Bipartisan Senate group proposes ‘no fly, no buy’ gun measure

[David Horn]

(10-11-2018, 06:49 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Ron Paul is an establishment booster par excellance, as is his son. They are social darwinists who allow greedy businessmen to do anything they want in the name of freedom and lower taxes. Result: control of society by a wealthy and powerful few.

Freedom isn't free on so many levels.  Let's agree that the freedoms that benefit the powerful are useless to the not-powerful, and ultimately corrosive to society in general.  We have a Constitution that was created to, among other things, promote the general welfare.  I fail to see how that's possible if all the power devolves to the monied few.

[David Horn]

(10-12-2018, 12:27 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Yes, I feel that outright political warfare is appropriate. Have you ever seen what happens to some liberal dickhead who goes off in a bar or at a party? I have and it's not pretty. I wouldn't want to be the blue dickhead who finds themselves at odds with an American Red with no Democratic support because they're viewed as being such dickheads. Dude, I didn't get to the position that I'm at today by being nice, playing nice and trying to be friends with liberals/blues/progressives. Ask yourself this question, how thick is the Democratic barrier these days. I broke through that protective barrier many years ago and the blues found themselves losing ground, losing popularity and losing support ever since. Look around, you're down to less than a handful vs me and whoever else who wants to pitch in and do their part opposing the blues these days. I remember the day when regular Democrats and left leaning libertarians couldn't say shit or say anything bad and say anything they disliked about the blues in public. I changed that during my stint posting as KIA.

When I first arrived at T4T, the conservatives on the old forum outnumbered the liberals roughly 2 to 1.  That ratio changed quickly to the opposite as the conservative arguments proved false and indefensible.  Even Marc Lamb had to pitch it in.  I doubt you were here when he departed.

Now, arguing that violence is executed better by Reds than Blues makes a mockery of your argument that you won the intellectual argument.  You didn't.  Then again, no one has definitively won at this point, because the argument continues.  Fist fights, on the other hand, don't play so well -- and shouldn't, in a civilized society.  Though less physically harmful, verbal abuse is no better.

[Classic-Xer]

(10-12-2018, 09:54 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(10-12-2018, 12:27 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Yes, I feel that outright political warfare is appropriate. Have you ever seen what happens to some liberal dickhead who goes off in a bar or at a party? I have and it's not pretty. I wouldn't want to be the blue dickhead who finds themselves at odds with an American Red with no Democratic support because they're viewed as being such dickheads. Dude, I didn't get to the position that I'm at today by being nice, playing nice and trying to be friends with liberals/blues/progressives. Ask yourself this question, how thick is the Democratic barrier these days. I broke through that protective barrier many years ago and the blues found themselves losing ground, losing popularity and losing support ever since. Look around, you're down to less than a handful vs me and whoever else who wants to pitch in and do their part opposing the blues these days. I remember the day when regular Democrats and left leaning libertarians couldn't say shit or say anything bad and say anything they disliked about the blues in public. I changed that during my stint posting as KIA.

When I first arrived at T4T, the conservatives on the old forum outnumbered the liberals roughly 2 to 1.  That ratio changed quickly to the opposite as the conservative arguments proved false and indefensible.  Even Marc Lamb had to pitch it in.  I doubt you were here when he departed.

Now, arguing that violence is executed better by Reds than Blues makes a mockery of your argument that you won the intellectual argument.  You didn't.  Then again, no one has definitively won at this point, because the argument continues.  Fist fights, on the other hand, don't play so well -- and shouldn't, in a civilized society.  Though less physically harmful, verbal abuse is no better.

I arrived in 2003. I was around when Marc Lamb (Devil's Advocate) was permanently banned for an altercation that occurred with Craig during a private exchange. I wasn't involved in that private exchange. However, I was involved in an altercation during a private exchange with Craig which resulted in the permanent loss of my posting privileges as KIA-67 and the eventual removal of Craig as the sites moderator. I wasn't around when you arrived and the conservatives had a 2 to 1 advantage. I arrived after so-called liberals like you and others like you had taken over and clearly established themselves as the dominant force and the so-called liberals had a 10-1 advantage.

[pbrower2a]

This is what I recall. KIA-67 told a fellow poster to commit suicide. Odin and I told KIA-67 to delete the post and apologize, and we reported the post to the moderator. KIA-67 did not delete the post and apologize; I would have advocated that he not lose his posting privileges had he done so.

He was gone.

[Classic-Xer]

(10-13-2018, 03:00 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: This is what I recall. KIA-67 told a fellow poster to commit suicide. Odin and I told KIA-67 to delete the post and apologize, and we reported the post to the moderator. KIA-67 did not delete the post and apologize; I would have advocated that he not lose his posting privileges had he done so.

