Rep. Cannon: Iglesias Was Fired ‘Because He’s An Idiot’
Rep. Cannon: Iglesias Was Fired ‘Because He’s An Idiot’
The Bush administration has repeatedly changed its excuses for why David Iglesias was ousted as U.S. attorney. Justice officials called him an “absentee landlord, even though his time away from the office was spent serving in the Navy Reserve. They also claimed that he didn’t pursue voter fraud investigations aggressively enough, even though he had been “heralded for his expertise in that area by the Justice Department.”
Yesterday on Fox News Sunday, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) pointed out that Iglesias, like many of the other prosecutors, exercised “independent judgment” and refused to follow the Bush administration’s political agenda. “And as a result, he was fired,” said Van Hollen. Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT) then shouted out his reason for why the Bush administration fired Iglesias: “No, no. He was fired because he’s an idiot.” Watch it:
Today, ThinkProgress spoke with Cannon spokesman Fred Piccolo, who explained Cannon’s “off-the-cuff” remark referenced the fact that when Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) and Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) contacted Iglesias and pressured him to pursue a case against Democrats:
It was more in regards to the fact that Iglesias was initially contacted by [Sen. Pete] Domenici and [Rep. Heather] Wilson. Instead of informing main Justice, he decided to inform the public and Justice…by holding several press conferences and tantalizingly releasing those names to the press, and has subsequently been the only fired us attorney to beat this drum of ‘this is a Karl-Rovian plot to obstruct justice and the prosecution of Republicans’ — after all these hearings, to any impartial observers it doesn’t play out.
Iglesias has admitted that not reporting the calls from Domenici and Wilson was a mistake. But he publicly revealed those calls only after he was fired. Similarly, he began speaking out about Rove’s role after he was fired. Therefore, Cannon’s criticisms of Iglesias’s post-firing behavior still don’t explain why he was ousted in the first place. It also doesn’t make Iglesias an “idiot.”
Raw Story and TPM have more on Cannon’s remarks.
UPDATE: Cannon’s office tells Raw Story’s Michael Roston that “Mr. Iglesias demonstrated, both during his time before the committee and his subsequent riding of the talk show circuit parroting outrageous assertions, that he did not possess the temperament for the position he held.”
UPDATE II: The Utah Daily Herald reports, “After the show, Cannon and Chief of Staff Joe Hunter discussed the quote. Cannon said that he was trying to figure out how to make sure that the ‘he was an idiot’ quote didn’t end up as the headline in the newspaper.”
Transcript:
HUME: It was voter fraud. Do you think it’s not OK to go after…
VAN HOLLEN: No, of course it’s OK to go after voting fraud. But the fact of the matter is it was after phone calls by Senator Domenici. Heather Wilson called as well.
It was clearly a case of trying to push somebody who exercises his independent judgment — didn’t think the facts were there.
HUME: And did he do so? Did he exercise his independent judgment?
VAN HOLLEN: There was an effort to — yes.
HUME: I don’t understand. So did the effort succeed? VAN HOLLEN: Yes, he did exercise independent judgment. And as a result, he was fired. That’s the whole point. He exercised…
CANNON: No, no. He was fired because he’s an idiot.
HUME: Go ahead.
VAN HOLLEN: No, the whole point is he did exercise his independent judgment, and as a result of that, he was fired because he didn’t take orders from the White House.
HUME: What about it, Congressman Cannon? What do you — what about that?
CANNON: There is…
HUME: Did the guy get fired because he exercised…
CANNON: There is no evidence that that was…
HUME: … his judgment or not?
CANNON: There is no evidence that that’s the case. There is clear evidence of appropriate activity by phone calls from political people in New Mexico. That’s appropriate. Calling it inappropriate does not make it inappropriate.
This is a guy who is clearly not competent to do his job and one of the few people who were decided — it was decided that he should leave his job because of competency.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
That interview was terrible. Van Hollen is an idiot that let Hume and Cannon throw out all the ‘two wrongs make it right’, ‘Clinton did it too’, ‘no underlying crime’, and the classicly hypocritical ‘out of control prosecutor’ talking points.
Van Hollen wasn’t up to the task.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
July 9th, 2007 at 1:52 pmNOBODY CARES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There goes Cannon, shooting his mouth off like a……you get the idea.
Of course you care CT, you took the time to type in all caps, bold it and add all those extra exclaimation points. That took time and thought and that shows you care.
Thanks for caring CT.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:54 pmOh poor baby, the truth hurts, now I know why Guvnahs and Presidents clean house when they get elected, gotta get the dead wood out!
July 9th, 2007 at 1:54 pmIf you want to help get Cannon out, visit utdemocrats.org. Despite residing in a very red district, his election performance has not been stellar. If we could get some candidates with financial strength, I think a Democrat could take him out solely on his stupid statements in the past. Republicans also hate him because he is “pro-amnesty.”
