Agreements
Borrowed from the Gun Control Meme book but it applies anyway:
.................
.................
.................
ONE PARTY RULE WORKS
Tags
- congress
- dead tyrants
- agreements
- one party rule
Comments
Seth says
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/191086-harkin-calls-for-more-rule-changes .. time's a wastin' get it all now!
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/191086-harkin-calls-for-more-rule-changes .. time's a wastin' get it all now!
Seth says
A nice thought experiment from Rush on the nuclear option just passed by Reid & cohorts:
source: ... Now, folks, the simple fact is, when the majority, in any group of
people, when the majority can change the rules at any time, then there
aren't any rules. This is a point that I've been making repeatedly all
week long. (interruption) Senator who? Carl Levin said that? I didn't
even pay attention. Carl Levin voted against it. There are three
Democrats who voted against it. He was one of them, 'cause he recognizes
this is bad, and it is.
Let's forget the Senate for a minute. Let's say there are 10 people in a room and they're a group, and the room is made up of six men and four women. Okay? The group has a rule that the men cannot rape the women. The group also has a rule that says any rule that will be changed must require six votes of the 10 to change the rule. Every now and then some lunatic in the group proposes to change the rule to allow women to be raped. But they never were able to get six votes for it. There were always the four women voting against it, and they always found two guys. Well, the guy that kept proposing that women be raped finally got tired of it and he was in the majority, he was one of the men, said, "You know what, we're gonna change the rule. Now all we need is five."
And the women said, "You can't do that."
"Yes, we are. We're the majority, we're changing the rule." Then
they vote. Can the women be raped? Well, all it would take then is
half the room. You could change the rule to say three. You could change
the rule say three people want it, it's gonna happen. There's no
rule. When the majority can change the rules, there aren't any. I have
to think, if Sheets Byrd were still alive -- of course, Sheets Byrd was
senile in the old days. I don't know how he'd come down on this. But
for everything else he was, this guy, the Senate was church to him. It
was inviolate. At least for a while. But it really is a fundamental
discarding of hundreds of years of tradition, and for one reason only.
Barack Obama can't get what he wants democratically. There's no other
reason for this.
...
Seth says
seth 2013-11-23 13:07:41 16916
Well obviously there is a spectrum from no rule based behavior whatsoever on one end to absolute rule based behavior on the other end. Me i say if a rule is not working change the rule ... the idea that people can make up rules that are always going to work much later in some other context is fundamentally flawed. I'm convinced that a flexible attitude towards changing rules works better and improves chances of survival ... see plastic habits. the filibuster rule for confirming judges was obviously not working ... the senate changed the rule ... good for them ... of course the other side is going to complain.
ME 2013-11-23 08:23:17 16916
ME 2013-11-23 08:14:20 16916
seth 2013-11-23 08:03:07 16916
well his argument is fallacious on its face. a group has a rule that it needs a majority to change a rule. there is no sense in which that also means that the group has no rules.
It means that the rules are capricious (at best) & in the moment which is the same thing as no rules or the rules of a dictator:
.. a majority
dictatorship &
tyranny.
see tagroom
try harder ..
over time
there are no rules
...
see also the movie
El Topo
dictatorship &
tyranny.
see tagroom
try harder ..
over time
there are no rules
...
see also the movie
El Topo
Well obviously there is a spectrum from no rule based behavior whatsoever on one end to absolute rule based behavior on the other end. Me i say if a rule is not working change the rule ... the idea that people can make up rules that are always going to work much later in some other context is fundamentally flawed. I'm convinced that a flexible attitude towards changing rules works better and improves chances of survival ... see plastic habits. the filibuster rule for confirming judges was obviously not working ... the senate changed the rule ... good for them ... of course the other side is going to complain.
Well, lets consider what happens when the other side gets in power - maybe 2014. Maybe they will overturn the abortion privacy thingy . After all that has been a precedent for a whole lot less time than the century plus time the filibuster has been in place; reputed to have been Jefferson's idea.
See - you missed the point. It is not about a temporary power grab to give POTUS his way, but what kind of a government you want: one of laws & precedent or one of men & tyranny.
