Political Correctness and Ft Hood Tragedy

[RonD1120 58]

Reports are indicating that political correctness was a prime factor in the Ft Hood murders.

Quote

In Hasan Case, Superiors Ignored Their Worries

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582732,00.html

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Andy9o8 0]

Old news. It's already long since been reported and debated. It's a short attention span world.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Old news. It's already long since been reported and debated. It's a short attention span world.

It's good to keep the message alive until the wussification of America has been reversed through the abolition of progressive liberalism and the socialist agenda.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Old news. It's already long since been reported and debated. It's a short attention span world.

It's good to keep the message alive until the wussification of America has been reversed through the abolition of progressive liberalism and the socialist agenda.

Amen

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Old news. It's already long since been reported and debated. It's a short attention span world.

It's good to keep the message alive until the wussification of America has been reversed through the abolition of progressive liberalism and the socialist agenda.

Amen

Oh; well in that case, Clinton got a blow job.

[wmw999 2,168]

Quote

abolition of progressive liberalism and the socialist agenda

And how do you propose to abolish them? Would that be by making them illegal?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Quote

abolition of progressive liberalism and the socialist agenda

And how do you propose to abolish them? Would that be by making them illegal?

Wendy P.

Too many laws already. I prefer to abolish incorrect thinking and behavior by promoting the benefits of successful living through the liberty of expressing the freedom of individual spirit. In other words, liberty is the freedom to do what is right. It is not the right to do wrong. Not an original thought but a meaningful one none the less.

Progressive liberals and their socialistic agenda is movement for power and control by elitists. I'm just an ol' country boy at heart.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

abolition of progressive liberalism and the socialist agenda

And how do you propose to abolish them? Would that be by making them illegal?

Wendy P.

I would think some of them would prefer the Central American solutions of the late 1970's and the 1980's, although in the long run that proved rather futile. The right wing death squads did manage to kill many thousands of percieved socialists though and there were some very sadistic torturers who plied their trade. The last administrations efforts certainly set the wheels in motion towards that end. They were the ones who provided the training of the central and south american men at the School of the America's who went home and for god and country, turned over every rock in their countries looking for commies. If they thought they found some.. they dissappeared into unmarked graves by the thousands.

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

...liberty is the freedom to do what is right.

And you, of course, will be the one defining what is "right".

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

...liberty is the freedom to do what is right.

And you, of course, will be the one defining what is "right".

Don

You got that right... God has a plan.. and has shared it with certain people.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Quote

...liberty is the freedom to do what is right.

And you, of course, will be the one defining what is "right".

Don

Nope, not me. See Post #10.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Quote

Quote

...liberty is the freedom to do what is right.

And you, of course, will be the one defining what is "right".

Don

You got that right... God has a plan.. and has shared it with certain people.

Actually, He has made it known to all. Some choose not to accept the plan.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

...liberty is the freedom to do what is right.

And you, of course, will be the one defining what is "right".

Don

You got that right... God has a plan.. and has shared it with certain people.

With Bill Cole, that one is for sure.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[wmw999 2,168]

So you're saying that you'd prefer the US to be a Christian theocracy? Obviously not everyone would have to be a Christian, they'd just have to adhere to whichever laws in the Bible were enforced by the sect in charge. Because a government can enforce behavior, not belief. Look at how well enforcing belief has worked for totalitarian governments.

Some sects won't allow women leading men. Some sects are OK with that. Some sects enforce some of the Leviticus laws; others say that they are of the Old Testament. Some sects celebrate Sunday as the sabbath, others Saturday.

Since these kinds of rules would have a huge impact on how people lived, there'd have to be a specific set chosen; ergo, a sect-in-charge. Is there a single right one?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Progressive liberals and their socialistic agenda is movement for power and control by elitists.

Pssst... hate to break it to you, but you've just defined fascism.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Progressive liberals and their socialistic agenda is movement for power and control by elitists.

Pssst... hate to break it to you, but you've just defined fascism.

So you do understand what you are supporting

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,168]

Do you have an answer to my post? I'm honestly curious if there is one besides "people should just do what I think is right."

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Do you have an answer to my post? I'm honestly curious if there is one besides "people should just do what I think is right."

Wendy P.

Been crazy and I have been ill Wendy
I am not sure what you are asking

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,168]

My post wasn't replying to you, but to Ron. However, since you agreed with him, I'm hoping you can take a look.

About 3 posts up, trying to figure out how a theocracy would work. Because it would take a theocracy to use Christian values and the Bible as laws.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

My post wasn't replying to you, but to Ron. However, since you agreed with him, I'm hoping you can take a look.

About 3 posts up, trying to figure out how a theocracy would work. Because it would take a theocracy to use Christian values and the Bible as laws.

Wendy P.

For the most part we live with laws that came from or agree to Christian values. Generally, not specifically. So I guess I dont agree with the premise that it would take a theocracy to begin with.