He was gone.

Craig listened to you (1st mistake) and he did exactly what the two of you expected of him (2nd mistake) and then proceeded to carry out the order that he'd been given by you (3rd mistake) which brought him into direct contact with me where he received questions relating to the severity punishment for something viewed as piddly by most at the time that no one other than you seemed to really care about at the time including the poster that it was directed at at the time  and an accusation of bias and an ultimatum (Last mistake which ended with his removal and job loss shortly afterwards). I bet you didn't know what you did actually represented the beginning of the end of Craig as T4T moderator at the time. As a business owner, I saw no value in him whatsoever. I mean, a clown/puppet running a large forum.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-14-2018, 12:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-13-2018, 03:00 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: This is what I recall. KIA-67 told a fellow poster to commit suicide. Odin and I told KIA-67 to delete the post and apologize, and we reported the post to the moderator. KIA-67 did not delete the post and apologize; I would have advocated that he not lose his posting privileges had he done so.

He was gone.

Craig listened to you (1st mistake) and he did exactly what the two of you expected of him (2nd mistake) and then proceeded to carry out the order that he'd been given by you  (3rd mistake) which brought him into direct contact with me where he received questions relating to the severity     punishment for something viewed as piddly by most at the time that no one other than you seemed to really care  about at the time including the poster that it was directed at at the time  and an accusation of bias and an ultimatum (Last mistake which ended with his removal and job loss shortly afterwards). I bet you didn't know what you did actually represented the beginning of the end of Craig as T4T moderator at the time. As a business owner, I saw no value in him whatsoever. I mean, a clown/puppet running a large forum.

For the record, asking another poster to commit suicide is just the sort of thing I quietly report, and I would not be surprised or disapproving if the moderator took action. The difference here is I just do not advertise to the other posters when I report or the contents of what I report.

More importantly, it illustrates an aspect of tribal thinking. If the other guy has a different opinion politically, then he is of another tribe, and common courtesy is therefore out the window. It seems a common red perspective that the Right of Free Speech can become a right to insult and abuse. It runs into the blue idea of common human decency, that others should be addressed with courtesy, an ideal that the reds seemingly reject with prejudice, often literally, insisting on abusing others.

Fighting tribal thinking is one small aspect of "all men are created equal'. You can post on a moderated forum, and the idea becomes real or not according to the moderator.

[pbrower2a]

(10-14-2018, 05:17 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(10-14-2018, 12:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-13-2018, 03:00 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: This is what I recall. KIA-67 told a fellow poster to commit suicide. Odin and I told KIA-67 to delete the post and apologize, and we reported the post to the moderator. KIA-67 did not delete the post and apologize; I would have advocated that he not lose his posting privileges had he done so.

He was gone.

Craig listened to you (1st mistake) and he did exactly what the two of you expected of him (2nd mistake) and then proceeded to carry out the order that he'd been given by you  (3rd mistake) which brought him into direct contact with me where he received questions relating to the severity     punishment for something viewed as piddly by most at the time that no one other than you seemed to really care  about at the time including the poster that it was directed at at the time  and an accusation of bias and an ultimatum (Last mistake which ended with his removal and job loss shortly afterwards). I bet you didn't know what you did actually represented the beginning of the end of Craig as T4T moderator at the time. As a business owner, I saw no value in him whatsoever. I mean, a clown/puppet running a large forum.

For the record, asking another poster to commit suicide is just the sort of thing I quietly report, and I would not be surprised or disapproving if the moderator took action.  The difference here is I just do not advertise when or the contents of what I report.

I am quieter about blatant spam because such is always done in calculation of a reward. People make mistakes, and I expect some mercy upon those who repent publicly after recognizing the error of their ways. Some people simply have bad moments. This said, I tend to see an encouragement of suicide as something that could be taken literally. I would have accepted something like "Kill the character" as much less threatening to a person. Historical reality requires huge numbers of literary deaths to make Schindler's List credible as a book or novel.

Some moderators ban people for words even to the point that I am unable to mention that I have a cocker spaniel or that my favorite director is Alfred Hitchcock; identifying Francis Fukuyama as a historian; describing Phuket, Thailand as a place ravaged by a tsunami; recognizing Dick Van Dyke as a great comedian; calling nonsense "bullshit"; or giving the unglamorous explanation of the meaning of the acronyms SNAFU and WTF.  

Quote:More importantly, it illustrates an aspect of tribal thinking.  If the other guy has a different opinion politically, then he is of another tribe, and common courtesy is therefore out the window.  It seems a common red perspective that the Right of Free Speech can become a right to insult and abuse.  It runs into the blue idea of common human decency, that others should be addressed with courtesy, an ideal that the reds seemingly reject with prejudice, often literally, insisting on abusing others.

I may be harshly judgmental about certain things, especially when they can hurt people. The other side of the political spectrum surely has nasty things to say of me when I disparage their ideals -- ideals that if taken to their logical conclusion would turn most of us or our descendants into serfs, if not slaves. Resistance to oppression is easiest and least violent when it begins with the oppression and not after it fully entrenches itself with brutal methods of enforcement. In an authoritarian or totalitarian society, practically the only speech is either stereotyped for banality or is identical with command. The alternative is to either have violent revolution (which can fail) or wait until the system rots from within, in which case nothing is left when the oppressors are gone.

Reagan may have been objectionable to liberals, but Trump is evil.

Quote:Fighting tribal thinking is one small aspect of "all men are created equal'.  You can post on a moderated forum, and the idea becomes real or not according to the moderator.

Today the Left side of the political spectrum is much more diverse than is the Right side. The real tribalism is on the Right.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-14-2018, 08:24 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: I am quieter about blatant spam because such is always done in calculation of a reward. People make mistakes, and I expect some mercy upon those who repent publicly after recognizing the error of their ways. Some people simply have bad moments. This said, I tend to see an encouragement of suicide as something that could be taken literally. I would have accepted something like "Kill the character" as much less threatening to a person. Historical reality requires huge numbers of literary deaths to make Schindler's List credible as a book or novel.

A month ago, under the Dungeons & Dragons fantasy roll playing rules, my character died.  Over the last month I have spent much energy trying to replace her.  I identify with my character much more than most, to the extent that other players object with how much I want to avoid replacing her.  Anyway, Erin worships the goddesses of Love and Joy, except her True Love died, and she is dealing with the instinct to bash every undead in the Forgotten Realms with her quarterstaff.  Not very loving and joyful, but the goddess of love quite understands...

Once, long ago, someone asked if I meant something really, or just in character.  One other player responded that it made no difference, that I was in character in the method acting sense long before and after the game was being run.  The world view, the culture of origin, can become that real.  An actor, or a gamer, can swap out perspectives entirely.

It even effects me in the 'real world'.  A while ago I was into a Star Trek character, an Asimov processor driven android with an integrated emotion chip, who saw the world though the filters of logic and law fed heavily through the emotion chip.  The persona I played in the Federation Council game among others, where she took the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the Federation most seriously, behind only the Prime Directive at Priority One.  I moved the persona and its perspective practically intact onto the old T4T forums.

I still don't think that forcing change on other cultures is a good idea.  You can help a culture that wants to change, but forcing them to change against their will, before they are ready, is a bad idea.  Joy Seven taught me that.  Just a coincidence that that is how she was programmed.

Another character was the super heroine Coda, who had the ability to see all of the possible Many Words futures, and chose the most interesting one.  This involved buying an absurdly high dexterity, a lot of danger sense, and an n-ray vision that could see anything visible in any possible future.  This also caused enough sensory overload that she had complete amnesia every morning.  She soon earned the knick name Space Cadet One.  (Space Cadet Two was based on the ability to manipulate mind altering drugs.)  She confused the heck out of the other superheroes, while being very good at jazz improvisation on the piano.

Basically, in my prime, the crazier the worldview, the better.  The best way to come up with an off the wall world view is to change the character's basic way of perceiving the world.

Anyway, when playing Coda, I came up with my theory of Psi based on the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum physics.  Sometimes immersing in weird world views has unexpected results.  You really can make sense of the Psi evidence while at the same time quantum physics makes perfect sense.  You just have to be crazy.  Reverse time causality, huzza.

Anyway, you keep your dirty little hands off my characters!  

[Classic-Xer]

(10-14-2018, 05:17 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: For the record, asking another poster to commit suicide is just the sort of thing I quietly report, and I would not be surprised or disapproving if the moderator took action.  The difference here is I just do not advertise to the other posters when I report or the contents of what I report.

More importantly, it illustrates an aspect of tribal thinking.  If the other guy has a different opinion politically, then he is of another tribe, and common courtesy is therefore out the window.  It seems a common red perspective that the Right of Free Speech can become a right to insult and abuse.  It runs into the blue idea of common human decency, that others should be addressed with courtesy, an ideal that the reds seemingly reject with prejudice, often literally, insisting on abusing others.

Fighting tribal thinking is one small aspect of "all men are created equal'.  You can post on a moderated forum, and the idea becomes real or not according to the moderator.