July 9th, 2007 at 1:55 pmThis is fishy, when someone keeps changing their story it means their lying, it’s a staple on tv cop shows, how difficult could it be to repeat the truth until it changes the consciousness of the majority of Americans? Money, I know, too bad no 1 is organizing the Left to play as a team for what matters, although on a little scale I can see some action. The traditional media is not a help, but hinderers, radio helps if it stays on-air; a Humanistic alternative to these “prayer breakfasts” would be tremendously beneficial, as would weekly face-to-face meetings with legislators, like oil/guns/god moneymen do.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:55 pmWhat a damned joke. As long as the underlying myth of “voter fraud” is taken seriously, this issue won’t be resolved.
Why so much emphasis on the mythical “voter fraud”, and so much silence on the all-too-real election fraud?
July 9th, 2007 at 1:55 pmThis is a guy who is clearly not competent to do his job and one of the few people who were decided — it was decided that he should leave his job because of incompetency…
Obviously, they’re talking about Britt Hume here. Britt has the persona of a Sloth, (sorry, Sloths), the voice of a bored bureaucrat, the looks of an aging alcoholic and the mental capacity of his President.
Britt, do the right thing & go away.
Far away.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:56 pmI think the fire sale at the end of this administration will be smaller than most. The mass exodus happening will continue to drain all but the ardent Koolaider.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:56 pmComment by hellinabucket
Thank you, Mr. Bucket.
Indeed, I do care – about not caring for this careless Iglesias. Therefore, I do care that Mr. Cannon sees him to be idiot.
Good blessings, Mr. Bucket.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:57 pm“NOBODY CARES! Comment by CT_V1″
Actually a lot of people care. That’s why 54% of the people in this country want to see Chaney impeached and 45% want to see Bush impeached. I think those numbers don’t add up to “nobody cares”.
But, I can say that nobody here cares what you have to say. That is a true statement.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:57 pmWhat? No Paris Hiton update today????????????
ROTFL
July 9th, 2007 at 1:58 pmYeah, yeah, Hilton (before I get pounced on)
July 9th, 2007 at 1:58 pmBut, I can say that nobody here cares what you have to say. That is a true statement.
Comment by Katie
Katie, do you mean to speak for all of us?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:00 pmAlthough, in all honesty…..
In my case, you’re absolutely correct. =)
Damn, it must be sooo easy to be a Republican. No research required, no hard thinking — just say whatever will make your side look better, and make the other guys prove you wrong. I guess if the facts are on your side, so much the better, but they don’t have that luxury too often, and it doesn’t look like it bothers them all that much.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:01 pmFor all the latest news, key reports, document releases and other essential materials surrounding the U.S. attorneys scandal, see:
July 9th, 2007 at 2:01 pm“The U.S. Attorneys Scandal Document Center.”
Comment by Katie
No, 54% of people present on a single poll care about your fantasies. Hippy for you.
Run along now to your academic pretty-pink playpen, since that provides you the “stimulation” you desire, albeit a deceiving one.
So scurred.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:03 pmCannon, to no one’s surprise also came out in support of Bush’s invoking of executive privelege today.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:03 pmToday, protection of ideology became more important than American ideals.
A talk-over-the-truthofotherguy remark like that coming from Cannon is actually a compliment. It means Cannon/BushCo considers Iglesias et al a real threat. Tip yr hand some more on Fox News, why don’t you. The world records your comments, & gets it…
July 9th, 2007 at 2:04 pmRep. Cannon: Iglesias Was Fired “Because He’s An Idiot.â€
Wrong. We’re the idiots if we believe idiotic Cannon.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:05 pmCT_V1
“Run along now to your academic pretty-pink playpen”
Scared of smart people?
I’ve never understood the conservative need to run down the educated in our country. Is it just envy? Jealousy?
Why wouldn’t we want smart people working on the big problems?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:05 pmDid I miss the thread about “Live Earth”? Oh, sorry, I guess I wasn’t the only one who did bother with it. Did anyone?
ROTFL
July 9th, 2007 at 2:06 pmCT, you realize Cannon is accusing him of going to the public before he went to the public. You are smart enough to understand that. I’ve read your posts. You can put several words together and sound like you do care about what you type so I want to be sure you are standing by Cannon when he went off like a loose cannon. Keep in mind the flip flopping from the right on the “officical” reason is exposing just how flippant the right side is.
It looks like the talking points memo hasn’t been made yet on this one.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:06 pmComment by Crump’s Brother
Actually, it’s a hit on the overrated academic system, the system that proclaims it holds the best and only key to intelligence and preparation for the workforce, etc.
Thank you for your projection.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:08 pmDon’t you love it when people call themselves smarter, more educated, and progressive? Funny, usually that kind of elitism is laughed at. But these people pat themselves on the back daily and tell themselves how much better they are than everyone else. What makes you smarter? Because you took the easy liberal arts majors? You took jobs as teachers because you could not hack the real world?
