Faustas. His name is Faustas.
The orange cat returned, except this time he was wearing a collar. He has a name. He chilled on the couch with Andey and me last night while we watched "The Princess Bride."
I walked out of the mall last night and the sun was shining brightly. I walked out from the protection of mall canope to discover it was raining. I love the juxtaposition of the two.
There are two exits off of South Bound 1-35 to get onto Main St. There is a yield sign there to allow traffic getting on the highway to continue on. I hate the people who yield to the people who should be the ones doing the yielding. God will punish them some day. He'll probably punish me first for have written that sentence.
I think limes are fantastic.
I watched Meet the Press yesterday. The mayor of New Orleans was on. I sat with smug satisfaction as Tim Russert appropriately humiliated him. Something to the effect of:
Russert: We've all seen the pictures of hundreds of school busses just sitting in water. Why weren't these busses used for transporting people out of the city?
Mayor: We didn't have drivers.
Russert: But does it state in (quoting law) that you are supposed to provide drivers to transport people to safer areas?
Mayor: Well, um, uh, um, uh, hm.
((Jesi is taking liberties with this paraphrasing))
Russert: Why didn't you supply the Superdome before the storm hit?
Mayor: I told people to bring non-perishable food. I thought that'd be enough.
Russert: So, told people to come to that location and only provided running water because you thought people would bring their own supplies?
Mayor: Well, yes, sure, why not?
Russert: You said (then quotes mayor's radio address) about the President. Do you still hold this opinion?
Mayor: Well, I had a chance to talk to the President, and I see that's not the case at all.
::smirks:: Hehe.
So, what did we learn today? The cat's name is Faustas. Rain and sunshine at the same time is good. Yielding when you aren't supposed to be yielding is bad. Limes are fantastic. And, finally, if you are local government, don't cuss out the President when Tim Russert can put you on national television and point out everything you did wrong.
I walked out of the mall last night and the sun was shining brightly. I walked out from the protection of mall canope to discover it was raining. I love the juxtaposition of the two.
There are two exits off of South Bound 1-35 to get onto Main St. There is a yield sign there to allow traffic getting on the highway to continue on. I hate the people who yield to the people who should be the ones doing the yielding. God will punish them some day. He'll probably punish me first for have written that sentence.
I think limes are fantastic.
I watched Meet the Press yesterday. The mayor of New Orleans was on. I sat with smug satisfaction as Tim Russert appropriately humiliated him. Something to the effect of:
Russert: We've all seen the pictures of hundreds of school busses just sitting in water. Why weren't these busses used for transporting people out of the city?
Mayor: We didn't have drivers.
Russert: But does it state in (quoting law) that you are supposed to provide drivers to transport people to safer areas?
Mayor: Well, um, uh, um, uh, hm.
((Jesi is taking liberties with this paraphrasing))
Russert: Why didn't you supply the Superdome before the storm hit?
Mayor: I told people to bring non-perishable food. I thought that'd be enough.
Russert: So, told people to come to that location and only provided running water because you thought people would bring their own supplies?
Mayor: Well, yes, sure, why not?
Russert: You said (then quotes mayor's radio address) about the President. Do you still hold this opinion?
Mayor: Well, I had a chance to talk to the President, and I see that's not the case at all.
::smirks:: Hehe.
So, what did we learn today? The cat's name is Faustas. Rain and sunshine at the same time is good. Yielding when you aren't supposed to be yielding is bad. Limes are fantastic. And, finally, if you are local government, don't cuss out the President when Tim Russert can put you on national television and point out everything you did wrong.
posted by Jesi E. at 9/12/2005 01:57:00 PM
33 Comments:
It's called "Monday Morning Quarterback Syndrome" or "Armchair Quarterback Syndrome" It's easy to examine all the errors after the problem has passed.
Case in point, once upon a time I bounced at a local bar for kicks in my younger days. One guy pulled out a gun and started shooting. After I remedied the situation I heard for weeks something similar to ".. If it was me I would've..." or " I would've done the same thing."
The truth is that you don't know how you would react in the same situation. Given your upbringing, you'd probably shit your pants in the face of real danger.
Since you are planning to enter the real world some day, the best advise I can give you is know when you don't know.
I used to get worked up reading your posts about how your knowledge far exceeds that of the world, but then I realized - your just a punk kid from Oklahoma. You can rattle off a hundred quotes from various sources, but haven't done anything. You can quote Donald Trump on business, but you can't tell me what it feels like to terminate someone whos has three kids at home living paycheck to paycheck. I'm not saying either that the whole Katrina disaster was handled as good as it should have been handled, or that the Mayor of New Orleans doesn't need to eat some crow - but I'd place my money on the authorities in action in Louisiana than you any day of the week.
Ah, welcome to the world of comparitive politics, Loxley. You're absolutely right, I have never been in a situation where the life and fortunes of millions of people is riding on my back. At the same time, not a lot of people have. I will say this much, I've been working in politics since I was about fourteen. I have seen the actions of hundreds or politicians and can moderately gadge one politician against another. This is how our nation runs. We hold people responsible to their decisions, yes after the fact when it's easy to see all the errors. Otherwise, we would live under a tyrannical government.
I vividly remember Bill Clinton coming to Oklahoma City after the bombing. I remember watching the adults around me, who I remember saying the most unkind things about that president, saying, "He's doing a good thing. This is the way the respond." I remember watching adults say the same thing about Frank Keating, the governor at the time. Then the May 3rd tornado came through, and the same thing happened. People set aside their political prejudices and dealt with the situation. I remember when Andrew came through. It doesn't mean these situations were dealt with flawlessly. It means that the majority of the people in charge responded to the situations correctly.
So, I do not suggest that I know better than the mayor of Louisianna. However, I can compare him to other people I've found in similar positions. I'll compare him to the local and state governments of Mississippi and Alamaba. I'll compare him to the governor and local government of the rest of Louisianna. I'll compare him with Frank Keating. I'll compare him with Rudolph Giuliani. Did any of this men go onto the radio and have a hissy fit? In my study of politics, I have never seen an elected official go off with such complete lack of control.
I've never believed that my knowledge far exceeds the world. Maybe I am just a punk kid from Oklahoma. Welcome to democracy. People have discourse, and sometimes people have less experience than others, but yet we all get the chance to talk on the matter anyway. I hardly think I am wrong in this situation. I can see absolutely no situation in which the mayors comments would be warranted. It makes me feel more secure in my nation when I see men appropriately humiliated when they make stupid decisions. If I were to shit in my pants given such authority, I hope I would be properly humiliated as well.
Let's hope not, though. The vast majority of Americans grow up in relative safety. These young men and women go on to be political leaders, military leaders, and leaders of organizations like the Peace Corps and the Red Cross. There is something in the nature of how men and women are raised that make them capable of handling the most extreme stress when it's put in front of them. I'm hoping that I've received that characteristic.
While I agree that Jess has a point in that everyone has the right in America to voice their opinion, even if their opinion is based on a total and complete lack of experience and education, Loxley has a point, too.
An opinion based on nothing is nothing... And a wise man knows where he stands in his opinions.
And here's a reality check: "The vast majority of Americans grow up in relative safety. These young men and women go on to be political leaders, military leaders, and leaders of organizations like the Peace Corps and the Red Cross."
Oh really? The last time I checked, the average American goes on to become an office worker, or a clerk, or a laborer, or whatever TV watching schlepp category you want to use. That's not to say that most college kids don't see themselves as going on to become "leaders," most do... That's why you find so many pseudo intellectuals on college campuses, and so few true leaders.
Those among us who do go on to be leaders usually, (not always, but usually) have lots of help from influential family and friends who are already leaders... Bill Clinton types being the exception, but they find a way to afford Ivy league educations, where they meet those true leaders and those with influential family and friends...
"...the mayor of Louisianna... " snicker snicker
This whole time I thought Louisiana was a state...
My argument that everyone can voice his/her opinion in America and my admission that I may be a punk kid from Oklahoma was not to discredit the stability of my argument. I don't think my age nor my place of residence has anything to do with the idiocy of complaints emanating from Louisiana. (Thank you boogeddy boo for pointing out the least important aspect of this debate: accidentally switching "Louisiana" for "New Orleans." Somehow I thought the issue was the proper place of younger citizens' critiques in social discourse on politics, but clearly you seem to think minor errors are much more important. I hope you enjoy that position in life.) I was rejoicing that I took a position of annoyance a few weeks back with relation to the mayor and was publicly justified when the mayor was humiliated on national television. My opinion is based on something quite solid (political history, public opinion, and public information).
I never said average Americans become leaders. I was respond to loxley's comment, "Given your upbringing, you'd probably shit your pants in the face of real danger." The idea is that I've never faced "real danger" and therefore am not likely to respond well to it. I said that the vast majority (meaning almost everyone) in America grows up in relative safety (the biggest threat to young adults in the U.S. is car accidents). From this group (Americans) comes leaders. I never implied that it was that the average American becomes a leader. You're right, average Americans go on to be average workers. (I will object heavily to the term "TV schlepp category." Both my parents have "TV schlepp category" jobs, but they perform their duties with honor and dignity. It's not the job that is undignified, it is how the job is done. A laborer who offers quality service with excellence is just as noble as the President of the United States. And in some cases, perhaps more noble.) But the leaders grew up in the same conditions (with concern to safety) as average Americans and still do quite well when dealing with violent, stressful, and devastating situations.
I'm not sure if you've been on a college campus recently, but most young people do not see themselves going on to be "leaders." Leadership positions are now considered to hard to be worth the time attempting to achieve them. Just a week ago in my political science course for the semester, the class was asked if they planned on becoming the President of the U.S. Out of forty-some students, only one raised their hand--in a political science course! On the college campus, leadership is overrated.
At some point, I'll return to dismiss the myth of the power of Ivy League institutions, but now I have to go to work.
You're too funny, Jesi.
I was saying you wouldn't respond well to real danger. The way you grew up isn't average in the U.S. Homeschoolers aren't the average household in the U.S. (I'm not doubting the quality of the education - so spare me the argument.) It's a life far more sheltered than the average household, and even more so than say...Crenshaw (LA) or Hialeah (Miami).
I have been fortunate, I work hard and in the not so distant past I had a few thousand employees under my supervision and can empathize with the authorities involved when things aren't going well. I've had deaths on the job etc. and while the scope of Louisiana is far beyond my skill set, I am able to tell you regardless of what you read - you haven't the foggiest idea of what you speak. Giuliani's situation - while horrible - wasn't on the same level as New Orleans. His local authorities were in the position to be able to respond, and the anomoly was contained to a few square blocks. Had Manhattan been submerged - we'd be talking about the same level of catastrophe.
As for Ivy League schools - like you - I was accepted to an Ivy League school and didn't go. That was a mistake. Like it or not the elite class runs the country and an Ivy League education will open far more doors than any state school regardless of how smart you are or how hard you work - the only possible exception being Texas A&M. You can quote the studies on salaries 5 years out from college, but what about 10, or 20? The Ivy's cover the same quantity of information in one semester than state schools cover in a year. The 1% of the population that contains 30% of the nations wealth won't send their kids to state school.
Yes, I have been on a college campus recently - the average age of a college student in the U.S. ranges from 29 to 32 depending on the source - I'm taking a stragetic vision class for executives from Harvard. I'll be traveling to Boston once a month for the next 4 months. The average college student that I see is far too focused on the money they will earn after college. They haven't figured out that income is by product of hard work and concentrating on being good at an area they like.
For you to say that you'll "dismiss the myth of the power of Ivy League institutions" again shows your youth and ignorance. How many U.S. Presidents came from OU, UT, or Virginia Tech? In the average workplace in the U.S., if you and a Harvard graduate applied and were hired in the same company on the same day - the Harvard person would be your boss. Saying the Ivy's aren't a academic and/or political powerhouse simply isn't reality. For someone who wants to work in Washington, you could be setting yourself up for a hard lesson on the things that can't be taught in a classroom.
"(Thank you boogeddy boo for pointing out the least important aspect of this debate: accidentally switching "Louisiana" for "New Orleans." Somehow I thought the issue was the proper place of younger citizens' critiques in social discourse on politics, but clearly you seem to think minor errors are much more important. I hope you enjoy that position in life.)"
HAHAHAAHA
I could really care less, but it sure is fun to see you get all pissy about a jab!
HAHAHAHAHA
You handled that like a real intellectual!
Thanks sooooo much!
Now, Imma go watch TV. Have fun!
Jess--
Just so ya know.. .I was just awarded my doctorate last year.. I've bee non a college campus VERY recently.
Next, your education and experience has everything to do with the value of your critique...
Why object to TV watching schlepp categories? We're all in them... you, me, our folks, our friends... we are not of the elite, which is why our opinions are relegated to blogs instead of national newspapers and government investigation reports. I mean, you don't seriously think your changing any one's mind on any issue by posting your editorial in a blog, do you? No, you post for the fun of it... I promise you this blog is far more fun for me than for you, because I can laugh at it...
oh and loxley---
Texas A&M... seriously, wtf?
Although I guess it's plausible.. I mean have you seen those fuckers scream at each other? freaky... It's like a giant hick-cult...
LOL Sammy.
yes - that's my point - in their own backassward way - A&M is as cliquish as the Ivy's.
Ah, loxley, I'm here only for your amusement.
Okay... back to being pissy. ;-)
There is a range of shelteredness in the U.S., absolutely. And I am definitely on the side of having been raised in a rather squeeky clean environment, as compared to the rest of Americans. Yes. But, in the scheme of the world and history, there is almost no distinction between my exposure to "real danger" and public schoolers'. America has a pretty squeeky clean environment itself and that's why it's so shocking when disasters happen. Millions of people will die in Africa this year of AIDS, but we're appalled that a few hundred (possibly pushing into the thousands) people die. Why? Because we are used to our safe little country. We are unfamiliar with war, widesread disease, famine, and so on and so forth. So, while Ray Nagin may have had more frightening experiences in his life than me, he is just as innocent to "real danger" as I am.
You're right again that Giuliani's situation was entirely different. New York was attacked without warning. Unlike Ray Nagin, he wasn't given advanced notice of the oncoming devastation. Wasn't it like 10 days before hand, they knew it was coming? Not to mention the many years notice that the levees would not hold if a Hurricane came. Yes, the destruction was limited to a small area, but the benefit of knowing should have off-set the scope. Who's responsibility was it to know what to do in the very possible case that a Hurricane moved in? The state and local government. I'm not by any means attempting to condone the failures of FEMA, but I have a feeling that in the long run, the failures of the lower levels of government will be the most significant.
Because of the differences, why do I compare Nagin to Giuliani? Because they were both mayors of major cities who were put under very stressful and abnormal circumstances. One handled the situation with poise and is loved and admired by the whole nation because of it. The other made major mistakes and exacerbated those errors by despairing and pouting.
Imagine for a moment that Al Gore had been elected president. (I know some of you are having little orgasims and others just threw up a little in their mouths, but hang with me.) Under the exact same circumstances as the Bush administration response to 9/11, Giuliani gets on a radio program and starts cussing out the Federal government for not predicting the attack or preventing it. Do you think America would hold him in esteem after that? I don't think so. Why not? Because it would have been the inappropriate time and place to open his mouth. It would've been seen as a political move and he would've been publically blasted for it. Frank Keating could have done that in the Oklahoma City bombing. Crisis situation, opposite parties.
I think I'll make the Ivy thing an actual post. ::sighs:: Hm, that means I'll have to dig up my research that I made when I decided against Columbia.
samiam, I see my writing provides amusement for you as well as loxley... That's fantastic!
My education and experience have nothing to do with the validity of my argument. A 3 year old boy can say, "Slavery is wrong" and he is right. Whether he has the education or experience to judge such things is irrelevent to the fact that the statement he made is true. I'm hoping in your process of receiving your doctorate that you do remember basic logic. Otherwise, you might review the Argumentum ad Hominem fallacy.
I do post this blog for fun, but it's not entirely without an expectation of at least making people think. I've learned from the back and forth over this one topic and from others before it. Surely you are not so solid in your opinion, iamsam, to think that you cannot learn from the things you spend your time reading.
“My education and experience have nothing to do with the validity of my argument.”
It has everything to do with the VALUE of your argument. There’s no weight behind an opinion that’s not born out of first hand knowledge. You have no real first hand knowledge, because you’re too young to have had any, regardless of what you think.
“…you might review the Argumentum ad Hominem fallacy”
You may want to review it yourself. There’s no personal attack of any kind in any of my statements. There’s just a reality check for one of millions of college students holding on to a naïve belief that their discussion is going to change the world. There’s nothing wrong with that in itself, but that belief needs to have a basic understanding of its place in the greater scheme of things. Calling out naïveté is not an ad hominem attack; it’s an attack on the basis of the argument. It’s calling bullshit on an opinion that loses its weight because it’s based solely on academics, not experience. College is academic, and that’s all it is. Its only real value is in learning how to learn.
Indeed, a 3-year-old can say that slavery is wrong, and that might (or might not) be true. But what the fuck does 3-year-old know? That baby does not have an argument; he has the ability to mimic. In the same way, college students regurgitate what they are taught (both in college and throughout their lives.) Whether you want to believe it or not, you have not been trained to train yourself. Not yet, anyway. That’s not what a high school or bachelor’s program is designed to do. (At least that’s what I read in my Masters of Education classes.)
As for my understanding of logic, I moved beyond basics, and onto the advanced classes. Hopefully you’ll have the opportunity to do the same. Nonetheless, I appreciate your concern.
“Surely you are not so solid in your opinion, iamsam, to think that you cannot learn from the things you spend your time reading.”
What’s the Bertrand Russell quote? Madmen are so sure of their reckless ideas, while the wise are always unsure..? Something like that… I read some things for education, and others for entertainment. Which do you think your blog is? Last question: Why would you write with any expectation of making people think? I know that when I write, it’s to make ME think.
See, now isn’t this fun?
"Okay... back to being pissy. ;-)"
Ohhhhhhh.. the rapier wit cuts me to the quick!
Hiss, kitty cat, growl and snarl!
A wise old man once said, " Arguing on the internet is like the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded."
Oh,wait... that wasn't a wise old man! That was some punk on the internet who thought he was making a point in a forum. How could I make such a mistake?
Go for the gold! You can ALL get it!
"It has everything to do with the VALUE of your argument. There’s no weight behind an opinion that’s not born out of first hand knowledge."
Okay, you are not judging the argument, you're judging my ability to form an opinion. I don't care if you don't think I'm able to form an opinion. Mimicked, regurgitated, or truly original is irrelevent. Is the opinion true? If it isn't, tell me why. If it is, then leave it alone.
"You have no real first hand knowledge, because you’re too young to have had any, regardless of what you think."
I'm sure you've seen that I've just uploaded a new post about this. I dare you to tell me what first hand knowledge you've had that makes your opinions superior to mine. Don't argue that you've just lived longer, because I certainly know plenty of people who've lived longer than you and who think that you are full of bullshit.
"You may want to review it yourself. There’s no personal attack of any kind in any of my statements."
My argument is "Ray Nagin was wrong to get on public radio and cuss out the President while making unreasonable demands." Your response is "The argument has no value because the arguer is too young to make a valuable opinion." Ad Hominem is attacking the person who made the argument rather than the argument itself.
"Whether you want to believe it or not, you have not been trained to train yourself. Not yet, anyway. That’s not what a high school or bachelor’s program is designed to do. (At least that’s what I read in my Masters of Education classes.)"
I will die at the irony that you just supported you argument that academics is not a good basis that what really counts is experience and then go on to make a separate argument on the basis "that's what I read in my Masters of Education classes."
