Explination of Hiaitus

I'm currently trying to figure out a problem I've been having with blogger, namely that I've run out of space to post photos. I don't know how this is surprising to me. Until I find a way to back up the posts I've made I won't be able to delete them to make room for new photography posts, so hang in there while I take a short break.

In the meantime, sink your teeth into this depressing NPR article. I don't know what to do when logic fails, and yet here we go: despite overwhelming factual proof - that's factual proof, not opinion - the Romney campaign continues to stick by their blatant lies about welfare, a strategy that they must assume will be successful.

And they're probably right. According to a study (in another article I somehow failed to post here that brilliantly analyses the effects and causes of Representative Allen West declaring that 80 members of the Democratic Party in Congress were members of the Communist Party, then standing by that ridiculous claim after it had been proven again and again to be false), a fact's accuracy does not have a primary effect on its believability. If one hears a political and factual lie, then hears the correction, he is most likely to believe whichever coincides most with his prior political opinions (specifically the study deals with fabricated information regarding Bush tax cuts).

In short, it doesn't matter if it's a fact or not. Just saying whatever you want about an opponent will make a large portion of your base believe the slander. This insults my intelligence and panders to fear and hatred - once again.

Is it true that the Republican Party's platform now is so outlandish that they have to rely on hearsay (and voter ID laws, another story) to win votes? What will these candidates do once they're in office and have to deal with the reality of a world where facts are important? People, we have to vote in November!