We have been for many years moving away from being responsible for ourselves and our own actions. This, again, IMO, moves us away from Christian values. Current laws being debated support that IMO.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[nerdgirl 0]

I find the invocation of the PC argument w/r/t the Fort Hood shooting to be interesting and speculate that it is partially a distracter. A politically popular one to blame, yes. But a small, if not very small, factor, imo.

My strong speculation is the reason that Hasan was not removed from Army has much, much, much more to do with the shortage of physicians in the US Army, especially psychiatrists. “Political Correctness” is, imo, being used as something of a distracter to shift attention from recruitment and retention problems. And they aren’t new or exclusively due to the OIF/Iraq War. OIF/Iraq (in particular) & OEF/Afghanistan has exacerbated them, however.

I agree w/LTG Schoomaker’s, who I respect tremendously – served on a review board (Biomedical TARA for the DoD-acronym-inclined ) with him when he was 1-star, comments in that Stars and Stripes piece, in principle. Between the op tempo and overwhelming work schedule, it isn’t that someone issued a memo ... it’s that given that context and the environment, it makes it less difficult to ignore problems because, among a whole number of other things, focusing on them means the already overburdened folks left have more work to do. Dealing with the shortage of psychiatrists and other trained medical specialties is, in many ways, a more difficult problem than blaming “politcal correctness”; it’s also more systematic in repercussions, which makes it a tougher problem.

I don’t know the total long-term solution. One piece, which I’ve advocated previously, I want military service to be seen as a first choice option for more. I want ROTC and Jr ROTC in San Francisco, Santa Monica, Austin, Evanston, Boulder, Ann Arbor, Madison, etc. One of the reasons for the origin of the draft in early 20th century US was a concern that the ‘best & brightest’ would join the military and be killed in WWI.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[wmw999 2,168]

When you're dealing with laws you have to get specific, because of the way that people are.

Which Christian values support the three branches of government? How about the freedom of the press, and the other rights in the Bill of Rights?

I don't really see Christian values in them. They (Bill of Rights and Constitution) are the framework for an organized society to function. The Bible is more of a book to be used for individual behavior, and even then you have to decide which pieces to work on -- getting back to that whole Leviticus thing.

What I'm saying is that there's a difference between laws and mores (societal norms etc). And unless we want to go away from some of the freedoms enumerated in the Constitution, we have to accept that people are going to behave in legal ways that make us uncomfortable.

Part of a free society is a willingness to be uncomfortable, and to study if the source of that discomfort is a problem, of if instead our discomfort is the problem.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[wmw999 2,168]

Quote

I don’t know the total long-term solution. One piece, which I’ve advocated previously, I want military service to be seen as a first choice option for more.

Unfortunately, that will take a change in how we view the accumulation of money to some degree.

Right now being rich is the best determinant of success for a very large number of people. Until that changes, people will seek what they think will make them rich, or what's close and convenient. Making ROTC more available helps with the second, but the first is more of a problem.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

When you're dealing with laws you have to get specific, because of the way that people are.

Which Christian values support the three branches of government? How about the freedom of the press, and the other rights in the Bill of Rights?

I don't really see Christian values in them. They (Bill of Rights and Constitution) are the framework for an organized society to function. The Bible is more of a book to be used for individual behavior, and even then you have to decide which pieces to work on -- getting back to that whole Leviticus thing.

What I'm saying is that there's a difference between laws and mores (societal norms etc). And unless we want to go away from some of the freedoms enumerated in the Constitution, we have to accept that people are going to behave in legal ways that make us uncomfortable.

Part of a free society is a willingness to be uncomfortable, and to study if the source of that discomfort is a problem, of if instead our discomfort is the problem.

Wendy P.

I was never considering going back that far.
we have the current constitution and I feel it and the bill of rights fit in well.

And I agree with your statement about the laws and social norms. I feel it is the smaller liberal side of the society that has been pushing change. and not for the better

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,168]

Which change is bad? Is it the pace of change, or just change in general? How about the things that didn't work so well for you -- should they change?

I'm asking because I remember something my father told me once. He grew up in Connecticut, and his high school was integrated -- there were 6 blacks in his senior class, including the class president. There a lot of Jews, too (that was integrated for the 1930's).

He served as an officer in WW2 on a floating drydock, so he had management etc. He told me that his thoughts at the time on the integration of the armed forces was that it was too sudden, a slower path should be taken. He thought that the early civil rights marches were trying to bite off too much, too quickly.

But then once he got to the 1960's (he was a college professor), and was working with a group of Black business men, he said he began to understand just how badly those things were needed, and how it wasn't too fast. That most of those men had lost the first half of their adult lives and productivity to prejudice (and this was Ohio), and they didn't have the skills basis or support structure to give their kids what many, many other kids had as a matter of course.

Which of those men do you think didn't need those rights? Because if it had waited another 20-30 years, most of them would have been old men by the time they were able to vote consistently, eat in restaurants and stay in hotels across the country.

Change that encourages people to work and live in the US, within the framework of the Constitution, even if not exactly the same way that we might think is best, is exactly the change that we need.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)