Everyone Knows…
President Obama is not inoculated against this condition. In fact, his economic policies are usually defended as “everyone knows.” Everyone knows something had to be done to save the nation from financial ruination after “the destructive policies of the Bush administration.” It is too bad I hadn’t received this doctrinal statement in my morning reading fare.
It is also axiomatic that everyone knows steps had to be taken to control the increase in health care expenditures and to provide insurance coverage for the uninsured. The fact that ObamaCare increases health care expenses and imposes insurance on those who may not want it is merely a pettifogging critique. After all, everyone knows it had to be done.
The experts in foreign affairs know what everyone knows: the U.S. cannot afford to play its traditional role of stabilizing global influence. Of course defense spending is 4.5 pecent of GDP and pales in significance to entitlement expenses, but not everyone knows that.
There is little doubt that “everyone knows” is a conversation stopper. It puts the naysayers in the penalty box. It says you cannot possibly have an informed opinion. It is comparable to reading a Frank Rich column or a New Yorker article in which the cognoscenti contend “everyone knows” the truth.
That there may be other points of view and that no one has a monopoly on the truth are conditions rarely considered by those who reflexively invoke “everyone knows” in argumentation. Needless to say, the reliance on this phrase isn’t an argument, but for those who assume their positions are in the orbit of natural order, it seems likely that this phrase will continue to be relied on.
I dunno…my favorite is still “all right-thinking people agree…..”
I cast my vote for “Some experts…” meaning my father’s second cousin’s Dermatologist discussing the economy.
This has been a bugaboo of mine for years. The biggest issue, here, at least as far as I’m concerned, is that they typically jump right over an issue that’s questionable (e.g. whether global warming is occurring at all) and move on to the solutions that are neccessary to fix the problem. So the debate isn’t about whether global warming is occuring, it’s about how much we should socialize our society to fight it, because it’s already been decided it’s occuring. If it isn’t, we rig the statistics to show that it is anyway, so that we’re justified in doing the socializing that we’ve prescribed to fix the problem…
Yeah, it’s really annoying…
DavidN, exactly.
The liberal free speechifiers have one thing in common-shutting down opposing debate.Oh what a tangled, hypocritical web they weave….
It is their undemocratic, ham-fisted, arrogant, illiberal attitudes which unmasks their real designs.
In a nutshell, to make sure that everyone thinks like they do, regardless of their so called liberal(really totalitarian) bonafides, they silence all clear/opposing thinkers.How quaint.
Their bugaboo indeed!
It follows from this that it is impossible to have a serious debate or dialogue with a progressive unless you can cut him out of the herd. Otherwise the EVERYONE KNOWS CHORUS drowns out all contradiction, whether valid or invalid.
Yes, courage is required — but not, except for the occasional airline pilot or government employee, because we risk actual, objectively measurable damage. Rather, our dissent from pieties long elevated to sacred status is used to demonize us, to cast us out of polite society.
Of course, when “polite society” is defined to be congruent with they who agree with the left-liberal dogmas and enforce ostracism upon those who differ, we have reached a state of affairs wherein a thinking man would consider it unacceptable to be accepted.
Everybody knows that Obama is brilliant. Sure but he sure seems stuck when it comes to recognizing failure of his policies. Why on earth does he stubbornly pursue greenhouse gas regulation which has not a snowball’s chance in hell of having any discernible effect on the climate if he is so damn smart? Its a mystery.
In response to your query, Obama is putting his fingers in his ears, shaking his head, and chanting, “I can’t hearrrr you.” As is everyone else who wishes to pretend that the stuff that “everyone knows” is other than a hoax or an opinion or part of a larger plan to destroy America.
Everyone knows what is wrong with this world. Everyone knows that the only way out is to vote these scumbag liberals out of office and take back our country.
