Have you ever noticed…

Speaking as someone with many imperfections and having been around the block a few times, let me offer some random musings for consumption and consideration.

Have you ever noticed…

  • People who are the least tolerant of others tend to require the most tolerance from other people in dealing with them.
  • People who tend to be hypercritical of other people or things, often cannot take criticism very well.
  • People who say “this is the truth,” usually do so before or after something that is not truthful or is an opinion.
  • People who say “this is the truth” are implying what they said at other times is not necessarily so.
  • People who brag on how pious they are should not have to brag about such matters – it should be obvious.
  • People who shout down your argument are using volume not quality as their argument.
  • People who name call or label don’t have a very good argument, so they must resort to shorthand demonization.
  • People can rationalize the most ridiculous viewpoints if they have decided this person best represents their interests, even if said viewpoint is antagonistic to their interests.
  • People who have an easy solution to a complex problem often do not understand what the problem entails.
  • People will agree with veracity of a source of information when it agrees with their position, but call that same source biased when it does not.
  • People who ignore the facts tend to get agitated when facts are used to refute their argument.

Now, I want you to close your eyes and picture each candidate running for office. Do any names come to mind as you do? If so, then do yourself a favor and vote for someone else. Being politically incorrect does not give anyone license to lie, name-call or label folks. But, if someone is going to be candid, then he or she should be prepared for candor in return.

If you have friends that are like this, my strong advice would be to lessen contact with said friend, as it will be less stressful. If you have a business colleague like this, smile, say have a nice day and move on down the hall. If this is your boss, then you may want to put that resume together.

I know I likely irritate people, even though I try my best not to. And, if I must say something direct, I will be as diplomatic and nice as I can be. As that is how I would want to be treated if I am doing something irritating or if someone disagrees with me. Maybe, with a little more civility, we can get along better.

 

Advertisements

57 thoughts on “Have you ever noticed…

    • Janis, I agree wholeheartedly. You can get your points across without being uncivil. Cursing and denigrating others are not good substitutes for civil discourse. I may be in a minority, but I discount arguments where labels or inflammatory are used. Thanks for your comment, Keith

    • Hugh, many thanks. I try not to offend, especially a professor emeritus such as yourself. So, someone resembled these traits more than others? Unfortunately, my lesson is lost on said person and his fanatical following. Acting tough does not equate to strength of character. Thanks for your comments, Keith

      • Just a thought about “P.C.” It began out of a genuine concern over the feelings of others — words that offend certain people. It was well intentioned. In academia, however, it has gotten out of hand and faculty are told (in violation of the First Amendment) that there are certain words that they simply must not use — at the cost of punishments in some cases. Strange to say, it is the liberals in academia who lead the charge on this issue.
        I suppose those on the political right simply don’t like being told that there are certain words they should not use and that’s the source of the problem. Trump appeals to those would-be anarchists, who see themselves as anti-establishment, rebels without a cause. There is genuine concern that folks should not be punished for using certain words, but that concern should not outweigh the concern over the feelings of those who are targeted by those words.

      • Hugh, your points are pertinent. Like many ideas, a solution can back fire if it is not used with a some common sense. Many comedians will not play college campuses anymore, as humor usually has a grain of truth that is exaggerated to make the point through comedy. They get vilified over some humor. Of course, they can take things way out of bounds, so it requires some judgment. What I don’t like is when a speaker who has a varied point of view is disinvited to speak at a college. Hear that person out. You may find there is some common ground. Or, you may find reinforcing points to your argument. I read Charles Krauthammer’s conservative columns. I may agree with only 5% of what he says, but I want to know what he is thinking. Thanks for sharing. Keith

      • Indeed. Institutions of “Higher Education” are becoming increasingly intolerant. Not a good thing at all! They are supposed tolled the way.

      • That runs counter to their mission. Given the evangelical bent, I was pleasantly surprised Bernie Sanders was given an audience at Liberty University. He gave the best speech of the campaign there.

  1. I know canidates 😉 who fit these personalities. I’ve also know and known people with these traits. I try to be diplomatic and thoughtful when dealing with people. I wasn’t always and I can be quick to be impatient now. I blame it on my health usually when I’m not feeling 100%. We don’t have to vote for negative people.

  2. I think most people come to politics and controversial issues from a position of emotional values.

    They think this thing because they feel a certain way about it. They look for evidence AFTER they have already decided they think a certain way.