I did not attend a traditional high school. By the time I was in the 8th grade, I independently, with some slight supervision from my mother, structured my own curriculum during high school. I did my own research, graded my own work, and set my own standards. I did my own independent study to take all of the college entrance exams. Why? Because my mother, my only teacher, had never taken the tests before. She did not go to college. I did not have any relationships that I trusted enough to help me make my college decisions. It was entirely up to me. I made my first choice, College of the Ozarks (Yes, my ignorance certainly contributed to that choice), which turned out not to work. Back to the drawing board, I did my own studying and tried to go into the military. I had to train myself to pass the ASVAB and the DLAB with the appropriate scores to get into the highly competitive job of cryptological linguistics. I passed those tests without a problem, but a hearing deficienciy disqualified me. (If you want "real world" experience, try military entrance processing. That'll fuck with your mind.) I then tried to go to an Ivy League school. I had to go back and retake all of my college entrance exams plus a few I had never taken before. Once again, all my own independent study. I was able to raise my ACT by 9 points, my SAT by 200 points, and score exceptionally well on my SAT IIs. I was accepted to Columbia with financial aid and some scholarship. But even with the scholarship, I would have graduated with at least $120,000 debt. That is highly expensive for undergraduate work considering I am planning on work for the U.S. government doing diplomacy. One does not work for the government with the expectation of making money doing it. Besides, Ivy League for undergrad work is not an essential element to success in my field. (Of the last 10 Secretaries of States, only 2 received their B.A. from Ivy League schools.) While attending OU, I am able to invest more money in studying abroad, which I hope will give me some "real life experience" and then study in D.C. for my graduate work. You're right that undergrad work is mind-numbingly easy, which is why I've had no difficultly working 20 hours a week, participating in close to 10 on campus organizations, keeping my own apartment, maintaining a 4.0, and living 100% fiscally independent of my parents.
"What’s the Bertrand Russell quote? Madmen are so sure of their reckless ideas, while the wise are always unsure..?"
I guess that's why I say I learn from it. But I am not so pretentious as to say I am wise. I'm merely someone who is learning what wisedom is.
"I read some things for education, and others for entertainment. Which do you think your blog is? Last question: Why would you write with any expectation of making people think? I know that when I write, it’s to make ME think."
I think you orginally read it for entertainment, but now you are writing about it, which makes you think, which means that what I wrote to entertain has led to you thinking. I may not have changed your opinion, but you did think about it. Why would I write with any expectation of making people think? Because it happens. If I was only trying to make myself think, why would I publish my blog publically? I don't think it's "changing the world," but who does really change the world? Is world change simply the combination of the major of individuals convincing each other that a former belief is wrong? So, any time people converse with each other, they have no idea whether they are changing the world or not. There is no one powerful figure that controls world opinion. And I certainly do not think I am amongst the most influential, which is why it gave me pride to see Tim Russert taking a position, with no regard for my opinion, that is in agreement with my own belief. It's nice to think that some people with influence are on the same page as you.
I find it interesting when people use the "you've never lived in the real world" or the "you're too young" excuse when responding to an argument. Reminds me of an exasperated parent hissing "Because I told you so!" It is not a valid response - it is an avoidance technique used to silence someone who doesn't agree with you.
As someone who has had way more life experience than I may have wanted, I value and welcome the passion and perspective that comes from the younger ones. Those of us in the 'real world' are sometimes too jaded and set in our ways to bring about real change. By the way, Loxley, I don't seem to remember you growin' up in the 'hood.
Jes's comments about Mayor Nagin are not only appropriate but we old ones should be damn happy that there are articulate, thoughtful whippersnappers comin'up. If a person runs for and is elected to a public office, he gets the power and responsibility. He gets the props if he does well and the verbal flailing if he doesn't do well. Tim Russert pointed out from the city's charter that Mayor Nagin had a clear responsibility regarding disaster planning and relief - the Mayor screwed up. He either didn't plan well or did not execute the plan. "Monday morning Quarterbacking?" You're damn right! Anyone who has ever been in a position of leadership knows it is not only "easy to examine errors after the problem has passed" to not do so is unthinkable! When someone died under your leadership, did you and the company reexamine procedures so it would never happen again? Mayor Nagin wasn't responsible for the totality of the catastrophe but he must face that for which he was responsible.
And, Sam, "There’s no weight behind an opinion that’s not born out of first hand knowledge." Are you really prepared to defend that statement? Do you live your life by the tenets you preach? If so, I have a few questions for you... Where have you lived? Only in America? Then don't ever express your thoughts on anywhere else. Ivy? State? Community? Be sure to limit your discussions to the type of schools you've attended. Ever been a politician? No? Please don't opine on politics... The one good thing about it is we could finally have a real reason to tell those stupid actor activists to shut their pieholes! How would this affect the First Amendment? Interesting thought, isn't it?
"An opinion based on nothing is nothing... And a wise man knows where he stands in his opinions."
First rule of debate - define your terms... Opinion: 1. A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof: “The world is not run by thought, nor by imagination, but by opinion” (Elizabeth Drew).
2. A judgment based on special knowledge and given by an expert: a medical opinion.
3. A judgment or estimation of the merit of a person or thing: has a low opinion of braggarts.
4. The prevailing view: public opinion.
5. Law. A formal statement by a court or other adjudicative body of the legal reasons and principles for the conclusions of the court.
I've not seen any of Jes's opinions based on "nothing" but on her life experience (don't start avoiding again by trying to invalidate her experience), her research and her intellect. My assumption is that your's are based on the same things!
I feel sure Jes will handle the Ivy garbage argument very well. You see, I was involved in the extensive research before she made the decision to attend a lowly state school. The level of snobbery and ignorance in the 'elites' or the 'wanna-be's' is quite breath-taking.
One more point I'd like to make. There needs to be an examination of the responisbility of the good people living in the affected areas. This should serve as a reminder to us all to be prepared. The government is not our nanny, no matter how hard they may try. People living in flood zones should have flood insurance or they should leave. Loxley, on another post, mentioned that OKC is in tornado alley. You are right, but the majority of our citizens have homeowners insurance. An incredibly low percentage of people in New Orleans had flood insurance. Now before we start the - they couldn't afford it - argument, we choose what we afford. Sam, I can speak to this, you see, I have first-hand experience with poverty. I was on welfare and foodstamps as a child when my 8th grade educated dad left my 11th grade educated mom with four children and no money. I've heard my mom in the other room crying because she wasn't sure how we could make the food stretch for another week or how we would pay the doctor bills. My mom worked 2 & 3 jobs, my brothers worked, my sister and I worked for our neighbors and, after our public school became too dangerous for us to attend, we worked, as grade school and middle school students, for the private school we atended. We studied and attended class all day then cleaned the building before we went home to do our homework. College was out of the question.
After I married, my husband and I struggled on minimum and near-minimum wage jobs. After we had been married for 12 years, we decided to try to buy a house. He worked a full-time job and 2 part-time ones. My kids helped us deliver papers and assisted me in the gymnastics classes I taught. We have homeowners insurance. If a tornado took my house, Met Life would rebuild it - not the federal government. Every state has a FAIR plan -Fair Access to Insurance requirements and everyone has access to flood insurance underwritten by the Feds. I also have first-hand knowledge here as a licensed property and casualty agent in Oklahoma, Lousiana, Mississippi, Florida and 41 other states including DC. If you live in California or Missouri without earthquake insurance, 'you buys your ticket and you takes your chances'. If you live in the midwest without homeowners,(insert the sound of a spinning roulette wheel, here) and if you live along the Gulf or Atlantic coast, or even river banks, you should buy flood insurance. How is it my responsibility to underwrite the stupidity of others? Why should we, as a society, encourage building or rebuilding in flood-prone areas? That is what we do each time an area floods and some politician somewhere decides we are going to pick-up the tab. Help, yes, finance absurdity, hell no! Let's tie the aid to some accountability, to some requirements that would keep people from putting themselves in an underprotected bowl! No homes in New Orleans without flood insurance or else the signing of a hold-harmless agreement for the rest of us.
