In His Interest Only

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Columnist and author of “The Undocumented,” Mark Steyn argued comparing President Obama to Neville Chamberlain is “rather unfair to Neville Chamberlain” on Tuesday’s “Hannity” on the Fox News Channel.

Steyn said of comparisons between Obama and Chamberlain, “I think actually that’s rather unfair to Neville Chamberlain, Sean. He got the central question of the 1930’s wrong, but he was an honorable man, who believed he was acting in the interests of his country and the British Empire which he loved. When Churchill became prime minister he kept Chamberlain on and had him chair the War Cabinet in his absence. And Churchill wept over Chamberlain’s funeral casket, and claimed he was an honorable man who just happened to be wrong. I don’t think you can say that about Obama. I think what Obama did is significantly worse than what Neville Chamberlain did. I don’t think, in effect, Obama was negotiating on behalf of the United States. I think what happened at these talks is that he and the Iranians were, in a sense, negotiating together to anoint Iran as the regional power in the Middle East and to facilitate Iran’s reentry, the biggest planetary sponsor of terrorism, to facilitate its reentry into the global community. That’s what Obama was there doing.”

“I think the nuclear issue was a mere pretext, a Hitchcockian McGuffin. Iran will be a nuclear state, and very soon. The joke inspections regime – under which Teheran can block any inspections for the best part of a month – will facilitate the nuclearization of Iran and prevent anyone who objects to it – such as Israel – from doing anything about it. That’s a given.”

But that’s not what the talks were about. Obama’s vision of the post-American Middle East sees Iran as the dominant power, and that’s what the negotiations were there to finesse.

Steyn added, “I think that’s the other difference between Obama and Chamberlain. The horrors of the — of what Germany did were not known to Neville Chamberlain. And in a sense the appeasers of the 1930’s did so because of the horrors of the first World War and the lost generation, and they didn’t want that to happen again. And it’s because we know they got it wrong, that history won’t give us the same opt out card. Because we should have known better because it had happened before. And I think what Obama gets here, i think it does come back to a — to his classic Marxist worldview in which he sees America as the problem on the world’s stage. And if you look at everything he did — he’s done, Sean, what he did with Iran fits into that context. I mean, whether you look at missile defense in Eastern Europe, where he takes the side of Russia over US allies like Poland and the Czech Republic. If you look at little things, like the Falklands Islands, where he takes the side of Argentina over a US ally like United Kingdom. And in the Middle East, he’s taken the side of Iran over US allies like the Sunni monarchies and Israel, because his central view is that America and American power is the problem in the world. And, therefore, American allies are part of that problem. And, therefore, what he does is, in a sense, withdraw from the world, and enhance the position of the enemies of American allies. That’s what he’s done in the Middle East. And it won’t be confined to the Middle East, it’ll spread beyond that.”

Sheldon Filger: In a private meeting with leftwing progressive activists in the Democratic Party held in January 2014, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor, Ben Rhodes, spelled out the administration’s intentions. Unknown to Rhodes, his confidential briefing was secretly recorded, and details would subsequently leak out. The core of what he had to say about the negotiations with Iran:

“So no small opportunity, it’s a big deal. This is probably the biggest thing President Obama will do in his second term on foreign policy. This is healthcare for us, just to put it in context.” He went on to say, “We’re already kind of thinking through, how do we structure a deal so we don’t necessarily require legislative action right away. And there are ways to do that.”

Largely in secret, and based on a belief that the American people lacked the sophistication to fully understand the Iran issue as thoroughly as President Obama and his expert advisors, a policy decision was apparently made to engage in a grand act of appeasement, allowing Iran to maintain intact its illicit nuclear infrastructure designed solely to fabricate fissile materials suitable for ultimately only one purpose — manufacturing nuclear weapons. A fig leaf of a 10-year moratorium on full-scale use of that capacity by Iran, with a supposedly strict inspection regime that is obfuscated by a complex treaty that is so arcane, it allows Iran numerous opportunities to thwart its intent and cheat successfully, has been presented as largely a public relations exercise. The real intent of the Iran deal, as Ben Rhodes suggested 18 months ago, is to transform Iran from an adversary to a regional ally of America’s and serve as the Middle East policeman, allowing the United States to finally extricate itself from military involvement in that region.

Barack Obama, John Kerry and Ben Rhodes apparently believe in a manner similar to Stalin’s that the Ayatollahs’ vehemently anti-American hatred is not a core value of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and will be sublimated by pragmatism. Yet, even as the Iran Deal was being finalized, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei publicly chanted “death to America!” American flags were burning on Iranian streets as Kerry and Zarif exchanged smiles. And the regime’s most militant instrument of power, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, was staging naval exercises that involved the “sinking” of a replica of an American aircraft carrier.

