David, you are absolutely correct. Seldom is absolutist rhetoric anything other than petulant expression. It's other major use is to shout down contrary speech and prevent the kind of specific and nuanced discussion that both you and I would prefer.
It would be so cool to explore the Republican spectrum of individuals and mini-blocs in order to explicate what "they" want. Similarly for the enveloping conservative spectrum and the liberal and Democratic spectra. It would be wonderful if we could have a conversation as to why Dobbs was 'correct law ' (with some input from the late RBG) despite Alito's moronic misreading of history. But that would mean taking on the task of thinking about how to craft appropriate and sound laws that clearly and absolutely established women's rights to privacy and personal health care. Maybe resurrect the ERA with codicils. Or, a discussion of how Clarence Thomas is far more Malcom-X and Martin Luther King than Uncle Tom. Or, my personal favorite, how the EPA ruling is, finally, a mandate to Congress folk to "do their Effing jobs!" But look, I have grossly exceeded my 140 character limit, so, in today's world, it seems such conversations are not allowed. davew On Sat, Jul 2, 2022, at 3:42 PM, David Eric Smith wrote: > There is a thing my father used to do, which bothered me even as a very young > boy, but for which I didn’t have an analysis until I was a lot older and > doing such things. > > For any difficult decision, he liked to make bitter scornful faces and say > “They’re all bad!”, a kind of game that a psychologist who visited our > elementary school once told us has a name, and is called “Isn’t it awful.” I > could have gone up and hugged her for letting me know I wasn’t along in being > stuck in a homelife where that was played and hating it. > > My analysis years later was that, since my father wasn’t a very smart man > (though he was a very good, giving, and loyal man), and the problems that > frustrated him are hard (hence we still live under them all), it was easier > to spit on it all, turn his back, and slam the door, than sit with the mess > and continue to try to make distinctions. But whether he liked it or not, a > bacterium in its tiny world can’t chemotax unless some direction is different > from some other. > > So, against the backdrop of a note with which I agree with quite a lot: > >> To a person they are cynical amoralists who care nothing about acquiring >> power and winning the next election. > > How about specific people, like Katie Porter or Stacey Abrams? Sheldon > Whitehouse? In the system where they work, they seem like people trying to > solve concrete problems in good faith. > > And yes, I do acknowledge your statement that you know you are being > over-the-top, and that is plenty disclaimer for me to live and let live. > > Still, coming out of the discussion, I think being able to make distinctions > is valuable. > > Eric > > > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
