![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
May. 11th, 2017 10:14 amFrom W. Post:
"I think the surprise of a great many in the White House was that as soon as this became a Trump decision, all of the Democrats who had long been calling for Comey’s ouster decided that this was now an awful decision,” Dubke said. “So there was a surprise at the politicization of Democrats on this so immediately and so universally.”
This is likely bullshit, just a way to pretend that they're unaware they did something that looks like obstruction of justice (hoping this appearance of innocence will create the impression they fired him for legit reasons), but if it isn't ... it's kind of fascinating. And if untrue of the players it must be at least true of many of the people being played - they assume Democrats love and hate merely for partisan reasons rather than based on, like, thinking. They're so dumb they don't know non-dumb is possible.
Though even there the surprise doesn't quite make sense, since if Democrats are operating by lizard brain rules shouldn't the enemy of one's worst enemy become one's friend ... or something? The argument could be made that right wingers are used to things being put on a Hate List from which they can never be removed, I guess, but that seems belied by, you know, their new embrace of condemning Comey's handling of the Abedin development, which loads of them thought was the best thing ever. So Dubke would have to be assuming that Democrats aren't just partisans but some extremely dumb version thereof. Maybe that's how he accounts for the fact that, unlike Republicans, Democrats do not tend to switch positions, but keep loving and hating who or what they did before. To someone who doesn't understand them, ethical principles might look like excessively sluggish groupthink. Our day's hate's so 2008, would then be their read on why we're so opposed to their mass-murder-by-negligence health bill.
No, it's not that, surely. Nor is it quite the bullshit thing. It's that when your group loyalties require you to believe bullshit that's so ridiculous it simply can't be believed any snapshot of your head will be like one of those photographs from The Ring. The syllogisms you're using to explain your own actions all have to blur out at some point. You need to switch assumptions mid-clause just to finish any sentence. Conway's speediness explains why she can do this - Trump's too. You need to keep hurtling forward so you never have time to listen to yourself. Trump said something much like that at one point, as I recall - about not analyzing his actions or motivations because he's afraid of what he'll see. People who are too slow to be blithe are going to have more trouble with this. Like with Spicer needing the lights off by those hedges.
"I think the surprise of a great many in the White House was that as soon as this became a Trump decision, all of the Democrats who had long been calling for Comey’s ouster decided that this was now an awful decision,” Dubke said. “So there was a surprise at the politicization of Democrats on this so immediately and so universally.”
This is likely bullshit, just a way to pretend that they're unaware they did something that looks like obstruction of justice (hoping this appearance of innocence will create the impression they fired him for legit reasons), but if it isn't ... it's kind of fascinating. And if untrue of the players it must be at least true of many of the people being played - they assume Democrats love and hate merely for partisan reasons rather than based on, like, thinking. They're so dumb they don't know non-dumb is possible.
Though even there the surprise doesn't quite make sense, since if Democrats are operating by lizard brain rules shouldn't the enemy of one's worst enemy become one's friend ... or something? The argument could be made that right wingers are used to things being put on a Hate List from which they can never be removed, I guess, but that seems belied by, you know, their new embrace of condemning Comey's handling of the Abedin development, which loads of them thought was the best thing ever. So Dubke would have to be assuming that Democrats aren't just partisans but some extremely dumb version thereof. Maybe that's how he accounts for the fact that, unlike Republicans, Democrats do not tend to switch positions, but keep loving and hating who or what they did before. To someone who doesn't understand them, ethical principles might look like excessively sluggish groupthink. Our day's hate's so 2008, would then be their read on why we're so opposed to their mass-murder-by-negligence health bill.
No, it's not that, surely. Nor is it quite the bullshit thing. It's that when your group loyalties require you to believe bullshit that's so ridiculous it simply can't be believed any snapshot of your head will be like one of those photographs from The Ring. The syllogisms you're using to explain your own actions all have to blur out at some point. You need to switch assumptions mid-clause just to finish any sentence. Conway's speediness explains why she can do this - Trump's too. You need to keep hurtling forward so you never have time to listen to yourself. Trump said something much like that at one point, as I recall - about not analyzing his actions or motivations because he's afraid of what he'll see. People who are too slow to be blithe are going to have more trouble with this. Like with Spicer needing the lights off by those hedges.
