Pali Posted November 10, 2016 Report Share Posted November 10, 2016 2 hours ago, Manual Labour said: But Pali didn't you pretty much say in another post Hillary is a pretty bad person/candidate but you voted for her because of her stance on climate change? If not maybe I misread or misunderstood and you actually think she is a fine role model and public official. Sorry, didn't see this post. I said that in this election I was effectively a single-issue voter, with climate change being that issue. That doesn't make it the only judgment call I made regarding the candidates. I'm not a fan of Hillary, though as this thread illustrates I tend to not buy into many of the more severe claims regarding her, and I considered her a very flawed candidate. Go back a ways to discussions of Hillary vs Bernie in the primaries and you'll see me arguing that she is vulnerable to Trump in ways that Sanders would not have been. That I was a single-issue voter also does not mean I won't criticize a candidate along other lines, because those lines may still be what convinces others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted November 10, 2016 Report Share Posted November 10, 2016 @Cydare, I didn't think I was quoting you out of context - apologies, I'm not trying to misrepresent anyone. We are just going to have to agree to disagree here, as I do think that there are times where a candidate's character is egregious enough to merit dismissal solely on those grounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cydare Posted November 10, 2016 Report Share Posted November 10, 2016 I think perhaps when I see someone, I see a much more opaque wall between someone's behaviors and their intentions. Someone can have good intentions, but never act on them -- or, someone can say nefarious things, but consistently have decent behaviors. I'm far more concerned with motive than I am results. That's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted November 10, 2016 Report Share Posted November 10, 2016 9 minutes ago, Cydare said: I'm far more concerned with motive than I am results. That's just me. Did this come out backwards? I'm guessing you meant to say you're more concerned with results than motive. Which is a position I can understand. Personally, I view actions as being the outcome of belief and character - the good intentioned who doesn't act may have the right beliefs but the wrong character makeup, for instance - so I anticipate and judge actions in relation to them. I don't see intent and action as wholly separate at all; if I kill someone, my intent and beliefs regarding the situation are one of the primary ways you determine if I committed murder or killed in self-defense. This matters, because if I killed because I justifiably thought I needed to protect myself, I'm not likely to kill again, but if I killed because I enjoy it? Lock me up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted November 11, 2016 Report Share Posted November 11, 2016 The whole lesser of two evils is the argument that got us here. 100$ tax break and national holiday for all voters. Shitheels get more for doing less. The republicans and democrats are both useless, feckless, and without any connection whatsoever to Americans. Greens and Libertarians are largely far sides of the main positions, but ultimately, all the parties are useless. We need fundamental changes to how the government works, not just policy. We're past the point of where simple policy, or even new laws can contain the modern needs. I'll hand it to Trump that he got a few things right in terms of lobbying, and some of the bans he proposed. That said, politics and money need to be decisively divided, penalties should be added to lawmakers and enforcers for breaking said laws, and crack downs on corruption. Representation should be based on wealth brackets- that is to say millionaires should not be representing the middle or working classes. GPI should be our indicator of choice, not GDP. Healthcare and Justice should not be privatized. And just a whole host of other things. Trumps not better than Hillary. Hillary is not better than Trump. Two different kinds of lethal poison. The system itself is what is toxic and what must be reworked and reforged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted November 11, 2016 Report Share Posted November 11, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatMike Posted November 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2016 She can be the first one over here, I've got something special just waiting for such a thing to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted November 11, 2016 Report Share Posted November 11, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manual Labour Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 What do you moderate dems think of the SJWs rioting over #notmypresident? I am pretty disgusted by it, do they not understand what democracy is or are they just triggered without a safe space? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatMike Posted November 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 It's the participation trophy generation and my generation failed them. They never learned how to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambroas Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 @FatMikeYou're exactly right, that's one of the reasons when we play games and things in my house there are clear rules on who wins. Winner gets things, the rest get advice on how to do better. To lose builds character and a drive to be better that winning can't give you. My kids will never play a sport where a tie is ok, they understand a participation award is just so you can remember that year, it isn't something that you should be satisfied with. If they want a safe space they better mean a bunker with a stockpile of ammo and some MREs, their feelings will get hurt and they'll feel much better when they get over it and move on. They learn to not start a fight but to not be a victim, how to fight and how to decide what's worth fighting for. How to admit they were wrong and to be humble when they're right. Just a few joys of having a Marine dad from the south I guess. Maybe they'll turn out better for it all and I can't control what they do but I know I'm not going to raise them thinking they can wine scream and break things they didn't pay for when they didn't get their way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celerity Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 More likely, and more troubling, is that some of these protests may have been agitated by the losing candidate's team. That said, the lawlessness and violence of the protests means they won't last long and won't help their cause. Just like if Trump's supporters/team had done the same. I know I would be embarrassed if libertarians were doing this, so I hope the 'silent majority' of the left feels the same. The worst offenders are always the most public. I wrote a letter to one of my master's professors (Applied Linguistics -- our study is all about cross-culture interactions, identity and rhetoric, and so forth -- because we teach English to non-English speakers), pleading the case that we, as specialists in the field, should be empathizing and finding common ground with those that don't agree with us (i.g. being empathetic is only virtuous if it is with something you don't agree with), not perpetuating the hate and fear that we hate so much. In her reply, I was told that I am wholly unqualified to comment on the issue because I am white (so is she...), that I was extremely