This is what the liberals and the Democrats did during the 2008 election. It was taken as gospel that Obama was simply the most brilliant person on the planet. And when the main stream media started crucifying Sarah Palin and calling her an “idiot” or a rube or not ready to be VICE presient, let alone President, they simply ignored the fact that she had much more executive experience than Obama (the guy who wanted to be PRESIDENT) ever had.
But no matter, “everybody knew” Obama was brilliant, right? It was just accepted about how “brilliant” Obama was. After all, “everybody knew” that. So now he’s president, we are trillions of dollars in debt and the economy still stinks, we have almost 10% unemployment (way higher in some states, like Michigan or California), and the prospects for 2011 don’t look any better than they did in 2008. But how can this be? Everybody “knew” Obama was brilliant and could solve this problem, right?
Just shows you what the far-left main stream propaganda can do. But America is wise to these lies now. I think after this miserable experience, when the main stream media says “everybody knows” they won’t believe it again. After all, look what they got with Obama, and everybody just “knew” he was the best guy for the job, right?
“Everyone knbows” is also frequently joined with the condescending eye rolling, and a heavy sigh as to suggest that if you don’t swallow their line of thought you’re a simplton to be pitied. Even when in my case a fifty year old vet is being lectured by a too young to vote 16 year old that…
“Everyone knows that not voting for Obama is racist, it just is!”
I asked her why she was bigoted against elderly people and why was she so prejudiced against a combat vet… The icy glare of hatred in return tells you everything. They never think the though through, it’s just swallowed and spat back out on cue. They mostly have no clue as to why “everyone knows” might be an ignorant generalization. She was 16,
what’s Frank Rich’s excuse?
Well if we all start saying “Everyone knows that liberals are a bunch of blithering idiots” we will all be right.
And let us not forget, Obama’s favorite strawmen:
“Some say…”
Thank you. For years I have felt my jaw tighten each time I’ve encountered the ubiquitous “some say” in liberal news outlets. Who’s “some”? How is “some” accountable for the often infinitesimal minority views that follow, and how accurately are those views being reported? Who, if anyone, does the “some” actually speak for, and why are their views newsworthy? What are their credentials? Without specific, verifiable attribution the news outlet is free to (and often does) fill in the blank—effectively editorializing the news— to promote whatever progressive issue it wishes.
All too often, if one really searches for the “some” in question, the answer is buried deep in the article and found to be something like an obscure activist cell with a storefront in Berkeley, identified by a cutesy acronym ending in “N” for “Now!”.
The “some say” straw man, then, is nothing more than a vehicle for introducing the ideological blather of a politically irrelevant, fly-by-night splinter group. And everyone knows it.
Jerry’s Law: The conventional wisdom is always wrong.
Corollary: “Everybody knows” is an indication of impending recitation of the conventional wisdom.
The term “everyone knows” is taken right out of the Communist propaganda playbook. However what everyone does not yet know is that the world is seeing the beginning of a paradigm shift concerning availability of real information, most of which is currently hidden under layers & layers of outright lies & clever disinformation.
Like it or not, the internet & groups like Wikileaks, are to governments around the world what the printing press was to the Roman Catholic Church. The printing press meant truth could no longer be suppressed by the officials who previously had approved for dissemination to the masses only what official doctrine had approved. Good or bad, the truth will now be available to the masses despite what governments officially approve for dissemination.
This situation will be remedied when the FCC completes its takeover of the internet, for our own good, of course. We mere unelected and un-appointed civilians should not be required to separate the wheat from the chaff, not when our betters can do it for us.
I really doubt that the FCC would be able to take over the internet, even if it tried, since there are now too many ways to distribute information, & too many ways for someone to get information – mainly because there is always someone too careless or too dumb to safeguard it properly. One interesting fact to consider is that history may record that Julian Assange (like him or not) was to the internet – what Martin Luther was to the printing press; namely they both used it to nuke the powers-that-be.
The one that drives me crazy..
“Most credible economists say, Obama’s plan is just _______, (fill in the drooling phrase)”.
Neatly making any economist who says no, it ain’t all that, someone out in the tall grass barking at the moon. They always fail to mention who selects these “credible” economists, and when and where they were polled to get this unanimous agreement on Obama’s awesomeness.
Why don’t liberals just cut to the chase and say, they have their minds welded shut and anyone who challenges their assumptions is crazy stupid and evil.. mustn’t leave out the evil part. They like that insult best.
I’ve never argued with a leftwinger who wasn’t positive any alternative thought was automatically disallowed, and maybe grounds for having you institutionalized. They really hate having to think on ther own.
“Everyone Knows” that “Let me be perfectly clear–” is the precursor to an “I am smart and you are dumb” lecture. This pathetic little welfare socialist needs to be stopped in his tracks by defunding and then thrown out on his tin ear.
‘Everyone knows’…that the Emperor has no clothes.
When they realize he has no more gold, and only a
puny Palace Guard to enforce his demand that they
turn over _their_ gold, everyone will laugh at him.
“Everyone knows” is the journalistic version of “the science is settled”.
That there is a natural order to opinions is manifest in what elitist ideas embrace.
Elitists embrace narratives, not reason, truth or logic.
On any given topic, a lockstep “politically correct” narrative supersedes anything resembling actual facts. Once you realize that, then the way these peoples’ minds work (or don’t) becomes clear. Or clearer. Or clear as mud. Something.
Here is the prototypical, quintessential élitist, Evan Thomas (grandson of Norman Thomas), who just happens to be a Newsweek editor.
Three young men were pilloried and their lives nearly wrecked in the aftermath of the Duke allegations against La Crosse players. After the dancer’s case melted down (BTW, she has recently been arrested (again), this time for something like child abuse) and the DA Nifong was shown to be a self-promoting liar, Evan Thomas said of the whole situation…
“The narrative was right, but the facts were wrong.”
Damn facts, wrong again.
(to my knowledge few if any of the Duke faculty or writers in the Lamestream media apologized for their rush to judgment and vilification of the Duke La Crosse players)
EVERYONE KNOWS Obama has been carrying on in the Bush tradition and continuing the Bush policies!
EVERYONE KNOWS that, if Obama keeps up this agenda, he will be defeated in 2012.
EVERYONE KNOWS Obama’s handlers will lie and paint a picture as a “MODERATE” to pad the votes in 2012.
EVERYONE KNOWS Americans will not know any more about who Obama really is in 2012.
EVERYONE KNOWS the KOOK media will give us moonbeams and sugar plums as proof Obama is the most intelligent, handsome, competent, handsome, clairvoyant, handsome, good looking, elegant, stately, dignified, statuesque, good-looking, attractive, personable, and just downright sweet, Commander in Chief the United States has ever had.
And this is precisely what will protect the United States from all evil for another four years!
It takes courage to stand up to the bromides masquerading as current truth.
Next time you watch an Obama speech (aka a teleprompter reading), keep yourself entertained with a little game of counting the bromides.
Play a little…
BS Bingo
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion – even if it is not logical or well founded in evidence. What get’s us in trouble is when we all start trying to enlist the government in supporting our opinions – i.e. making laws and regulations, taxing and spending in an attempt to perform the kind of social engineering we feel we all need. Both sides do this but more so the “Progressives” .
To use one of the author’s examples, so what if being gay is nurture or nature? You can knock yourself out arguing about it if it’s so important to you. But descriminating against any group with tax policy, employment policy or any other policy is wrong. So is demanding special treatment because of one’s sexual orientation.
To both conservatives and progressives: Limited government please. Just the essentials.
“Everyone is entitled to their own opinion – even if it is not logical or well founded in evidence.”