I didn't tell the person to commit suicide. I didn't ask the person to commit suicide. I tossed it on the table as an option as a way to call an obvious bluff of a blue playing the victim and stifle them a bit.

[Classic-Xer]

(10-14-2018, 10:07 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: A month ago, under the Dungeons & Dragons fantasy roll playing rules, my character died.  Over the last month I have spent much energy trying to replace her.  I identify with my character much more than most, to the extent that other players object with how much I want to avoid replacing her.  Anyway, Erin worships the goddesses of Love and Joy, except her True Love died, and she is dealing with the instinct to bash every undead in the Forgotten Realms with her quarterstaff.  Not very loving and joyful, but the goddess of love quite understands...

Once, long ago, someone asked if I meant something really, or just in character.  One other player responded that it made no difference, that I was in character in the method acting sense long before and after the game was being run.  The world view, the culture of origin, can become that real.  An actor, or a gamer, can swap out perspectives entirely.

It even effects me in the 'real world'.  A while ago I was into a Star Trek character, an Asimov processor driven android with an integrated emotion chip, who saw the world though the filters of logic and law fed heavily through the emotion chip.  The persona I played in the Federation Council game among others, where she took the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the Federation most seriously, behind only the Prime Directive at Priority One.  I moved the persona and its perspective practically intact onto the old T4T forums.

I still don't think that forcing change on other cultures is a good idea.  You can help a culture that wants to change, but forcing them to change against their will, before they are ready, is a bad idea.  Joy Seven taught me that.  Just a coincidence that that is how she was programmed.

Another character was the super heroine Coda, who had the ability to see all of the possible Many Words futures, and chose the most interesting one.  This involved buying an absurdly high dexterity, a lot of danger sense, and an n-ray vision that could see anything visible in any possible future.  This also caused enough sensory overload that she had complete amnesia every morning.  She soon earned the knick name Space Cadet One.  (Space Cadet Two was based on the ability to manipulate mind altering drugs.)  She confused the heck out of the other superheroes, while being very good at jazz improvisation on the piano.

Basically, in my prime, the crazier the worldview, the better.  The best way to come up with an off the wall world view is to change the character's basic way of perceiving the world.

Anyway, when playing Coda, I came up with my theory of Psi based on the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum physics.  Sometimes immersing in weird world views has unexpected results.  You really can make sense of the Psi evidence while at the same time quantum physics makes perfect sense.  You just have to be crazy.  Reverse time causality, huzza.

Anyway, you keep your dirty little hands off my characters!  

Hmmm...This may have something to do with the reason why Reds don't take Blues very seriously, why they don't want the Blues to ever be the ones in power and why Reds don't view Blues as genuine people who actually care about other people as much as they seem and often claim to care about the people BELOW them. Well, I'm a reddish who isn't that much below you or all that much above you at this point in our lives. This could also be the reason the two if us are rarely on the same page, rarely understanding where each other's at and misunderstandings relating to differences with values and worldviews.

[pbrower2a]

(10-14-2018, 08:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hmmm...This may have something to do with the reason why Reds don't take Blues very seriously,

It would be wise to do so, as your President looks like a failure, and we see your Red legislators capable of winning yet incapable of getting desirable results for any but people on the Right.

Bart Kavanaugh, mark my words, will be a sick joke in American legal history.

Quote:and why Reds don't view Blues as genuine people who actually care about other people as much as they seem and often claim to care about the people BELOW them.

We are not the ones who believe in economic hierarchy and brutal management as the fount of all blessings. Tell us about all those horrible things we did in the first two years of the Obama Presidency when Democrats had control of both Houses of Congress. Selling out American interests to Russia, massive corruption, use of Orwellian language, never trying to get the other side to give input to make our programs more palatable, imposing high new taxes in the form of tariffs, trying to privatize the public sector to monopolistic profiteers, using natural disasters as means of enriching the President's cronies, mocking disadvantaged people, and turning words into lies as the controllers of communication of the fictional Oceania in Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. Oh -- that's your side in the last twenty months. 

Let's put it this way -- your side has taken conservatism and twisted it into a sick parody.

Quote:Well, I'm a reddish who isn't that much below you or all that much above you at this point in our lives. This could also be the reason the two if us are rarely on the same page, rarely understanding where each other's at and misunderstandings relating to differences with values and worldviews.

