Posted on 10/19/2016 8:13:45 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
Here’s a little thought experiment for you:
If a friend said he could see a pink elephant in the room, standing right in front of you, but you don’t see it, which one of you is hallucinating?
Answer: The one who sees the pink elephant is hallucinating.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.dilbert.com ...
Way back in the 90s I was working with a woman who was Liberal — but she did not follow politics at all. I started talking about Bill Clinton and various policies or activities or scandals that were known to some of us but which (somehow) did not show up on the 6 o’clock news.
She put up both hands and said, “I live in a happy place. I don’t want to hear about any of that stuff.”
What can be said in response to that?
Upon further thought, I think Adams is making a useful distinction between the “personality” stuff and the “issues”.
Is Trump a Nazi? Is he a racist? Does he demean women? — Adams makes the case that these are all pink elephants and such “personal failings” are actually hallucinations that the media has trained some people to accept.
A policy of accepting illegal immigrants? a police of accepting Syrian refugees? a policy of tax increases to grow the economy? a policy to punish rich and successful businesses? — these are not pink elephants but are policies which Hillary will openly claim as her own.
I guess Adams is correct in saying that the pink elephant problem is pretty one-sided. I just failed to see it initially.
The people who oppose Hillary have good reasons.
The people who oppose Trump are hallucinating.
Status quo or risk taker?
Bernie voters were/are risk takers.
Clinton is status quo. Did Bernie voters flick some sort of internal switch, or are they stoopid?
Is a DJT vote really risky or is fully half of the eligible voters fisted meat puppets hooked on the gimme gimme politics of free cheese and cell phones?
Sounds like “thinking with” from “The Cool War,” by Frederik Pohl. From 1981 but still fascinating in many ways.
“because other people don’t see what I think I see”
But they do see that, they just don’t place the same value judgements on it as you do. Still, Hillary supporters know she is a globalist, they count on her to grant amnesty, to pack the Supreme Court with lefties. So the objective things you see, they see too, they are just not distressed by them.
Which candidate is running for love of country versus which candidate is running for self-aggrandizement and because the presidency is somehow “owed” to that candidate?
I’ll take the bombastic patriot over the felon 100% of the time.
There are none so blind and those that will not see.
Hey, half our population is below average.
“I live in a happy place.”
^THIS^ is the answer.
Most leftists choose - they are WILLFULLY ignorant of the corruption in their party. For them their intention is all that matters:
“We just want to “help” people - and for everything to be “fair”...”
I must be hallucinating. I see the "Pink Elephant" of total control of the media rather than "Democrats are damned good at it."
From my perspective, this is like saying the guy with the shotgun is better at killing things than the guy with the squirt gun.
I sorta think it has more to do with the weapon you are using than it does with how "good" they are at it. Give us that media weapon, and I bet we would be pretty "good" at it too.
But back to the "Pink Elephant." I say I see the "Pink Elephant" because in so many of these conversations I notice people talking about everything except the elephant in the room, which is the fact that DEMOCRATS OWN THE BROADCASTING SYSTEM AND USE IT TO ADVANCE DEMOCRATS.
So to apply Scott Adam's theorem, that must not be true because most people don't see it.
I know how she can be so stupid...she watches MSNBC.
Dumb question. Is she married and does she have children?
Based on demographics studies, i'm betting not. Single women are huge supporters of Democrats. Married women with children are huge supporters of Republicans.
Yadda, yadda, yadda.
Here’s what we need to know:
The POTUS we elect will:
1. Appoint 1-4 Supreme Court Justices
2. Be Commander in Chief of our military
3. Will support our Constitution (especially 1A and 2A) and the rule of law, including immigration law-—or not
4. Will raise taxes, promote bigger government, put more Americans out of work, and increase the deficit-—or not
5. Will be pro-American business interests, or will favor foreign interests
Single with grown children. Lives in Seattle - probably a lost cause anyway.
Seattle has gone increasingly crazy as Californians fleeing the mess they created have moved northward.
Yeah, in that environment I am not surprised. My friend's sister lives near Seattle, and she is a moonbat.
Interesting, but there are also data that indicate that higher intelligence actually makes a persons delusions more solid. Self Delusion among the Intelligent explains a large portion of modern Liberalism. Wish I could find that article...
Not so with Hillary. Some of us are informed about the crime and corruption. Others read the NYT, that may have one story about this stuff every month on an inside page amidst the propaganda about what a wonderful woman she is. Those who think we see pink elephants are merely uninformed or they have some financial incentive to ignore the facts.
ML/NJ
Indeed seems to me a person can also misuse their intelligence to contrive rationalizations. And I think people who hold a world view that precludes the concept of objective value will have no motivation not to do so when considering their own stance of issues of value. And indeed they will compensate their intellectual dishonesty by pride. I think one has to remain dishonestly proud in this way in one's heart to be an intelligent naturalist.
But being an intelligent theist also has special snares. They will often grow up with a childish understanding of religion and try to maintain its absolute truth with a growing apprehension that its all nonsense that they don't dare to really examine. I was trapped by both these patterns in my life, so I can take no pride in this critique.
I found the cure in the brilliance of CS Lewis, who taught me how to really think through his books.
“Some ideas are so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.” - George Orwell
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.