Sorry, on the one test that Bush and Kerry took that was the same Bush scored higher. How do you spin that one? ROTFL
July 9th, 2007 at 2:12 pmActually, it’s a hit on the overrated academic system, the system that proclaims it holds the best and only key to intelligence and preparation for the workforce, etc.
Thank you for your projection.
Comment by CT_V1 — July 9, 2007 @ 2:08 pm
“The best and only key to intelligence and preparation for the workforce”?
Are you saying that getting educated is not better than NOT getting educated?
Sounds like you just trying to justify an anti-intelligence prejudice. It’s common among the less intelligent.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:13 pmDang, bring out the education/intelligence issue and we see all manner of trolls come out from under their bridges, blinking in the sunlight and decrying the “elitism” of getting educated.
One more losing issue for hard-core conservatives — “edumication is elitist!”
July 9th, 2007 at 2:15 pmHappy Guy sez:
Actually, there’s been two threads, HG…one with 292 comments, and another with 742 comments.
Not sure what you were trying to insinuate, but I think it’s safe to assume that you failed…again.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:16 pmComment by hellinabucket
Mr. Cannon wouldn’t be of sufficient reference in confirming Mr. Iglesias to be an “idiot.” I suppose that I’m tired of the whole debate and would like Congress to complete its investigation swiftly. Even if there’s actual wrongdoing and the President abused his powers, taking a stand is going to be pointless unless the courts firmly press on the administration and do it fast enough. Otherwise, everybody is running in circles.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:17 pmHey CT!
July 9th, 2007 at 2:18 pm“Sorry, on the one test that Bush and Kerry took that was the same Bush scored higher. How do you spin that one? ROTFL”
It’s not spin, it’s the truth. Bush cheated on the test. That’s the only way the C student Bush could beat any liberal/progressive on a test of any sort.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:20 pmMore infotainment dividing America.
FOX continues to be supported by Democrats like Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD).
Shame on him and the Democratic party.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:21 pmKatie,
Link Please?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:22 pmMr President you need your sleep
July 9th, 2007 at 2:22 pmComment by Katie — July 9, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
Link Please?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:22 pmHey CT!
Comment by Mr. President
Here he goes again…talking to himself.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:22 pmMr President you need your sleep
Comment by Smart Fellar — July 9, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
You are correct.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:22 pmTMM-spot on again, as usual….
July 9th, 2007 at 2:23 pmAre you saying that getting educated is not better than NOT getting educated?
I think you have the reading comprehension problem here. Why would one rail against acquiring an education? Please reread the posts. The elitism is the higher ed system, whic isn’t providing people enough in return for their money.
Sounds like you just trying to justify an anti-intelligence prejudice. It’s common among the less intelligent.
It sounds like you are taking your own beloved way of doing things too seriously, to the point of demeaning others when they choose to dissent. It’s common among the bigoted.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:23 pmSo you care more than you let on CT. There are legal questions to be answered and I think Leahy isn’t going to sit by while this administration stalls.
I can tell why Happy Guy is happy. He avoids substance while indulding in substances. “Don’t drink the Kool unless it’s properly mixed eh Happy??”
July 9th, 2007 at 2:23 pmBut Mr President, your finger is on the button, who has the football?!
July 9th, 2007 at 2:23 pmDear Happy Guy(?),
if Bush and Kerry took the same test, and Bush passed…………….well, I’m pretty sure you know the obvious answer to that one, even though you like to pretend you’re not “smart” , Bush cheated!
July 9th, 2007 at 2:24 pmwhiteyfresh- jerk-off again, as usual………
July 9th, 2007 at 2:24 pmInteresting how from a “Christian” point of view, an education makes you elitist and evil and unAmerican.
How does evolution fit that mold? How about the fact that the more educated a person is, the more likely they are to have no religious affliliations?
Almost as if they want to keep people scared of education. As if they like ‘em working and ignorant of the world around them.
Ah, but that is too obvious for TP psots. These guys are way beyond that.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:25 pmComment by Mr. President
Greetings, Mr. President! How’s Islamo-Stalinism?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:25 pmSGT. Higgins-#36
*snerk* where’s Jake, Patrick, and the rest? I guess his shcitzophrenic
July 9th, 2007 at 2:25 pmmind will roll them out soon enough…
Comment by newpantaloons — July 9, 2007 @ 2:24 pm
Link please!
July 9th, 2007 at 2:26 pm“Katie,
Link Please?
Comment by Mr. President ”
Sorry Mr. Prez, as usual you are not making any sense. What link are you referring to? The link to the poll numbers finding that 54% of us want Chaney impeached and 45% want Bush impeached? If that’s the link you are asking for, here’s how you can find it for yourself. Go to Google, you do know what Google is, don’t you. Ok, now that you are there, type this into the little box: “Bush Cheney Poll Impeachment”. Now, that wasn’t hard, was it!