[/quote]



I have long given up on President Trump. At best he makes no sense; at worst the sense that I can derive is pointless offense to all that is good and humane. The best that I can hope with him is that he will find Democratic majorities checking his worst tendencies including his severe deficiencies in empathy, integrity, wisdom, and savvy. Gridlock is far better than despotic or authoritarian lockstep for keeping a troubled nation out of the abyss.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-14-2018, 07:51 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I didn't tell the person to commit suicide. I didn't ask the person to commit suicide. I tossed it on the table as an option as a way to call an obvious  bluff of a blue playing the victim and stifle them a bit.

Note I didn't point fingers or address by name. I would rather not deal with personal attacks, but deal with issues. That is one way to push it.

Second, what one person intends to say, especially on the internet, is often not what another person with a hostile world view interprets. Miscommunication should be expected. If it isn't cleared up, you get a mess.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-14-2018, 08:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hmmm...This may have something to do with the reason why Reds don't take Blues very seriously, why they don't want the Blues to ever be the ones in power and why Reds don't view Blues as genuine people who actually care about other people as much as they seem and often claim to care about the people BELOW them. Well, I'm a reddish who isn't that much below you or all that much above you at this point in our lives. This could also be the reason the two if us are rarely on the same page, rarely understanding where each other's at and misunderstandings relating to differences with values and worldviews.

Few, even among those who lean blue, will explore world views as gleefully as I do.

But what you see often from reds is just tribal thinking.  Red leaners just do not emphasize as much with people who are not like them, are not of the same tribe.  People who think a certain way, people they call Americans, sure.  All men are created equal?  Care as much about one guy as the next?  That is a more blue ideal.  Reds just do not follow.

[Eric the Green]

(10-14-2018, 08:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hmmm...This may have something to do with the reason why Reds don't take Blues very seriously, why they don't want the Blues to ever be the ones in power and why Reds don't view Blues as genuine people who actually care about other people as much as they seem and often claim to care about the people BELOW them. Well, I'm a reddish who isn't that much below you or all that much above you at this point in our lives. This could also be the reason the two if us are rarely on the same page, rarely understanding where each other's at and misunderstandings relating to differences with values and worldviews.

You reds certainly have succeeded in keeping us blues out of power. I have to hand it to you. Of course you are not very clear in your writing much of the time, so I can't tell what the "reason" is why you Reds don't want us in power. I can surmise from my Blue point of view, and you know by now what I would say. The whole self-reliance anti-social government ideology, plus dog-whistle appeals to closet or overt racism, and the whole guns, gays and god axis.

But the Blue side as well has done a lot to sabotage itself the few times it has been allowed to take power. Only in a deep depression did a figure emerge with a 21-4 horoscope score named FDR who had the ability to lead us in a Blue direction. And Truman was OK, and he and Eisenhower at least pursued a double policy of domestic and foreign containment. Kennedy was a Blue leader who inspired the people, but was unable to get much accomplished. His martydom enabled his successor LBJ to accomplish a great deal, but LBJ also took the nation into a hopeless and unpopular, immoral war. The divisions this stoked have divided the country from that time to this, and never again has a genuine Blue leader emerged who could accomplish jack shit, both because they were too timid, and because they met so much resistance (even starting under LBJ), for whatever reason you cite.

It is very hard to break through the Red Wall. The prejudices, fears, hatreds and deceptions held by Reds are too powerful. Plus, blues having moved to blue states to escape from their spell, have left red states with disproportionate power, thanks to the constitution. This constitution and its electoral college also enabled two (recent and current) Red so-called presidents to stack the court with reactionaries. And now the young blue generation fails to vote in midterms, which enabled the older Reds to gerrymander the congress. And Blues continue to choose ineffective candidates more often than Reds do when it comes time to pick a president.

[pbrower2a]

(10-14-2018, 10:40 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(10-14-2018, 07:51 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I didn't tell the person to commit suicide. I didn't ask the person to commit suicide. I tossed it on the table as an option as a way to call an obvious  bluff of a blue playing the victim and stifle them a bit.

Note I didn't point fingers or address by name.  I would rather not deal with personal attacks, but deal with issues.  That is one way to push it.

Second, what one person intends to say, especially on the internet, is often not what another person with a hostile world view interprets.  Miscommunication should be expected.  If it isn't cleared up, you get a mess.

As someone who has contemplated suicide when his world crashed, the only response to someone so thinking is to remind someone that life still has value. Maybe I could not talk someone out of suicide who is in the end stages of terminal illness or who faces a long prison term or the death sentence, but someone who has lost everything and thinks himself too old or too wrecked to start over or to live on his past? There really is more to life than uncritical consumerism -- like culture. Time and life are precious, and there are enriching experiences available cheaply. Like this:







Visit an art museum. Go on a hike. Play a round of golf on the course on which you still have a membership. Watch an old movie that is side-splitting funny. Dust off your recording of a beloved opera and play it on your stereo. Do some volunteer work. People can live happy lives without sweating whether they can make payments on the Mercedes-Benz or keep up a costly self image.

