The Partisan Divide on Issues

[pbrower2a]

(01-31-2020, 07:23 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 05:52 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Lots of words have negative connotations. I'm not sure it would be in your interest to go down that road with me. You say and do a lot of stuff that have negative connotations. The way you're using the word Classic is a demoninzation. What you're doing is what I view as a typical liberal tactic. Hint...Ain't enough liberals around for it to work these days. It doesn't appear to be many willing participants who want to tangle with me. Do you want to know what would be cool, bring in the liberal lawmakers from the House? I'd like to see how well they would up to REAL scrutiny.

Would you rather be called Xer?  Classic just gives my spell checker less of a problem, but I could ‘learn’ the abbreviation.  How does it have a negative connotation?  Why did you choose it as a screenname if it did?  Just curious.  I do use lots of negative connotations, but view them as true.  Classic?  (Hmm.  I guess it does imply something that has been around a long time, is is acknowledged a something good.  My view is that you are not.  If I went to the middle of the country, I would not expect to find a lot of folks like you.)

I do note the threats of violence.  Over the internet?  Other that it being a schoolyard bully trick, why?  Am currently handicapped.  Do you think it would increase your status or the truth of what you say to try to beat me up, to break the law?  Threatening violence in response to things said implies you are against free speech?  Do you consider Free Speech un American by your definition?  It seems more likely that you are just showing your immaturity.

In politics, I do expect negative implications and opinions.  I do not expect constant schoolyard level taunts, word redefinition, lies or threats.  Is this expectation unusual in your view?  Un-American, whatever that means to you?

Yes, words that have strong emotive content have clear meanings, or language is worthless. If you think a handicap unpleasant, then think of how emotionally-crippling it would be to live in a nightmare such as the Oceania of Nineteen Eighty-Four  in which something so basic as expressive language loses all subtlety and something so much a cornerstone of life as romantic love becomes impossible. The sex drive remains but it has no humanity to keep it from becoming an animal lust. Maybe I overuse synonyms to avoid boring people with my prose (and I recognize that I can be a numbing bore at times). A totalitarian or even harshly-authoritarian regime invariably debases life. It is telling that a study of where people were happiest showed that the happiest people were the people in societies with entrenched democracy (let us say France) and the least-happy people were living under repressive regimes (Saudi Arabia). This also distinguishes India from China. 

I loathe Donald Trump because he does much that I associate with someone who debases democratic life, in part by degrading the language so that words become lies in themselves, trivializes the intellectual processes that make life interesting, and short-circuiting established traditions for his own gratification. Maybe the next Presidency will repudiate Trump more convincingly than Trump pretends to repudiate Obama, and maybe the next effective conservative President will have a personal life and the integrity of Obama and prove an even more complete repudiation of Trump.  Then again, I have compared Obama to Eisenhower by temperament and conduct, so that may be no stretch of the imagination. 

There are basic rules of decency, and Trump violates those. I find it appalling that someone in a position of commercial, cultural, or political responsibility mocks the handicapped. (OK, drunks and addicts are fair game... but I quit hearing Helen Keller jokes from my peers before I was a teenager). I do not mock personal tragedy unless the mockery is a lesson. OK, I did nominate someone for a Darwin Award:

Quote:A 58-year-old man was driving a car with an open sunroof on a winter night on a freeway in Detroit. He was using a hand-held device while driving even when he turned onto a cloverleaf ramp off the freeway and lost control of the car. He was killed as he was thrown out of the car as he lost control of it. The hand-held device was playing a pornographic video, and his pants were down. It was not stated whether his car had a stick shift or not, but I can imagine something similar to a stick shift... on him.

      
Darwin Awards are made in 'honor' of people who removed themselves from the gene pool through deeds that either kill them or destroy their reproductive ability without suicidal purpose or any redeeming virtues such as heroism*. In that fool's case, both the end of his life and his reproductive ability happened permanently.  The story would not have so much pathos had the unfortunate fellow been watching a nature video or a Billy Graham crusade... but distracted driving is dangerous and stupid. So keep both hands on the wheel and avoid using any hand-held devices of any kind while driving, whether cell phones, electric razors, or milkshakes. Pornography is the most distracting of all material. People should know better, but fail to show ordinary discretion. 

The only fitting threats of violence are either warnings from history (images of Mussolini and Ceausescu not necessary), divine retribution (if one is religious -- as in threatening a neo-Nazi that God might be Jewish), or personal consequences of reckless or self-destructive behavior. I consider deaths from vehicle collisions 'violent death', and the fool who got my nomination for a Darwin Award indeed died a violent death.  I can easily imagine what four Rottweilers could do to a burglar -- the color pattern should suggest an infamous predator. (Dogs are strong, swift, agile, powerful, voracious, and cunning -- much like typical man-eating species. You do not want a dog as an enemy). 

All in all, it is best to remember the adage, "Honesty is the best policy". If one is tempted to lie about doing something to deny bad consequences, then it is wise to avoid doing what can cause one to be in a position in which one might 'need' to lie about the act -- let us say cheating on a spouse or filching office supplies from an employer.

*Throwing oneself onto a live grenade to save the lives of one's fellow soldiers is heroism.