July 9th, 2007 at 2:26 pmoh, geez-he’s making up hyphenated words again…
July 9th, 2007 at 2:26 pmThe elitism is the higher ed system… CT_V1
oops. Maybe not.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:27 pmCT_V1,
“The elitism is the higher ed system, whic isn’t providing people enough in return for their money.”
Do have some info to back this assertion? It kinda seems like some amorphous talking point thrown out there with the expectation that it will be accepted as obviously true. What make you say this? I feel I got a great return on my money for my education. Did you not?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:27 pmMr. Prez:
Just in case you were asking for a link about how Bush cheated, here it is:
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen
July 9th, 2007 at 2:28 pmhagel / webb bi-partisan amendment being debated now…
it will sort out the repugs who don’t support the troops…
…
also
http://impeachcheney.org/
July 9th, 2007 at 2:28 pm…
#44
July 9th, 2007 at 2:29 pmFar from the truth, the less you have invested in your future, ie faith and family, the less you have to lose. The only reason we are here on this Earth is to have babies and bring them up right, all the education in the world aint gonna help you. This is a very profound and deep subject, uncomprehensible to all Progressives/narcissists.
CT,
1) I have news, “david” and “willyloman” are name hijackers, they stole my name yesterday and tried to mess with me, but I know it was them.
2) Leahy and Conyers NEED to be investigated!!!! They are harassing the Bush Adm. when clearly no crime has been committed. Something is going on.
3) “The Joker” is now known as “Ace Ventura”
I’ve been up for about 30 hours now, so I’m going to take a quick nap.
I will check in with you later.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:29 pmDEATH TO ISLAMO-STALINISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“The link to the poll numbers finding that 54% of us want Chaney impeached and 45% want Bush impeached?”
NO! As I’ve stated, 54% of people who be chillin’ on the website of leisure, not “us.”
I would like to see that specific link, regardless. I sure-ity hope it won’t ruin my day.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:29 pmIf the Democrat weren’t on FOX it would be just another Neocon lying.
When someone attacks us and there is a Democrat sitting there on the *FOX* set it makes the *Democratic party* and us look weak.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:31 pmWhy would the DOJ ask him to teach other prosecutors?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:31 pmPerhaps the CongressIdiot could answer that question.
If you ever watch this guy on other interviews, you would know that Cannon is a big alcoholic and he is drunk by noon everyday.
His liver will give out soon.
Jack Jett
July 9th, 2007 at 2:31 pmhttp://www.jackejett.com
Far from the truth, the less you have invested in your future, ie faith and family, the less you have to lose. The only reason we are here on this Earth is to have babies and bring them up right, all the education in the world aint gonna help you. This is a very profound and deep subject, uncomprehensible to all Progressives/narcissists.
Comment by Smart Fellar
Either that, or it’s a remarkably shallow and ignorant subject that suggests humans are only good for reproducing themselves and that any other contribution a human can make is irrelevant.
“Smart” you’re not.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:32 pm#44
Far from the truth, the less you have invested in your future, ie faith and family, the less you have to lose. The only reason we are here on this Earth is to have babies and bring them up right, all the education in the world aint gonna help you. This is a very profound and deep subject, uncomprehensible to all Progressives/narcissists.
Comment by Smart Fellar
Wow. Now that is telling. “Profound and deep” indeed. Education about the world we live in wont help, but “faith” will?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:33 pmSmart Fellar,
“Far from the truth, the less you have invested in your future, ie faith and family, the less you have to lose. The only reason we are here on this Earth is to have babies and bring them up right, all the education in the world aint gonna help you.”
Spoken like a true faith head. “Why serach for reason when I have faith? I don’t need no stinking fancy education. As long as I can read my bible, I feel just fine.”
July 9th, 2007 at 2:33 pmOne Smart Fellar:
i don’t even know where to begin with that but to say, trying to understand the world around you isn’t narcissistic… in fact, it is the opposite of it.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:37 pm“I would like to see that specific link, regardless. I sure-ity hope it won’t ruin my day.
Comment by CT_V1″
I gave Mr. Prez instructions on how to find the links. If you are half as smart as you think you are, you should be able to follow the instructions and find the link for yourself. God helps those who help themselves.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:37 pmfart smeller’s head is hurting from the multiple thumps on the head his mom gave him with her King James.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:38 pmMan, when did this site become so heavily infested with RNC retards, administration bobbleheads, and paid pundits? I really don’t have time for this kind of ignorance. If I have the desire to hear unbridled stupidity, I’ll just listen to our commander in chimp.
Time to migrate to a site where rational thought is not a liability.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:39 pmJ. Lewd there was a time when thr trolls were simply ignored 80% of the time. I don’t know what happened.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:41 pmCT,
1) I have news, “david†and “willyloman†are name hijackers, they stole my name yesterday and tried to mess with me, but I know it was them.
