A taxonomy of different living beasts in our world is an important thing to keep up with. Because they are constantly evolving, due to processes of evolution (Stop hitting me with that old family Bible, Reverend Winchuck! It is still legal, for now, to say that word), you have to constantly change and refine your understanding of beasts and their relationships to one another. So here I am trying talk about “Why liberals and conservatives are completely different species!”
When I look at a group of people, a crowd, a… what do you call a flock of people? An idiocy perhaps? They all look the same to me. To tell which species they are, I have to hear them talk. So I selected a couple of notable interviewees to explain what the differences really are.
Bull Blindersly, head of the Bullish for Trump and Trumpkins Committee
The conservative I will use to represent conservatives is Bull Blindersly, who I noticed briefly had a Make America Great Again red hat on until the wind took it off his flat head. I’ll let him tell you the difference in his own words.
“It’s easy to spot a libtard. They have pointy little nerd heads full of stupid ideas based on statistics and encyclopedia facts and other such brainiac junk that clogs up your head. They don’t have the common sense they were born with because they spend all their time reading and thinking and other stuff that just gets in the way. There is a simple solution for everything in life. The economy is healthy and grows if you give tax breaks to rich folks and job creators. They will spend that money they have earned to improve things for everyone. You don’t fix problems by dancing around giving away my hard-earned tax dollars to folks who don’t work hard enough. Those people are just tempted to become blood-sucking parasites for life when you do that. We need to build a wall around Animal Town to keep more of those kinds of people out.”
Phillip “Flip” Moosewinkle. ACLU lawyer and Dal Mation, independent media journalist
I talked to Flip Moosewinkle and his friend Dal Mation because they were protesting in front of city hall with “Not My President!” signs and other signs that indicated they were liberals because everything was spelled and punctuated correctly.
Flip; “I think conservatives talk without thinking first most of the time.”
Dal; “You have to be careful about making blanket statements like that, though. It is not backed up by any studies I can find with Google on my i-phone. And we want to be fair and considerate when making statements about our opponents.”
Flip; “Yes, that’s quite correct. But a shoot-from-the-hip style of discourse is still common among those we argue politics with. They’ll accuse us of trying to take away their rights to own guns and won’t even listen when we try to shift the conversation towards gun safety and responsible ownership. They mostly agree with our positions when it comes right down to it, but they rarely listen to our point of view. They would rather call us names and chant slogans.”
Dal; “True, but you have to admit they do tend to win arguments that way in public forums. Maybe we should try some of their tactics, and try to be more forceful in making our case the way they are.”
Flip; “Do you really want to sink to their level? Then we’d be no better than they are.”
Dal; “But isn’t that the point we are trying to make? Aren’t we all the same and no one is better than anyone else? Aren’t we trying to be fair and loving to all?”
Doofy Fuddbugg here is an example of what a “Nolt” is.
Of course, it is at this point in the consideration of the topic that I reach the inevitable conclusion that I am dealing with two different categories of animal here. One side is patently unfair, and the other is marginalized and ineffectual. One side is often predatory, while the other is routinely prey.
What do I do about it? The conservative side has purged themselves of all compromisers, liberal-leaners, and RINO’s (Republican In Name Only, not rhinoceroses). The liberal side never wins. (Yes, I know Obama was president, but look how easily he was erased from the public conversation when his term ended.) There is no place for moderates any more. To be moderate is to be isolated and headed for species extinction. So I am a liberal now, hoping the side that is in power at the moment won’t pass a law against my continued existence. And trying exceptionally hard to fit in with other members of my same species.
You may not be able to rescue other people’s minds from being stupid. But what you can do and be artful about is… make them laugh.
Catch a Falling Star 
Fact or Opinion (It’s a Teacher Thing)
“Climate change is a hoax by the Chinese.”
That, unfortunately, is not an opinion. It is a fact. It is a FALSE FACT.
Facts are statements that can be proven or disproven. There are studies by government agencies and university science departments all over the world that provide evidence to back up the theory that the climate is drastically changing in ways that threaten our existence. The studies are repeatable, peer reviewed, and thoroughly “vetted”, to use the new word that Republicans embrace so deeply and lovingly for immigration issues. On the other side of the question, you have scoffing congressmen who bring snowballs into the capitol and say, “See? The science is not proven.” That is not a fact. Where is the evidence which is not anecdotal and based on a misunderstanding of the difference between “climate change” and “weather change”? That is by definition an opinion. And it is not even an informed opinion. Opinions are not equal to facts. Comparing the two is like comparing apples to onions. No, that is not even correct. You can eat both of those things. It is more like comparing apples to planetary moons.
