Now, This Is Pretty Evil!

By -
Michael Moore calls for Obama to arrest the head of S&P. For, you know, saying what he thinks about US credit worthiness. Which is his job. Maybe the rating downgrade was a terrible mistake, but how is this exercise of free speech a crime in Moore's eyes?

Moore's comment is not nearly as evil as Goebbels, but it is pretty damned bad.

Comments

  1. Daniel9:55 AM

    There seem to have been a lot of problems at S&P. I think there's good evidence it was a bad decision.

    Apparently Michael Moore thinks that threatening decision makers with police action will make bad decisions better.

    I'm failing to understand the logic, but then, this is not a new experience with Michael Moore.

    ReplyDelete
  2. gcallah10:58 AM

    It's vaguely possible that Moore feels there is some sort of conspiracy to damage the US economy going on, but he gives no sign he thinks that, and I'm not even sure that is a crime.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more