TomAiello 26 #51 June 13, 2004 QuoteAre you going to mention the same thing to the guys who posted about "liberal pussies" and "whining liberals" yesterday? I was going to PM you with this, but here it is. The difference, in my mind, is that those comments are generalized, where yours are usually directed specifically at another poster. Using generalized labels about political groups is a rhetorical device (not one that I personally care for). Making specific comments about a specific person involved in the conversation is a totally different animal. All I'm really trying to do is point out that winning "points" in an argument is not going to really change anyone's mind if it is done in a disrespectful manner. Those who agree with you may clap and cheer, and you may feel superior, but those who are undecided will generally be repelled by such tactics.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #52 June 13, 2004 QuoteQuoteAre you going to mention the same thing to the guys who posted about "liberal pussies" and "whining liberals" yesterday? I was going to PM you with this, but here it is. The difference, in my mind, is that those comments are generalized, where yours are usually directed specifically at another poster. Using generalized labels about political groups is a rhetorical device (not one that I personally care for). Making specific comments about a specific person involved in the conversation is a totally different animal. How is it less valid to comment on a specific act of misrepresentation in a debate than to make a rude comment ("liberal pussies") about an entire class of people simply on account of the group they belong to? My "liberal pussy" son is at this instant protecting US interests in his capacity as a sergeant in the US Army infantry.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crwmike 0 #53 June 13, 2004 QuoteQuoteExplain how (1) is not contradicted by (4). It's pragmatism, professor. (1) showed his core values and other things that he did not need to compromise. He had the power to fire those ATC's regardless of any compromise as the executive. On taxes, he lowered the tax rate, thereby bringin in more dollars. The dude actually found a way to lower taxes and raise them at the same time. Government growth - hey, I point out his weaknesses. But, he had to give in to many things to get anythign done. Anti-abortion? Isn't it amazing when a leader does what he believes necessary, even though he doesn't like it personally? That's great governing. That solidifying the vote of the extreme right. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newbie 0 #54 June 14, 2004 Quote Speaking of slogans "No Child Left Behind" comes to mind. blues jerry Not wanting to digress, but you sort of struck a nerve with that one My day job is teaching 5th and 10th graders about business and also the impact local business/organisations have on them and the community as a whole. Regardless of what may be going on in other schools up and down the country, not a single child is excluded from my programme. I work with the top high flyers right through to the lowest academic achievers (sometimes the one's with the most nuance and real world understanding), and the "problem" children (see:those that want to 'kill' the other kids, and generally be disruptive/destructive/disrespctful), the ones with all sorts of learning difficulties, new immigrant children that can barely speak the language etc you get the idea. Not a single one is "left behind". Sometimes political slogans are just that, other times there is an element of truth behind them. Going back to "Just Say No", i honestly don't know who came up with the slogan/programme, but it was obviously someone who had no exposure to the drugs problem, or a realistic sense of how to deal with it. Sorry for the long winded reply "Skydiving is a door" Happythoughts Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #55 June 14, 2004 QuoteGoing back to "Just Say No", i honestly don't know who came up with the slogan/programme, but it was obviously someone who had no exposure to the drugs problem, or a realistic sense of how to deal with it. Nancy Reagan was asked by a reporter what should a child do when preesured to use drugs. Her bewildered reply, " Just say no!" She was attacked in the media as being out of touch for such a unrealistic reply. Well like many simple answers to difficult problems; it actually caught on, and is now a mantra for the anti-drug folks. President Reagan's anti-drug stance actually worked. Many children during the 1980's looked at dopers as lowlife losers. I, myself love to get wasted but would never recommend it to someone who has never used drugs. Drugs,while opening the mind, closes opportunities. ----------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #56 June 14, 2004 QuoteI, myself love to get wasted but would never recommend it to someone who has never used drugs. Drugs,while opening the mind, closes opportunities.----------------- opening you mind in the same way as drinking gasoline and shoving knitting needles repeatedly in your ear if you want to be an addict, then admit it and enjoy it - no probs. But 'opening your mind' is that much BS to rationalize self destruction. Now, who wants to go to the bar with me and drink ourselves silly? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #57 June 14, 2004 Quoteif you want to be an addict, then admit it and enjoy it - no probs. But 'opening your mind' is that much BS to rationalize self destruction. I disagree. I have had several positive life changes result from the use of hallucinogenic substances. And in general they're non-addictive. I've heard things _very_ similar to your statement that "opening your mind is that much BS to rationalize self destruction" used to describe parachuting. Some drugs are chemical, some are not. Most everybody has some they take, chemical or otherwise. A related thought: I think that classing all illegal mind-altering substances together as "drugs" makes about as much sense as classifying cigarettes and alchohol together--that is to say, very little.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #58 June 14, 2004 I would say you could also have had positive changes in your life without the drugs. But attributing those changes as caused by drugs sounds like more of the same rationalization and an underestimation of your good personal character. But if you'd rather credit 'drugs' (and by that, I infer the discussion is of the illegal kind rather than medical) instead of self choice to personal growth, then I don't have common ground for this discussion. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #59 June 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteI, myself love to get wasted but would never recommend it to someone who has never used drugs. Drugs,while opening the mind, closes opportunities.----------------- opening you mind in the same way as drinking gasoline and shoving knitting needles repeatedly in your ear if you want to be an addict, then admit it and enjoy it - no probs. But 'opening your mind' is that much BS to rationalize self destruction. Now, who wants to go to the bar with me and drink ourselves silly? You totally missed my point. Alcohol is the 3rd worst drug in my book. #1 cocaine, #2 tobacco. My reply was about kids and the 'just say no' program, which I totally support. Drugs are a personal option. I choose to smoke weed, cigarettes, drink moderately and an occasional hallucinogen( aided by Jimi Hendrix Electic Ladyland). Anything can be addictive incuding skydiving.The only problem with an open mind is it gets kind of drafty. ------ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #60 June 14, 2004 QuoteI infer the discussion is of the illegal kind rather than medical... Depends on if you mean "illegal" here and now in the US, or "illegal" when and where I used them.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #61 June 14, 2004 I'd more say that some use of recreational substances was part of the greater journey of personal growth, for me. Everyone picks out the things that work for them, and help them. Just because some of those things don't (or do) work for one person, is no reason to think they will have similar effects for others. Still, I do find the idea that something is "bad" because it happens to be prohibited by the government in a particular part of the world to be a bit odd. By that logic, guns are "bad" because they are prohibited in many places, BASE jumping is "bad" almost everywhere, skydiving is "bad" in some places, christianity is "bad" in parts of the middle east--heck, pretty much everything is "bad". Activities, or physical objects cannot by their nature be "bad". They just _are_. It's the impact they have on human lives that make them "good" or "bad", and that impact varies depending on usage and individuals. In fact, the "bad", much as the "good", appears to spring entirely from the human context in which things are used or activities undertaken.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #62 June 14, 2004 What were we talking about? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #63 June 14, 2004 >I think that classing all illegal mind-altering substances together as >"drugs" makes about as much sense as classifying cigarettes and alchohol >together--that is to say, very little. A drug is a substance you introduce into your body for a desired effect. There are lots of types of drugs, including recreational, chemotherapeutic, antibiotic etc. It's just the definition; I don't think the definition makes any value judgements or anything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #64 June 14, 2004 Quote>I think that classing all illegal mind-altering substances together as A drug is a substance you introduce into your body for a desired effect. There are lots of types of drugs, including recreational, chemotherapeutic, antibiotic etc. It's just the definition; I don't think the definition makes any value judgements or anything. I agree with you. I had taken rehmwa's first post as classing illegal substances of this nature as "drugs", distinct from the the legal substances of this nature. Perhaps I misunderstood.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #65 June 14, 2004 QuoteMy "liberal pussy" son is at this instant protecting US interests in his capacity as a sergeant in the US Army infantry. And how are the rest of the kids? Dude, you are wired so tight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #66 June 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteMy "liberal pussy" son is at this instant protecting US interests in his capacity as a sergeant in the US Army infantry. And how are the rest of the kids? Dude, you are wired so tight. Why do you ALWAYS have to be so RUDE?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #67 June 14, 2004 Quote Why do you ALWAYS have to be so RUDE? I prefer impertinent. And I don't have to be, it would just be a tremendous waste of one of my only God-given talents to not be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crwmike 0 #68 June 15, 2004 QuoteQuoteGoing back to "Just Say No", i honestly don't know who came up with the slogan/programme, but it was obviously someone who had no exposure to the drugs problem, or a realistic sense of how to deal with it. Nancy Reagan was asked by a reporter what should a child do when preesured to use drugs. Her bewildered reply, " Just say no!" - The 'Just Say No' campaign was created and 'given' to the first lady as part of the usual muck that first ladies do. Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