It may be that I took the message too literally. That goes with Asperger's, and people with Asperger's often  have unusually-rigid morals. We must, lest we act as badly as we might. We have enough problems trying to seem normal and presentable.

Miscalculations happen, and I asked someone who made an unflattering distortion of my screen name to correct it. I got compliance and an apology, which was good enough for me. That is what I wanted. I can be pedantic; it goes with the territory.

I know that a majority of people dislike my politics and my cultural values. I accept this. On the other hand, I thoroughly loathe the political statements of anyone attached to a philosophy that has murdered, enslaved, or robbed people. I have encountered antisemitic screeds entering fora with audiences like this, and I call the antisemitic creep out for something so blatantly unwelcome. Because I am a Jew? I am not Jewish. I am about half-German, and I can never forgive people who align themselves with those who have murdered people similar in culture and morals to mine. Some harsh judgments really are just.

I'm giving nobody a free pass. I have called out some allegedly pro-Israel people for mocking the death of Rachel Corrie, an English woman who sneaked into a Palestinian home scheduled for destruction by Israeli authorities because a family member had committed a suicide attack on Israelis and was killed when the home was demolished as the home collapsed upon her. She may have been misguided, but her death is a tragedy, and people who mock her disgust me. Life is precious, which makes terrorism wrong.

In any event, contrition is a good thing for all concerned.

[Classic-Xer]

(10-14-2018, 10:54 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(10-14-2018, 08:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hmmm...This may have something to do with the reason why Reds don't take Blues very seriously, why they don't want the Blues to ever be the ones in power and why Reds don't view Blues as genuine people who actually care about other people as much as they seem and often claim to care about the people BELOW them. Well, I'm a reddish who isn't that much below you or all that much above you at this point in our lives. This could also be the reason the two if us are rarely on the same page, rarely understanding where each other's at and misunderstandings relating to differences with values and worldviews.

Few, even among those who lean blue, will explore world views as gleefully as I do.

But what you see often from reds is just tribal thinking.  Red leaners just do not emphasize as much with people who are not like them, are not of the same tribe.  People who think a certain way, people they call Americans, sure.  All men are created equal?  Care as much about one guy as the next?  That is a more blue ideal.  Reds just do not follow.

I see that you're able to use people, switch characters, perform roles and use their world views as much as you are able to use ideals and values associated with other people too. You do realize that all men are created equal was written by a slave owner who's wife wasn't viewed as an equal either.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-15-2018, 07:52 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-14-2018, 10:54 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(10-14-2018, 08:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hmmm...This may have something to do with the reason why Reds don't take Blues very seriously, why they don't want the Blues to ever be the ones in power and why Reds don't view Blues as genuine people who actually care about other people as much as they seem and often claim to care about the people BELOW them. Well, I'm a reddish who isn't that much below you or all that much above you at this point in our lives. This could also be the reason the two if us are rarely on the same page, rarely understanding where each other's at and misunderstandings relating to differences with values and worldviews.

Few, even among those who lean blue, will explore world views as gleefully as I do.

But what you see often from reds is just tribal thinking.  Red leaners just do not emphasize as much with people who are not like them, are not of the same tribe.  People who think a certain way, people they call Americans, sure.  All men are created equal?  Care as much about one guy as the next?  That is a more blue ideal.  Reds just do not follow.

I see that you're able to use people, switch characters, perform roles and use their  world views as much as you are able to use ideals and values associated with other people too. You do realize that  all men are created equal was written by a slave owner who's wife wasn't viewed as an equal  either.

Of course.  You do know the root word of progressive?  You do know how many times values have turned over since then?  You know how many times conservatives have been shown wrong by new values standards at least?

Morality evolves.  What is acceptable by the old values from before the crisis is not acceptable by the new.  There is a valid arrow of progress, which though the Industrial Age has pointed towards more rights, more equality, more democracy, and better integration with new technology.  Always, conservatives cling to privilege and are wrong in doing so.  

Of course, I am seeing a new age.  The patterns that held in the Industrial Age may not hold in the new.  I kind of hope they will.

[pbrower2a]

(10-15-2018, 07:52 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-14-2018, 10:54 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(10-14-2018, 08:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hmmm...This may have something to do with the reason why Reds don't take Blues very seriously, why they don't want the Blues to ever be the ones in power and why Reds don't view Blues as genuine people who actually care about other people as much as they seem and often claim to care about the people BELOW them. Well, I'm a reddish who isn't that much below you or all that much above you at this point in our lives. This could also be the reason the two if us are rarely on the same page, rarely understanding where each other's at and misunderstandings relating to differences with values and worldviews.