arrogant in asking for intellectual reconciliation with evil, and that I'm a racist that is absolutely responsible for Trump's victory (for voting third party). She said that she is literally living in fear because every time she sees a white male, she knows he is secretly gloating over his domination of her and that she will live in physical and psychological fear from now on. It is completely irrational. This kind of person is just as bad as the equivalent white supremacist. She is an expert in the field of multiculturalism and identity, but she is completely blind to her own hate speech and feelings. That is a very dangerous place to be and way too close to home for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatMike Posted November 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 And that comes from to many liberal professors that have poisoned higher education in this country. It's also a sign of the failure of coddling people, making sure every little thing is okay and protecting all their little feeling from harm. It's a crying damn shame this country has turned into this in a very short span of time. That's what is really scary, I'm worried about my 3 year old when he grows up be leaves home with his uneducated, white priveledged dad having raised him old school. He'll be a pariah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 The term some of us liberals tend to use about the kinds of people you're talking about is "Regressive Left." It was coined by Maajid Nawaz as a descriptor of those on the left who, in the name of multicultural pluralism, reflexively condemned his statements regarding Islamism (distinct from Islam) as racist because he was criticizing a non-Western religious group (rather than dealing with the substance of what he was actually saying). Since then, a number of us have taken to using it to describe the SJW brigade, college groups demanding censorship of things ranging from guest speakers to Halloween costumes, and the like - Authoritarian Left also functions, but since many of these people like to call themselves Progressives, I feel the Regressive label has more bite to it. And no, we're not proud of them. The last protests I was a part of against a Republican administration had 100,000 people present, and we set the damned standard for large-scale, non-violent protests with zero people hurt, zero property destruction. Violent protests against Trump supporters I am happy to condemn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cydare Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 I did actually mean that I care more about intent than I do results. The end result of all things human is to die, hopefully at an old age. I firmly believe the motives, or intent of people, is what is most important about them, not that they simply "cause" things to happen. The agency of an action is the intent. I want to know the intent before I see the action. Someone can give billions to charity, but if they did it so that they could brag or puff themselves up, I'd rather they have kept their money. I honestly believe that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 7 minutes ago, Cydare said: I did actually mean that I care more about intent than I do results. The end result of all things human is to die, hopefully at an old age. I firmly believe the motives, or intent of people, is what is most important about them, not that they simply "cause" things to happen. The agency of an action is the intent. I want to know the intent before I see the action. Someone can give billions to charity, but if they did it so that they could brag or puff themselves up, I'd rather they have kept their money. I honestly believe that. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I get what you're saying, but the whole picture should be judged. Intent & Outcome (desired or not). EDIT: As for the charity comment- I bet you have never been starving lol. And if that is true, then it's an easy statement to make. I haven't either, but if I was and some billionaire was giving out money, I doubt I'd much give a fuck as to why he was giving it. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cydare Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 The road to the grave is paved with any intentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 Well everyone dies lol. I'm making the point that just because someone means well, that doesn't mean dick. They could mean well for people, but be super religious and impose all their crazy rules because they are "trying to help"... etc. So yeah, I don't understand. Intent is relative, and often fades away before someone can blink but the outcome is permanent (in the sense that it happened and is now marked into the history books). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 16 minutes ago, Cydare said: I did actually mean that I care more about intent than I do results. The end result of all things human is to die, hopefully at an old age. I firmly believe the motives, or intent of people, is what is most important about them, not that they simply "cause" things to happen. The agency of an action is the intent. I want to know the intent before I see the action. Someone can give billions to charity, but if they did it so that they could brag or puff themselves up, I'd rather they have kept their money. I honestly believe that. Okay, we're in the same place here then. Edit: well, mostly. I'd still take the billions for charity, and just not give them points for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cydare Posted November 12, 2016 Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 The outcome is that we die -- that is the permanence. There is no other outcome that is permanent. We die, that is the result. When I say intent, what I'm really talking about is the seminal sin, which is Pride. You either intend to serve yourself and your interests before others, or you intend to serve others and their interest before your own. You can say, "do both", but in life, there will come a point (and I am convinced of this), where the conflict of the two arises and you will be forced to choose. Before I give a crap about the result of someone's actions, I want to know what their intent was. I cannot be swayed from this; it's a matter of my view of the world. In a court of law, intent must also be determined before any verdicts can be cast. There is a reason for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatMike Posted November 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2016 Can I just throw out there how much I loathe the media. Left, right, mainstream or grass roots they all suck. They have to make money so they blow out of proportion anything that will get them ratings or views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 Warning, "politically incorrect" words used. You've been warned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 So, @Pali, after a two stage election, our Hillary lost the runoff too. This is our new president: Rumen Radev - a pilot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magick Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 I'm under the impression that you're saying that being a pilot is a bad thing. That a pilot can't run a country. We had an actor run ours and we didn't disappear into a black hole at any point. We've also had servicemen elected too, at various points. Sexy, sexy plane, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 Eh, I just said he is a pilot. I voted for him too, so no need to go ham on me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.