15th
Three Utterly Meaningless and Transparent Statements Commonly Used in Politics
“Look at the facts.” This gets said ad nauseum, especially in D.C. Usually some operative hack from one think tank or another says this to make a point. Like, someone from the Liberty Counsel will say “Look at the facts! Children who grow up in families with same sex parents are likely to be traumatized.” Or someone from the coal lobby will say “Look at the facts! There is no significant proof that global warming is man made.” Or somebody from the absolutely shameless Heritage Foundation will say “The best way to get out of the mess that we are in is tax cuts for the wealthy. LOOK AT THE FACTS!” The left is not immune to this bullshit either.
What this meaningless statement does is add weight to a theory or idea that has no weight of its own. I’m sure that many of these groups and politicians do have what they consider to be “facts.” But where did they get them? Who put the “facts” together? Are they “facts,” or are they opinions or push polls? Use of “Look at the facts” is a sure sign that the speaker is so full of crap that his eyes are brown.
“I’m Outraged.” No you aren’t. Seriously. Stop it. Everybody knows you aren’t. All the radio hosts, political pressure groups and politicians get “outraged” so much that if all of their outrages were real they would have climbed a water tower with a deer rifle a long time ago. And nine hundred and ninety nine times out of 100, the “outrage” is over something like a gaffe at a microphone, or failure to wear a flag pin that was shiny enough, or someone simply expressing an opinion. Child molestation is an outrage. Rape is an outrage. White collar theft is an outrage. Saying that you didn’t approve of the war in Iraq is not. The Dixie Chicks saying they arent fans of President Bush is not.
“I Demand an Apology.” President Obama recently said that he didn’t think bank CEO’s who take bailout money should be taking corporate trips to Vegas. The mayor of Vegas immediately won a double BS award by both claiming to be “outraged” and “demanding an apology.”
This guy thinks Obama should apologize because he doesn’t want bailout recipients to go on freaking gambling junkets with government money? Hope you brought something to read, Mr. Mayor. You’re gonna be waiting for awhile.
It seems that all people do these days is wait around for someone to do or say something that they don’t approve of so they can “demand an apology.” They do this not because they actually really care about getting one, but so they can get in the papers, or get on the radio, or get on television. Does the mayor of Vegas really think that his money making factory masquerading as a town is going to all of a sudden go bankrupt because Obama mentioned it once? No. But now his name is linked to Obama and is all over the news. And I guarantee you that over the next few days this guy will be a guest on as many high profile right wing radio shows as possible. I guarantee that the right wing bloggers will be opining on this little bit of nothing like it was the fall of the Berlin Wall. I guarantee that there will be an editorial on Obama’s “outrageous comments” in the piece of crap Washington Times. “Demanding an apology” creates hubbub out of nothing, which is really what the mayor wanted.
See, “I demand an apology” usually means “I demand column inches,” or “I demand a spot on your radio show,” or “I demand cameras.”
Just remember, use of any three of the above statements is not a sign of expertise, a wound, or moral righteousness. It is instead a sign of the purest form of political hackery and attention mongering that science has been able to isolate.