President Obama has apparently convinced himself that Tehran’s hostility is only a passing phase, and that in time it will become the trustworthy guardian of the Middle East, protecting the United States from what the administration seems to regard as the unruly Sunni Arab world. Decades of alliances with the broader Arab world, and especially Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries, along with Israel, are in the process of being abandoned, in what must be regarded as the most reckless crapshoot in American geostrategic planning.

Unfortunately, the administration has lulled itself into sleepwalking with a hegemon whose core ideology, as the leaders of the Islamic Republic have repeatedly stated, is centered on hatred of the United States. Unless other forces can prevent what at this point seems inevitable, the ultimate outcome of the Iran deal is that Americans will one day awaken to the reality of an apocalyptic regime pointing nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles at their shores.

But it makes THEM feel good. It makes THEM feel superior. It MAKES them look “strong” in their eyes. And we know the only opinion that matters to Obama, Is Obama’s.

And in 10-15 years (or less) when Iran is terrorizing the world with Nuclear weapons the Left and Obama will be firmly and resolutely convinced beyond a shadow of any doubt that it will be someone elses fault! 🙂

Somebody Else’s Problem field, or SEP, is a cheap, easy, and staggeringly useful way of safely protecting something from unwanted eyes. It can run almost indefinitely on a torch (flashlight)/9 volt battery, and is able to do so because it utilises a person’s natural tendency to ignore things they don’t easily accept, like, for example, aliens at a cricket match. Any object around which an S.E.P. is applied will cease to be noticed, because any problems one may have understanding it (and therefore accepting its existence) become Somebody Else’s. An object becomes not so much invisible as unnoticed.

“The Somebody Else’s Problem field is much simpler and more effective, and what’s more can be run for over a hundred years on a single torch battery. This is because it relies on people’s natural disposition not to see anything they don’t want to, weren’t expecting, or can’t explain.”

― Douglas Adams, Life, the Universe and Everything

Problem Solved. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Welcome to the Dawn of 2013- Lies & SEP

Have you ever asked yourself why the people who want to actually cut spending (not just “cut” the rate of growth and call it a “cut”) and want to actually cut the size and scope of government intervention in our lives are portrayed as violent, ignorant, and/or extremists??

I do. Every day.

And I still think it comes down to drug addiction. But it goes deeper.

The people are addicted to the “free” stuff that isn’t free. And politicians are addicted to themselves and their own power. The Politicians are the dealers. The people are the enablers and the addicts buying from the dealers. And the Dealers are addicts to selling the drugs.

So they are incestuously addicted to each other.

The politicians keep giving the people “free” drugs – entitlements, class warfare, etc. and the people keep electing people who will give it to them.

And the sane ones who say that we have to stop this behavior are hated by everyone. The responsible one in the room is the last person anyone wants to listen to.

The Republicans aren’t happy with the Tea Party. Happy they got elected in 2010. But not happy that they keep getting reminded why they were elected which goes against this grain. And they aren’t prepared to fight the fight that is required to stop or wean off the addiction because they are in fact, addicts themselves.

And the Democrats and the Media that portray anyone who isn’t on board with them as “extremists” , “obstructionists”, “unfair”, “racists”, none more than the “domestic terrorists” known as The Tea Party.

Not loved by anyone.

Funny that.

Because in the end we will be forced to grow up. The longer we wait the harder and more painful it will be for us and for the future.

The Truth will come. That’s inevitable. It WILL come regardless. It is the real wolf at the door.

But like a petulant child, we refuse.

We want our candy and presents. We want Santa Claus/Obama Claus to come along and bring all of us more toys and tell us it was mean old Scrooge’s fault and that the Tea Party is the Grinch who wants to steal their Christmas.

The People of Whoville don’t want to know the truth.

There is is no joy in Whoville when it comes to the Truth about The Debt, The Deficit, Entitlements, Taxes, and Foreign Policy Threats like Al-Qaeda.

The People of Whoville want to be told sweet little lies because the Truth is too much too bear. And they are at fault and they can’t face it.

The Political Class just see an opportunity to use this to gain more power for themselves. But it’s a trap too.

Now they are addicted to lying. They can’t tell the truth anymore. And anyone who tries will be summarily crushed.

Divide and Conquer has no softer side. Authoritarians have non softer side.

And they are addicted to the power to control everyone and everything. The authoritarian modern liberal more so than the weak Republicans.

So the politicians are addicted to the power money brings them and the people are addicted to the money the government brings them.

What  a viciously incestuous cycle.

And the sane ones who want this to stop are the bad guys.

Well, a drug intervention is never anything but messy.

But 315 million addicts is a lot of messy.

The addict’s judgment is clouded due to their substance of abuse making it tough for them to see or think clearly.

And the Ministry of Truth is there to feed them sweet lies and to calm their fears. 🙂

That’s the Comfort Zone.

