacy Policy: Invasive, Innovative or Both?

This entry was posted in SteveG's Posts on by

I was disgusted with the other news channels yesterday, so I happened to surf to the PBS News Hour.  I caught the tail end of this “debate”.  It just confirmed why I never watch the PBS News Hour.  The woman in this debate is nuts, bonkers, absolutely off the wall.

I watched the first few minutes of the video below to see what I missed, but had to turn it off after the woman in the video uttered a few sentences.



If anyone is brave enough to watch the whole thing, let me know if the woman says even a single sentence that is truthful or makes sense.


    

    
                                    

                                
                                                            
                                                                    
                                
                                                            
                                                                    

                                        
    

              

          
Tell Scott Brown To Stop Attacking Women’s Health Care
This entry was posted in  Greenberg's Law of Reverence  SteveG's Posts  on  by  
        

        
The Elizabeth Warren campaign sent me an email titled, “Stop Distorting Ted Kennedy’s Record”, that wants me to sign onto a letter shown below.  However, I think they are taking the wrong approach.  Even though I signed the letter, I attached the following comment:


As a volunteer for Elizabeth Warren and a collector of signatures for her primary ballot access, I must tell you that you are taking the wrong approach.


Politicians distort other politician’s records all the time. The public does not care that much, they are used to it.


This approach to what Brown is doing plays right into Brown’s bit about this is not being the Kennedy seat. It also sounds a little whiny. What famous politician got nowhere by asking, “Tell him to stop lying about my record?”


Instead, attack Brown’s policy because it is the wrong policy.


Previous accommodations for religious reasons to allow personal non-compliance with legal mandates were an attempt to be reasonable.  Give these Republicans an inch, and they want to take a mile.  They cannot use the granting of previous accommodations which were granted out of the goodness of people’s hearts to ask for even more accommodations.  The previous accommodations were a stretch to grant in the first place.


Granting an accommodation so a person can block the right of someone else to get health care is not a reasonable (or perhaps not even a Constitutionally permissible) thing to do.


I suppose you could mention that even with his Catholic principles firmly intact, Senator Kennedy understood the limits of granting accommodations.


In referring to Senator Kennedy, we might wish to remember Greenberg’s Law of Reverence.


We do not quote a revered historical figure because of our reverence for that person, we revere that historical figure because of what he or she said that is worth quoting.


I am being a little weaselly in this post because I used the Warren campaign’s headline, “Stop Distorting Ted Kennedy’s Record” to attract your attention. Let me know what you think of that. Would you have read the post if the headline had been “Tell Scott Brown To Stop Attacking Women’s Health Care?” [Without waiting for feedback, I changed the headline.]







    

    
                                    

                                
                                                            
                                                                    

                                        
    

              

          
I helped end the Bush tax cuts for the rich
This entry was posted in  Greenberg's Law of Idle Threats  SteveG's Posts  on  by  
        

        
MoveOn sent me an email telling me that I helped end the Bush tax cuts for the rich.  This is what MoveOn wanted me to share on the web.


I joined over 250,000 MoveOn member and progressives calling for President Obama to veto any extension the Bush tax cuts for the richest Americans–and he just made a public commitment to do it! Share this victory for the 99% with your friends, family, and co-workers.


When I posted this to my Facebook page, I added the comment:


Unfortunately, didn’t Obama back out of that commitment the last time? I will breathe easier when he actually does the veto as promised.


After receiving some push back on that remark, I explained why I made it.


Fairly early in life I recognized a principle that I have stuck to. “Never make a threat that you won’t be willing to carry out if developments take you to the threshold you warned about.” There must be some equivalent idea in poker.


Once you have backed down from carrying out a threat, then no threat in the future will carry any weight. So, if you have any doubts about your ability to carry out the threat, do not make it.


If your opposition knows from past experience that you operate under that principle, they will take your words more seriously.


Otherwise, they know your spine is weak and they can walk all over you. I can’t count the number of times I have emailed the President about this, and how many times he has been walked all over because he won’t take any advice.


So am I supposed to pretend that this threat is serious? Should I be willing to look like a fool in front of the opposition, by pretending that I believe these threats?


This isn’t just about Obama’s credibility anymore. This is now about my credibility. That is why I take his failures personally.


I will now add a new law to this blog,  Greenberg’s Law Of Idle Threats.  “Never make a threat you don’t intend to carry out.  If you have any doubts about your ability to carry out the threat, do not make it.”


Corollary:


“If you never test the opposition about whether they make idle threats, then you enable them to ignore this law.”


How many people remember George Bush’s threat, “Read my lips, No New Taxes.”  Remember how he was ridiculed in and lost his bid for re-election because of his failure to carry out his threat?


    

    
                                    

                                
                                                            
                                                                    

                                        
    

              

          
Iran wins first Oscar with “A Separation”
This entry was posted in  SteveG's Posts  on  by  
        

        
Reuters reports the story Iran wins first Oscar with “A Separation”.


Written and directed by Asghar Farhadi, the domestic drama focuses on a couple going through a divorce and touches on traditions, justice, and male-female relationships in modern Iran.


Quoting the director of the film, the article goes on to say:


“At this time, many Iranians all over the world are watching us and I imagine them to be very happy,” director Farhadi said while accepting the Oscar.


“At a time of talk of war, intimidation and aggression is exchanged between politicians, the name of their county (sic), Iran, is spoken here through her glorious culture, a rich and ancient culture that has been hidden under the heavy dust of politics.”


“I proudly offer this award to the people of my country, the people who respect all cultures and civilizations and despise hostility and resentment,” he added.


It is nice to know that amidst all the battling back and forth there are still voices of reason that speak out.


Above, I have included the Iran link from the Reuters article, so that you can go back to reading about demons if you must. After all, too much reason at one time might corrupt your mind.


    

    
                                    

                                
                                                            
                                                                    

                                        
    

              

          
Putin Says Iran Military Strike to Be ‘Truly Catastrophic’
This entry was posted in  Greenberg’s Law of Inexplicable Behavior  SteveG's Posts  on  by  
        

        
Business Week has the story Putin Says Iran Military Strike to Be ‘Truly Catastrophic’


His remarks about Iran and North Korea were interesting, but I find his remarks about Syria worth quoting.


Syria has come under mounting international pressure as a result of President Bashar Al-Assad’s crackdown on protesters, which is nearing its one-year mark.


Putin said that the resolution would be possible if the UN demanded not only from Assad to withdraw his forces but also from opposition to take away militant units from towns. “Refusal to do so is cynical,” Putin said.


It is no so much whether I agree or disagree with what he says here.  The marvel is that this is the first time I have read what he was thinking when Russia vetoed the plan of the other countries to put more pressure on Assad.


Maybe I need to add another law – Greenberg’s Law of Inexplicable Behavior – “When the media report on the existence of some seemingly inexplicable behavior, they owe us a report on what are the reasons that the actor uses to justify this behavior. Until you are able to read such explanation, you have to realize that the media is not reporting the whole story.”