Notice how the “trolls” aren’t the regular namejackers. Again, I get the feeling that if TP were to start banning regulars who fail to adhere to the TOS, you and I wouldn’t be the first ones to go.
2) Leahy and Conyers NEED to be investigated!!!! They are harassing the Bush Adm. when clearly no crime has been committed. Something is going on.
They’re the new power-abusing duo of the Screeching (Nancy) 110th Congress. More like parodies of themselves.
3) “The Joker†is now known as “Ace Venturaâ€
I’ll keep that in mind. Is that a spin off to the JooOOOoooOOOs (A)(C)(E) figure?
I’ve been up for about 30 hours now, so I’m going to take a quick nap.
Sleep helps keep the “troll” hairs sheen and pristine. It is, however, of no help to the “troll” complainers, who remain inherently stupid and redundant at every turn.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:42 pmKatie
July 9th, 2007 at 2:47 pmI can read so I’ll help you. MR P wanted the link showing evidence of Bush having cheated on that test you two spoke of.
I’ve been up for about 30 hours now, so I’m going to take a quick nap.
Comment by Mr. President
I keep telling you to lay off the amphetamines, but will you listen? Oh, no.
Speed kills, Mr. P. Get into rehab and then try to find something to give your life meaning.
We’ll all be happier in the long term if you do.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:56 pmIt’s amazing, isn’t it?
They jabber on against affirmative action, about how merit should be the only basis for advancement–until the people who have achieved on that basis disagree with them. Then they’re an elite.
dishonest and not very bright.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:57 pmLandSurveyor, they got fed too many times.
July 9th, 2007 at 2:58 pmfrom Mr. P. 2) Leahy and Conyers NEED to be investigated!!!! They are harassing the Bush Adm. when clearly no crime has been committed. Something is going on.
Clearly? care to expound on that mr. p?
Also, calling yourself Mr. President and blurting bs like you have only solidies others perceptions of the actual president. It’s only your head trip that’s enjoying that ride.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:00 pmif cannon is correct, then his own job is very much in jeopardy.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:06 pmComment by Crump’s Brother — July 9, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
Crump,
You want to talk reason? There is no god. We are animals. We have no divine purpose only the natural purpose of reproducing our DNA. The only law is the law of the jungle which is dog eat dog, survival of the fittest. Darwinian morality. There is no “right and wrong” “good or evil”. No obligation to feed the hungry. No such thing as justice. Power is the law.
Because there is no god to say otherwise.
That is reason without faith.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:09 pmBecause there is no god to say otherwise.
That is reason without faith.
Comment by Troll
Morals and ethics do not require divine intervention.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:13 pmGummitch,
Morals and ethics are based on the assumption that humans have value. From where would that value come?
July 9th, 2007 at 3:15 pm“From where would that value come?
Comment by Troll — July 9, 2007″
not from mr. cannon, that’s for sure.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:16 pmKatie, you provide a link to Rolling Stone and want to be taken seriously? And part of the link says “Stolen Election”! Get over it already. We elected Bush in 2000 and to prove it was what we wanted we did it again in 2004. If you elitists are so smart when are you going to get it right already? Everything is not a conspiracy.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:21 pmTroll sez:
Troll, here’s some required reading for you:
Come back when you’re done, and we’ll discuss.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:21 pmHappy guy didn’t like the link but cried for a link. Didn’t bother to look deeper but jumped back to his tried and true talking points.
Man, you are going to fall hard.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:24 pmHappy Guy sez:
Didn’t get any farther than the link, I see.
Come back when you can actually dispute some of the facts cited in the linked article. But don’t waste our time attempting to cast aspersions on the source…that would be a fallacious argument even if your credibility wasn’t bankrupt.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:24 pmTrip
July 9th, 2007 at 3:25 pmBeen there.
I am ready to discuss it now. Have at it. demonstrate to me the source of human value and morality since there is no god.
“Katie, you provide a link to Rolling Stone and want to be taken seriously?”
i know, right? that magazine’s nothing but wacky conspiracy theories. i even saw a movie about how they let teenagers write for them. wtf?
July 9th, 2007 at 3:26 pmMorals and ethics are based on the assumption that humans have value. From where would that value come?
Comment by Troll
From being a sentient human and part of a civilization.
Looking to religion for the “assumption that humans have value” hasn’t been all that productive. Look how long it took Christianity to get around to condemning slavery.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:29 pmTroll,
“demonstrate to me the source of human value and morality since there is no god.”
Most biologists believe that there is a evolutionary component involved. Uh oh!!! I said evolution!!
Just because one doesn’t knwo the answer the a hard question like yours, doesn’t mean taht God is right answer. That’s just dumb.