See - you missed the point. It is not about a temporary power grab to give POTUS his way, but what kind of a government you want: one of laws & precedent or one of men & tyranny.
Seth says
seth 2013-11-23 13:50:54 16916
well perhaps i did miss the point. but all i have heard so far is a side that got voted against by a legal democratic process reaching for some creative justification for their complaint about the vote. really, mark, the stuff i have heard so far is logically pretty lame ... to me, not even worth arguing against.
It is a power grab to stack the courts since the Senate is the only one who has to approve appointments. Of course the House has the purse strings & can block the money. If the left thinks they have made a coup then what next? IMHO (which is neither) polarity has just accelerated. Way to go.
Seth says
Getting something bad done or more of something bad done is not progress & should be opposed!
Seth says
Yep. I doubt that the Leviathan is much more than just a concept of yours. True , it is most likely above both our pay grades to speculate the purpose for humanity when it is at the next giant leap of evolution ... if there be evolution. Haggling on evil-good not useful here ... or there.
Seth says
seth 2013-11-25 13:57:59 16916
Well i doubt that it is just my conception that our individual actions collectively make patterns. I walk in the malls and i see almost everybody holding and playing will devices they hold in their hands and stroke in various ways. That is a pattern of behavior that has emerged out of ... er, somewhat free ... individual choices and actions.
The phenomena of gettin getting a Prius & all of a sudden you notice there are a lot of Priuses or cell-phones or Nike shoes or .... is part of the Reticular activating system - talked about here & maybe the Wikipedia:
Source: ...
Reticular activating system senses the things around us and sorts them out. There are so many things in our daily routine which are to be considered and which are not to be considered. These are categorized by the Reticular activating system.
If something good occurs in your life that is treated as positive
e.g. meeting of an old best mate whom you’ve lost contact with etc., and
similarly If you’re thinking something negative in the mind or
something bad happens in your life e.g. someone ditches you, then these
are informed to you by the Reticular activating system to make you
realize the presence of either positive or negative impact.
The best part of this part of reticular activating system is if you
really concentrate on what you want to focus then you will find that
everything is at your presence whatever you want is with you.
... my question is we know it helps with sorting by sameness so what happens when we refuse to look use it & just become present to each thing as it is in its particularity.
Seth says
An interesting dialogue indeed. It is not for me to choose this beast or specify whether it is good or evil ... that would not be for me to judge. I write its story ... er because i must ... not to inspire you ... although i do appreciate your contributions .
For me freedom is the ability to think feel and act voluntarily without force or obstruction from another. I am merely a human who does not believe that i can judge whether a immense being, orders of magnitude more powerful than myself, is benign, good or evil ... and for that same reason i do not trust the judgemet, good or evil, of any other human. I have never bought into the idea that the purpose of my freedom is merly to "transform evil to good" ... for were that the case, then it is not freedom at all but some kind of sick trick. In other words, for me, the freedom to act is quite literally that ... the freedom to act ... is is not just the freedom to act good.
ME 2013-11-25 07:55:10 16916
seth 2013-11-25 07:29:20 16916
source: mark says
The collective vs the individual is the eternal question that freedom must ask & solve.
The collective vs the individual is the eternal question that freedom must ask & solve.
...
well yes, it would seem that spectrum would be the critical balance that concerns us. your sentence espressess it from the point of view of the individual for certainly the "freedom" your refer to must be the freedom of the individual. right?? but must it necessarily happen that way? certainly the is way things work today the more force there is in the collective, the less freedom an individual has to act. but what if the individual won all his freedom and then the Leviathan emerged on top of that? all the individual's free creations then would be the very pixels which form the pattern of the Leviathan. in other words the freedom of the individual would be directly proportional ... not inversly proportional ... to the strength of the collective pattern.
well yes, it would seem that spectrum would be the critical balance that concerns us. your sentence espressess it from the point of view of the individual for certainly the "freedom" your refer to must be the freedom of the individual. right?? but must it necessarily happen that way? certainly the is way things work today the more force there is in the collective, the less freedom an individual has to act. but what if the individual won all his freedom and then the Leviathan emerged on top of that? all the individual's free creations then would be the very pixels which form the pattern of the Leviathan. in other words the freedom of the individual would be directly proportional ... not inversly proportional ... to the strength of the collective pattern.
