October 27, 2006
What does "pragmatist" mean?


prag.ma.tism ... a practical approach to problems and affairs ... an American movement in philosophy founded by C. S. Peirce and William James and marked by the doctrines that the meaning of conceptions is to be sought in their practical bearings, that the function of thought is to guide action, and that truth is preeminently to be tested by the practical consequences of belief
Berkeley, CA Mayor Tom Bates calls himself a pragmatist:
"I'm a pragmatist, a person who wants to see things implemented,"
(he is best known for implementing the theft of newspapers endorsing his opponent).

And then there is campaign sign thief Deb Eddy, whom the Seattle Times considers to be a pragmatist:

Eddy is a pragmatic Democrat who knows this district, its strengths and challenges.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 27, 2006 04:30 PM | Email This
1. Maybe they need to add "accomplished thief" to the definition.

Posted by: Hinton on October 27, 2006 06:11 PM
2. And maybe they need to list the sign makers as Campaign Violators as they didn't include who paid for the signs on them.

Posted by: Michael Caine on October 27, 2006 06:47 PM
3. BTW, its nice to see that yall are now advertising to Vote for Maria Cantwell and Anti-Bush Stickers on your site. Welcome aboard the train that is going to take our country back from corrupt Republicans.

Posted by: Michael Caine on October 27, 2006 06:50 PM

(From the Princess Bride):
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Perhaps this dim-bulb mayor, and the MSM in fawning over Klepto Deb, are confusing pragmatist with pilferer or purloiner or maybe larcenist.

Stupid is as stupid does!

Posted by: BRC on October 27, 2006 06:50 PM
5. "Michael Caine": And maybe they need to list the sign makers as Campaign Violators as they didn't include who paid for the signs on them

Actually, no. From today's Times article

Tony Perkins, political finance specialist for the State Public Disclosure Commission, agrees it is legal to post yard signs without attribution.
Sorry, dude.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on October 27, 2006 06:51 PM
6. Uh-oh!!


Posted by: BRC on October 27, 2006 06:52 PM
7. I think Democrats have a slightly twisted definition of pragmatism. In their version, things like truth, the facts, or even fairness take a backseat to implementing something - anything. What a liberal implements doesn't really matter, as they seem to validate their existence by controlling others, feeling the power behind that control, and feeling good about the decisions they've made regardless of the consequences.

For liberals, thoughts do not guide actions, but they live in reverse, where the necessary political action guides their thoughts. It is the only explanation for positions that defy logic or reason, and even work against the interests or security of the American people. It is not an accident that a liberal believes the opposite of whatever Republicans does on any given issue, as they see it as necessary to oppose and obstruct to gain and hold power. They have the need to simply believe what they must. Power and control of others is what a liberal lives for.

"Liberalism is a mental disorder."

Posted by: MJC on October 27, 2006 07:00 PM
8. Deb Eddy is a product of Kirkland politics--what do you expect?

Posted by: Organization Man on October 27, 2006 07:01 PM
9. Progressivism, as a movement, has never been anything more than than predestination without God. Replace God with the Vanguard of History that Eddy thinks she's a member of (not to mentionn half the English Dept. at the UW) and you have egoists of the highest order whose sense of self entitlement is unalloyed by reference to objective truth or morality. For Deb, stealing the property of another amounted to nothing more than engaging herself in another rationalization of the kind so-called progressives engage in every day (CAO anyone?). Her absurd theory that she is entitled to any property the ownership of which she hasn't investigated (here it was easily determined that KCGOP owned the signs by a WHOIS search) only highlights the grotesque philosophy of self importance that she's embraced and that is so typical of progressives. At what point do statements like Eddy's become Feliniesque in their detachment from reality? She actually suggested that her political opponents could not use her name without her authorization as if she were Queen or had a copyright on her name (which she doesn't). Like most progressives, she's come to view herself as some sort of minor diety, entitled to render judgments as prosecutor, judge and jury over another's property. This is scary stuff and she's a scary lady.

Posted by: Scary Eddy on October 27, 2006 07:16 PM
10. From what I have read:

prag.ma.tist 1) Democrat in office. 2) Democrat running for office. 3) Democrat.


Posted by: SouthernRoots on October 27, 2006 08:06 PM
11. I believe it was The Penguin in the movie "Batman Returns" that was referred to as a "Pragmatic Thief"!!!
Deb Eddy====The Penguin

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 27, 2006 09:01 PM
12. Well, as Caine has once again proven... the fringe left and facts are usually not able to coexist in the same space.

Posted by: Hinton on October 27, 2006 10:12 PM
13. Main headline on the front of the King County Journal today: "Candidate Swipes Campaign Signs. Republican Party says Deb Eddy violated law when she had workers pull out stakes."

Posted by: Michele on October 28, 2006 03:30 PM
14. The Seattle Times is right. She is a pragmatist. She wanted to get the theft of the signs done, so she stole them.

Posted by: pbj on October 28, 2006 03:39 PM
15. Following his pragmatic victory to retain the high-paying position of Washington State Republican Party Chair, some of our group at the Reagan Wing sat down with Chris Vance and he described his view of entirely pragmatic politics. Highlights: Chris said that he only wanted a REPUBLICAN to win and all his efforts were to get Republicans to win office in Washington State, REGARDLESS OF IDEOLOGY. I asked him, point blank, if circumstances were such that he there were two primary opponents(both "Republicans") and one was a conservative but the other was a marxist that Vance believed had a better chance of winning: what would be his position? He said, without hesitation, that he would favor the marxist and try to get the conservative to quit. THAT'S PRAGMATISM. An adjunct to that discussion was the discussion of "viability" because, to go along with his (seemingly neutral) pragmatism, he also had a belief that conservatives COULDN'T win in Washington as a general rule. We kicked that around a bit... he spoke of what it takes to win and I made the comment that the way the GOP was structured (with the candidate censorship still in place) it wouldn't be possible for a Ronald Reagan to win. He didn't disagree. So, "pragmatism," clearly in the case of Chris Vance, but I believe in all who practice it in Washington GOP politics, carries with it a prejudice against the actual ideals of the Party. This describes those currently in control. They are addicted to the idea that they have to run candidates who have no real belief in the things the Party stands for to win. They, themselves have no particular political beliefs and tell different people different things. And, of course, their track record is of greater and greater defeat. With them at the helm, the GOP is sinking. THAT'S PRAGMATISM. It's entirely impractical. Leftists will always support someone they perceive to be liberal (socialist) Conservative do the opposite, but true independents tend to go (all else being equal) with whoever sounds the most sincere. That's never pragmatists. They can't be sincere because they don't actually have any beliefs. Like McGavick, they take a position, but will happily reverse it if it seems politically profitable. They're pragmatists.

Posted by: Doug Parris on October 28, 2006 09:16 PM
Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember info?