The toddler in the WH

Post Reply
User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20657
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm

The toddler in the WH

#1

Post by TollandRCR » Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:54 am

There is sonething strange and sad that our entire front page is devoted to the Bundy extremists while the greatest threat to our democracy rages on in the White House.


“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
p0rtia
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 11:44 am

Re: The toddler in thb WH

#2

Post by p0rtia » Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:06 am

I cordially challenge your hypothesis. I take the position that 45 is a symptom (or excrescence) of the threat.* The silence and inaction of our elected representatives and the growing shift in our laws seems to me to be a much greater threat--or closer to the underlying threat/cancer.

Even the Bundys and their pals seem to me to be more representative of the underlying threat than fuckshit.

* Either that or it's Hillary's incompetence, I'm not sure.


No matter where you go, there you are! :towel:
ImageImageImage

User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20657
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm

Re: The toddler in the WH

#3

Post by TollandRCR » Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:22 am

I agree about the legislators (state legislators and governors). They are the foundation of reactionary politics.


“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6983
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: The toddler in thb WH

#4

Post by Slartibartfast » Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:55 am

p0rtia wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:06 am
I cordially challenge your hypothesis. I take the position that 45 is a symptom (or excrescence) of the threat.* The silence and inaction of our elected representatives and the growing shift in our laws seems to me to be a much greater threat--or closer to the underlying threat/cancer.

Even the Bundys and their pals seem to me to be more representative of the underlying threat than fuckshit.

* Either that or it's Hillary's incompetence, I'm not sure.
To answer your tiny comment, Hillary's incompetence is (or hopefully was) a political problem. It's her lack of integrity that is a part of the "underlying cancer".


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
p0rtia
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 11:44 am

Re: The toddler in thb WH

#5

Post by p0rtia » Mon Oct 02, 2017 11:52 am

Slartibartfast wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:55 am
p0rtia wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:06 am
I cordially challenge your hypothesis. I take the position that 45 is a symptom (or excrescence) of the threat.* The silence and inaction of our elected representatives and the growing shift in our laws seems to me to be a much greater threat--or closer to the underlying threat/cancer.

Even the Bundys and their pals seem to me to be more representative of the underlying threat than fuckshit.

* Either that or it's Hillary's incompetence, I'm not sure.
To answer your tiny comment, Hillary's incompetence is (or hopefully was) a political problem. It's her lack of integrity that is a part of the "underlying cancer".
And I will likewise cordially disagree with you, too. But that's another thread!


No matter where you go, there you are! :towel:
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 15875
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: The toddler in the WH

#6

Post by Suranis » Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:02 pm

Yep, disagree here too.

Anyway you cant think about Trump all the time. You will go crazy, and burn out if you do. I think its very healthy that we have all this Bundy stuff on the front page. It shows that people are not getting consumed by Trump, and being consumed by Trump and losing all sense of reality is how he wins.


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6983
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: The toddler in the WH

#7

Post by Slartibartfast » Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:21 pm

It's certainly fine to disagree with me, and a topic for another thread, but you need to realize that my opinions regarding Hillary's competence and integrity are rational conclusions that follow from facts that you openly accept, based on my relevant expertise in data science and predictive analytics. It has nothing to do with the hyperbolic right-wing attacks Hillary has endured for decades, only what can be justified based on her own words and actions.

I agree that thinking about Trump (and all the damage he is doing) all the time is very bad for people (although I'm not sure following the Bundys is all that much of a relief), but this is just one more reason to put your faith in principles, not principals. Even Trump is going to get one right from time to time or at least be seen as doing so (I would guess that his net approval will go up in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting, for instance) and those on your own side can slip up from time to time too. also. We can only avoid hypocrisy by establishing an objective standard and applying it equally. And, given the gravity of some of Mr. Trump's offenses, the last thing we want to do is muddy the waters with trivialities and gray areas. At least in my opinion.


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
vic
Posts: 3668
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:36 am
Location: The great San Fernando Valley
Occupation: Web developer

Re: The toddler in the WH

#8

Post by vic » Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:09 pm

There is a bright line between "predictive analytics" and "jumping to a conclusion". Your posting (e.g., about the White House staffs' use of private emails compared to Clinton's, where you have said that there is no comparison, even though the extent of the current situation is not known) seem to cross that line.

