Sharp as a Marble - The Attacks Begin

<< Slow Cooked Spaghetti Sauce | Home | Respect In Peace, Rodney >>

The Attacks Begin

Politics , Views

An email from my boss (one of many):

Challenger says more than 724-thousand job cuts have been announced so far this year.
At the same time, employers revealed only 16-thousand new job openings, according to the Challenger report.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6183320/

Let's hear the spin on this one :}

Then, when I counter with a few articles that I've read to the contrary, it's all about how I'm ignoring the facts. I can't win. Granted my boss is actually cool about it, we both get a little emotional then agree that these conversations are better over beer. But he honestly believes that Bush & Co. fired all the CIA guys who dared question them about the Iraq war so that the top 1% could get rich off of tax cuts. How do you argue with someone like that?

I don't want hard feelings. I don't want arguments. And I really don't want this type of pressure at work. I'm not trying to claim Bush walks on water and that his farts meet EPA standards for hospital grade oxygen, I'm trying to show that the man and his cabinet are not responsible for all the world's ills and that focusing on him as a sole source of evil is unhealthy.

Sigh... I want to live in a bubble. I really do. I want to forget I know anything and go back to the days where it was all sunshine and happy thoughts. I want to erase those planes crashing into the WTC. I want that field unmarred by the wreckage of that flight. I want the Pentagon to not have a new coat of paint on one side. I want the world to still think of America as the bastion of freedom and not the harbinger of the end of the world.

But I can't. Pandora's box has been open and the lid lost.

So now, I try desperately to find some sort of meaning in everything that happens around me. I want to make sure we, as Americans, are doing everything in our power to protect ourselves. I realize Iraq was a risky strategy. I'd like to believe that nothing nefarious was involved in the planning, but I doubt it. But I still believe that for the most part, we were in the right to go in there and that someone, somewhere has a true plan of what is going on (or at least has the vision and ability to adapt).

I don't believe that Kerry will help. Maybe his being president simply gives the perception of prosperity and that's what causes the economy to jump, but the appearance of being weak in the face of terrorism assures us more attacks. Notice I said more. I still expect attacks anyway, I just think a passive / reactive stance invites even more.

What really boggles my mind is that my boss has such distrust for the government yet feels the appropriate response to fix it is to add more Democrat controlled government. I'd like to see less government, regardless of political party.

Oh well. 4:00 can't come soon enough. At least I have my family to go home to for comfort.

posted @ 10/5/2004 1:12:00 PM

Comments

Josh says:

on 10/6/2004 8:38:00 AM

" I'd like to see less government, regardless of political party."

Exactly, and well put. I don't see how adding more social programs or expanding the current ones will benefit anyone except politicians. Until they can prove to me that they aren't going to waste the funds, then I can't support adding more funds to any government social program or any government entity. Throwing billions of dollars or more people at a problem isn't going to fix the problem, until they realize that there is a problem.

Lysander says:

on 10/6/2004 2:31:00 PM

Actually, part of his argument you can rebut by apparently agreeing with. Ask him if he knew that over fourteen million square feet of office space had been lost since President Bush was elected (or, to tweak it further, "since the US Supreme court took action in December 2000.") depending on how you work that in to your argument, he'll be ready for the sucker-punch. Those 14 million sq ft of office space? That was Nos. 1, 2, and 7 WTC in New York (http://www.globalsecurity.org/eye/wtc.htm). It really sounds like he forgot about September Eleventh. Then again, when the BDS takes over, most logical thought goes right out the window.

Lysander

cooper says:

on 10/6/2004 3:16:00 PM

The only solice I find in these types of encounters is when I whisper to myself: "How will they explain being so far off track from the rest of the nation when this thing is all over." I am confident that the incumbent will prevail. Not just prevail, but triumph.

Bryant says:

on 10/5/2004 3:52:00 PM

"When we want to correct someone usefully and show him he is wrong, we must see from what point of view he is approaching the matter, for it is usually right from that point of view, and we must admit this, but show him the point of view from which it is wrong. This will please him, because he will see that he was not wrong but merely failed to see every aspect of the question." - Pascal

I think Pascal has a good point and I think the idea he presents can be helpful in these political "debates".

The first thing that has helped me in "debating" people was learning that I didn't need to respond or rebut every point. In fact, when someone sent me something like you were sent it worked much better when I would respond with something like "interesting.. I have to take a look at this" and then leave it at that for the time being and then look at it again when I didn't feel like I was under some kind of pressure to rebut the argument (and I wasn't feeling emotional about it). My general feeling about these kinds of attacks is that the more your try to tell someone they are wrong, the more they will dig into their position and the more they will attack back with everything they have. However, if you allow them to make their point and accept it then they will tend to open up to you.

I think the reason is that most people are insecure in their ideas and the more insecure they are the more vigorously they will attack people who disagree with them. When you let them make their point and don't bash them for it then they will start to trust you even though you disagree with them. This puts you in a position where you actually have a chance to change their views. This will only happen if they trust you enough and seek you out to find out what you believe and why. The only time they will accept your arguments is when they ask for them.

The other things that have helped me are to not take attacks on my views personally, accept the fact that some of my views are probably incorrect or skewed to some degree, and above all, it isn't my job to change other peoples views: that will happen when they are ready to have them changed.

So take a page from Pascal and don't try to change what your boss believes, but find out why he believes it. Only when you understand the why will you be able to address the what (and even then you might not be able to, but you'll have a better understanding of it at least).

That was quite a ramble, but hopefully it will help you in your "debates". I know they aren't always fun.

BTW - I'm hoping to try out your recipe this weekend. It looks like a good one. :)

Comments have been closed on this topic.

Comments

Archives

Categories

Comments

Archives

Categories

Second Amendment

Sharpest Marbles

Blogroll

Funny, as in Ha-ha

Good Reads

Extended Blogroll

Industry Links