Here.

It’s amazing what you’ll discover when you start WEeding.

(Remember how I found out McCain and Obama are secret business partners?)

It’s been a fruitful week! (Or “WEek”?)

Politicians never cease to surprise.

UPDATE Comments on the first Obama piece and the Rush Limbaugh piece are finished now, too.

Speech to NFIB Summit, by John McCain

(More) Remarks on Retirement Security, by Barack Obama

“Drill Here! Drill Now! Pay Less!,” by Rush Limbaugh

“Tax Relief for the Middle Class,” by Barack Obama

“Hail the Male,” an Interview with Kathleen Parker (conducted by Kathryn Jean Lopez), NRO

Prologue

I’m on the brink of declaring Barack Obama the WEediest writer in history. He always delivers. (Of course, there’s always the question of who actually writes his material. Politicians and their speechwriters . . . .)

With Obama’s nomination victory speech this week, I honor an amazing piece of collectivist WEediness, published, ironically, by one of the biggest libertarian sites known to humanity. If humanity is the kind of thing that can know things. If humanity even exists.

Along with these two, I’ve included links to three other pieces (one by Obama) which received nominations and — I believe — deserved to win. But, unfortunately, I didn’t have the time this week to give all the nominated pieces their just deserts.

Contents

36: Nomination Victory Speech, by Barack Obama

37: “Whose Iraq Is It, Anyway?,” by Steve Chapman, Reason

Other Nominees:

“It’s Time to Talk to Syria,” by John Kerry and Chuck Hagel, Wall Street Journal

“The Gas Prices We Deserve,” by George Will, Washington Post

Remarks at AIPAC Policy Conference, by Barack Obama

WEeding Winner 34

[<<prev. | top | contents | next>>]
[ A | B ]

“New Crops for Afghanistan,” by Lisa Schiffren, National Review Online‘s “The Corner” blog

Reasons for Winning:

A:

“We, in the form of the DEA, have been sending specialists out to Afghanistan since the 1980s to persuade them, by carrot or stick, to stop growing opium poppies.” -Lisa Schiffren

Comment:

This sentence is utterly baffling. “We, in the form of the DEA . . . .” What?! We can take form as different things? We are mighty morphin’ power . . . Americans?

The DEA isn’t even elected by “us”!

[Post More Comments] [ A | B ]

B:

“There is nothing complicated about why our many attempts have failed, or, at best, only temporarily displaced poppy growth.” -Lisa Schiffren

Comment:

Do tell us why your attempts have failed. While you’re at it, tell me why my attempts have failed. Then you can tell me why “our” attempts have failed.

Don’t you love it when people tell you you’ve been failing at something you’ve never even tried?

[Post More Comments] [ A | B ]

Judgment:

Did you feel the despair rising in you, as you were WEedily informed of your DEA doppelganger’s failures? (“What’s wrong with weeds?“)

WEediness Quotient: [FAQ]

2/0 = ? [A tie for the highest WEediness Quotient record! (Though, because it has more WEedy sentences that the other two pieces which achieved a WEediness Quotient of ?, it will be awarded first place!)]

[Post More Comments]
[<<prev. | top | contents | next>>]

WEeding Winner 31

[<<prev. | top | contents | next>>]
[ A | B | C | D | F | G ]

“All About Me,” by Victor Davis Hanson, Real Clear Politics

Reasons for Winning:

A:

“Here is how our baby-boom generation solves problems:” -Victor Davis Hanson

Comment:

An entire generation solves problems? Isn’t it mildly shocking to hear a conservative talking like a collectivist? Almost Borg-like.

This isn’t a WEedy sentence, because the instance of the first-person plural in it is legitimate. But the group-reification (a consequence of WEedy thinking) would automatically make this article eligible for a “Groupy” (if such an award existed).

(If you were wondering, Dr. Hanson should have said, “Here is the way many members of our baby-boom generation tend to solve problems:”)

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | F | G ]

B:

“When the bubble inevitably burst, cries of outrage followed about how “they” (never “we”) caused a “depression” in housing. Our leaders shrieked about greedy lenders and incompetent regulators who foreclosed on us — never that the American people themselves caused much of the speculation problem, or that housing prices are finally becoming affordable again for new couples.” -Victor Davis Hanson

Comment:

There are some fascinating things going on here. Notice how Dr. Hanson focuses on the first- and third-person plurals, arguing that the former would have been more proper.

But then he goes on to claim “the American people themselves caused much of the speculation problem.” We’re all real estate speculators to Mr. Hanson? Surely he doesn’t believe this. I, for one, am not a real estate speculator, and don’t think I’ve ever met one.