Jes--
Check out Federal Rules of Evidence numbers 403 and the 800 series to see the value of first hand knowledge in considering the weight of and opinion. The section on experts is good for this, too (1100 or 1200? don't remember). Try to find an annotated version of the rules for an explanation. I don't have time... gotta go to work... But, I'll leave with this... your opinion is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. You express it for yourself. That's the only point I was trying to make... gotta go... good luck.
dreamer--
Are you Jes's mom?
Didn't the Army Corps of engineers build the levees? Doesn't that place some burden of the feds to watch over it?
Quote - Dreamer:
"Then don't ever express your thoughts on anywhere else. Ivy? State? Community? Be sure to limit your discussions to the type of schools you've attended. Ever been a politician? No? Please don't opine on politics..."
If you want to play the qualifications game, I'm easliy the most qualified person in this conversation to discuss any of the topics mentioned
Actually, with the class I'm taking now - I've attended all colleges - Community, state, private, and Ivy. I need a Seminary class to complete the circle. Oh - yes - I've also sat on various advisory councils to local and state governments, been involved in research for a case that was recently argued in front of the supreme court. Finances prevent me from running for office at the state level. Additionaly, I've personally funded a kitchen for the homeless for two years and run an auction of dates with local celebrities to benefit a shelter for battered women. I've started programs for parolees to re-enter the work force and the policies and programs I've implemented with the companies I've worked with is nearing one billion dollars in revenue generation. In addition to all operations, I'm currently responsible for the risk analysis of my current company and am intimately familiar with most business insurance situations.
Using qualifications - you are in no position to lecture me on anything, other than your opinion of the role of a parent.
I'm not saying "because I told you so," I'm saying in the business and politcal world - her method of communication will make her a target of actions that she will not like. Not everyone loves her like her mother.
As an aside, The only company we found that offered flood insurance for the home of an employee in MSY, was FEMA - with a 250k cap.
I didn't grow up in the hood? You must have me confused with someone else. I find this interesting - the first school rape I knew of was when I was in the 6th grade (by a 3 year flunkie) and the first school shooting I witnessed I was in the 7th grade. It was only the third poorest school for that grade level in the district - maybe you don't consider that bad, but I learned how to fight more than anything else at that school.
As for Ivy garbage, I know you don't like to recognize the establishment, but that doesn't mean that what I say isn't true.
The Ivy's are the standard the rest of higher education in the U.S. tries to achieve - whether you or I like it or not.
Deaths in the workplace - in the ones under the company control - of course we review. They most always occur when one breaks company policy. We don't take the "This guy is a dumbass" approach. The ones that weren't company controled - we didn't. (one had a heart attack inside a diner) People will die - there is nothing one can do about this.
One of my points, was that in our youth and exuberance, one doesn't take into account that they could be wrong. You can take the gunslinger mode and in many cases no one will say anything contradictory. I'm confident you won't like it will people tell you different that what you believe - this exchange is an example.
If Jes really wants to go into the State department at her age with the guns blazing "I know best" attitude - she'll be doing data entry in the basement for 15 years. Her parents might like and embrace her method of communication (and they should) but the world won't - IF she presents herself in real life as she does on this blog.
Work calls...
"My argument is"Ray Nagin was wrong to get on public radio and cuss out the President while making unreasonable demands."
That's not an argument, that's an opinion. Calling an opinion naïve is not ad hominem... I've attacked the opinion as being based on nothing more than what an unqualified person says is wrong instead of being based on statistics and facts to back it up... whether your opinion is correct or not is something that I do not know... I haven't seen any argument to help me decide. If the mayor's conduct was wrong, say why and cite to reliable authority that agrees with you (other than your mother); otherwise, leave it alone.
"I dare you to tell me what first hand knowledge you've had that makes your opinions superior to mine."
On the topic of mayoral comments... absolutely none... I've not expressed an opinion. But I'm not the one judging the mayor of New Orleans as a "flippin moron." I will say that I cannot begin to imagine the stress and guilt of a man in the situation of the mayor. My heart goes out to him and his frustration, not my judgment.
I do have a superior opinion on the state of mind of a 21 year old punk who talks out of his/her ass... but that's only because I've been one, and have gone on to know better. One day, no doubt, you will, too.
"I certainly know plenty of people who've lived longer than you and who think that you are full of bullshit."
That's funny... so do I! Would you like to compare lists? BTW.. I'm 80 years old!
"I will die at the irony that you just supported you argument that academics is not a good basis that what really counts is experience and then go on to make a separate argument on the basis "that's what I read in my Masters of Education classes.""
That was a limiting clause... it was actually written to express the idea that I do not know for a fact that those programs are designed for a particular purpose, but that, for what it's worth, the establishment says so... I apologize for the confusion.
And, I think we have a further confusion in our communication.. I think I have said that experience and education work together.. the are interchangeable as paths to gaining understanding the world...
"I did not attend a traditional high school. By the time I was in the 8th grade, I independently, with some slight supervision from my mother, structured my own curriculum during high school."
That's too bad... some guidance may have helped learn when to hold your tongue and listen... From our conversation here, I think you learned the opposite.
Read carefully.. I have never said that I am wise... I have only said that you are not, either... I am not afraid to say that I do not know anything about the propriety of the mayor's anger... can you say the same? If so, then why the blog post calling him a moron? If not, then who is it that is pretentious?
And don't fall into the trap of believing your own bullshit... I'm reading this blog, rolling my eyes, and laughing.. just like always... The only thing different this time is that I made the mistake of trying to participate. It will not happen again.
Dear brother-in-law, Loxley, it is quite ironic you make the statements you do. You and Sam attack Jesi's opinions but can't handle your own being challenged. BTW - of course the only flood insurance you could find was from FEMA with strict limitations. That is because no one else underwrites it - the chance of loss is too great for any company to be able to handle. The limitations are to keep the underwriting losses as low as possible. As an agent, I do have some minute knowledge in this area... Again, I state if you live in a flood plain get flood insurance or get out. $250k would be enough to cover most lower or moderately prices dwellings. For those with a higher cost, you roll the dice by building a dwelling in danger of being swamped. Simple fact of life - For the people in New Orleans, inappropriate development and outright corruption set the stage for this horrible tragedy. Prior to 1975, the city had experienced only 2 major floods in this century. Since then? 25 - I am not referring to hurricanes but to flooding from the lake, storms or the river. In March of this year, FEMA demanded the return of over $60 million dollars in disaster mitigation funds because the local officials couldn't account for the expenditure of 97% of that money. The Army Corps of Engineers spends more money in Louisana annually than any other state in the Union including California - a state with more than seven time the population. Again - Katrina was terrible but the problem occured with the breaking of the levees which (sorry Mr. President) even my cat predicted would break in a Cat 3 (if a direct hit) or larger. We are just now finding the depth of the corruption in that city. Yes, the Corps had responsibility, so did FEMA but lets not give Mayor Nagin, Governor Blanco and the rest of the officials closest to the problem a free pass. Another point to make - my nephew has said I-10 is so congested with peole trying to get back into the city (the Honorable Mayor said "Come on down!) that the National Guard can't move supplies and personnel without getting in traffic jams. So much for evacuation.