The point is about voluntary that's where freedom or liberty exists. Choosing a mythological , possibly NOT benign, creature as your your groupness god doesn't inspire me. Pardon some god-reasoning to make the point: if a god is good & powerful & all-loving then there is no calling for anything else & freedom is moot & unnecessary. However, such god permits evil for the sake of freedom & the volition to transform the evil into good. One misses the point in haggling what good & evil are all about for the purpose of this thought event.
An interesting dialogue indeed
. It is not for me to choose this beast or specify whether it is good or evil ... that would not be for me to judge. I write its story ... er because i must ... not to inspire you ... although i do appreciate your contributions .For me freedom is the ability to think feel and act voluntarily without force or obstruction from another. I am merely a human who does not believe that i can judge whether a immense being, orders of magnitude more powerful than myself, is benign, good or evil ... and for that same reason i do not trust the judgemet, good or evil, of any other human. I have never bought into the idea that the purpose of my freedom is merly to "transform evil to good" ... for were that the case, then it is not freedom at all but some kind of sick trick. In other words, for me, the freedom to act is quite literally that ... the freedom to act ... is is not just the freedom to act good.
Seth says
source: mark says
The collective vs the individual is the eternal question that freedom must ask & solve.
The collective vs the individual is the eternal question that freedom must ask & solve.
...
well yes, it would seem that spectrum would be the critical balance that concerns us. your sentence espressess it from the point of view of the individual for certainly the "freedom" your refer to must be the freedom of the individual. right?? but must it necessarily happen that way? certainly the is way things work today the more force there is in the collective, the less freedom an individual has to act. but what if the individual won all his freedom and then the Leviathan emerged on top of that? all the individual's free creations then would be the very pixels which form the pattern of the Leviathan. in other words the freedom of the individual would be directly proportional ... not inversly proportional ... to the strength of the collective pattern.
well yes, it would seem that spectrum would be the critical balance that concerns us. your sentence espressess it from the point of view of the individual for certainly the "freedom" your refer to must be the freedom of the individual. right?? but must it necessarily happen that way? certainly the is way things work today the more force there is in the collective, the less freedom an individual has to act. but what if the individual won all his freedom and then the Leviathan emerged on top of that? all the individual's free creations then would be the very pixels which form the pattern of the Leviathan. in other words the freedom of the individual would be directly proportional ... not inversly proportional ... to the strength of the collective pattern.
Seth says
seth 2013-11-25 07:29:20 16916
source: mark says
The collective vs the individual is the eternal question that freedom must ask & solve.
The collective vs the individual is the eternal question that freedom must ask & solve.
...
well yes, it would seem that spectrum would be the critical balance that concerns us. your sentence espressess it from the point of view of the individual for certainly the "freedom" your refer to must be the freedom of the individual. right?? but must it necessarily happen that way? certainly the is way things work today the more force there is in the collective, the less freedom an individual has to act. but what if the individual won all his freedom and then the Leviathan emerged on top of that? all the individual's free creations then would be the very pixels which form the pattern of the Leviathan. in other words the freedom of the individual would be directly proportional ... not inversly proportional ... to the strength of the collective pattern.
well yes, it would seem that spectrum would be the critical balance that concerns us. your sentence espressess it from the point of view of the individual for certainly the "freedom" your refer to must be the freedom of the individual. right?? but must it necessarily happen that way? certainly the is way things work today the more force there is in the collective, the less freedom an individual has to act. but what if the individual won all his freedom and then the Leviathan emerged on top of that? all the individual's free creations then would be the very pixels which form the pattern of the Leviathan. in other words the freedom of the individual would be directly proportional ... not inversly proportional ... to the strength of the collective pattern.
The point is about voluntary that's where freedom or liberty exists. Choosing a mythological , possibly NOT benign, creature as your your groupness god doesn't inspire me. Pardon some god-reasoning to make the point: if a god is good & powerful & all-loving then there is no calling for anything else & freedom is moot & unnecessary. However, such god permits evil for the sake of freedom & the volition to transform the evil into good. One misses the point in haggling what good & evil are all about for the purpose of this thought event.
Seth says
Beyond Leviathan: Mostly near the bottom.
Seth says
Well, the patterns are mostly in our heads &/or minds - otherwise you might have to claim the reality of some of my political assessments . [See also: item 16907] & some of the youtube links.
Seth says
source: ... when does a pattern become a being? when is a pattern being?
then too think ... how does a pattern become aware of itself? ... especially if we are part of it?
then too think ... how does a pattern become aware of itself? ... especially if we are part of it?
... I don't think patterns become aware of themselves. I am not a pattern. When we were kids the folks used a pattern to make clothes. The patterns themselves did not become aware of themselves.
Anthroposophically, all thoughts are beings of some kind with some level of consciousness which is a primary category (see Aristotle). There is also beings that are not thoughts. But,,... one might have to concede to using some metaphysics or spiritual science to grok that.
Anthroposophically, all thoughts are beings of some kind with some level of consciousness which is a primary category (see Aristotle). There is also beings that are not thoughts. But,,... one might have to concede to using some metaphysics or spiritual science to grok that.
Seth says
seth 2013-11-26 07:24:56 16916
source: mark
my question is we know it helps with sorting by sameness so what happens when we refuse to look use it & just become present to each thing as it is in its particularity.
... interesting question indeed. me, i love innocence 
... to experience a thing fresh as if for the first time with no taint of memory. yet i would not want to discard the continuity of sameness vs difference to sustain my awareness. maybe i don't understand your question.
... to experience a thing fresh as if for the first time with no taint of memory. yet i would not want to discard the continuity of sameness vs difference to sustain my awareness. maybe i don't understand your question. This maybe is just a new wallaby. Instead of generalizing the notion of "everybody's doing it" what happens if we just treat the individual instances as of importance which may reveal something new beyond the generality. We both have used computers since close to the beginning. I remember talking dirty over a 256 baud modem & an apple 2 to some chick(?) who represented herself as working for Intel. I don't have an iPone - just an emergency single monthly phone from Virgin mobile. ~$20/2 months. Others have other uses. Some bury themselves in the cellphones & learn to type with their thumbs & escape "the now". The interactions are in the past & not immediate as in NOW. The interaction is with the intermediary (or filtered by) the cellphone itself & an imagination of what is going on at the other end even with video. If you doubt that try having an experience with porn that you can get with a live human. Human being is more than a collection of electronics. The collection you call Leviathan is far from human being. Electronics & computers are just like guns - it is all a matter of what the user does with them & for what purpose, imho.
.. no need to pursue the "question" imho any more.
.. no need to pursue the "question" imho any more.
Seth says
seth 2013-11-26 07:45:46 16916
ME 2013-11-26 07:24:23 16916
Well, the patterns are mostly in our heads &/or minds - otherwise you might have to claim the reality of some of my political assessments . [See also: item 16907] & some of the youtube links.
unfortunately i have not gotten a chance to watch your tubes ... that will need to wait until my sound space is my own.
perhaps you missed my point that pattern is not exclusively subjective ... not always just "in our minds" ... sometimes they also can be scientifically detected and reliably recognized outside of our minds.
then too there is a corollary to your reticular activation ... anticipation of something can tend to cause it to happen ... there is a term for that but it escapes me at the moment.
then too there is that pesky fact that where the mind ends (and its "not" starts) is itself quite subjective. can it not be considered a grand system of cause and effect ... a complex maze ... a vast network. when does a pattern become a being?
perhaps you missed my point that pattern is not exclusively subjective ... not always just "in our minds" ... sometimes they also can be scientifically detected and reliably recognized outside of our minds.
then too there is a corollary to your reticular activation ... anticipation of something can tend to cause it to happen ... there is a term for that but it escapes me at the moment.
then too there is that pesky fact that where the mind ends (and its "not" starts) is itself quite subjective. can it not be considered a grand system of cause and effect ... a complex maze ... a vast network. when does a pattern become a being?
