"The world of words" vs. reality
Most of the information we humans get about the real world comes not from direct personal observation but through words or numbers provided by intermediaries--textbooks, the internet, newpapers and...government press releases.
A savvy person constantly questions this information, because acting on bad information can be costly--sometimes even fatal.
Obama and company have announced that the estimated cost of the first ten years of Obamacare is a paltry $900 billion. But the Democrats cunningly started the clock on those first ten years on the day the bill was passed (March 23, 2010), knowing the new law would cost virtually nothing for the first *four* of those ten years because it didn't kick in until 2014.
If we look at the costs per year after the thing starts spending money like a...well, like a Democrat, the actual cost per decade is closer to double the Democrats' estimate.
But since roughly 54 percent of Americans don't actually *know the difference* between billions and trillions, no biggie, right?
Washington is a world built on words: press releases, MSM stories, monthly reports, rumors, speeches and so on. To the extent that pols a) get good information; and b) tell the public the truth about it, the public at least has a n make rational decisions. But if either condition is violated, which version do you think prevails: reality, or the World of Words?
Children typically believe words will shield them against reality. But if an adult believes words can overcome reality he or she is probably a Democrat. Because the truth is that eventually, reality wins.
I can hear the chorus from my liberal friends now: "That's irrelevant in this case, because we're certain our wonderful, cool, dreamy president and our Democratic senators and reps are telling us the facts. And not just *any* facts, but true facts.
"After all, they've never lied to us before."
Ah.
I'm not a psychiatrist but from what I've read, Obama appears to be a classic narcissist: He seems to believe he's the smartest, most talented person on the planet. (Remember his offhand comment that he thought he was a better speechwriter than his speechwriters? Better on foreign policy than his foreign-policy advisors? At the time most Americans thought he was joking.)
To a full-blown narcissist the rest of the world then has only those qualities he has determined. It is, in essence, Obama's own 'virtual world,' defined by his thoughts. Any connection between those thoughts and reality is largely coincidental.
His main skill seems to be the ability to manipulate awestruck listeners into doing what he wants. He's done that for so long that it seems to be virtually the only way he relates to others.
Anything he can't control--the economy, the Constitution, other nations--is considered a potential threat. That would also include Benghazi, Syria, Iran--and the American people.
A savvy person constantly questions this information, because acting on bad information can be costly--sometimes even fatal.
Obama and company have announced that the estimated cost of the first ten years of Obamacare is a paltry $900 billion. But the Democrats cunningly started the clock on those first ten years on the day the bill was passed (March 23, 2010), knowing the new law would cost virtually nothing for the first *four* of those ten years because it didn't kick in until 2014.
If we look at the costs per year after the thing starts spending money like a...well, like a Democrat, the actual cost per decade is closer to double the Democrats' estimate.
But since roughly 54 percent of Americans don't actually *know the difference* between billions and trillions, no biggie, right?
Washington is a world built on words: press releases, MSM stories, monthly reports, rumors, speeches and so on. To the extent that pols a) get good information; and b) tell the public the truth about it, the public at least has a n make rational decisions. But if either condition is violated, which version do you think prevails: reality, or the World of Words?
Children typically believe words will shield them against reality. But if an adult believes words can overcome reality he or she is probably a Democrat. Because the truth is that eventually, reality wins.
I can hear the chorus from my liberal friends now: "That's irrelevant in this case, because we're certain our wonderful, cool, dreamy president and our Democratic senators and reps are telling us the facts. And not just *any* facts, but true facts.
"After all, they've never lied to us before."
Ah.
I'm not a psychiatrist but from what I've read, Obama appears to be a classic narcissist: He seems to believe he's the smartest, most talented person on the planet. (Remember his offhand comment that he thought he was a better speechwriter than his speechwriters? Better on foreign policy than his foreign-policy advisors? At the time most Americans thought he was joking.)
To a full-blown narcissist the rest of the world then has only those qualities he has determined. It is, in essence, Obama's own 'virtual world,' defined by his thoughts. Any connection between those thoughts and reality is largely coincidental.
His main skill seems to be the ability to manipulate awestruck listeners into doing what he wants. He's done that for so long that it seems to be virtually the only way he relates to others.
Anything he can't control--the economy, the Constitution, other nations--is considered a potential threat. That would also include Benghazi, Syria, Iran--and the American people.
posted by SF at
5:07 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home