For the record, I never challenged Loxley's or even Sam's qualifications but rather the statement made by Sam that the only valid opinions are those formed by first-hand knowledge. I then said, if we were to adhere to that line of reasoning, I would speak on the things in which I would be 'qualified' because of my experience. BTW - you are right, you hardly know your brother and you certainly do not know me. You have not enough information to make judgements on what qualifications I have. Therefore, you should keep your lack of knowledge to yourself. You are making the mistake of assumption.
Regarding the 'hood - I've done a little informal survey with my 'contacts' who went to school in the same district you attended. Some from the 'worst' schools there. I attended the high school from which you graduated. I know people whose children attend those very schools, today. They seemed to have far different memories and experiences. But, I will not assume you provided incorrect information. Based on your previous arguments, you should thank your lucky stars for being immersed in the real world at such a young age. Perhaps we should allow all children to have your experiences - it seems to have served you well.
I don't quite know why my relationship to Jes should make a difference in these discussions - the arguments I present should be accepted or rejected on their merits.
Sam, you mentioned you have a Master's in Ed. Again, I am surprised at the vehemence of your attacks. I do hope you were never in the classroom - the proper way to teach is to use reason and rational to show one the errors of one's way. Both you and Loxley bristle when someone calls into question your position but you do not respond with reasoned arguments. And being 80 is no excuse - you should know better by now. But, don't leave the discussion - to leave would not allow us to reach a proper conclusion even if that conclusion is to agree to disagree. Short of dismissing the arguments because of age/experience, what point do you want to make about this subject?
Regarding the Ivy thing, Loxley, you've not been doing your research - the Ivys have been rapidly declining in their intellectual monoply for at least 25 years but the fans of elitism are unwilling to admit. Simply do a google search on non-ivy ceos or "is an ivy league education worth the price" and you will find many articles with lots of evidence showing the tide has definately turned. For more in-depth analysis, spend a bit of time researching the the alma maters of the Fortune 500 companues' leaders, America's millionaires and Congress. The vast majority of physicians and attorneys and even judges are not Ivy graduates. The leaves are falling...
No matter what age we are, we should all be aware that we don't know it all, that other people may have more information or different perspectives than ours. Neither of the two people I am addressing in this seem to be at all open that they may be wrong, that they may not have the right answers and that people they may arrogantly label as inexperienced, undereducated or youthful might have something valuable to say. Sam, you say Jesi should have had more guidance (I suppose you mean from people such as yourself) and she might have learned to hold her tongue. Why should someone hold their tongue on their on blog? Should we all just automatically bow to your superior intellect and experience? Come on, you are missing the point of this type of media. The beauty of the blog, in fact, the beauty of this country is that everyone has a right to speak their mind.
Dreamy:
First of all: READ. I never said I had a master's.. I said I took masters classes...
This exemplifies the problem with both the blog author and her mother... assumptions are made, and then passed off as fact.
The author assumes she knows how the mayor of a destroyed city should behave. She does not know... Just as loxley stated, in general, a 20 year old kid has never been in a situation of extreme stress like that of the mayor. She expresses her opinion as fact.
The only opinion I myself have purported to express is that the author is far to young and inexperienced to be able to form an educated opinion on the propriety of the mayor's conduct. She said he was a "flippin idiot," To say such things when she has no basis to determine whether or not he is indeed a "flippin idiot" reveals he naiveté.
Furthermore, she offers no facts or other information to support her opinion, leaving her statements clearly in the opinion arena; never forming an argument. Then, she calls ad hominem to any challenge to her uninformed opinion.
As I stated in another post, I am more than willing to say. "I do not know." I do not however, think that the author or her mother have ever spoken these words, if this blog is any indication.
As for my teaching style, I have to say that I'm sure it seems harsh to a mother who's only teaching experience is with her own children. How many times, may I ask, did Jesi fail at a a task in her education? I suspect it was very few. Bias can be a real bitch. You see, many lessons in life are learned through failure... I'm sure you have at your disposal a plethora of studies (both secular and religious) beaming with praise for home-schooling. However, I doubt a child's learning to cope with failure is among its more admirable attributes in reality...
Speaking of bias... bias is the reason a mother's defense of her child cannot be trusted. If you were my mother, you'd be defending my point... That's what mothers do.
Jesi absolutely can express whatever opinion or idea she wants in her blog. But in the real world she seem so hungry to understand, people will call her on her bullshit, ad hominem or not. People will not put up with condescending tones and dogmatic attitudes.
I, myself, freely admit that I know very little. But I do know that Jessi is a kid. Kid's need guidance. Although you gain make assumptions about my meaning, you are again incorrect... guidance should not come from me.. I am not qualified to teach, as you are... oh, wait... never-mind.
Just as no one should bow to my intellect, Jessi should learn that no one will bow to hers. In this entire "discussion" Jessi is the one who came out on the offensive against loxley when he disagreed with her, and called her on her bullshit. Loxley may have been a little harsh, but he was a sweetie compared to what the world will do to jessi if she took the tone of her posts with her into the workaday world. Also, I got the feeling Loxley was trying to be helpful... so much for good deeds...
What I learned today:
1. Faustus is a friendly cat.
2. Limes are fantastic.
3. The world runs on contrast.
4. Follow road signs, they are rarely in the realm of civil disobedience.
5. Tim Russert is a Jerk.
6. Ray Nagen is not very smart.
7. Jesi's mom is amazing.
8. I don't always agree with Jesi even though I'm dating her, and I doubt her mother does too.
9. Always agreeing with your child is just bad parenting. (see #7).
10. Although Loxly and Sam have gotten better at it, they have so far failed to adequately defend their positions.
11. Restating your position is not defending it.
12. It is not what we have, but what we do with what we have.
13. America is a good place to live, and maybe even settle down and start a family.
14. The barrio is not one of these places.
15. Impassioned arguments are amusing to say the least.
16. Limes are fantastic.
Sam,
Perhaps I should give you a pass because of your relative youth and inexperience... but no - what fun would that be?
The dangers associated with assumption and implication are too often overlooked. Most people reading this blog assumed your were a master of ed(personally I think that may be an oxymoron, but that is just my opinion :-)based on the implication of your post. I apoligize for jumping to that conclusion. But you have made assupmtions based on nothing that I can see. Do you have information to support you conclusion that I am unqualified to teach? Or, for that matter the only children I have taught are my own? I'd love to hear your evidence. Hopefully you haven't received any evidence form Loxely. He is another one who seems to shout out of his ass. As quick aside - if Loxley was only trying to help - wow - I hope he doesn't 'help' his empolyees, employers, friends and family members in that manner. Someone should teach him tact and discrestion - perhaps a home school mother...
Andey is correct - you are not making your case - in fact, you are quite brilliantly making mine - thank you. I restate my case: Someone's youth and inexperience is not a valid argument against a stated position. It is, perhaps, a one of a plethora of reasons behind the position, but many who are older, wiser, higly educated and experienced hold the same position. I have yet to hear one single solitary piece of evidence from either of you to refute or even challenge that position. Let me make it a bit more clear - Ray Nagin, good man though he may be, has, in the opinions of a great many people, has acted in an unprofessional manner. He, as the highest elected official in the city of New Orleans, negelected provide direction and support for his constituents during the time of most desperate need. If you read the papers, listen to the news or access any internet news sight, you will see he is continuing in that pattern. Get in, get out, get in, get out - we need federal help, we don't want that kind of federal help, we need federal help, I won't listen to the FEDs, I have to listen to the Feds (paraphrased, of course.)
You are right, none of us have been in his position, including you and Mr. Loxley but to call stupidity stupidity is not a bad thing. You may object to her tone - well noted. But, all your posts have been complaints about language and grammar - not a defined position complete with evidence of some kind.
BTW - over the course of my career, so far, I have taught all type of subjects to well over 200 children though I only gave birth to two. Those two, educated by me and a selects few other parents, are flourishing at their chosen university. Both could have gone on to much more exclusive educational institutions (both were accepted to others) but wisely chose to begin their young lives with a bit of fiscal responsibility. I also taught my niece during her senior year - you see, this brilliant young woman was foundering in her public school She too graduated and is also attending college. I haven't taken any Master Level courses but I think that's a graduation rate of 100% with 100% of my high school students going on to college - not too bad, really. In fact, of the 20 or so students to whom I taught a couple of high school classes, all have graduated and all have gone on to university. Some have graduated college, by now.
The final assumption and brainless position I want to address is that I am only defending her because I am her mother. Sounds slightly sexist but I am only going to make one assumption, myself. As Andey stated - to do so would be bad parenting - and, I could provide you with signed affidavits from at least 50 people from all walks of life, all socio-economic and educational backgrounds, from all races and most religions who have first-hand knowledge of my life and thelives of my children that I am a kick-ass parent.
It appears to me that this is a family squabble. Is Sam related to Loxley?
Also, I don't believe Sam and Loxley failed to defend their positions. To me, it appears they stopped defending them.
***please forgive my tpographical errors - I was in a hurry this morning and did not properly read over my comments***
Now you had to go and drag my Momma into this - that's too bad - this was a lively discussion with a few different view points.
Now to business:
If I ever see or hear you even pretend, ever again, to contemplate the possibility that you are on the same level as my mother - I will personally come to OKC, we can meet over dinner, speak like civilized adults and we'll close this let's be enemies for life deal in person. You aren't even worth the effort needed by my mother to expend the breath to speak your name.
I have always believed that everyone should live and act as they choose - but you will not for one single second assume that you are in any way remotely in the same category as my mother, or that you have acheive some higher insight that you would do a better job than she did. If this is not clear enough for you let me know and I will refine my explanation.
As for not knowing you and your husband - who said I wanted to? We were close when we were kids, but people move on things change. Sure, it's sad that we as a family aren't closer,but it really doesn't matter and I certainly don't sit around and pine over the past. I frequently speak with my other two siblings - how often do you two receive a call? I wrote the two of you off with your conduct at our grandfather's funeral. If I thought my life had such a hole in it I would reach out, but I wouldn't be holding my breath for a call. I'm not holding my breath for one from you.
Now, one with your intellectual insight suspects my responses are in anger - or whatever word you choose. Don't give yourself so much credit. Your daughter is taking philospohy - what's the opposite of love? Google holds the answer.
I'm at a loss, Loxley. At what points was your mother dragged into this discussion?
So much anger for no reason... it is too bad, really. Simply put, I never brought your mother, my sweet mother-in-law, into any part of this discussion. I simply said perhaps someone like myself, a lowly homeschool mother could teach you and Sam something about discretion and tact...and maybe how to not color a discussion with your own bias and preconceived notions.
There's no anger. I don't have enough emotion in your direction to be angry. Emotionless statements are oft mistaken as anger.
As pointed out to me by a friend of mine that reads this site occassionally - we don't like each other. That's neither anger nor bad - that's just the way it is.
It wasn't a wise choice on my part
begin discussion with Jessica or any other part of Yukon crew after so many years. Let some dogs lie, and I'll be happy to remain off your Christmas card list.
It was interesting to see how she has progressed. She'll learn her way in the professional world just as the rest of us have. She make a few professional bumps, but she's smart and will land on her feet. I'll see her on the news when she runs for President.
"Perhaps I should give you a pass because of your relative youth and inexperience... but no - what fun would that be?"
Isn' this exactly what your opinion say I should do for Jesi?
"Do you have information to support you conclusion that I am unqualified to teach?"
Your daughter said you hadn't gone to college. Every state in the union require a college education to teach full time. No bachelor's degree; no qualification to teach according to state governments. In my book, teacher qualification from the holy church of the self-righteous does not count, and it apparently doesn't hold water with the state legislatures either...
I'll restate my case: Education and experience have everything to do with the WEIGHT of an opinion. Here's evidence in the form of an example: Someone who has never sucked a dick can't tell me semen tastes bad... without some backing( none of which was provided by Jesi in stating her opinion) the opinion is waste... Tell me WHY your opinion has merit, otherwise, it's just like an asshole... (Everybody has one).
Also, it does not appear that you (or OU) ever taught your daughter the difference between opinion and argument. One has backing, one is meaningless...
"I could provide you with signed affidavits from at least 50 people from all walks of life, all socio-economic and educational backgrounds..."
Good. Let me know when you have them notarized and compiled, and I'll provide a mailing address... but even if you don't, I'll say "Good for you." You're still biased. Not as a mother, but as a parent, so there goes your sexism assumption.
If you are going to try to tell me that your love for your child does not blind you to her faults, I'm going to have to ask you to stop smoking crack. Now. Crack will make you brainless. BUT, to say that parents love their children to the point of bias is a human fact. Wait... are you saying you're not human? Now, THAT makes sense....
