Double Standards III

.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Thought about this topic for the past 2 days? Come to any concrete conclusions? Made a firm decision? Not that you have to answer me anyway. As the Bard said "To thine own self be true." Remember that.

Refresh yourself Part I and Part II.

NOT POLITICS AGAIN!

I give you a real life example now. Getting political just for a moment. Bear with me.

The former president used "signing statements" to say a bill he signed into law did not apply to his administration. The Damnocrats wailed, gnashed their teeth and generally threw what we in the South call a hissy fit. The current president was among those throwing a tantrum.

The current president uses "signing statements" to say a bill he signed into law does not apply to his administration. The Reboobicans wail, gnash their teeth and generally have what we in the South call a hissy fit.

This is only one of many examples where the two presidents did exactly the same thing much to the chagrin of the opposing party and delight of their own party.

I call this thinking Idiotology.

And if it lands on the edge?

Let's get back to the central question, why is it OK for one person to do something and not OK for another person to do it? Whittle off variables until you are down to what amounts to two stick-man figures. One stick man can do it and the other stick man cannot.

If you reached a decision or you didn't, cool, either way. That gives us three options.

1) You decided double standards are acceptable

2) You decided double standards are not acceptable

3) You did not decide

Let’s look at these answers in reverse order.

If you never make a mistake, you never learn

If you did not decide, why? I will always accept an honest "I don't know" as a legitimate answer. But I don't think you can honestly give that answer. In this case, if you did not decide I tell you what Geddy Lee sings "If you choose not to decide you still have a made a choice." I think you decided in favor of double standards because you will not say they are wrong. Indecision is support of the status quo.

If you reached a decision, what grounds did you use for it? Doesn't matter what you decided. If you reached a decision, how did you get there? Regardless of your decision, did you base your decision on substance, facts and reality? Will your reasoning process stand up to my advocates diaboli attacks? Think so? Willing to put your words to the Redneck Genius Turing Test?

Hit me baby.

Or did you fall back on the excuse we ALL HATED to hear when we were kids "Because I say so." Your parents said that. It was a cop out then and it is a cop out now.

Working with reality here...

When you're dealing with equals, "because I say so" is truly an excuse. A cheap power play. An effort to exercise whatever atrophied muscles you have left. A pathetic attempt to self-justify what you know is wrong. You do it because you can. You have rejected reality and attempt to substitute your delusional view in its place.

In short - Might makes right.

Or, you are rebelling because you can. No real reason, just because you can. The worst part about being a rebel is living long enough to suffer the consequences of your actions.

In other words, your ship is busy sinking, still taking fire and you say "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead."

Eh. Philosophical meanderings that don't really anything while saying an encyclopedia.

Note to self...

Here's the real rubber on the road. However you decided, however you reasoned, if the opposing side uses the exact same arguments, what are you going to think about it?

Will you think they are being fair? Will you call them unjust? If it's good for the goose, the other goose deserves the same treatment.

If you set the rules and the other side plays by them, who is really at fault?

What does your decision really say about you? A better question - Do you want to associate with people who make decisions the way you do?

No particular reasons for this. I found it amusing.