I would argue that the Bible is a horrible source of ‘moral’ education. Slavery, rape, war and like are rampant in that book, and cononed I might add. You choose to ignore tha parst that don’t agree with your ‘inner’ moral compass’.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:36 pmsorry about my horrible typing today. I think I have two left hands :)
July 9th, 2007 at 3:37 pmI am not defending Christianity. I am following atheisms logical conclusion. There is no objective right and wrong or objective moral truth. Simply because some may think they exist does not make them exist in an objective sense. Subjectively you may delude yourself into thinking so but that does not make it objectively so.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:37 pmTroll sez:
First of all, please define which morality you are speaking of. While the basics of ethical behavior are similar for all humans, different subsets of humans tend to differ on the particulars (which would be odd indeed if ethics were divinely instilled).
Second, moral behavior can be explained quite simply as an extension of our instinct for self-preservation. In your previous post you expounded upon “survival of the fittest” and “Darwinian morality”, and you were absolutely right. Where you went wrong was in assuming that these values held solely for the individual, when the fact is, as Homo Sapiens is a social animal, the values hold for the tribe at the very least, with generalization to the entire species not being terribly difficult.
Your turn. You’ve held that morality is impossible without divine inspiration. Please defend this assertion.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:41 pmMost biologists believe that there is a evolutionary component involved. Uh oh!!! I said evolution!!
Comment by Crump’s Brother — July 9, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
I have no problem with evolution. But simply because some biologist has some theory as to the evolution of emotions and sentiments which may lead us to think morals exist does not make them in fact exist.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:42 pmTroll,
“I am following atheisms logical conclusion. There is no objective right and wrong or objective moral truth.”
But religion takes you down the same path. Unless you are following the letter of your particular religious book, then you are substituting your own moral judgment, for that of the book.
With this logic, we are then saying that only the absolute fundamentalist are right. If that is the case, then are justified in holding slaves by way of Christian edict.
Do you need a book to tell you killing someone else is wrong? Probably not. I’m not saying I have the answer (I do believe that with reseach into the brain, which has truly only just begun) we will find the answers to your question.
But religion/God, does not get you a satisfactory answer.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:43 pmMorals and ethics are based on the assumption that humans have value. From where would that value come?
Comment by Troll — July 9, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
Perhaps from an intrinsic sense of self and an empathy and sense of shared experience with those around us?
July 9th, 2007 at 3:44 pmWingers still think they’re smart. What are we gonna do with these guys?
July 9th, 2007 at 3:47 pmFirst of all, please define which morality you are speaking of. While the basics of ethical behavior are similar for all humans, different subsets of humans tend to differ on the particulars (which would be odd indeed if ethics were divinely instilled).
Second, moral behavior can be explained quite simply as an extension of our instinct for self-preservation. In your previous post you expounded upon “survival of the fittest†and “Darwinian moralityâ€, and you were absolutely right. Where you went wrong was in assuming that these values held solely for the individual, when the fact is, as Homo Sapiens is a social animal, the values hold for the tribe at the very least, with generalization to the entire species not being terribly difficult.
Your turn. You’ve held that morality is impossible without divine inspiration. Please defend this assertion.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — July 9, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
I speak of any morality. The self is the only imperative in nature and the only concern which has made us social is survival of the self. It may be extended beyond the tribe if the self freely chooses or if it is imposed through power.
To answer your question. as previously stated morality is based on the assumption that man possesses an objective value which if no objective truth exist then no objective value exist. Only subjective value then exists and those values are determined by the self not the collective. A group of individuals may agree upon subjective truth but that does not make it “truth” in the sense that we traditionally consider it. If this objective truth does not exist then we have no obligation to it.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:00 pm“No, no. He was fired because he’s an idiot.â€
This is what I hope to say about Cannon in 2008.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:02 pmSorry to have copied that whole post.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:03 pmPerhaps from an intrinsic sense of self and an empathy and sense of shared experience with those around us?
Comment by spit take — July 9, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
Spit take,
What you are describing here is silly sentimentalism. What if someone or a group of someones feels otherwise? They cannot be wrong for it is their feeling. Feelings then determine truth which is about as rational as you seem to think faith is. (actully they are very much the same)
July 9th, 2007 at 4:08 pmTroll,
I’m guessing the kind of thing your talking about may not exist in the way you are articulating it. I think we find our ‘moral’ standing through negotiation. When we decided to work together for mtual advantage in order to secure resources necessary for living, we would have to have some agreement on behavior towards one another.
I guess I’m saying morals are outlined through contracts essentially. WE must agree to a point, or conflict ensues. But if we agree, we can work together to our mutual advantage.
The social contract would ultimately be the highest form of this.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:11 pmTroll sez:
Then please explain the difference in acceptable moral behavior between different social groups. As I said earlier, a divinely instilled morality would necessarily need to be the same for all humans. This is demonstrably not the case.
Wrong. The self is not imperative in nature…not in the least. The gene is what is the imperative. While the behavior of solitary animals stresses survival of the self, the biological strategy of social animals is to stress survival of the group. Even solitary animals which are supposedly selfish will risk their lives to safeguard their young (the repositories of the genes most similar to themselves). Social animals have found it to be a successful strategy to generalize that behavior to the group.
