Be skeptical of 'silver bullet' solutions

You may hear or see it frequently.

"If we only did this", "all we need is", "just do this, and your problem is solved".

Mind you there are some situations where one simple act fixes a problem. Tightening your gas cap in your car can make the "check engine" light go away, for example.

What's bemusing to read or hear is "most problems have simple solutions". A poster on a site I frequent put it in those exact words. You would frequently see him state "just do x, problem solved. Next!" "If you want the NFL Network, just call DirecTV, order the service, and the nice technician will come by and set it up for you. Problem solved". When he was challenged about folks who live in apartment complexes that didn't allow satellite dishes, "Then you need to move." In other words, unless you're willing to sacrifice every other life consideration and get DirecTV, you  don't really want NFL Network.

Last spring on Mike Huckabee's show on Fox News, he made one of the most vapid, ridiculous analogies I've ever heard. Referring to immigration reform, he scoffed at any notion of the need for comprehensive reform. His analogy: a reference to Curly in the movie City Slickers, and his statement that the secret to life is 'one thing' (where he holds up his index finger). He then segued to his point that the key to immigration reform is 'just one thing' - strengthen border and law enforcement. By the way, that gentleman on that site used the "most problems have simple solutions" line in regard to immigration reform. His next sentence: "this one is simply a matter of law enforcement".

Never mind the potential for human rights abuses. Never mind the fact that ridding this country of those who aren't here legally will not improve the plight of the middle class and economically displaced Americans. I'm not suggesting that better patrol of the border and enforcement of the laws isn't a part of the solution, just that several other things need to be considered.

Too many times people want emotionally satisfying, 'silver bullet' prescriptions to problems that are multi-layered, multi-faceted, and that need to be thought through carefully. People who want the easy, quick fix are ripe for demagogues and swindlers.

Trish Roberts Miller writes in Characteristics of Demagoguery "A demagogue never claims that the situation is complicated to explain, nor that the solution is difficult to grasp. Demagoguery depends upon the perception that political problems and solutions are easy to understand; while demagogues often grant that it may be difficult to implement their solution(s), they almost always assert that the basic concept of the solution is straightforward.

This insistence on the simplicity of the situation may be a rhetorical decision on the part of the demagogue. Gustave Le Bon's The Crowd (the book that was supposed to be the main influence on Hitler's rhetoric) insists that the masses can only grasp simple ideas: 'Whatever be the ideas suggested to crowds they can only exercise influence on condition that they assume a very absolute, uncompromising, and simple shape'

On the other hand, it may be the demagogues really see the situation in such stark and un-nuanced ways. When Hitler's commanders would complain about his orders being unrealistic and try to talk about logistics, he would tell them that it is not logistics, but The Will that wins wars. (He was wrong.)"

As a side note, the whole essay is a good read: http://www.drw.utexas.edu/roberts-miller/handouts/demagoguery

In short, people who insist that a problem is just awaiting one, simple remedy, are most likely easily manipulated, or are themselves manipulators.

Simply the best

I'm talking about Denver radio's AM 760 morning show host David Sirota. Of all the talk radio I've ever listened to, he is the best I've ever heard. Maybe there are others I haven't heard of, and others that will come along, that are better, but right now, he is, for me, the gold standard on how to facilitate productive and informative discussion.

Sirota can be heard 7am to 10am Monday through Friday. Unlike a lot of talk radio, whether on the right OR left, Sirota tries to keep the discussion focused on real issues, and insists on guests and callers doing likewise. You cannot go onto his show and just spin or regurgitate talking points. Bring substance to the table, or be exposed. He does his homework and digs deeper than just about anybody I've read or heard.

As a progressive radio host Sirota also is refreshing in that he will not just shill for anybody. You being a Democrat or even a liberal doesn't make you immune from his scrutiny. You can listen to him not just by tuning your radio dial to that show but also on the AM 760 website

http://www.am760.net/pages/DavidSirota.html

Small potatoes, but

On Sunday the Arizona Cardinals wrapped up a 30-20 victory over the New Orleans Saints after Dominique Rogers-Cromartie returned a Drew Brees interception for a touchdown. The next night the New York Jets sealed a 29-20 victory over the Minnesota Vikings after Dwight Lowery picked off Brett Favre and returned it all the way.

Both of these plays were spectacular. But there's something about both of them that bother me a little. In both instances, the scores took place with less then 2 minutes remaining in the 4th quarter, and with the opponents being out of timeouts. Ultimately no negative consequences resulted from these plays, but good coaching will remind both of them that in that situation, the best course of action is to take a knee or run out of bounds. Then your offense will take the field, take a few kneel-downs, and get out of there with victory still intact. The fact that nothing bad happened as a result doesn't mean that it should be swept under the rug.

It wasn't as obvious in the Saints-Cards game because DRC's score happened with so little time left. But by scoring, he forced his team to have to kickoff to the Saints again. The chances of a Saints comeback were virtually gone, but my point still stands: take a knee or run out of bounds and get your offense to take the victory formation. Lowery scored with about a minute and a half left, which the Vikings conceivably could have used to get a quick score and try to recover an onside kick.

Remember a few years back when Brian Westbrook broke loose on a run against the Cowboys and took a knee at the 1 instead of scoring? The Cowboys had already burned all of their timeouts at that point. Westbrook's move denied Dallas any chance of getting the ball again. Shorten the game, folks. Try to take the shortest path to victory. Don't just play hard, play smart.

What would I like to see?

I want my blog entries to be thought-provoking and to stimulate interesting discussions. With that goal in mind, here are a few things I want and some groundrules I will have for comments:

• I more than welcome disagreement and correction. If you can point out where I make a factual error or other type of mistake, and if I can see clearly that you're right, I'll acknowledge it
• The first rule for comments is this: you're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. This is a well-worn phrase that many of you may be sick of hearing, but, unfortunately, needs repeating due to many insisting on using their own facts. So try to use at least a modicum of sound logic in your comments, or expect an intellectual thrashing
• I'm not an absolutist against pejoratives, but if I see that a personal attack is just that and adds nothing to the discussion, that comment will be deleted. Know the difference between "That's not true and you're being an idiot for even suggesting that" and "You're just an idiot" and not offering anything substantive
• Racist, sexist, and homophobic comments will be summarily deleted.
• Spam will be dealt with harshly
• If I suspect trollish behavior in your comments, kiss your commenting privileges goodbye
• Posting on here is a privilege, not a right.
• If/when I sense that the discussion in comments is nothing more than going around in circles, I will close the comments

Why am I doing this?

I'm brand new to blogging. One might ask "What possesses you to write your own blog?"  A perfectly fair question.

For starters, few things are more cathartic to me than to write my own thoughts either on paper or on screen. Secondly, I like discussing ideas with people. This is the avenue I choose. Thirdly, I have a real fire in my belly about many issues facing this country. This blog will deal with current political and social issues, as well as religion, NFL football, or just some random topic.

How often will I post? That depends. Sometimes you might see multiple entries in a day. Sometimes I may go a week or two without entering anything. Right now I don't have internet at home so I'm limited to sponging internet off of a relative's or friend's computer.

Hopefully my posts will stimulate thought and interesting discussion. In my next entry, I will set expectations and let you know what I would like to see from readers.