Left's 'objective truth' and why it wants to shut you down
Left's 'objective truth' and why it wants to shut you down
David Limbaugh: 'Thank heavens for conservative radio, TV news and the internet'
David Limbaugh
LIFEBLOOD OF DEMOCRACY
Former President Barack Obama (I love the adjective preceding his title) made some comments at the recent Global Opinion Leaders Summit in Japan that I can’t let slide, so please forgive me:
It used to be that the two political parties in the United States would disagree, but there was a common baseline of facts and a set of norms in terms of political behavior that were followed. … You could have a disagreement, but basic things got done. … And some of the reason for that is … it used to be that in the United States, there were three television stations. Basically everybody watched the same thing. Everybody got their news from the same sources, and so everybody had, more or less, a similar view of the world. But today, because of first cable television and then now the internet, people have 500 channels to choose from, and they are able to find the news that fits their views instead of fitting their views to the news, so they are very biased in terms of how they see things, in a way that just didn’t used to be the case. And so it becomes harder to have a proper democratic debate if we don’t agree on just basic facts. … I can have an argument with somebody who doesn’t think it’s worthwhile for us to sacrifice economic growth in order to reduce carbon emissions. It’s much harder to have a debate with somebody who doesn’t believe that the planet is getting warmer despite the fact that 99 out of 100 scientists say it is. … When you don’t have a common set of facts, it’s hard to have, then, a basic democratic conversation.
The opinion Obama is expressing is not unique to him. This is the way far too many liberals think. I’ve heard former news luminaries such as Ted Koppel and Dan Rather separately lament that conservatives are essentially in a different reality. The liberal worldview springs from a healthy mind; the conservative one is not a different but valid alternative; it is just wrong.
Do you see the irony? Liberals don’t see that they are grossly guilty of what they are complaining about. They are the ones who don’t accord legitimacy to opposing views. Obama revealed his contempt for opposing viewpoints most infamously in his “bitter clingers” remark, but we witnessed him demonstrating it throughout his presidency, when he seemed to take umbrage at disagreement itself, as opposed to the reasons for the disagreement. If people disagree with leftists, they are being unreasonable, because leftist ideas are self-evidently true. Even worse, they presume that they alone are compassionate and that conservatives are heartless, self-interested wretches.
As an example, a young leftist criticized me on Twitter for noting that a certain student gun-control activist has become offensive, hostile and partisan in his advocacy while berating those who don’t agree as placing their partisanship before children’s safety. My Twitter stalker asked me: “Since when is not wanting to get shot a partisan issue? Aren’t you bothered in the least that grade-schoolers have drills about crazed gunmen?”
I responded: “What makes leftists think that because we don’t agree with your proposed solutions we care any less about the problem than you? We actually want to address it. Your collective arrogance is astounding – no offense. I assume you want to help; you assume we don’t care.”
Now back to Obama. He longs for the days when an oligarchic media delivered a monolithic message. Darn that Rush Limbaugh (though Obama forgot to mention my evil brother this time) for opening up the media floodgates for an equally valid worldview. Darn Fox News and darn the internet. Competition is anathema to leftists not only in economics but also in the dissemination of information itself – the lifeblood of democracy.
They liked it better when the reporting of so-called facts was controlled by a narrow group of Beltway elites with a similar bias – a bias that influenced what the elites deemed important enough to report (or useful to their political agenda), the way they reported it and their commentary on it. It was much better when the expression of conservative dissent was limited to the local bar and the renegade conservative newspaper columnist.
A good way to determine which group of people is credible is to notice which is unafraid of the liberal flow of information and of the public’s ability to separate fact from fiction. Those who want to control the information are the suspect ones. Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously said, “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” Ironically, Obama once approvingly cited this. You will note that it is never conservatives who advocate limitations on free expression through campus speech codes and other forms of censorship.
If leftists weren’t so self-important, they might understand that these things they call “facts” are not always objectively true. Take Obama’s dogmatic assertion that 99 percent of scientists believe the planet is getting warmer. Many dispute that assertion, saying that it is based on a skewed study and that there are thousands of scientists known to disagree. Further, many believe that even if it’s occurring, it is not primarily being caused by human beings and that, even if it is, there is not much we could do, short of returning to a Stone Age-like existence, to reverse the process, and it’s doubtful that would work, either. Studies have shown that the draconian measures leftists support wouldn’t appreciably reduce global mean temperature in 100 years.
But if we disagree with Obama’s facts, then we are ridiculed as science deniers and told that there is a consensus, and the matter is closed – claims that are wholly antithetical to the scientific method.
Leftists’ attitude that their subjective opinions should be universally recognized as objective truth is precisely why we need to promote the flow of information from all sources and let the people decide for themselves what is and isn’t credible. Thank heavens for the advent of conservative radio, conservative TV news and the internet, all of which, in various ways, liberals are trying to undermine or seize control over. Beware. http://mobile.wnd.com/2018/03/lefts-objective-truth-and-why-it-wants-to-shut-you-down/
Tags
Who is online
96 visitors
There is no objective, subjective or alternate truth, there is only the truth.
Pretty much, something is either true or it isn't.
Not if you're HA and ilk. This whole seed is basically the usual whining that rightwing lies just don't get the respect rightwing liars think they deserve.
Liberals are experts when if comes to saying something is true when it actually isn't.
Trump is a liberal!!!! We'll I'll be darned.
He was also the biggest liar.
Yet you voted for him and continue to shill for all his lies and crimes.
LOL
If Donald Trump was so liberal then why did he have the support of Neo-Nazis and the Klan?