The first lesson I was taught by a science teacher was not to jump to a conclusion.
Edit: Appeal to authority fallacy? Check.



User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6983
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: The toddler in the WH

#9

Post by Slartibartfast » Tue Oct 03, 2017 10:46 am

Vic,

You were kind of the straw that broke the camel's back -- this isn't about you, it's about issues that have been festering for a long time. Thanks for giving me the chance to articulate them!
:towel:
vic wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:09 pm
There is a bright line between "predictive analytics" and "jumping to a conclusion".

And which side of that bright line is this statement on? I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, just pointing out that you're making an appeal to an unknown authority on a subject where I am an expert.

Your posting (e.g., about the White House staffs' use of private emails compared to Clinton's, where you have said that there is no comparison, even though the extent of the current situation is not known) seem to cross that line.

The word doing all the work here is "seem" (you really should change it to "seems" before :sterngard: notices). You don't know what information and expertise went into my opinion, so while I don't doubt that things seem a certain way to you, you don't have a strong foundation to argue that that is the way that things are.

The first lesson I was taught by a science teacher was not to jump to a conclusion.

And yet you've leapt to all sorts of conclusions about me. I'm a mathematical scientist and I'm very interested in the philosophy of the application of math, science, and technology. Do you really think I don't understand the first lesson you learned about science?

Edit: Appeal to authority fallacy? Check.

An appeal to credible, relevant expertise is not a fallacy. Which raises two (really not also) questions: what expertise am I claiming and what is the reasoning behind my statement that you've taken exception to. I've always liked getting the students to answer questions (their mistakes are usually more pedagogically useful than correct answers), so I'll ask you, what do you think comes next?
While I work on my response (and thousands of words are already written and properly "Slartibartized", as Foggy put it -- this has been coming for some time), let me pose a question to the boogle: how do we, as a group, identify relevant expertise and show respect to credible authorities?

Because I'll tell you, from my point of view it seems like we suck at it.


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 7182
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: The toddler in the WH

#10

Post by RoadScholar » Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:21 am

There are no absolutes, Slarti. No assessment can be made in a vacuum.

So, really, the question is: How does HRC's competence and integrity rate in comparison to other contemporary politicians?

AFAICS, she's far from the worst, and always has been. I liked her.


The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
kate520
Posts: 14927
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Re: The toddler in the WH

#11

Post by kate520 » Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:27 am

You’re trying to convince people that their emotional decision about whether or not they like Hillary Clinton is wrong, based on facts. Um...I’d think that the only expert in the room would realize it’s pointless and, worse, arrogant. It’s almost like saying “That’s your wife???” and snickering.

I recognize your genius, starti. Please recognize that the rest of us just hobble along on what we’ve got. Try not to make us feel like idiots, eh?


DEFEND DEMOCRACY

User avatar
Whatever4
Posts: 11520
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:36 am
Location: Mainely in the plain
Occupation: Visiting doctors.

Re: The toddler in the WH

#12

Post by Whatever4 » Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:20 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:21 pm
It's certainly fine to disagree with me, and a topic for another thread, but you need to realize that my opinions regarding Hillary's competence and integrity are rational conclusions that follow from facts that you openly accept, based on my relevant expertise in data science and predictive analytics. It has nothing to do with the hyperbolic right-wing attacks Hillary has endured for decades, only what can be justified based on her own words and actions.

I’ve been staying out of the HRC stuff because reasons, but I’d like to jump in with a very uncharacteristic (for me) rant. :boxing:

Slarti, that’s total bullshit. Your opinions are yours. You have driven away several long-time members by belittling their opinions and their ability to do science. Their opinions may be based on things THAT THEY ARE EXPERTS AT. Your expertise is no more valid than theirs. Stop pretending that your “superior” analytical abilities are any more valid than those of others.

You aren’t the only one here guilty of obnoxious arrogance, but you are the one I’m singling out. Because it hurts people.


"[Moderate] doesn't mean you don't have views. It just means your views aren't predictable ideologically one way or the other, and you're trying to follow the facts where they lead and reach your own conclusions."
-- Sen. King (R-ME)

User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6096
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

Re: The toddler in the WH

#13

Post by June bug » Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:20 pm

Whatever4 wrote:
Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:20 pm
Slartibartfast wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:21 pm
It's certainly fine to disagree with me, and a topic for another thread, but you need to realize that my opinions regarding Hillary's competence and integrity are rational conclusions that follow from facts that you openly accept, based on my relevant expertise in data science and predictive analytics. It has nothing to do with the hyperbolic right-wing attacks Hillary has endured for decades, only what can be justified based on her own words and actions.

I’ve been staying out of the HRC stuff because reasons, but I’d like to jump in with a very uncharacteristic (for me) rant. :boxing:

Slarti, that’s total bullshit. Your opinions are yours. You have driven away several long-time members by belittling their opinions and their ability to do science. Their opinions may be based on things THAT THEY ARE EXPERTS AT. Your expertise is no more valid than theirs. Stop pretending that your “superior” analytical abilities are any more valid than those of others.

You aren’t the only one here guilty of obnoxious arrogance, but you are the one I’m singling out. Because it hurts people.
W4, thank you for saying what I've been thinking and for doing it so well.

Slarti, I've enjoyed and learned things from many of your posts, but I'm about to put you on my ignore list. Why? Because I'm sick and tired of what reads to me as your overweening arrogance and condescension to anyone who disagrees with you.
Slartibartfast wrote:You don't know what information and expertise went into my opinion, so while I don't doubt that things seem a certain way to you, you don't have a strong foundation to argue that that is the way that things are.
Then stop lecturing people about your vaunted expertise and start putting in the data that you say backs up your conclusions.



qbawl
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:58 pm

Re: The toddler in the WH

#14

Post by qbawl » Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:47 pm

June bug wrote:
Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:20 pm
Whatever4 wrote:
Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:20 pm
Slartibartfast wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:21 pm
It's certainly fine to disagree with me, and a topic for another thread, but you need to realize that my opinions regarding Hillary's competence and integrity are rational conclusions that follow from facts that you openly accept, based on my relevant expertise in data science and predictive analytics. It has nothing to do with the hyperbolic right-wing attacks Hillary has endured for decades, only what can be justified based on her own words and actions.

I’ve been staying out of the HRC stuff because reasons, but I’d like to jump in with a very uncharacteristic (for me) rant. :boxing:

Slarti, that’s total bullshit. Your opinions are yours. You have driven away several long-time members by belittling their opinions and their ability to do science. Their opinions may be based on things THAT THEY ARE EXPERTS AT. Your expertise is no more valid than theirs. Stop pretending that your “superior” analytical abilities are any more valid than those of others.

You aren’t the only one here guilty of obnoxious arrogance, but you are the one I’m singling out. Because it hurts people.
W4, thank you for saying what I've been thinking and for doing it so well.

Slarti, I've enjoyed and learned things from many of your posts, but I'm about to put you on my ignore list. Why? Because I'm sick and tired of what reads to me as your overweening arrogance and condescension to anyone who disagrees with you.
Slartibartfast wrote:You don't know what information and expertise went into my opinion, so while I don't doubt that things seem a certain way to you, you don't have a strong foundation to argue that that is the way that things are.
Then stop lecturing people about your vaunted expertise and start putting in the data that you say backs up your conclusions.
:yeah: :yeah: I realize I am not a long standing revered member of the boogle so value my opinion any way that seems appropriate to you, but I agree wholeheartedly with w4 and June bug. to paraphrase my take is "the statistician doth protest too much". Most truly brilliant people I have met (and yes there have been a few) hardly ever seem to feel the need to remind me of their brilliance. Just sayin.



User avatar
tek
Posts: 2521
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:02 pm
Location: Happy Valley, MA
Occupation: Damned if I know

Re: The toddler in the WH

#15

Post by tek » Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:06 pm

Off Topic
I've been (good-naturedly) dialed-back on the forum for being holier-than-thou .. and I've backed off on some things where I probably had far more real-world experience in the subject than the attacker.. but..

May I humbly suggest that we explain, coerce, convince rather than firing both barrels?

When I started my professional career, I was fortunate enough to land a job with DEC.. and before I was there for three months, they forced me to go to what the engineers, with much disdain, called "charm school" .. which was a week-long offsite course titled "face to face" .. eye-opening.. the message I took away was "everyone brings something to the table" .. that was 35 years ago.. and still the most important lesson I have ever learned.


Digging the snow and the rain and the bright sunshine.

Post Reply

Return to “Bundy Ranch/Malheur NWR”