Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

[Cool Breeze]

Bob, you've become irrelevant. It's not worth engaging with people who promoted racism (DEI) via law, lawfare, and all the other things you just got smacked down for. We're moving on, while you still complain - and even dig deeper on all of your revolutionary concepts, which are failed and from the evil one.

Too bad. You're not worth our time.

I am for drug enforcement. Are you for illegal drugs? I am not sure what you mean by lawfare. Welfare? Helping out those in need? If so it can be overdone, but policies are set by Congress. I don't see where I promoted it increasing. Well, I have supported the sanctuary cities.

I don't see independence, equality, and containment as revolutionary concepts coming from the evil one. My brief summary of the S&H cyclical history theory is that every four score and seven years there comes a new birth of freedom. The ideas of the original Declaration of Independence as reprised and expanded at Gettysburg are proper and worth continuing. The more perfect union is worth striving for. Countering the American Revolutionary ideas through bigotry, using government to enforce religious doctrine, exaggerating profits and influence of the elites and supporting autocratic invasion are abhorrent.

I can agree that participating in this site in increasingly a waste of time. John barely posts anymore. Neither do most. The concepts promoted have faded. We''ll see.

They previously lumped me with you, if you noticed, which was funny to me - you annoyed them, and they hated me for being able to see things they can't.

That's the difference. You do nothing in terms of prediction, and you can't see things either. You just complain.

Notice that most do that around here.

[Bob Butler]

They previously lumped me with you, if you noticed, which was funny to me - you annoyed them, and they hated me for being able to see things they can't.

That's the difference. You do nothing in terms of prediction, and you can't see things either. You just complain.

Notice that most do that around here.

Crises solve the worst problem confronting a crisis. As such, they are inherently progressive. Flaws are being removed. Pointing out that conservatives advocate continuing the flaws is annoying.

Predictions? China talks aggressively but hasn’t done much of late. Speak loudly and carry a small stick. Putin seems headed for a negotiated settlement echoing the end of WW II which John recently mentioned. Trump sounds aggressive in opposing Hamas which is troublesome for overall Middle East settlement, but we have not seen precisely what he has in mind yet. I can see Trump pardoning everyone in sight while pretending that pardons were once considered admissions of guilt. The justice system is being weaponized, used to punish one’s political opponents, but to date this has been more effective if the opponents habitually flaunt the law.

But, yes. Nobody’s ideas are being followed entirely. Expressing one’s ideas can be interpreted as complaining if you think that way.

[Cool Breeze]

The flaw is that dysgenics produces people who promote your view.

You love lies rather than the Lord our God. This explains all of your posts.

[Bob Butler]

The flaw is that dysgenics produces people who promote your view.

I hadn't bumped into dysgenics. A quick visit to Wiki dismissed the theory.

Despite these concerns, genetic studies have shown no evidence for dysgenic effects in human populations. Reviewing Lynn's book, the scholar John R. Wilmoth notes: "Overall, the most puzzling aspect of Lynn's alarmist position is that the deterioration of average intelligence predicted by the eugenicists has not occurred.

***

You love lies rather than the Lord our God. This explains all of your posts.

The religious christian concept of love thy neighbor and the secular liberal thrust of helping the working man are each the similar values of the dominant ethos of their times. This is opposed by the conservative oppression of minorities, or Generational Dynamics featured instinct to hate, oppress and kill those that are different. That comes closer to explaining the thrust of this site, why John was rejected by many in the Cambridge environment. The conservative ethos is directly opposed to loving one's neighbor, helping those in need. Under conservative ethics, one divides us from them and [expletive deleted] them. That does indeed explain a great many of my posts.

Again, repeatedly attacking me is not a good way to make me go away, especially as your approaches are generally so bogus.

[Cool Breeze]

My approaches are accurate. You can't even define the word "love" let alone a lot of the other terms you use, typical of leftism which has distorted your mind and soul. I'm not inclined to interact with people who don't repent and accuse others of evil. But that's what defines your father, so I already know why that's the case with you.

Goodbye.

[Bob Butler]

My approaches are accurate. You can't even define the word "love" let alone a lot of the other terms you use, typical of leftism which has distorted your mind and soul. I'm not inclined to interact with people who don't repent and accuse others of evil. But that's what defines your father, so I already know why that's the case with you.

Goodbye.

I'm not inclined to believe your approaches accurate. I'd take Wiki first. The problem is conservative 'facts' are often from strange places' Russian propaganda, Fox telling people what the want to hear, conspiracy theories, Trump's habitual lies. Well, you've got another four years of Trump. We'll see if that cures you,

I called up the Apple dictionary for a definition of love. I expected a succinct paragraph that could be quoted. What I ended up with was a multi page essay which included. how different cultures interpreted what the behavioral scientists call bonding. You are likely used to the Greek distinction between eros and agape, but apparently every culture looks at the human need to work together a bit differently.

One thing I noted was that love and hate have an odd pairing. If one group hates a minority that implies the hating group exists. Us and them. As John emphasized, people hate, oppress and kill the different. In order for someone to be different, there has to be someone they are different from. There is love of some degree among the haters.

It is conservative's nature to wish to preserve the established culture. Those that are different, as John made explicit, are hated, oppressed and killed. When you look at various issues, you see this: sanctuary cities, various groups with different racial, culturel, sexual or political norms. The opposition liberals follow the revolutionary idea that all men are created equal. To a liberal, a way should be found to coexist. We are all one. Love.

I'd rather avoid trying to use love as a club. I'd rather use the behavioral scientist's word of bond. Basically they are the same. Males and females bond. Parents and their kids bond. Groups of people living together bond. The choice is whether you include other groups under these and similar categories, or perceive them as different with the hatred that results. I'd still claim that the liberals are inclusive, the conservatives exclusive. It matter not whether you use word 'bond' or 'love'.

Anyway, goodbye.

[Tom Mazanec]

Bob, since you allow rights only on the basis of using language, would you be in favor of postnatal abortion till the toddler developes speech?

[Bob Butler]

Bob, since you allow rights only on the basis of using language, would you be in favor of postnatal abortion till the toddler developes speech?

Not really.

I have been waiting for someone to define sentience as other than language, but no one has. Language as sentience does seem to be a way to justify killing everything but humans. There is no other scientifically justifiable property that seems to fit at all, and I would propose that one cannot justify killing sentients (save with the plausible war or extreme criminal excuses which do not apply to a fetus). Still, out of an intuitive gut feel that I can't justify, I'm generally going with the common end of the second trimester line.

This has often been stated before.

[Bob Butler]

John and I were never on the same page. As early as the Nashville T4T meeting I had crises as progressive. The largest flaws in the culture were removed. John put a different emphasis on this. The different would be hated, oppressed and killed. Somehow, these two ideas came together. The faction which wanted to remove a flaw was different than the faction that did not. The desire to fix a perceived problem confronted a desire to remain the same.

He was good though at understanding and describing the attitude towards the different.