As I previously stated, the behavior that is judged to be morally acceptable differs from culture to culture. This would argue against a divinely inspired “objective morality” that you posit.
Again, this jump is flawed logic. As social animals, these values are determined by the collective, with the interests of the collective in mind, not the individual.
Perhaps you could clarify your position for us. Are you arguing that since morality exists, God must as well? Or are you simply arguing that since there is no God, there is no obligation to follow any moral code?
July 9th, 2007 at 4:17 pmOr man can opt for conflict, which in nature is the rule for resorces are limited, and there is nothing “immoral” about this option.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:19 pmTroll,
“there is nothing “immoral†about this option.”
Unless we agreed that there was.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:21 pmTrip,
The gene or DNA is an extention of the self. Yes
My logic is not flawed the individual cooporates with the collective for the preservtion of the self.
To argue that morallity exists so god must would be flawed. Certainly if there is no god there is no obligation to follow a moral code for the obligation would imply a objective morals which would not exist. This belief if largely embraced will eventually lead to chaos or tyranny.
Monkey wrench
“It is true absolutely there are no absolutes.”
Think about it. Its fun.
I have purposefully avoided discussing particular beliefs regarding god. Though I hope we can in the future I must take my extensions of self to the pool.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:35 pmBe back later.
I cant resist
“Unless we agreed that there was.”
Comment by Crump’s Brother — July 9, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
And if one broke the agreement then there is nothing immoral or wrong about this because morality does not exist.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:37 pmTroll,
You can say that it wasn’t immoral. But I might say that it is, and in the end, with the knowledge we now have, we would both be correct and wrong.
Now you are no closer to your answer.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:47 pm“It is true absolutely there are no absolutes.â€
Comment by Troll
Of course there are ‘absolutes’.
Want an example?
Whether you believe in it, or not…..whether you acknowledge it’s existence is immaterial……9 IS the square root of 81. You can argue that YOU believe the square of 9 is orange….but you’d be wrong. Then again, I bet you’re accustomed to that.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:50 pmPerhaps from an intrinsic sense of self and an empathy and sense of shared experience with those around us?
Comment by spit take — July 9, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
Spit take,
What you are describing here is silly sentimentalism. What if someone or a group of someones feels otherwise? They cannot be wrong for it is their feeling. Feelings then determine truth which is about as rational as you seem to think faith is. (actully they are very much the same)
Comment by Troll — July 9, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Deride it if you like, but you asked where a sense of morality comes from, if not from faith.
I didn’t say that morality was universal, or that all who base their actions on a sense of self and empathy with others would make the same choices.
All I said was that a sense of self and a sense of empathy serve as a source for morality at least as well as an ancient book.
By your argument, the fact that not all faith-based moralities are identical argues against THAT source just as well as it argues against what I suggested.
I don’t know where the hell you got that “feelings determine truth” crap. I said nothing about truth. Again, you asked a question, which may have been rhetorical, but I took to be serious: “where does morality come from if not from faith”. I offered an answer. Dismissing it as “silly sentimentalism” doesn’t really address it.
I don’t know why a theological text is necessary to develop a sense of community and right and wrong.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:50 pmTroll sez:
No.
The self, like the tribe, the village, the nation, the species, etc., is an extension of the gene. You’re putting the cart before the horse.
Your genes have no interest in the preservation of your self. They are only “interested” in propagating more genes.
While that may be the opinion of the self, it is not the reason social groups are biologically advantageous. It all goes back to the propagation of the gene, which is paramount.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:52 pmActually, it’s a hit on the overrated academic system, the system that proclaims it holds the best and only key to intelligence and preparation for the workforce, etc.
Thank you for your projection.
Comment by CT_V1
CT, the twit homeschooled by his mommy with the 80 IQ while she was chugging cheap vodka and smoking cigarettes while feeding her baby boy lead paint chips and catfish loaded with mercury hates anybody who got a real education.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:54 pmHey CT!
Comment by Mr. President
Fellow TPers since the jury is out how about a vote. Is Mr. P talking to his butt buddy or talking to himself.
I vote that he’s talking to his butt buddy. Anybody else.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:57 pmbut you’d be wrong. Then again, I bet you’re accustomed to that.
Comment by SGT Higgins
Hey Sarge, arguing with the Troll. You are so busted. Admit it, you’re starting to like progressives, aren’t you?
July 9th, 2007 at 5:11 pmI called the Albuequrque Journal for a way to contact Mr. Iglesias. They said they would get back with me. The next thing I got was a phone call from David Iglesias. Now thats cool.
July 9th, 2007 at 5:46 pmHow about we just ignore CT_IV. Come on now, everyone. He’s just doing it to get a rise out of you. He’s a troll. Don’t respond to anything he says, unless he (highly unlikely) says something that contributes to the discussion. After a while he will get frustrated at the lack of response and go away.