(with apologies to Fleetwood Mac)

Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies
(Tell me lies, tell me, tell me lies)
Oh, no, no you can disguise
(We want you to disguise, you can disguise)
Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies

Although I’m not making plans
I hope that you understand
There’s a reason why
Close your, close your, close your eyes…

But I couldn’t find a way
So I’ll settle for one day
To believe in you
Tell me, tell me, tell me lies

Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies

It’s someone elses’ fault other than our own and we don’t want to take the medicine to get it better.

Somebody Else’s Problem (also known as Someone Else’s Problem or SEP) is a condition where individuals/populations of individuals choose to decentralize themselves from an issue that may be in critical need of recognition. Such issues may be of large concern to the population as a whole but can easily be a choice of ignorance at an individualistic level. Author Douglas Adams‘ description of the condition, which he ascribes to a physical “SEP field,” has helped make it a generally recognized phenomenon.

Where multiple individuals simultaneously experience the same stimulus, diffusion of responsibility and/or the bystander effect may release individuals from the need to act, and if no-one from the group is seen to act, each individual may be further inhibited by conformity.

“Somebody Else’s Problem”, an effectively-magical field that obscures things you think aren’t relevant to you, such that even though you see them (or hear them or read them) you don’t actually *notice*, and quickly forget.

More generally, the phenomenon that causes people to ignore issues that they know about but think of as either not something they can do anything about, or not personally relevant to them right now. This can result in something that’s very important to a group of people being ignored by every individual member of that group.

Popularized by Douglas Adams in the “Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy” series, in which Ford Prefect describes it as:

“An SEP is something we can’t see, or don’t see, or our brain doesn’t let us see, because we think that it’s somebody else’s problem…. The brain just edits it out, it’s like a blind spot. If you look at it directly you won’t see it unless you know precisely what it is. Your only hope is to catch it by surprise out of the corner of your eye.”

When individuals are exposed to a multitude of messages about pressing matters of concern- information overload (now also known as Information Fatigue Syndrome) may be a result.

In Joseph Ruff’s article “Information Overload: Causes, Symptoms and Solutions” Ruff states, “Once capacity is surpassed additional information becomes noise and results in a decrease in information processing and decision quality”.

The 24/7/365 News cycle anyone? 🙂

The virulent “I don’t wanna know” reaction , mixed with deeply cynical fear and racist power politics equals the 2012 election anyone?

Vote for Me, the Other Guy’s asshole!!! It’s HIS Fault!!

And the Politicians and The Ministry of Truth can herd these willfully ignorant sheep to use to satisfy their own addictions.

Thus the cycle continues.

There may also be a tendency to argue that since a proposed solution does not fit a problem entirely then the entire solution should be discarded. This is an example of a perfect solution fallacy. “This fallacy is often employed by those who believe no action should be taken on a particular issue and use the fallacy to argue against any proposed action”.

The nirvana fallacy is the informal fallacy of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives. It can also refer to the tendency to assume that there is a perfect solution to a particular problem. A closely related concept is the perfect solution fallacy.

By creating a false dichotomy that presents one option which is obviously advantageous—while at the same time being completely implausible—a person using the nirvana fallacy can attack any opposing idea because it is imperfect. The choice is not between real world solutions and utopia; it is, rather, a choice between one realistic possibility and another which is merely better.

The perfect solution fallacy is an informal fallacy that occurs when an argument assumes that a perfect solution exists and/or that a solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it were implemented.

It’s Not “fair”!  🙂

It is common for arguments which commit this fallacy to omit any specifics about exactly how, or how badly, a proposed solution is claimed to fall short of acceptability, expressing the rejection in vague terms only. Alternatively, it may be combined with the fallacy of misleading vividness, when a specific example of a solution’s failure is described in emotionally powerful detail but base rates are ignored.

Misleading vividness is a term that can be applied to anecdotal evidence[1] describing an occurrence, even if it is an exceptional occurrence, with sufficient detail to permit hasty generalizations about the occurrence (e.g., to convince someone that the occurrence is a widespread problem). Although misleading vividness does little to support an argument logically, it can have a very strong psychological effect because of a cognitive heuristic called the availability heuristic.

The availability heuristic is a mental shortcut that occurs when people make judgments about the probability of events by the ease with which examples come to mind. The availability heuristic operates on the notion that, “if you can think of it, it must be important.” The availability of consequences associated with an action is positively related to perceptions of the magnitude of the consequences of that action. In other words, the easier it is to recall the consequences of something, the greater we perceive these consequences to be.

Short circuit logic with emotion and keep it simplistic. Sound like Obama and the Democrats?

Never let a Crisis Go to Waste! 

Create new ones daily. Crisis Mode prevents a lot of actual critical thinking.

And the anti-nirvana heuristic solution  is to do something substantive and real. Hence, The Tea Party is against nirvana, utopia, mom and apple pie so they are the ultimate evil and must be destroyed. 🙂

The ones who truly want people to face the truth and fix the problem are seen as the problem. 😮

Welcome to the dawn of 2013 where doing the responsible thing makes you the Grinch, the enemy, the bad guy…

Well, Isn’t that Special? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson