User Tag List

First 91011121321 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 268

  1. #101
    Member Yussa Tampon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    entp
    Posts
    42

    Default

    Advocacy for leaving more stuff to the states is advocacy for giving us a chance to let mistakes like Orval Faubus happen. I will not be one to support such a position, and thus Paul fails my litmus.

  2. #102
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yussa Tampon View Post
    Advocacy for leaving more stuff to the states is advocacy for giving us a chance to let mistakes like Orval Faubus happen. I will not be one to support such a position, and thus Paul fails my litmus.
    Exactly.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  3. #103
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yussa Tampon View Post
    Advocacy for leaving more stuff to the states is advocacy for giving us a chance to let mistakes like Orval Faubus happen. I will not be one to support such a position, and thus Paul fails my litmus.
    Yeah, shit like Romneycare happens at the state level, too. States can be just as bad, although their reaches are less.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #104
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yussa Tampon View Post
    Advocacy for leaving more stuff to the states is advocacy for giving us a chance to let mistakes like Orval Faubus happen. I will not be one to support such a position, and thus Paul fails my litmus.
    And nothing bad happens at the federal level? Japanese internment camps? Project MKULTRA? The Davidian Massacre? I don't see any evidence to suggest that shifting power from the state to the federal level results in governance being any better.

    I'm not a fan of highly concentrated, centralized power.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #105
    Member Yussa Tampon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    entp
    Posts
    42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    And nothing bad happens at the federal level? Japanese internment camps? Project MKULTRA? The Davidian Massacre? I don't see any evidence to suggest that shifting power from the state to the federal level results in governance being any better.

    I'm not a fan of highly concentrated, centralized power.
    Aye, I doubt my distrust in states would be applicable to the entire nation - there are some states that have their business in order something fierce somewhere, right? But I'm not insisting on a giant federal oversight for those states, either. Against the feds, I've got loads of negligence, to criminal levels; but for fuck's sake, what the hell happened to states saying "hey, we got a problem" and the fed saying "alright, what do you think ought be done" and a conversation happening? I'll tell you what happened - it ain't never existed, and that's the core of the entire issue. There is no teamwork, and I for one insist on teamwork.

    The feds are negligent by not insisting on that same teamwork.

    The states are equally negligent for that, but the states also have a healthy track record of turning that negligence to more venomous ends.

    I'm not scared that Paul would come by to hunt my kind down, but that he'd be fine with letting states' governors do that. Anyone shooting the "get the fed out of people's business" rhetoric makes a man the anti-Eisenhower to me, for it was only in getting the fed in people's business that my kind ever got any degree of justice.

    Seriously, how can I be expected to trust state government with no oversight when it elects men like Rick fucking Perry to governorship?

    Being a minority in some 200 different ways isn't mentally easy in our country; people are extremely bigoted and very bad at seeing how they're bigoted and even worse at caring about it once they see it.

    Whatsmore, I will take this Faubus thing to my grave - he ruined "states' rights" for me as a legitimate position, argument, et al. I, as citizen of Texas, should be able to say to any other state's governing authorities in the Union that "hey, X is fucked up, and you ought be permanently removed from office for doing X."

    "States' rights" removes the few damn teeth one has in forcing other states to be decent.

    One may say, "who am I to insist that they are indecent?"

    I'm a rational human being who cares about people and isn't willing to extend blind benefits-of-the-doubt to positions I know are able to accommodate bigotry based on past evidence. To hell with anyone who is less willing to be vigilant about bigotry than I am, because their laziness is just the poison needed to turn this nation's more bigoted pockets into even bigger shitholes. I will drag the ill-minded among us into the future kicking and screaming: their bigotry deserves no respect, and their feelings deserve no protection. Their decency is to be protected, so I will not be petty to them: but I would force them to inhabit the same space as the people they hate, and I would make them be good to those people, under massive penalty. Bigotry is the greatest enemy to a truly proper society, and I will always seek to kill it.


    But back on topic, Paul's consistency and rationale on several things are outright admirable. But he fails one of the most important things one can fail in this sort of discussion: he would make it easier for another Faubus to come into play, and I will not accept that in my commander-in-chief.

    He is a good man, I truly think - but he has crucial, and unforgivable, flaws that I refuse to endorse with my vote.

    I for one thing think he is an excellent civil servant; his simplicity is attractive as hell, and there is a place for him at the table as a result. That place is just not the President's place, in my opinion. Keep him a representative, or make him a governor, or just take him out of the legislature and let him be part of presidential staff someday. But I won't tolerate what is ultimately a careless, far too trusting man to be the HNIC.

  6. #106
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    And nothing bad happens at the federal level? Japanese internment camps? Project MKULTRA? The Davidian Massacre? I don't see any evidence to suggest that shifting power from the state to the federal level results in governance being any better.

    I'm not a fan of highly concentrated, centralized power.
    You know what way a libertarian economy looks over time right?

  7. #107
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yussa Tampon View Post
    Aye, I doubt my distrust in states would be applicable to the entire nation - there are some states that have their business in order something fierce somewhere, right? But I'm not insisting on a giant federal oversight for those states, either. Against the feds, I've got loads of negligence, to criminal levels; but for fuck's sake, what the hell happened to states saying "hey, we got a problem" and the fed saying "alright, what do you think ought be done" and a conversation happening? I'll tell you what happened - it ain't never existed, and that's the core of the entire issue. There is no teamwork, and I for one insist on teamwork.

    The feds are negligent by not insisting on that same teamwork.

    The states are equally negligent for that, but the states also have a healthy track record of turning that negligence to more venomous ends.

    I'm not scared that Paul would come by to hunt my kind down, but that he'd be fine with letting states' governors do that. Anyone shooting the "get the fed out of people's business" rhetoric makes a man the anti-Eisenhower to me, for it was only in getting the fed in people's business that my kind ever got any degree of justice.

    Seriously, how can I be expected to trust state government with no oversight when it elects men like Rick fucking Perry to governorship?

    Being a minority in some 200 different ways isn't mentally easy in our country; people are extremely bigoted and very bad at seeing how they're bigoted and even worse at caring about it once they see it.

    Whatsmore, I will take this Faubus thing to my grave - he ruined "states' rights" for me as a legitimate position, argument, et al. I, as citizen of Texas, should be able to say to any other state's governing authorities in the Union that "hey, X is fucked up, and you ought be permanently removed from office for doing X."

    "States' rights" removes the few damn teeth one has in forcing other states to be decent.

    One may say, "who am I to insist that they are indecent?"

    I'm a rational human being who cares about people and isn't willing to extend blind benefits-of-the-doubt to positions I know are able to accommodate bigotry based on past evidence. To hell with anyone who is less willing to be vigilant about bigotry than I am, because their laziness is just the poison needed to turn this nation's more bigoted pockets into even bigger shitholes. I will drag the ill-minded among us into the future kicking and screaming: their bigotry deserves no respect, and their feelings deserve no protection. Their decency is to be protected, so I will not be petty to them: but I would force them to inhabit the same space as the people they hate, and I would make them be good to those people, under massive penalty. Bigotry is the greatest enemy to a truly proper society, and I will always seek to kill it.


    But back on topic, Paul's consistency and rationale on several things are outright admirable. But he fails one of the most important things one can fail in this sort of discussion: he would make it easier for another Faubus to come into play, and I will not accept that in my commander-in-chief.

    He is a good man, I truly think - but he has crucial, and unforgivable, flaws that I refuse to endorse with my vote.

    I for one thing think he is an excellent civil servant; his simplicity is attractive as hell, and there is a place for him at the table as a result. That place is just not the President's place, in my opinion. Keep him a representative, or make him a governor, or just take him out of the legislature and let him be part of presidential staff someday. But I won't tolerate what is ultimately a careless, far too trusting man to be the HNIC.
    I don't think another Faubus could come into play, regardless of the direction our country takes with the balance of power between the states and the feds. In an age with the internet and 24/7 news coverage, it simply could not happen. And it's not unacceptable because of anything the federal government might do, but because of our culture. That's why discrimination against LGBTs and Muslims is still permitted, despite the federal government's ability to stop it, because it is culturally acceptable.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  8. #108
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blank View Post
    Yes. But you implied that he put their noses into shit. People who get their noses put to shit by others tend to not like those that do it.

    My point exactly.

    So while you might not have said so explicitly, you certainly did implicitly.
    Prove it. When you talk with someone, you have to argue on the word said only, everything else is just vain speculation, extrapolation and intention input from yourselve.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  9. #109
    . Blank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    I did. Quit being daft.
    Ti = 19 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Te = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ne = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fi = 15 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Si = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ni = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Se = 11[][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fe = 0

    -----------------
    Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
    Man got to sit and wonder why, why, why;
    Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
    Man got to tell himself he understand

  10. #110
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blank View Post
    I did. Quit being daft.
    vain speculation, extrapolation and intention input?
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] NF, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 08-27-2017, 05:28 PM
  2. [SJ] SJ, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-04-2017, 06:25 PM
  3. [SP] SP, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 05-15-2017, 03:39 AM
  4. Anyone who thinks Ron Paul Shouldn't be President is completly stupid or ignorant...
    By Munchies in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 01-13-2012, 01:47 PM
  5. [NT] NT, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 09-27-2008, 05:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO