from Con
Money does not equal Character and lack of money does not equal lack of Character.
And I am arguing that such an assumption alone completely ignores about 10 other equally important factors. These factors are always conveniently ignored by those who argue that being poor is self-inflicted and deem themselves somehow as ‘more than equal’ to the poor – after all, how could they otherwise so easily sit in judgment of the poor. These same people would never suffer any other American to sit in judgment on them, would argue that no one has the right to judge me!’, yet talk out the other side of their mouth when it comes to the poor.
There are equal numbers and percentages of middle class people who ALSO lack “native intelligence, self discipline, and a good work ethic”. Why are they not poor? If you cannot see that and then answer that, this discussion will have zero affect and I would suggest you really examine that middle class and challenge yourself to determine if there truly is that huge difference in the CHARACTER of the people.
It is the worst kind of self-serving fallacy and sophistry to FIRST judge the people and THEN find all manner of support for that judgement and accompanying conclusions about how they are responsible for their lot in life. Why is it that only the poor are singled out for such judgment? That begs far more questions than ‘what right does one American have to judge another merely because that other is poor’?
When is the last time such harsh and mean-spirited judgments were made wholesale about the middle class? Yet the middle class is made up of many people whose character, behavior, attributes and tendencies are identical to those condemned in the poor. There are plenty of people in the middle class whose character may be lacking and whose behavior may be identical to that which you find so blameworthy in the poor, but they get a complete pass and are not touched by this judgment and condemnation. Why is that?
If you argue that one main reason is they do not cost society as much as the poor do, then again I have to suggest that you are willfully blind to (or haven’t yet learned) facts and factors that are always ignored, but do negatively affect and cost society at least as much and often more than the same when found in the poor. The poor are without power or influence; they have been stripped of them, in large part, by the judgements and condemnation of the non-poor. So negative attributes in the poor actually affect society LESS because their influence is less.
The bottom line is that the poor cannot be summed up in a Slogan; they are not one-dimensional and are not all the same, any more than all American are the same and are one-dimensional. Arguments that the poor are unique in one degree or another while other groups in society are not are fallacious arguments which, taken to their conclusion, are always found to ignore several sometimes complex issues that must be taken into account in any intelligent and comprehensive discussion of these groups.
Individuals from all socio-economic groups in America are absolutely responsible for their behavior, but I cannot abide the attitude by those who “are born on Third Base, but believe that they hit a Triple” and then use their vantage point on Third to judge those who haven’t made it that far, have fouled out or struck out. Money does not equal Character and lack of money does not equal lack of Character.
As one who has interacted with very successful Venture Capitalists, business men, high powered lawyers, academic faculty, academic scientists, clergy, politicians, nobel prize winners, actors, writers, my own children, and more, I am in complete agreement with Con.
Unfortunately, I also feel that Character is missing in politics, especially on our local Town Boards (but not all of these people), but these people are doubly disappointing in that they are not either wealthy or poor (except for Hans Frankhouser who hasn’t paid his property taxes). Some like Neumann tried to use their office to protect their business. Look at our past 1st Selectmen in Neumann, Wetzel, Very, and Wholean; and current members of the Board of Education in Rosendahl, Musameci, and Walker, and then the school system litigants, Shultz and Powers.
I had the pleasure of meeting Chris Murphy this morning in Thompson. He will hopefully be Connecticut’s Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate. While its always hard to tell, on first impression this guy seemed to have a lot of character. Of course he doesn’t have the headbutt drop of Linda McMahon-or her $$- but he seems to have the sincerity, the intelligence, and the progressive pragmatism to make Ct. proud. I’m supporting him and I hope other Cafer’s will too once they learn a little more about him.
Con-
I quote from you:
“There are equal numbers and percentages of middle class people who ALSO lack “native intelligence, self discipline, and a good work ethic”. ”
Really? The smart, disciplined and hard working are equally represented among the poor and not poor?
It can be labeled character, or personal responsibility, but for example do I judge people who get pregnant as teenagers? Yes, I do, and doubly those who do it again.
LibDem,
How do you (personally) define “progressive pragmatism”? Do you consider the Obama Administration to be a good example of progressive pragmatism?
NC-Yes. Absolutely. Good question.
Reading the comments of progressives makes me laugh. Sometimes you have to be hungry tired Nd cold to motivate yourself. Your thought has ruined a generation with your everybody gets a trophy and no failing grades. Now we have the result of your programming in the occupy movement. It becomes obvious why you hate the Superbowl because today someone will be crowned as the best. Your pandering to the poor keeps them poor, telling a drunk , drug addict, criminal etc.. That it is not their fault contributes to future bad behavior. The worst type of racism is your type; telling minorities that they are of capable of providing for themselves and that the good socialists will make progra
S from the benefits of others labors to provide for them.
Yes Mary. We are coming for your money so that we can give all away to the poor. You better take it out of the bank and put it in a very very safe spot. We have your IP address and know who you are. And while you are at it, dig a very deep shelter in your backyard and begin stockpiling food, guns, and bibles. The Marxist Revolution is coming and all of the illegal immigrants and dark-skinned people are going to come after you.
Oh, and Mary, watch out for the gays too.
lib dem is expressing lots of hate, not unlike three great progressives ; Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Reading your lefty blogs and following occupy chats , I would like to inform those that do not know that the progressives have their own ” crystal night ” planned for May 1 st. They carefully selected Mayday as the start of the new American
Communist revolution. All the unions are having a one day national strike and the occupiers have been openly bragging about burning churches, synagogues, and wealthy peoples homes. For a group that expresses tolerance they prefetch lots of hate.
I dunno, Mary-if someone is openly bragging of a plan to burn churches and synagogues I have missed it so far.
I wonder when was the last time that Mary went to church.
Wow – I’m in a union, and I was in a leadership position, and nobody told me about 5/1. Dang.
J k, union leadership? Find out where your union considers you, it is not leadership. Do a google search of occupy, may 1 and union. You will see that you are participating, but just haven’t been informed yet
Mary,
You have so very many buried (and incorrect) assumptions and jump to so many conclusions that you don’t seem to even realize that your comments do not accurately reflect the specific comments you poke at. Where in any of my comments did I say any of those silly assertions you make or support any of the conclusions to which you seem so willing to jump?
You have your own set-in-stone opinion of who others are and what they believe that I have to ask you again: Are you a Mind Reader? If not, then you have NO WAY to know what I believe unless I have written in expressly.
Shall we apply your standard of thinking and assumptions to you? Shall we conclude that because you say X, you MUST also believe A, B and C? That is intellectually dishonest and is transparent: You have already jumped to your extreme and incorrect assumptions and conclusions and merely search for any scrap to which you can point and say ‘See? That person is a commie, socialist, muslim, arab commie!’
It’s completely unfounded to assume you know what a person thinks or believes unless they have actually said it. Though convenient for you, in Reality the world is not made up of human beings you can simply sum up in a biased, contemptuoius Slogan.
Have you noticed that in all the comments I made to you, not only do I ask challenging questions (rather than ASSume and jump to conclusions), but I refrain from asserting that ‘Mary must be an X!’ (insert pejorative, one-dimensional label).
Is America truly made up of Labels, not Citizens? Are you so superior to all Citizens that you can use one method, but not others? What is the basis of your silly double-standard? What is your source of information about the occupy participants? How many have you talked to? How ‘deep’ is any of your ‘research’?
When someone jumps to incorrect, negative conclusions based on buried, negative assumptions they appear narrow-minded, angry, defensive and – most of all – a very lazy, almost brainwashed, thinker who never challenges yourself or your conclusions. You lose all credibility and intelligent people stop taking you seriously.
Mary, we have not seen a single comment of yours that did not have a string of vague Slogans defining others; that did not contain angry Hyperbole telling us that you are superior to your fellow Americans. I cannot imagine what actions you would take toward these perceived enemies of your if you were in power.
Somehow I can easily imagine you taking actions that are in total contravention to the Constitution and American values and principles and doing it all in some half-baked notion of Patriotism. Your approach to your fellow Americans are antithetical to the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Federalist Papers and fundamentally American principles of Equality and Liberty.
For example, how can you call yourself an American if you hate literally millions of fellow Americans BASED ON WHAT THEY THINK AND BELIEVE? Or, with you, I should say ‘Based on what you have invented to be what they think and believe’.