After a long and heated Facebook debate about immigration between me, a Texas teacher, and an Iowa Republican Trump supporter I went to high school with who doesn’t even know if he ever met an illegal immigrant, I have pretty well proven to myself that a big share of the divide between liberals and conservatives stems from the unwillingness of one side to avoid equating facts and opinions. Apples and moons.
So give me a moment to do what teachers do.
Here is a non-political lesson in Fact versus Opinion.
Who do you prefer? Mickey Mouse or Bugs Bunny? The answer doesn’t matter to me.
I can give you a quick and dirty lesson on fact and opinion using these two cartoon characters. And it doesn’t even matter who you like more.
Here are some obvious facts about the two of them.
They are both cartoon characters. They are both anthropomorphic animals. They both wear gloves most of the time. They both have a thumb and three fingers on each hand.
These things are observably true. You can prove them by looking at the illustrations I have already provided.
Other things may not be as readily apparent, but no less provable.
Both of them are heterosexual and both of them have one main love interest. Neither of them have ever been married, but neither of them really are playboys and even though there are no legitimate bits of evidence that either one has ever had sex with their respective girlfriends, Bugs has kissed Lola on more than one occasion and Mickey has kept company with Minnie for longer than most old married couples.
These things are provable by watching the cartoons and observing a preponderance of evidence. There is no contradictory evidence. But the possibility of contradictory evidence doesn’t change these things into opinions. A disproven fact is still a fact. It is merely a false fact. Over time the relationship between Bugs and Daffy Duck may become clearer and the fact that Bugs is gay may pop out of the cartoon closet. It does however, require proof, so it is a fact, not an opinion.
Here’s another fact you know the evidence supports. Bugs Bunny is a nudist. He almost always appears in cartoons naked. Mickey, however, believes in wearing clothes. Even when he gets out of the bath tub, he clutches the nearest towel, and you never get a look at whether he has cartoon genitals or not. Mickey does hang out a lot with a duck who wears no pants, but that’s an irrelevant fact.
The notion that Mickey and Bugs are very different personalities because they had very different creators, is an opinion. It is a opinion offered by people who have studied the characters and their creators, and therefore can give you an informed opinion. But it still can’t be proven.
Walt Disney made Mickey into more or less of an every-man sort of character whom audiences can identify with. Things happen to Mickey Mouse, and the comedy comes from him trying to deal with those external forces, be they wind storms during music concerts, Donald Duck’s raging temper, or the evil plots of Black Pete. Walt never said this was so to prove it, but it is not unreasonable to think it.
Bugs Bunny, on the other hand, was created by several great animators like Robert McKimson, Tex Avery, Chuck Jones, and Bob Clampett. And Bugs tends to make things happen to other characters. Think of how he plays Elmer Fudd, Yosemite Sam, and even his pal Daffy for laughs. He is more of a Groucho Marx type character than an every-man. We don’t identify with him. We only laugh at his victims (because they always deserve what he gives them). That too is an opinion. And even if one of his creators were to say that this was the intent, it still is not proven until all of them agree. And they all had very different ways of doing things.
But these are only informed opinions. You cannot be proven wrong whether you agree or disagree with them. You are entitled to your own interpretations and opinions because they are not provable facts. There is no one way to view any opinion.
Opinions, even un-informed opinions and religious beliefs are never either wrong or right. You don’t make a mistake when you have an opinion. It only becomes a mistake when you try to use it as a fact, or mistakenly believe it is a fact.
So, there is my lesson for those Facebook arguers who never seem to know the difference. It’s all color-coded and everything. So try using this new knowledge when arguing with me, rather than calling me stupid, or making your point IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS!
3 Comments
Filed under angry rant, artists I admire, cartoons, commentary, education, Mickey, strange and wonderful ideas about life, teaching
Tagged as Bugs Bunny, fact or opinion?, lesson on fact and opinion, Mickey Mouse, teaching with humor