Comments on: The Incoherent Obama http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/ The Sweet Release of Reason Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: JB http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22036 JB Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:19:24 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22036 Government stupidity got us into this trouble by inflating housing prices and now the answer (of course!) is more government stupidity.<br><br>Obama is just digging a deeper grave that he wants us to all willingly jump into. No thanks. You and all the other kool-aid drinkers are welcome to jump in of course. Government stupidity got us into this trouble by inflating housing prices and now the answer (of course!) is more government stupidity.

Obama is just digging a deeper grave that he wants us to all willingly jump into. No thanks. You and all the other kool-aid drinkers are welcome to jump in of course.

]]> By: JB http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22035 JB Sun, 01 Mar 2009 04:19:24 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22035 Government stupidity got us into this trouble by inflating housing prices and now the answer (of course!) is more government stupidity.<br><br>Obama is just digging a deeper grave that he wants us to all willingly jump into. No thanks. You and all the other kool-aid drinkers are welcome to jump in of course. Government stupidity got us into this trouble by inflating housing prices and now the answer (of course!) is more government stupidity.

Obama is just digging a deeper grave that he wants us to all willingly jump into. No thanks. You and all the other kool-aid drinkers are welcome to jump in of course.

]]> By: Todd http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22034 Todd Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:33:30 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22034 It all depends on how seriously you take the notion that the Constitution was intended to establish a government of enumerated powers for the benefit of a people with unenumerated rights. I see the 9th and 10th amendment as clearly saying that unless the power the federal government wishes to exercise is authorized in the Constitution, it cannot legally proceed. I can't find a provision that sanctions the use of tax revenues to fund scientific research. This is the closest thing I could find "The Congress shall have Power...To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" but I don't see how that authorizes anything other than the granting of copyrights and patents. It all depends on how seriously you take the notion that the Constitution was intended to establish a government of enumerated powers for the benefit of a people with unenumerated rights. I see the 9th and 10th amendment as clearly saying that unless the power the federal government wishes to exercise is authorized in the Constitution, it cannot legally proceed. I can't find a provision that sanctions the use of tax revenues to fund scientific research. This is the closest thing I could find “The Congress shall have Power…To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries” but I don't see how that authorizes anything other than the granting of copyrights and patents.

]]> By: erutan http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22033 erutan Fri, 27 Feb 2009 01:05:53 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22033 It would depend on whether the increase in taxes was enough to cause companies to flee the country, or just rethink the degree of outsourcing. There's a difference on taxing profits made in other countries and "ending the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas" imo.<br><br>I'm a bit baffled how this (or havng government sponsored R&D) is a raw use unconstitutional power... It would depend on whether the increase in taxes was enough to cause companies to flee the country, or just rethink the degree of outsourcing. There's a difference on taxing profits made in other countries and “ending the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas” imo.

I'm a bit baffled how this (or havng government sponsored R&D) is a raw use unconstitutional power…

]]> By: Tony http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22032 Tony Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:11:38 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22032 I get it. You don't like the new president. Reading your blog, I get the impression that you don't like much of anything. You live in a world where all decisions can be Monday-morning quarterbacked. Here in the tactile world someone has to clean up the mess left by a generation of bubble-economics so that knuckleheads like you can spend your days banging on a keyboard. If you don't like it, then run for office yourself. Knob. I get it. You don't like the new president. Reading your blog, I get the impression that you don't like much of anything. You live in a world where all decisions can be Monday-morning quarterbacked. Here in the tactile world someone has to clean up the mess left by a generation of bubble-economics so that knuckleheads like you can spend your days banging on a keyboard. If you don't like it, then run for office yourself. Knob.

]]> By: Vangel http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22031 Vangel Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:09:12 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22031 The incoherence is obviously based on goals that cannot stand the scrutiny of real world economics. People do not behave as Obama and the Democrats (or Republicans for that matter) want them to and as long as they ignore human nature the confusion and contradictions will be visible for all objective observers to see. The incoherence is obviously based on goals that cannot stand the scrutiny of real world economics. People do not behave as Obama and the Democrats (or Republicans for that matter) want them to and as long as they ignore human nature the confusion and contradictions will be visible for all objective observers to see.

]]> By: mk http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22030 mk Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:17:01 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22030 Let me make that clearer. <br><br>What is the point of saying "if ((something that won't happen)), we end up in the lake"? If it won't happen why mention it?<br><br>Well, he's trying to persuade us to make sure it doesn't happen. In other words, he believes we don't yet agree with him.<br><br>But he is also predicting that we will agree with him. He's figured everything out for us! He understands our perspective better than we do, and knows that once we consider his arguments we will be convinced! <br><br>In other words "This is the right thing. I know you'll do the right thing."<br><br>Does this strike anyone else as smarmy and presumptuous?<br>Not that that's anything new. Bush was significantly worse of course. Let me make that clearer.

What is the point of saying “if ((something that won't happen)), we end up in the lake”? If it won't happen why mention it?

Well, he's trying to persuade us to make sure it doesn't happen. In other words, he believes we don't yet agree with him.

But he is also predicting that we will agree with him. He's figured everything out for us! He understands our perspective better than we do, and knows that once we consider his arguments we will be convinced!

In other words “This is the right thing. I know you'll do the right thing.”

Does this strike anyone else as smarmy and presumptuous?
Not that that's anything new. Bush was significantly worse of course.

]]> By: mk http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22029 mk Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:08:43 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22029 It was a good comment, but there is a sleight of hand here:<br><br>We will go to the beach (if [and only if] we do what I think we should do)<br>We will end up in the lake if we don't do what I think we should do.<br><br>Obama removes the antecedent of the first statement. In order for the abridged statement to remain true, the antecedent must be true.<br><br>Therefore, Obama is implicitly saying "We will do what I think we should do."<br><br>Maybe that's true, but you have to admit it's kind of an odd thing to say, even implicitly. Unless you're a politician and you want to get credit for being optimistic and still scare people into action! It was a good comment, but there is a sleight of hand here:

We will go to the beach (if [and only if] we do what I think we should do)
We will end up in the lake if we don't do what I think we should do.

Obama removes the antecedent of the first statement. In order for the abridged statement to remain true, the antecedent must be true.

Therefore, Obama is implicitly saying “We will do what I think we should do.”

Maybe that's true, but you have to admit it's kind of an odd thing to say, even implicitly. Unless you're a politician and you want to get credit for being optimistic and still scare people into action!

]]> By: Will Wilkinson http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22028 Will Wilkinson Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:51:10 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22028 Yeah, my next post, which I think preceded Paul's comment, was a grudging recognition of the thrust of Paul's point. Ah, blogging. Sometimes one feels so vulnerable. <br><br>I was in fact projecting too much of my opinion of the viability of Obama's proposed route, which is why he sounded to me like he was saying that if we keep going this way, we'll end up in the lake, and so we'd better go straight into the lake, which is after all the quickest route to the beach. Yeah, my next post, which I think preceded Paul's comment, was a grudging recognition of the thrust of Paul's point. Ah, blogging. Sometimes one feels so vulnerable.

I was in fact projecting too much of my opinion of the viability of Obama's proposed route, which is why he sounded to me like he was saying that if we keep going this way, we'll end up in the lake, and so we'd better go straight into the lake, which is after all the quickest route to the beach.

]]> By: midge http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/25/the-incoherent-obama/#comment-22027 midge Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:21:10 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=2972#comment-22027 i agree. well done, paul. i agree. well done, paul.

]]>