I’m sorry my comment didn’t meet your standards. I’m tired of reading the same intellectually vapid nonsense every day. “Why can’t these evil/ignorant/despicable fools just see the world the way I see it!?” You treat them the same way they treat us and expect them to have some kind of coming-to-jesus moment as a result. IMO, thinking this way requires the same level of cognitive dissonance as being a Trumpster. You need to read the room and see that your method doesn’t solve the problem you want it to solve. It exacerbates it. Instead of crying out to the world, wishing everyone else would do the hard work of expanding their understanding of political theory, history, and philosophy, maybe do that work yourself first.
Can you look beyond the harshness in the tone of my paragraph and take the constructive criticism I’m offering? This is what you’re asking them to do.
It’s weird. You’re asking me to accept constructive criticism, but a) you’re not offering any and b) you’re continuing with the ad hominem, and failing to offer an actual position despite it being very constructive feedback to your argument. You’re calling it “intellectually vapid nonsense” but you’re only offering logical fallacies. You’re just noise and hypocrisy.
My “understanding of political theory, history and philosophy” is backed by a career in the DC and NYC political sphere, including the White House, several campaigns, and extensive work with NPOs/NGOs. I’ve met and worked with 5 US Presidents, and more than 230 congresscritters on both sides of the aisle, and have personal commendations from the CEO, COO, and CTO of the USA so I feel pretty confident that I’ve got a well developed perspective. You’ve seen my work. So please enlighten me.
If you’ll notice in the previous postings, I was able to disagree with others while accepting their positions and without belittling them. Every assertion you’re making now is disproved before you even typed it, so I’m not sure why you’re rattling your cage. If you want to be a part of the discussion, and wish to bring about new information, I’m amenable to change my position, but your post is really just finger wagging and more of “NUH UH!!”.
I’m sorry my comment didn’t meet your standards. I’m tired of reading the same intellectually vapid nonsense every day.
Did you seriously type this passive aggressive nonsense and put it into the world? Do you hear yourself? Do better.
It’s actually not something I really knew about before, the WH gig, but these are actual positions that help to advise the President on specific matters related to their specialties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Technology_Officer_of_the_United_States (I can’t seem to find the others right now, but if I do, I’ll post them). I did some work on the Open Data Initiative that took it from policy to practical, and received some official recognition for it.
I’m sorry my comment didn’t meet your standards. I’m tired of reading the same intellectually vapid nonsense every day. “Why can’t these evil/ignorant/despicable fools just see the world the way I see it!?” You treat them the same way they treat us and expect them to have some kind of coming-to-jesus moment as a result. IMO, thinking this way requires the same level of cognitive dissonance as being a Trumpster. You need to read the room and see that your method doesn’t solve the problem you want it to solve. It exacerbates it. Instead of crying out to the world, wishing everyone else would do the hard work of expanding their understanding of political theory, history, and philosophy, maybe do that work yourself first.
Can you look beyond the harshness in the tone of my paragraph and take the constructive criticism I’m offering? This is what you’re asking them to do.
It’s weird. You’re asking me to accept constructive criticism, but a) you’re not offering any and b) you’re continuing with the ad hominem, and failing to offer an actual position despite it being very constructive feedback to your argument. You’re calling it “intellectually vapid nonsense” but you’re only offering logical fallacies. You’re just noise and hypocrisy.
My “understanding of political theory, history and philosophy” is backed by a career in the DC and NYC political sphere, including the White House, several campaigns, and extensive work with NPOs/NGOs. I’ve met and worked with 5 US Presidents, and more than 230 congresscritters on both sides of the aisle, and have personal commendations from the CEO, COO, and CTO of the USA so I feel pretty confident that I’ve got a well developed perspective. You’ve seen my work. So please enlighten me.
If you’ll notice in the previous postings, I was able to disagree with others while accepting their positions and without belittling them. Every assertion you’re making now is disproved before you even typed it, so I’m not sure why you’re rattling your cage. If you want to be a part of the discussion, and wish to bring about new information, I’m amenable to change my position, but your post is really just finger wagging and more of “NUH UH!!”.
Did you seriously type this passive aggressive nonsense and put it into the world? Do you hear yourself? Do better.
deleted by creator
It’s actually not something I really knew about before, the WH gig, but these are actual positions that help to advise the President on specific matters related to their specialties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Technology_Officer_of_the_United_States (I can’t seem to find the others right now, but if I do, I’ll post them). I did some work on the Open Data Initiative that took it from policy to practical, and received some official recognition for it.
deleted by creator