Occam vs. Obama

Following up on that last post, the cognitive dissonance over Obama's position on commercial whaling actually started just days after Obama was inaugurated, as you can see in this Washington Post article from January 25th, 2009:

The United States is initiating a closed-door negotiation that could open up new areas to whale hunting for the first time in decades, part of an attempt to end a long-standing impasse over whaling limits with Japan, the world's most avid whaling nation.

The tentative plan, outlined in documents obtained by The Washington Post, seeks to achieve a breakthrough in the dispute that has raged since the International Whaling Commission voted in 1986 to ban commercial whaling. Faced with the reality that Japan and its allies have continued to hunt whales and have succeeded in blocking new conservation efforts, commission Chairman William Hogarth -- an appointee of President George W. Bush -- has been trying this weekend in Hawaii to craft a pact that would permit a new type of "coastal whaling" in exchange for a commitment by Japan to scale back its "scientific" whale hunts.

Note the emphasis on the fact that Hogarth was appointed by Bush; apparently the reporter didn't want to tar the shiny new president with this unfortunate vestige of darker days.  And she wasn't the only one:

Patrick Ramage, who directs the global whale program at the International Fund for Animal Welfare, called the proposal "a lousy idea." He added: "Declaring open season on Japan's coasts would have grave implications for vulnerable whale stocks." [...] Ramage questioned why Hogarth would push such a controversial proposal now that President Obama has taken office: "The Bush administration has decided to wave the white flag on whaling and say, 'We can't end this,' and we're saying, in the words of a certain presidential campaign, 'Yes, we can.' "

Odd that Ramage would say "the Bush administration has decided to wave the white flag on whaling" in reference to actions that were taking place after Bush was nearly a week out of office, isn't it?  And if you look here you'll see him saying "Apparently, the last lousy idea of the Bush Administration was to legitimize commercial whaling in the 21st century. It's unbelievable, and fundamentally un-American."  (I wonder if it's still fundamentally un-American now that it can't be pinned on a Republican?)

The answer to Ramage's question about why Hogarth would push such a controversial proposal after President Obama had taken office should have been apparent then, and it's certainly crystal clear now: because President Obama wanted him to.  But as his "yes we can" illustrates, Ramage—like so many other liberals—was too mired in the spell of adulation cast by his future betrayer to be able to reach the most direct and obvious conclusion.

Unfortunately, even more than a year on, Occam's razor is no match for Obama's reality distortion field.

Comments

[Donald Johnson]

Obama apologetics is a form of theodicy, as best I can tell. A member of the faithful must work hard to justify the ways of Obama to humankind. (or cetaceankind, in this case).

[John Caruso]

I don't see what the works of Homer have to do with it, but otherwise I agree entirely with your statement.

[No Comment]

'Theodicy' starts with Thorn, or þorn (Þ, þ) not with Eth (Ð, ð; also spelled edh or eð).

Thus no Homeric confusion when mentioned, for example, over the phone. Wondering if theodicy gets a lot of phone time.

[John Caruso]

Nicely observed, but I have to point out that Daffy Duck would disagree.

[LLoyd]

Your blog is garbage. Couldnt believe it when I came across it. Written by a very paranoid person with some adjustment issues. Just give it up and find something else to do.

[John Caruso]

Man, the comment spammers are getting testy. And he even forgot to include a link to the discount viagra web site.