Few, even among those who lean blue, will explore world views as gleefully as I do.

But what you see often from reds is just tribal thinking.  Red leaners just do not emphasize as much with people who are not like them, are not of the same tribe.  People who think a certain way, people they call Americans, sure.  All men are created equal?  Care as much about one guy as the next?  That is a more blue ideal.  Reds just do not follow.

I see that you're able to use people, switch characters, perform roles and use their  world views as much as you are able to use ideals and values associated with other people too. You do realize that  all men are created equal was written by a slave owner who's wife wasn't viewed as an equal  either.

I will  gladly look at what other countries do well that we do not well  to determine whether what they do well applies to this country. We ignore traditions at the risk of destroying the foundations of the reality that we know. Revolutionary or even incremental change must prove itself in theory (such as logical consistency) and applicability. For example, if we are to lose all freedom, including consumer choice, and all security from governmental despotism, in return for rapid development (the essence of Stalinism), then we must ask whether rapid material development is worth the price. Gulags and show trials? I'd rather be a peasant in Bengal than a zek in a Gulag.

As for Thomas Jefferson and his hypocrisy -- even the idea that all white people are created equal was a revolutionary idea in 1776. Slavery was fully entrenched in American economic life, and extirpating it would require revolutionary changes in their own right. But let us remember that when Jefferson had Sally Hemings as a quasi-wife, the laws of Virginia prohibited their marriage. Sally Hemings was a half-sister of his late wife... and she was 3/4 white. More importantly, she was very intelligent, as was Jefferson. Jefferson would have had a hard time finding some woman who would not have bored him to no end. Living on the frontier, and Charlottesville was the frontier around 1800 would have been difficult for any woman. Many women moved to the frontier with their husbands and started family life on the frontier, but most of their husbands were not Thomas Jefferson. 

Jefferson was not a violent man, and their is no record of him sleeping with basically anything that moved while at Monticello. This is not a matter of exploitation, of sowing wild oats, as was common among white men in the South (they would practice sexuality upon black women who had no real choice, which is basically rape by modern standards). Jefferson was with Sally Hemings for a very long time, and she had six children with him. That suggests some permanence in a relationship. Jefferson had other slaves and did not treat them the same way as his by Sally Hemings. He freed his children by Sally Hemings as they reached adulthood,and by all accounts they did well. People 7/8 white and 1/8 black can often "pass" as white.

Yes, slavery by people who assert that all men are created equal is hypocrisy. This said, I have come to recognize in my 62 years that hypocrisy is far more normal than its absence. Most people fail to live up to their ideals for causes ranging from the unattainability of those ideals, their incapacity to meet their ideals, social or economic pressures (let us say an 'environmentalist' who works in the oil industry because he is a petroleum engineer), or the contradictions within his beliefs. The people who have high ideals and live up to them are saints, and we have few of those. People bad and proud of it are not at all hypocritical. To give an idea of what a bad non-hypocrite is, consider the serial killer Alton Coleman (executed by the State of Ohio). We rightly hope that our successors will transcend our shortcomings; such is one measure of progress. It is only after white people could decide that all white people are created equal that they could contemplate whether non-white people are created equal. It also took freedom of expression and elected governments to determine at the earliest that slavery was an abomination.

...Now back to contemporary life. The American economy increasingly looks like a stereotype of capitalism out of Marxist screeds, except for having a Soviet-style elite running things. This country increasingly looks like an aristocratic plutocracy in which heirs and bureaucratic elites are becoming a self-selecting, exclusive elite that believes that it can do horrible things to people and  believe such right. It is not simply ownership through inheritance; the executive elite in America is becoming almost aristocratic in self-selection. In times that I remember, business executives (when they were GIs) were typically in their 50s and 60s and had loyalties down the line. They had started with the firm, typically upon graduation from high school, doing ordinary labor. With effort and dedication they proved themselves able to do something other than raw labor and increasingly-skilled work, found their way into management or traveling sales, and steadily showed competence and dedication. They were paid badly by standards of today's executives, but by the time they got to an executive role they were too old to buy a mansion or a sports car. Today's executives are now paid lavishly to treat workers badly. That's how the Soviet nomenklatura operated at the end, and advancement into the nomenklatura depended upon having connections. Right. Mommy and Daddy. We have a quasi-aristocratic elite owning things and a quasi-aristocratic elite managing things, and everyone else gets whatever those elites determines is suited to their appointed roles. For most people that is working poverty.  Let us remember that exploitative elites try to shape the political system to their advantage. I may change my tune in November, but so far, the corporate lobbyists, retainers of the heirs and executives, are the real power in both Houses of Congress and most state legislatures. Although the politicians run as nice guys who would be your neighbor, the real campaign often comes from front groups of one Party; those front groups try to discourage anyone from challenging the power of the economic elites.