Geeze, this reminds be of this Samizdata Quote of the Day from almost two years ago:
“The idea that everyone is entitled to his opinion is one of those truisms so often repeated that it now goes without saying. Like many truisms, however, it is false. It is also usually irrelevant. Let us suppose that Jill disputes Jack’s opinion that free trade causes poverty in the Third World. Jack may defend his opinion by producing evidence connecting trade and poverty but he cannot help his case by insisting that he is entitled to his opinion. How could that show that free trade causes poverty in the Third World? The entitlement would be relevant only if it guaranteed the truth of your opinions. But it can’t do that, because it is an entitlement supposedly enjoyed by everybody. And people disagree. Jack and Jill are both entitled to their contradictory opinions about trade and poverty, but they can’t both be right. So insisting that you are entitled to your opinion cannot possibly give you any proper advantage in a debate.”
You’re quite right that basing laws on unsupported opinions/preferences rather than demonstrable facts is a mess.
There’s a short hand version of “everyone knows” which is my favorite turn off when it emanates from the pursed lips of an intellectual expounding his or her inviolate opinion…..”clearly.” “Clearly,” before the expression of an opinion renders it unchallengeable. How is it, in any way possible, to refute an opinion that is “Clearly” true. The implication is that any dissent must “clearly” be grounded in abject ignorance.
Here’s another one to be on the alert for; any expression that begins with “the American people.” “Clearly,” dissent or disagreement with whatever follows puts the dissenter at odds with “the American people.” Go ahead! Disagree! You are so out of touch! “Clearly” somebody is out of touch because every politician “clearly” speaks for “the American people.”
And a corollary: questioning what everyone knows is “denialism”.
I wrote a couple days ago, in the VDH column, a very similar thought.
It was this:
Living a life in a leftist cocoon where all matters are “settled” once the leftist imprimatur has been established, the finely honed debating skills of the “elites”, reduced to spitting, shouting, screeching and saying “because I said so”.
“Winning” an argument via tantrum is de rigueur.
The only time I want to hear the words “everybody knows” this time of year, it should be followed by “a turkey and some mistletoe”.
The considers all fundamental questions to have been answered and settled, and the need for debate and discussion over and done.
The “everybody knows” stand is never taken by the right — especially the “No compromise!” right.”
Everybody knows global warming is causing these cold temperatures and snow. The science is settled. It’s so obvious that I have to be a heretic to continue to believe in Occam’s Razor.
Don’t you just hate it when it becomes obvious you don’t know what you are talking about, in public, and you can’t just go away, so you have to redouble your efforts when you’ve got nothing? Even when you’re caught in a lie, and you can be shown to have suppressed and falsified data? Pardon me while I continue to believe that some corrupt people are chasing the climate science money, with less sincerity than Bernie Madoff. In times of shrinking budgets, no problem means no career, so what side do you think they’ll come down on? We’ll just remove any data that doesn’t fit our conclusion.
Look at the the Duke 88. A human being would apologize. A sentient human being would learn something. The Harvard of the South pretends nothing happened. Pardon me while I consider them to be unworthy of academia, or respect, and consider their institution tainted for having failed to discipline them. Maintaining a reputation is hard. Duke wasn’t up to the task.
It is a truth universally acknowledged…
There is this disturbing pattern of thought, speech, and behavior as if all of these people suffered a terrible arrest of mental development locking them in at age 16. At 16 I was convinced I was smarter than the world, and dismissed those who begged to differ by labelling them. Pelosi recently showed how labelling has some kind of mystic power, reminicent of High School days when a cheerleader dissed you and you just knew the whole school was going to hate you now (and it actually mattered), when she skewered challengers to her leadership position after the recent woodshed of an election by calling them (gasp) “irritants”. Having observed this peculiar truth about them, I knew Pelosi would keep her position. They are living in a High School Drama. Witness Hillary jumping up and down on Lincoln’s bed like a little girl, her first night in the WH. So how do we reason and negotiate with adults who have the mindset of children? Perhaps Captain Kirk’s technique would work best: “No more nah nah nah!”