I intended to write on an entirely different subject, but as I delved into the research, I was diverted on to another path that begged for comment.
I saw that the titles of proposed legislation and organizations are at times aiming for a Pulitzer Prize in fiction as opposed to divulging their intended purpose; they may be intentionally misleading in order to garner support for something one would not normally support. Don’t rely on the title: look underneath that rock and see what really lives under there.
A convincing case can be made for nearly any point — if one is willing to ignore, hide, discount or cherry-pick pertinent information. Neglecting to read criticism of an issue, even one you support, may leave one ignorant of the whole picture, akin to drinking the Kool-Aid.
Absolute assertions that something is broken, failed, or implied to be non-existent (without evidence offered) is likely a source of global warming: hot air. Certainly some things may need improvement, but totally broken? Unlikely.
Beware the superficial message. Get the shovel out and dig.