July 9th, 2007 at 6:51 pmI vote that he’s talking to his butt buddy. Anybody else.
Comment by shane — July 9, 2007 @ 4:57 pm
—————————————————————————————-
Shane, you need to stop talking out of your butt, buddy!!!
July 9th, 2007 at 7:05 pmIf being “an idiot” was the criteria for losing one’s job, Bush would have been impeached, tried and executed already.
July 9th, 2007 at 7:44 pmYou can say that it wasn’t immoral. But I might say that it is, and in the end, with the knowledge we now have, we would both be correct and wrong.
Now you are no closer to your answer.
Comment by Crump’s Brother — July 9, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Another brain teaser here to reply
July 9th, 2007 at 7:52 pmThe theory of relativity states “A thing cannot be and not be at the same time and in the same manner”.
Of course there are ‘absolutes’.
Comment by SGT Higgins — July 9, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
SGT
The statement
“It is true absolutely there are no absolutes.â€
Is a contradiction. In order for it to be true you must admit that at least one absolute exists.
I hope you fugured out what that one truth is.
So of coarse I agree there are absolutes.
I should in the context have said “there is one objective moral truth, that there are no objective moral truths”
It admits that indeed objective moral truth exists. Objective moral truth cannot exist if god does not. Therfore……..
July 9th, 2007 at 8:05 pmComment by Troll — July 9, 2007 @ 7:52 pm
I believe that is the law of the “excluded middle.”
July 9th, 2007 at 8:07 pmTrip says
“The self, like the tribe, the village, the nation, the species, etc., is an extension of the gene. You’re putting the cart before the horse.”
“Your genes have no interest in the preservation of your self. They are only “interested†in propagating more genes.”
If that organism which we refer to as the self ceases to exist the gene can no longer propogate. It is in our genetic make up to survive, primarily for this purpose.
In the case of humans the gene does not need nations or tribes necessarily. Ultimately it needs only one other of the species to achieve propogation.
“While that may be the opinion of the self, it is not the reason social groups are biologically advantageous. It all goes back to the propagation of the gene, which is paramount.”
Yes but the existence moral truth, or absolutes does not follow from the fact that social groups may be advantgeous.
July 9th, 2007 at 8:33 pmComment by Mr. President — July 9, 2007 @ 8:07 pm
That is in regards to mathematics.
July 9th, 2007 at 8:38 pmSpit said
“Deride it if you like, but you asked where a sense of morality comes from, if not from faith.”
I did not mean to offend. Actually I asked “Morals and ethics are based on the assumption that humans have value. From where would that value come?”
Spit said
“I didn’t say that morality was universal, or that all who base their actions on a sense of self and empathy with others would make the same choices.”
OK
“All I said was that a sense of self and a sense of empathy serve as a source for morality at least as well as an ancient book.”
No, you said
“Perhaps from an intrinsic sense of self and an empathy and sense of shared experience with those around us?”Comment by spit take — July 9, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
I don’t know where the hell you got that “feelings determine truth†crap. I said nothing about truth. ”
We’re discussing human value and morals if it is not moral truth then what is it? You argued that perhaps these stemmed “from an intrinsic sense of self and an empathy and sense of shared experience with those around us?”
Intrinsic senses and empathy are feelings.
“Again, you asked a question, which may have been rhetorical, but I took to be serious: “where does morality come from if not from faithâ€.” (again these are not my words)
“I offered an answer. Dismissing it as “silly sentimentalism†doesn’t really address it. ”
My answer went beyond that. But I will repeat in different words. Intrinsic senses and empathy do not translate into objective human value or moral absolutes.
“By your argument, the fact that not all faith-based moralities are identical argues against THAT source just as well as it argues against what I suggested.”
I am sorry but it does not follow logically that because people have different ideas of god or that people follow god badly that god therefore is a poor source of truth.
I don’t know why a theological text is necessary to develop a sense of community and right and wrong.”
Theological texts are not necessary to develop a sense (aka feeling or belief) of community or of right and wrong. But remember feeling does not make it so.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:30 pmIglesias a republican was fired because he would not politicize his job. He was fired for purely political reasons. He was not fired for performance reasons rather he had received excellent reviews for his work. Personal name calling is unacceptable but is expected when republicans know they their actions were indefensible. I’m sure Cannon knows that both Sen. Domenici and Rep. Wilson are under investigation by their respective Ethics Committees. Because Rove is involved, this makes it political. The Justice department has always operated independently of the White House only this White House has had a political litmus test for its US attorneys. If Iglesias was such a bad US attorney why did they give him such good performance reviews?
July 9th, 2007 at 9:39 pmCANNON….FODDER.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:46 pmThe only thing Iglesias was a idiot about was not talking about the phone calls sooner.
July 10th, 2007 at 2:14 pm