Creepy governor's vision for Nevada taking shape nicely

A public meeting full of hundreds of local parents "rose to scream-therapy intensity" or "took a heated turn," depending on who your education reporter is. But whether people were lusting for the blood of white guys in ties or just whining like the nation of whiners John McCain's campaign always said we were, all these complaints about cuts in education funding are confusing.

Look, in the future there aren't going to be any "jobs."  Kids today don't need an education to prepare them for lives of roaming a desolate wasteland in rags and eating raw rat meat until they die from starvation or the poisons that saturated air and water after the world's industrial facilities were abandoned and just allowed to rot. Really, who cares if Johnny can't read?

Having said that, these public meetings would probably be a lot more fun if they featured a personal appearance by Nevada Republican Gov. Pervus A. McSkanktard.

Comments

[dave404]

Gleaner,
Sounds like you have been reading James Howard Kunstler's "world Made By Hand" and "The Long Emergency".

Both very intriguing reads!

[Michael Green]

Gleaner, a couple of questions. One, wouldn't it be nice to know how the parents voted? My answer to anyone who complains about the state's budget problems is, if I don't already know the answer, who did you vote for? If you voted for Gibbons, quit complaining. You got what you asked for.

But we're all in this together. Still, the second point, should we WANT Gibbons at any such meeting? All of those women ....

[Patrick]

Yes, because without government who will you serve?

[Russell Kirk]

I thought Penguin said we would "serve" wingnut young "braised ... with a nice sun-dried tomato and leek ragout." Has there been a menu change?

[The Penguin]

Well, we do need a vegetarian option for all the bunny-food eaters out there. Perhaps substitute braised young with grilled tofu steaks?

[Patrick]

I was using the word serve as an intransitive verb refering to service as in servant.

I am reminded of the wize words of ober dicta.....

Oh Patreek, mon ami! You are still quite the clevair one! Eez a play on words, non? Ees eveedent nobody can match your wiley skeelz with zee use of zee English langwage!

[Patrick]

In regards to Ober Dicta et al., may I remind each of you that referring to someone as an ideologue or a zealot is merely neurotic projection, a Freudian defense against something you either don't understand or dislike.

You project my disagreement or opinions as the cause of my reason for being. For example a white conservative (Actually libertarian) male...or just a wingnut ideologue, thus being so, you can ignore me or dispense with any facts or reasoning I might provide.

It certainly is easier to deal with people who disagree with you that way.

But what Orby and Gleaner misunderstand is this, evidence (Facts or reason) is not mutually exclusive from ideology. Ideology is not just policy preferences but are a set of expectations about how the real world works. Ideology is the culmination of a persons reason, logic, and the assembly of facts present to them. It is no more wrong to hold a liberal ideology than it is to hold a conservative or libertarian ideology. The policy preferences of these ideologies are therefore reflections of how these groups believe the world operates.

Liberals observe the world and see greed, inhumanity, poverty, inequality and want to rectify these problems by having a government geared toward helping them. Government can help people with healthcare needs, income needs, housing needs, but government does a poor job in telling people how to live. Therefore liberal ideology often wants government out of the privacy of peoples homes. Government, to them, is good, so long as it is accountable through the election process.

Conservatives see a world where the private sector is efficient because competition brings out the best while government tends to perform poorly when regulating the economy. Many social services should be in the hands of the private sector because they can do it better. But government is needed to make sure people are morally upright. They need to protect us against the things we refuse to protect ourselves against like pornography or trashy television…or gay marriage.

Libertarians observe the world and see the world as millions of self interested individuals interacting. In the private sector they act cooperatively (even in competition they can only survive by getting people to cooperate voluntarily … aka buy their own goods) but in government they see coercion. Government not only telling people how to run their business but how to run their “family values” Libertarians see government (when expanded too far) not as something that is accountable to the people but as something that enforces its particular values (whatever they might be) on an unwilling minority.

Each ideology is different, each has different reasons and different facts and different predictions about the world works. Liberals see an economic meltdown as the root of free markets. Conservatives see rising crime and poverty as the root of government welfare programs. Libertarians predict that too much government regulation leads to economic meltdowns and greater poverty.

Ideology, therefore, is not bad. To be an ideologue is not a pejorative term. It simply means to be a person who has come to understand how the world works through reason. We use facts and logic to shape our arguments. If facts and reason can be proven to shake the foundations of an ideology then good.

But calling someone a zealot, or an ideologue, or a wingnut does nothing to prove them wrong. All it shows is that you are incapable of dealing with another person with a different set of beliefs and that you are only capable of ignoring them and the merits of their position.

[The Penguin]

I observe the world and see a place where there is insufficient braised young.

[Dave404]

Oh my! someone must be winded! Not me; I scrolled past.

Hey kids, I offer you a link to the website of one James Howard Kunstler. I don't know if Gleaner is tongue in cheek with his comments or not, but I, for one, believe that society is about to undergo a drastic change.

So for those who are interested in what may be coming, and it isn't more government, read "The Clusterfuck Nation Chronicle" here
kunstler

I urge all of you dto read Kunstler's outlooks and I look forward to some discussion back here in Gleaner land.

[Russell Kirk]

I didn't read any of that either, D404. Are all Scientologists that windy?

[Patrick]

Proven right three posts in a row...

[Patrick]

I know some of you guys are into fashion and interior design so I thought you might like this article.

[Myrna the Minx]

Patrick, um, that's not what projection is exactly. It's attributing your own unconscious desires or wishes to other people. So for instance, if I portrayed myself as a free market libertarian but unconsciously believed that, say, government sponsored universal health care was actually a fabulous idea, I would run around all over the internet and accuse people of being socialists. Just as an example.

[Myrna the Minx]

I should just clarify that I am clarifying your reference to Freudian projection.

[Patrick]

I did find that definition as well.

I will accept that definition and I will subsititute "projection" with "ad hominem" which will be used to make my point.

[Judy]

Ahem - Gleaner - How long are you going to allow Patrick to take up real estate on your blog comments section? He is boring me.