You don't know the difference between left and right.
Jeb Bush was the biggest liberal in the 2016 GOP primaries, for Pete's sake!
Do you think the pyramids were grain silos too? Just wondering...
So a far right wing Koch owned fascist decides to become a liberal?
Trump is whatever and whoever he is paid to be. It's all about the money for Trump.
skirting the CoC [ph]
I object to that!
Republicans only have alternative facts which means false/fake bs facts. They wouldn't know the truth if it bite them in the butt
Every story trump has said was fake news, has turned out to be true.
"If people disagree with leftists, they are being unreasonable, because leftist ideas are self-evidently true."
I don't mind when people disagree with me on something, I am willing to have constructive debates about facts as they happened. What I do mind are when conservatives invent their own set of facts, their "alternative facts" and present them like just because they believe it that makes it true.
"Even worse, they presume that they alone are compassionate and that conservatives are heartless, self-interested wretches."
What's the worst is when I hear from a gaggle of Obama haters who imagine they have some valid point to gripe about but refuse to accept that anything he did was constructive or healthy for our country. They are often joined in their vehement denouncements by those who simply hate Obama because he is black and they're pieces of shit racists.
This would be akin to someone who claims they hate Obama for passing the ACA being joined by other Obama haters who hated him because he wouldn't let them rape kids. They're on your team so it's your job to denounce them and get away from them if you don't want others to assume you're just like them, but the right and alt-right have embraced the bigots and welcomed them into their fold because they have a common cause, they all hate Obama.
"But if we disagree with Obama’s facts, then we are ridiculed as science deniers and told that there is a consensus, and the matter is closed – claims that are wholly antithetical to the scientific method."
It's not Obama who decided global climate change was happening or that it was a problem being made worse by mankind's activities. That is what 97% of climate scientists concluded based on several decades of research along with ten thousand year old ice cores and hundreds of thousands of year old deep sea floor sediment showing climate trends and CO2 levels on our planet. Yes, the deniers should be ridiculed, their ignorant assumptions that because 3% say it might not be true, that happens to match nicely with their job prospects working for oil or coal companies, that's enough "doubt" to ignore the warnings and just keep burning the midnight oil is beyond stupid, it's dangerous. It's the scientific method that has come to the conclusions, which were not made lightly, they are based on hard facts regardless of what the deniers falsely claim.
"Studies have shown that the draconian measures leftists support wouldn’t appreciably reduce global mean temperature in 100 years."
Oh, so we just give up because we can't be certain that changes now would be able to appreciably slow the climate change in the next 100 years? What a defeatist, selfish, and blatantly ignorant position to take. The only way it would make sense is if you either didn't care about the next generations of humans who will have to live in the shit we create, or you believe God will come save everything, or at least rapture your ass away to somewhere else so you won't have to live in the aftermath.
That's the teavangelical cult's agenda in a nutshell. Destroy the environment, destroy all the animals, and destroy all of humanity. Create the armageddon they've been so impatiently waiting for if necessary, because they believe they'll be the only people raptured away before it happens. Use it all up, fuck everyone else, who cares what happens afterwards, because..... Jesus. This in plain view religious cult of domestic terrorists is the most dangerous threat to individual freedom that the US has ever faced.
Is there a reason you (plural) will be proud to leave the earth dirtier and unhealthier for your kids and grandkids? Is it a virtue to pollute at will to profit? To allow destruction of vital water and air and allow companies to leave the clean up after they've stripped every dollar out? (Which we all pay for) Ignore changing climate due to fears of it impacting a bottom line? Which costs more because its not addressed and we are unprepared And these same people claim to follow the lord and act as if they are the morals police. Yet we keep hearing about 'the left this and that' (never correctly) instead of defining yourselves. No buzz words allowed.
No laws, rules, ethics, or morals apply to the forgiven.
WOW!!! I've heard some serious spin in my day but that takes the cake!
Pretty sure that everybody knows that the environment is the last thing you care about.
Actually, thanks to anthropogenic global warming, the sky is actually falling.
So why do you seem to think that uncontrolled breeding is a good thing?
I've asked you if lying isn't a sin in your religion and you haven't answered, of course. But it's clear that you don't care if it is.
Yep I tend to make cooing noises when I look at the night sky with my Celestron.
Don't even have kids but yet care for the next generation.
Pretty sure that many semesters in college becoming an environmental scientist is proof, not to mention those years becoming a paramedic.
People believe the lefts objective truths over the damn gop's outright lies any olde day...
It isn't hard to tell what the gop is up to. It is whatever the gop accuses the left of doing.
Again, with the biggest loudest whiniest voices complaining about being "shut down." Their screeching must be so loud in their own ears they can't even hear themselves.
Conservatives are desperate to deflect the discussion about Sinclair Media and their love of fake news. I'm surprised that Kelly Ann Conway hasn't been given a job at Fox News. Maybe they could call it the 30 minute hour of alternative conservative facts.
Why is it that conservatives need someone to feed them a steady diet of partisan lies and confirmation biases? Are you too much of a snowflake to watch the other news outlets and spend time fact checking what you read or hear?
You might want to include InfoWars and Breitbart into your conservative echo chamber.
I have never understood why conservatives want their media to treat them like they are a mushroom but they do. Conservatives love confirmation biases that reinforce their current opinions rather than being told facts that might force them to change and think.
How has free speech or the freedom of the press been subverted in the big 3 media outlets?
I get my news from the BBC/NPR, plus various print sources such as WaPo, and McClatchy.
If anyone feels "shut down" by truth and objectivity, that's a sign they're working from solely from lies and and opinions.