Mary, are you a Mind Reader? IF NOT, then you have no basis for many of your conclusions regarding what I think and believe and you completely misconstrue and distort what I DID say.
doubtful,
In what way did your comment refute the statement that “There are equal numbers and percentages of middle class people who ALSO lack “native intelligence, self discipline, and a good work ethic”. ?
Your comment was kind of mixed up in it’s presentation – I don’t get your argument. As far as teen pregnancies go, do you have definitive and empirical data that no middle class teens ever get pregnant? OR that if more lower class teens get pregnant than middle class (HOW MANY MORE, by the way? That makes a difference) then that means that none of the middle class lack those attributes?
Again, I am talking about these populations taken as a whole and with regard to their overall % of all factors taken together as a whole. Sure there may be more lower class teen pregnancies, but can you tell me exactly how many more and, more importantly, WHY!?! Your comment was, at best, an incomplete argument.
You do suggest that these attributes are not equal, as I claim. So what is the basis for that suggestion (or is it a firm belief)? IF you cannot point to the same kind of empirical data, studies, etc. that are necessary to prove this kind of thing in other matters, why is not necessary in this instance?
I am also talking about buried assumptions of our right and prerogative to actually judge the poor. You suggest you DO have such a prerogative with regard to teen pregnancy. To what else does it apply? And more importantly, in what specific way does it apply MORE to the poor than others (surely you admit there is teen pregnancy in all groups)?
What gives you the right to judge the poor regarding certain behavior, but NOT with regard to other groups (same behavior)? The prejudices and incorrect assumptions we already have regarding the poor not only influences how we look at them, but almost pre-determines the negative conclusions we draw about them. WHERE do these assumptions and prejudices come from? In what way are they legitimate?
Is it OK if others judge you and your behavior in the same way as the poor? Is it OK for everyone to scrutinize your behavior and latch on to anything inconsistent with our own standards, thus supporting the conclusion we bring to the table that, for example, you are lazy?
It’s not OK with me. I’m an American and no other American gets to judge me. If one group can judge another, then by definition there exists no Equality. If one group can dictate the behavior of another, there exists no Liberty. Without Equality and Liberty, where does that leave the group? Are they still ’100% True’ Americans? How can they be if they don’t posses as full a measure of Equality and Liberty as ALL Americans?
Where does your supposed prerogative to judge others end?
Actually, folks in my union can’t legally strike.
Kind of like when it was illegal for unions to call in sick for protest in Wisconsin? Or did the union have Doctor’s write out of work notes for the striking teachers? Your union will be there.
Mary, a sick out is not a strike. Most teacher contracts allow a certain number of days out sick before requiring a doctor’s note. Does your employer require you to furnish a doctor’s note after missing one day?
Mary:
Sorry, but you can’t just assume that everyone in a union acts they way you stereotype us.
I want to be careful not to come down on Mary’s side here, but the idea of public employees using their sick days to take labor action is infuriating to me and an example of what is wrong with the system.
I had not heard about this May 1st thing either. I googled it and was led straight to a socialist blog that is concerned that this 5/1/2012 strike day may not go off well because the three main planning groups are having some disagreements. According to this blog, the Occupy planners can be broken down into 3 different groups: the “hardcore” anarchists (their term, not mine), the “mainstream” anarchists (again their term), and the socialists and activists.
I had no idea that there’s such a thing as a movement of “mainstream” anarchists. Isn’t that a double entendre? That’s quite a cast of characters when the socialists are reduced and made to sound like the peons in the group – yikes!
The thing I found the most interesting is that I didn’t find these terms in a conservative blog that’s slamming the occupy movement. No, this is from a socialist blog and the tone in which these terms are being used is so matter-of-fact as though this article is discussing the letters of the alphabet. Unbelievable.
Here’s the link:
http://socialistaction.blogspot.com/2012/02/occupy-movement-debates-call-for-may-1.html
Newcomer-might be an oxymoron but not a double entendre.
I googled it as well. While it does appear some occupy groups are trying to plan this, I read no evidence that union leaders were actually on board. It seems like it’s coming only from the occupy group, not the unions themselves. I therefor think it’s a stretch to claim that all of our union leaders are planning this, Mary.
Also, I completely agree with you doubtful I am in know way advocating for a sick out, only trying to further explain to Mary what one is.