We have the formality of elections, but the exercise of political power follows dictum of the late oil billionaire H. L. Hunt: "He who has the gold makes the rules". That, I regret to say, describes how American politics work. Add to that, Donald Trump is everything wrong with American politics -- a demagogue who pitted working-class white people against a diverse middle class on behalf of a quasi-aristocratic elite, who punishes people who disagree with him with malicious policies, and who insults people who ever voted for him the first time. For affecting military shtick, having been a draft-dodger makes him an extreme and pointless hypocrite. He mocks people with handicaps, which is behavior that I thought abominable when I was in single digits in years. He shows despotic or dictatorial tendencies (take your pick of the description) and gets cozy with dictators while weakening our relationship with democracies that I would rather trust. To be sure, we all occasionally say things that we might regret; think of Barack Obama making this statement on April 14, 2008:


"They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

of working-class people in towns that had lost their well-paying industrial jobs

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/a...ctions2008

Barack Obama wisely backed down from that. When Donald Trump says something even  more offensive, far from backing down, he faults people for not accepting what he says at face value. I know from history what sort of leaders fault opponents for failure to believe what the Great and Infallible Leader says. 

Il Duce ha sempre raggione. (Mussolini) is always right.

[Classic-Xer]

(10-15-2018, 08:40 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Of course.  You do know the root word of progressive?  You do know how many times values have turned over since then?  You know how many times conservatives have been shown wrong by new values standards at least?

Morality evolves.  What is acceptable by the old values from before the crisis is not acceptable by the new.  There is a valid arrow of progress, which though the Industrial Age has pointed towards more rights, more equality, more democracy, and better integration with new technology.  Always, conservatives cling to privilege and are wrong in doing so.  

Of course, I am seeing a new age.  The patterns that held in the Industrial Age may not hold in the new.  I kind of hope they will.

Yes, I know/understand what the word means and how the word relates to the advancement of people, society, the arrow of progress and so forth. However, the word is also used with modern politics and the word has a political meaning and understanding associated with it when it's used politically and viewed in a political context as well. Well, I'm not a blue snow flake so the idea of Thomas Jefferson owning slaves (black people) and the idea of Jefferson's wife not having any rights or being recognized as equal doesn't bother me knowing that that's just the way it was in America back then.

[Classic-Xer]

(10-14-2018, 08:24 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: I am quieter about blatant spam because such is always done in calculation of a reward. People make mistakes, and I expect some mercy upon those who repent publicly after recognizing the error of their ways. Some people simply have bad moments. This said, I tend to see an encouragement of suicide as something that could be taken literally. I would have accepted something like "Kill the character" as much less threatening to a person. Historical reality requires huge numbers of literary deaths to make Schindler's List credible as a book or novel.

Some moderators ban people for words even to the point that I am unable to mention that I have a cocker spaniel or that my favorite director is Alfred Hitchcock; identifying Francis Fukuyama as a historian; describing Phuket, Thailand as a place ravaged by a tsunami; recognizing Dick Van Dyke as a great comedian; calling nonsense "bullshit"; or giving the unglamorous explanation of the meaning of the acronyms SNAFU and WTF.   




I may be harshly judgmental about certain things, especially when they can hurt people. The other side of the political spectrum surely has nasty things to say of me when I disparage their ideals -- ideals that if taken to their logical conclusion would turn most of us or our descendants into serfs, if not slaves. Resistance to oppression is easiest and least violent when it begins with the oppression and not after it fully entrenches itself with brutal methods of enforcement. In an authoritarian or totalitarian society, practically the only speech is either stereotyped for banality or is identical with command. The alternative is to either have violent revolution (which can fail) or wait until the system rots from within, in which case nothing is left when the oppressors are gone.

Reagan may have been objectionable to liberals, but Trump is evil.



Today the Left side of the political spectrum is much more diverse than is the Right side. The real tribalism is on the Right.

Actually, the amount tribalism on the right is minimal compared to the tribalism that seems to exist on the left these days. You don't have to worry about people like me getting directly involved with blue politics or becoming directly associated with blue politics. The Left looks diverse but the Left doesn't seem to be as diverse to me.