The Truthiness Behind $11 Mayo

While the author may express some legitimate points in his blog (rant), he does not offer any opposing points of view nor does he offer much evidence behind his claims. Not only that, he has joined the millions of people in molding Obama’s name to make some kind of trite political statement, which I personally think is getting very old. And he’s only been in office for three months.

It seems in this entry the author is targeting the liberal, almost anarchical, government non supporters. He seems to support neither the left nor the right but offers no alternative solutions or sources of power. Is no Government the answer or a different one? The author doesn’t seem to have clear ideas on this, only that he is not happy with the current administration or the previous.

In his dissatisfaction with our presence overseas he mentions that we should pull out of all countries outside our borders, yet in his introduction he talks about the billions- or trillions- of useless spending. How does the author propose we finance abandoning all of our foreign bases at once? And then he goes on to talk about price inflation, which unless you are buying some type of organic mayonnaise made from truffle oil, just doesn’t seem logical. I personally have never seen mayonnaise of ANY kind over seven dollars and even that is extremely high. It seems the author is shopping at the wrong grocery store. And one could argue that the increased price of mayonnaise may be inadvertently meant to boost our economy as a decrease in consumption of pure fat (mayonnaise), will almost certainly lead to lower health care costs.

And then of course, he uses the argument that he will leave our country for one that practices sovereignty. However, the author fails to acknowledge, or realize, that the few places that do practice sovereignty don’t want Americans on their turf (at least not over 90 days) because they are afraid we will spread the disease of globalization or the countries are only sovereign because they don’t have the resources for it to be any other way.

Finally, the author argues that capitalism and war and politics remove the beauty from the world, but it can be argued that oppression is often a catalyst for art, music, literature and other forms of beauty. Just look at the 1960’s. Yes, the media generally offers generous portions of smut but the Internet and Independent thinkers of society have ensured that the feeling of being a GOOD person is never too far away. We may even be closer than we have in the past.

In all, as mentioned above, the author discusses some good points, i.e. the China problem, unchecked spending, the continuation of War in the Middle East, but does it in such a bitter way that his arguments lose validity. Any good political argument, in my opinion, should offer solutions, evidence and a certain amount of objectivity. It seems all this author wants to do is perpetuate the glass half empty mentality. Pessimism and bitterness surely will not solve the precarious situation in which we have found ourselves.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/20978