As for Andey's support for jesi.. I suspect he is biased, too. Either he's banging her four times a week, or wants to do so REAL BAD. Whatever she says, he'll lap up. He can deny it; he can hold out his nobility. But, in the end, he is a guy wit ha penis and hormones... I've been there myself, and seen my friends, and my own kids go through the same thing. He might think he's different. You and Jesi might think he's different, but unless he too is not human... well... some things are just as natural as can be... Like the hickey on the neck of a 19 year old girl...
"a home-school mother... could teach you and Sam something about discretion and tact...and maybe how to not color a discussion with your own bias and preconceived notions."
The only preconceived notion I hold in relation to this conversation is that "Kids are too inexperienced to form reliable, weighty opinions." That's a conclusion I reached by growing up, and seeing that I was. myself, was too inexperienced to form reliable opinions when I was 21. Jesi hasn't has the same opportunity yet.
I do not know why this is such an affront to jesi or her mother... all I'm really saying is that Jesi is just like every other kid in the world. If there's any anger that's been raised here, it's bee non the part of the OKC bunch through there defensiveness on the point of their own human fallibility... but as stated... I'm beginning to think maybe you are not human.
And you did indeed imply (just as you said I implied my education) that's loxely had not been taught tact... So make up your mind, please, regarding the weight of implication...
Finally.. if you think that either you or Jesi has displayed tact in this conversation, then put down the pipe.. and READ.
And, Joe: yes. On both counts.
Im sure there are lots of errors in this post... but I really just don't give a fuck anymore... think whatever you want... bye
Ah, such eloquence...thank you. No, really. We are all enraptured by your exquisite expression of intellectual prowess.
I thought this morning that I might wake up and finish my very long response that I started typing up yesterday, but then I realized it would be futile. Why? Because it's not fun anymore. I entered into this discussion merely for loxley. He is my uncle and I value his opinion. Apparently this uncovered a family debate that I was unaware was still working. I thought this had died some time ago. Regardless, he knows very little about my true character and experience. It has been years since I've seen him or had any significant conversation with him. This is not an insult to him, just a matter of fact. Reading this blog is hardly a representation of my achievements and experience. I finally understood his argument to be that if I protray myself in my public life as I do on this blog, I will have some trouble. He's absolutely true! I consider my blog to be a private way for me to discuss controversial thoughts circling in my head with very little consequence to my reputation. When I first started this blog, I stated that I was frustrated with my writing because I spent so much time editing and re-editing that it was not longer fun. I needed a place where I could be less serious. The vast majority of my readers are my friends and family who are quite familiar with my qualifications to speak on each subject. I don't go into great detail, because they do not wish to read all of that. Brevity is a beautiful thing.
I'll conclude my comments with a couple of statements:
You have assumed that I do not have the experience to judge how a mayor should behave. But, sam, I don't think we know each other personally. So, from what I can tell, your only knowledge of my true experience is: age. But does age really say much? It may make the probability of lack of knowledge, but every person has individual experience and you have no idea what my experience is. My opinion, as I said before, is based on political history (the actions of former elected officials in similar circumstances), public opinion (which is available from every major news source), and public information (which came to me through news source, and I partially quoted from Tim Russert). All of this points to the mayor having at least questionable behavior, if not suggesting that he's acted in moronic ways.
You claim I've present no evidence, but if you had read carefully, you would have seen that I had. But it does not matter. You have not provided me with what you expect me to know in order to make a valid argument, which is very convenient. If you never set a standard, I can never fulfill your demands. I will always fall short.
And perhaps that's for the best. Even if I could provide evidence that I'm qualified, why should you believe me? You still don't know me; you still don't know if I'm lying. For the strangers who happen across my blog, I only ask that they consider the idea for themselves. I am not going to convince you.
I will give you one point, though: I am very unfamiliar with academic failure... Because I've never failed. I've made mistakes, I've misunderstood things shortly, but every in every major aspect of my academic career, I've succeeded with flying colors! (I've discussed this previously) Yet, what does that say about my mother's success in teaching me? You claim that she has not taught me to hold my tongue, but I merely do not hold my tongue on my blog. Would I be so successful in college if I did not know how to do this?
You also presume to know the sexual nature of my relationship with my boyfriend. I will not get into it, because it is none of your business. However, I will say your interpretation will amuse him immensely.
And finally, I really don't think anyone here is truly angry, save for maybe loxley's comments about his mother. ("If I ever see or hear you even pretend, ever again, to contemplate the possibility that you are on the same level as my mother - I will personally come to OKC, we can meet over dinner, speak like civilized adults and we'll close this let's be enemies for life deal in person. " Sorry, dear, but those words cannot be used without emotion. Or, at least, if you wanted to give the impression of emotionlessness, you should have changed the way you addressed yourself.) We're impassioned, to be sure. (Don't claim you're not impassion. If you weren't, you wouldn't keep coming back.) I was affronted originally when my uncle callled me "just a punk kid from Oklahoma," because I thought it was genuinely unkind. I do not think I deserve such an insult. But, since then, I've been affected very little by what has been said. I don't know you, sam, and I have no reason to think that I should care about your opinion at all. I will seriously stand your arguments against my own reason, but I see no reason why I should seriously consider any of your contempt. I know I believe I am fallible. But I do not rescind my beliefs simply because a stranger claims I am too young to know anything. And if you wanted me to, you should have found a more sophisticated way of communicating your ideas than the crass collection of thoughts you threw together in your last post.
It seems you are the one who is taking this to heart, because you seem to think that we have not used tact. When I read your statements, I do not assume you are trying to be mean. I assume you are trying to be kind, but failing miserably. It's a much easier way to live.
Finally, I wuld like to discourage my uncle from ceasing discussions with his niece. I would advise him against making assumptions about my character considering the limited knowledge of my life, but he is an intelligent man, and I have no doubt that he can. I've enjoyed his presense on my blog, despite disagreements.
"Ah, such eloquence...thank you. No, really. We are all enraptured by your exquisite expression of intellectual prowess."
Who's bristling now? But I'm glad you finally understood something.
Here's something I doubt you've heard in a long time: shhh.
Jesi --
"Even if I could provide evidence that I'm qualified, why should you believe me? You still don't know me; you still don't know if I'm lying."
I think this is a question that has to be asked every-time an opinion is expressed.. I think t his entire time I've been asking you to tell me these exact things... that's exactly what builds an argument... The answers really don't matter in a forum like this. It's about the exploration... and for that I say "good for you."
I have to say.. you handle yourself far, far better than your mother.
Finally... Who said I was a stranger?
Sam and Loxley,
I am not sure when or why this ceased being in good fun. I never blogged in malice. I never picked up a battle weapon - I have never done so toward you in your lives - but I symbolically lay one down. If there are issues unknown to me or your brother, air them in another forum but please don't deprive my daughter or the readers of this blog of your insight. Again, no malice or sarcasm. I in no way intended to besmirch your character and consider myself no one's enemy. I've always taught my children to preserve the relationship in the midst of an argument. I will take my own advice.
Post a Comment
<< Home