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | F | G ]

C:

“Over 70 percent of the American people, and a majority of Democratic senators, wanted to remove Saddam Hussein — overwhelming support for the administration’s war that rose even higher as a brilliant campaign finished off the Baathists in three weeks.

“But when a messy insurgency erupted, suddenly we heard that our victory was ruined by “their stupid occupation.”" -Victor Davis Hanson

Comment:

Once again, Dr. Hanson is focusing on the shifting of “person” in pluralized pronouns. He says the the Baby Boomers (at least) wanted the Iraq War at first, only to divest themselves of it, calling it “their . . . occupation.”

And yet Dr. Hanson speaks of “the administration’s war” as leading to “our victory”! He wasn’t there fighting, and yet he claims it as his own.

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | F | G ]

D:

“What are the baby boomers’ collective traits? Like all perpetual adolescents who suffer arrested development, we always want things both ways: Don’t drill or explore for more energy, but nevertheless demand ever more fuel from other suppliers.” -Victor Davis Hanson

Comment:

Did I mention this was a conservative talking? “Collective traits”!?! And even though he does not share these traits (he is criticizing them), he speaks in the first person about them.

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | F | G ]

E:

“When things don’t go well, we always blame someone else. Why drill off Santa Barbara or Alaska when we can sue those terrible Saudis for not putting more oil platforms in their Persian Gulf?” -Victor Davis Hanson

Comment:

You do, Dr. Hanson? You always blame someone else? And you can sue the Saudis? Really? In what court will you be filing?

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | F | G ]

F:

“And in our self-absorption, no one accepted that our notorious appetites created more problems than our supposed “caring” solved.” -Victor Davis Hanson

Comment:

In this part of the article, Dr. Hanson is doing some excellent critiquing of how some people think about themselves (using the first person). And yet he falls into the same trap of being focussed on “we.” Clearly Dr. Hanson does not believe himself to be self-absorbed, nor does he believe himself to have a “notorious appetite,” nor does he think himself to have merely cared in a “supposed” way. But he talks in the first person about each.

And he has “accepted that . . . notorious appetites create[] more problems than . . . supposed ‘caring’ solved.” Yet he speaks as if he hadn’t.

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | F | G ]

G:

“The fault of this age, dear baby boomers, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.” -Victor Davis Hanson

Comment:

After saying, in the paragraph previous to this sentence, that “the anonymous ‘they’” were not to blame for various problems, Dr. Hanson goes on to blame himself for things he clearly does not believe himself to have caused.

So much wasted potential for clarity!

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | F | G ]

Judgment:

If this article were WEeded, it would be an excellent piece. It says much of importance. (“What’s wrong with weeds?“)

WEediness Quotient: [FAQ]

7/10 = 0.7

[Post More Comments]
[<<prev. | top | contents | next>>]

WEeding Winner 29

[<<prev. | top | contents | next>>]
[ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

“Sacrifices to the Climate Gods,” by Roy Spencer, National Review Online

Reasons for Winning:

A:

“Although we shudder at the thought of such barbaric practices, I believe that we have unwittingly reinstituted human sacrifice in modern times. But while the list of justifications has grown immensely, our new rituals are still performed in the name of avoiding the wrath of the gods of nature.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

The question one wants to ask, then, is, “Is this going to be Mr. Spencer’s letter of repentance, or is he really talking in the first-person plural about something he would never dare do?”

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

B:

“Our environmental protection practices have already caused the deaths of millions of people, mainly in poor African countries.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

Wow. Really? Why would we do such a thing?

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

C:

“Since we now have the scientific method, we rely on computer models to predict these future catastrophes rather than on our fears and prejudices. While this gives the illusion of modern objective precision, the truth is that all we have done is enlisted one of our modern idols — the computer — to justify what we want to believe anyway.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

First, what a sweet possession that scientific method is, which all of us have. I wonder, did you remember to list “the Scientific Method” among your valuables for home insurance purposes?

Second, how does having the scientific method (observe, hypothesize, experiment, observe, revise, hypothesize, experiment, observe, revise, hypothesize, etc.) lead us to rely on computer models?

Third, do you think, in fact, that Mr. Spencer relies on computer models “to predict . . . future catastrophes”?

Fourth, the final sentence of C is simply too unbelievable. There is no way Mr. Spencer sees himself as a member of the group which uses “modern idols . . . to justify what [he] want[s] to believe anyway.”

It’s really hard to take someone seriously when he doesn’t take the very things he says seriously. (Even when you are like me, and actually agree with him, sans the WEeds.)

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

D:

“But we also know that the Martian atmosphere has 15 times as much CO2 as our own atmosphere, and its surface temperature averages about 70 deg. F below zero.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

That was news to me. Did you know that?

Who’s the “we” who knew this, then?

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

E:

“Why do we love to believe that mankind is a plague upon the Earth? We view anything and everything that happens in nature, no matter how barbaric, bloody, or destructive, as good.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

That is a question. Why do you love to believe that mankind is a plague upon the Earth, Mr. Spencer? Why do you view anything and everything that happens in nature, no matter how barbaric, bloody, or destructive, as good?

Obviously you don’t.

But you said you did.

Why, Mr. Spencer? Why?

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

F:

“If a volcano like Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines dumps millions of tons of sulfur into the stratosphere, cooling the Earth for two or three years, this is simply Mother Nature at work. If humans did it, we would call it an environmental catastrophe.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

Or rather, Mr. Spencer wouldn’t, but other people would. He just doesn’t want to be too offensive to the people he thinks are terrible, and therefore tries to paint himself as one of them to make it look like he’s being humble. (See, FAQ)

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

G:

“And now we are teaching our children to perform their own acts of worship, again hoping to placate the gods of the natural world. Substituting compact fluorescent light bulbs for incandescent ones, and turning the light off when they leave the room, makes them feel good about themselves and their relationship to nature. These rituals being taught in the public schools will help define their still-developing worldviews and religious beliefs.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

Congratulations on your new job! Evidently we’re all public school teachers teaching our own children to become Environment Worshipers.

I wonder how soon Mr. Spencer is going to get fired from his teaching post, after his principal reads his article.

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

H:

“We are already causing a food crisis around the world by converting food, such as corn, into liquid fuels for transportation. Now, with the Climate Security Act, we will also be causing additional turmoil at home as the poor struggle to survive in a world where only the middle class and wealthy can afford to live relatively comfortably.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

And now he’s accusing his fellow public school teachers of Crimes Against Humanity! He is so fired!

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

I:

“We will, in effect, be sacrificing even more humans at the altar of radical environmentalism in the vain hope that the gods in charge of weather and climate will look favorably upon us, and not destroy us.” -Roy Spencer

Comment:

And if only Mr. Spencer had identified the real culprits, instead of spreading the blame around with his WEeds. How are you supposed to stop yourself from committing murder if you’re not the one committing murder?! If there are people who need to be brought up on charges, Mr. Spencer, tell us who they are so we can . . . I don’t know. What is it exactly you want us to do?

[Post More Comments] [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I ]

Judgment:

Mr. Spencer’s piece is vitally important. I think he’s correct on every count — if you ignore the WEeds. (“What’s wrong with weeds?“) But since I count thirteen WEedy sentences in Mr. Spencer’s piece, it deserves a WEedy.

WEediness Quotient: [FAQ]

13/5 = 2.6

[Post More Comments]
[<<prev. | top | contents | next>>]

Post Comments Here

Prologue

Seven more articles win WEedies, this week, and six of them come from conservatives. Volume 6 begins with four pieces on what we might call “domestic” issues, and ends with three pieces on “war” issues.

No less than two pieces tie the record for highest WEediness quotient (i.e., ?), but one of them moves into official first place due to its number of WEedy sentences!!!

Click on the links below to jump to the quotations and comments for whichever article looks most interesting.

Contents

29: “Sacrifices to the Climate Gods,” by Roy Spencer, National Review Online

30: “How We Really Help Ted,” by Jonathan Alter, Newsweek

31: “All About Me,” by Victor Davis Hanson, Real Clear Politics

32: “Same-Sex Marriage: Giant Leap in the Wrong Direction,” by Frank Pastore, Town Hall

33: “Feith: The War Is About Eliminating a Security Threat, Not Democracy Promotion,” by Andy McCarthy, National Review Online‘s “The Corner” blog

34: “New Crops for Afghanistan,” by Lisa Schiffren, National Review Online‘s “The Corner” blog

35: “McCain Takes Obama to School on Iraq,” by David Limbaugh, Town Hall

A new format this week leads to a more-amusing read, if I do say so myself. I have interspersed my commentary with the quotations for each WEedy article, to delightful effect.

As always, the writers whose works are honored come from both sides of the political aisle. Volume 5 begins and ends with pieces on “security,” contains the work of no less than four U.S. Senators, a record-breaking speech (60 WEedy sentences!), and the first-ever winner of an Honorary WEedy.

You’ll want to pay particular attention to the Honorary WEedy-winning piece, as it evidences everything that is wrong with WEedy thinking, without using a single WEed. A sight not to be missed!

Bon appetit!