You can always use earphones ... even my old ipod has earphones. The youtubes are short. The explanation of being in there somewhere is intuitive not like Peter Ralston's. IMHO, a collective category name will never become being & from the point of view of phenomenology who knows? Being erudite or logical is not likely do clear up the question. What is the real question behind all of this? What are you listening for? Do you just want agreement with your own definitions?
Seth says
well there is no doubt, me thinks, that patterns of behavior are subjective ... even when we ourselves participate in them. yet still and all sometimes they can be detected objectively ... er, from the outside, scientifically ... the emergence of people stroking their gadgets in the mall is a example. reticular activation itself is a very real pattern and no doubt can be objectively recognized. i think when we recognize a pattern there certainly can be a feedback between it and us ... so that as we participate in it, it grows and our awareness of it does too.
when does a pattern become a being? when is a pattern being?
then too think ... how does a pattern become aware of itself? ... especially if we are part of it?
ME 2013-11-25 14:17:48 16916
seth 2013-11-25 13:57:59 16916
Well i doubt that it is just my conception that our individual actions collectively make patterns. I walk in the malls and i see almost everybody holding and playing with devices they hold in their hands and stroke in various ways. That is a pattern of behavior that has emerged out of ... er, somewhat free ... individual choices and actions.
The phenomena of gettin getting a Prius & all of a sudden you notice there are a lot of Priuses or cell-phones or Nike shoes or .... is part of the Reticular activating system - talked about here & maybe the Wikipedia:
Source: ...
Reticular activating system senses the things around us and sorts them out. There are so many things in our daily routine which are to be considered and which are not to be considered. These are categorized by the Reticular activating system.
If something good occurs in your life that is treated as positive e.g. meeting of an old best mate whom you’ve lost contact with etc., and similarly If you’re thinking something negative in the mind or something bad happens in your life e.g. someone ditches you, then these are informed to you by the Reticular activating system to make you realize the presence of either positive or negative impact.
The best part of this part of reticular activating system is if you really concentrate on what you want to focus then you will find that everything is at your presence whatever you want is with you.
... my question is we know it helps with sorting by sameness so what happens when we refuse to look use it & just become present to each thing as it is in its particularity.
well there is no doubt, me thinks, that patterns of behavior are subjective ... even when we ourselves participate in them. yet still and all sometimes they can be detected objectively ... er, from the outside, scientifically ... the emergence of people stroking their gadgets in the mall is a example. reticular activation itself is a very real pattern and no doubt can be objectively recognized. i think when we recognize a pattern there certainly can be a feedback between it and us ... so that as we participate in it, it grows and our awareness of it does too.
when does a pattern become a being? when is a pattern being?
then too think ... how does a pattern become aware of itself? ... especially if we are part of it?
See Also
- Thought Copy of - a thought in fastblogit.com with 37 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought about: [Congress] slips into a ‘predictable spiral’ - The Washington Post with 29 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought about: transcript: pope franciss speech to congress 2015 with 3 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought about: My Inside, My Soul, My Spirit - comment 59016 - comment 59030 with 2 viewings related by tag "agreements".
- Thought Uncovering the Ingredients in a Shit Stew with 2 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought Usually the Enemy Declares Victory First with 1 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought [title (17631)] with 1 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought Debt Committee with 0 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought I voted today with 0 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought Supplemental Funding of the Surge with 0 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought Fast Lawmaking Sausage - Nobody knows what is in the Bills with 0 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought Phoney Baloony - government wasting time with 0 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought Your government wasting time ... with 0 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought U.S. Government Sausage - Helps Recognize Decay with 0 viewings related by tag "one party rule".
- Thought Sometimes Gridlock is a Good Thing with 0 viewings related by tag "congress".
- Thought One Party Rule ! with 0 viewings related by tag "one party rule".