SocraticGadfly

June 16, 2010

The Mighty Obama strikes out?

I didn't see too much of The One's speech, read snippets of it online, read more in the way of analysis of it. That said, nobody needed to tell me in advance that "pontificating platitudes" were likely. Also, now, can we get past the idea that he's that dynamic? Or eloquent? Can we also get past certain stereotypes (you have them too, many white liberals) that lie behind those presuppositions?

Face it, the speech sucked. It contained nothing new, other than Obama groveling more for the Senate to pass about anything he can call an "energy bill" with his name attached.

Where have we seen that one before? Oh, yeah. National health care. Stimulus.

June 15, 2010

Jay Rosen: Half right on MSM at best

Jay Rosen says the MSM isn't really either liberal agenda pushers nor corporate tools, but that it's much more complicated than that.

He's right that journalists look to serve their own interests. How he can miss the angle of journalists being perfectly OK as being celebrities and entertainers, though, I have no idea.

He's also wrong in overlooking how much the press does serve as part of an elite, and considers itself as such. That also is not complicated.

Hmm, maybe Rosen likes a bit of vicarious boost "pushing off" the MSM as a critic, to partake in being a celebrity, entertainer elite himself.

June 14, 2010

June 13, 2010

Blinded to the change

A new book explains how, especially when our attention is focused tightly, we can be blind to changes that we're not looking for.

And, computerized testing of this illustrates how pervasive it is, and not just about literal field-of-vision "change blindness."

Altruism not just limited to humans

People who have not felt the need to insist on the uniqueness of homo sapiens have known this fact for some time. Nonetheless, it's worth noting that information for the number of altruistic species, and the depths and specificity of their altruism, continues to mount.

Frank Rich asks two good questions

In a good column about gay marriage, Frank Rich asks why Rush (The Pomposity of Lust, to riff on Steve Miller) Limbaugh would invite Elton John, openly gay and civil-union pseudo-married, to be the wedding singer.

The real question is, why would Elton John even have considered accepting, let alone actually doing it? Was he fame-whoring or something? Does he really need the money that badly?

Elton John just went way down in my book.