    • Totally agree. Or, they may like an advisor who agrees with them. So, when data is shown to them which contradicts, they have disharmony or dissonance. This cognitive dissonance explains Limbaugh, Beck and now Trump’s followings. They run home to papa when contradicted to quell the dissonance. Thanks for bringing this up. Keith

  3. In my eyes, and I hope in many others, making someone feel small does not make you great, it make you an ass.
    I really feel that there needs to be a refresher course in what Politically Correct really is. There is a huge difference between truth to power and anger to power. If this continues we are doomed.

    My favorite new line “I loved the uneducated” …. I wonder if he “loves” them enough to ensure that they will all have the opportunities he and his children have had in that department.

    • Lisa, you and I both know the man who embodies these traits cares very little about his fanatics. I would wager he makes fun of them in private. In fact, he did make fun in public with one comment which I will paraphrase – my followers are so loyal (stupid), I could shoot someone on the street and they would not care. He did not say stupid, but that is implied.

      As you point out, there is a difference between being politically incorrect and inconsiderate and rude. He is playing these folks and it is painfully easy for him to do so. They are like wind up dolls. What amazes me is people cannot see through this false bravado. Part of the issue, are the other candidates do not have much to offer and one, in Cruz, is scarier.

      Back to your first sentence. I read a great leader deflects the credit to others, while a bad one assumes credit even when it is not due. This man is a great salesman, but is not a leader as he fails this basic tenet. Thanks for your comment, Keith

  4. Note to Readers: I have written before about my favorite boss and some other good ones, but I do not think I have written about my least favorite one. Like I mention to Lisa in “Life with the Top Down,” he took credit for others’ success. He shared internally how he harnessed these stallions for increased revenue production. He also lied often and was prone to cheat. They say you can learn a lot about a person by playing golf with him (or her). Let me just say the score he recorded was not a true representation of the number of strokes he took. And, yet he was successful. He was charming and had a persona of confidence. He looked the part of distinguished senior advisor, but it was not earned.

    He would infuriate one of our best consultants by asking him before a big meeting, what do we think this client should do. And, he would proceed to tell the client that in the first few minutes of the meeting making it disjointed. He was owning the solution. It would become disjointed as the cat was out of the bag beforehand. But, we knew you had to take this step by step – here is the problem, here is what is happening, here are some options, here are the implications and here is what we think you should consider, usually with a couple of options. We knew what the better option was, but we wanted to present a couple because they may have different cost implications.

    Does this man sound familiar to you?

  5. Excellent post.

    But I think it cuts deeper than civility, especially in the United States. The Senate and it’s cohort of have just agreed to nullify our Constitution as it pertains to the U.S. Supreme Court and the Senates obligation to give advice and consent regarding the President’s pick.

    We can easily fix a simple matter of civility.

    What’s at stake is the way we define our Democracy and who will enjoy the fruits of living in an advanced and wealthy global civilization.

    • Thanks for your comment. The Senate passing on their duty is extremely poor form. If the President nominates someone, the Senate’s job us to vet the candidate. They cannot refuse as that is in violation of their duty charged them by the Constitution.

      The civility should be easier, but I fear it is not. It requires leaders to lead. When you have a candidate who goes beyond divisive comments calling one candidate a derogatory name and saying he wants to punch a protester is not leadership.

      George W. Bush will not be considered a good president, but I recall an incidence in Charlotte, where a man was booed for asking him a tough question at an event. Bush quieted the crowd and said this man has the right to be heard.

      Many thanks for your comment. Keith

      • Thank you for your excellent reply. The most troubling aspect of our current political dilemma is that we have a congressional majority that has no respect for the rule of law-I don’t know who they represent but I presume that the people they represent also have no respect for the rule of law.

      • Plus, they grandstand and say it is the other party that does it. I live in North Carolina and our General Assembly has been in court over numerous laws that have been ruled unconstitutional. It should not have to be this hard to govern.

      • Unless the goal is to make it look as if ‘government’ can’t work.

        The reason these guys don’t like government has everything to do with their history of nullifying laws that were intended to give the the former slaves their rights as citizens of a democracy. If you don’t want to live in a democracy then you will do everything in your power to create a despotism. I’m surprised that we’ve let them get this far.

      • With the new campaign laws, it is even easier for the oligarchy to dictate. Trump says he cannot be bought, but he is part of the oligarchy, so he does not need to be.

      • True. It is all about Trump. I hope it is brought up at the debate that the wall builder employs about 95% of his staff from foreign guest workers at a resort in South Florida.

      • Yeah but Trump can shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his followers would still love him…He is the abyss of the GOP’s poisonous political discourse.

        He is what happens when the people allow their media and their leaders to lie to them without consequences.

        He is what happens we create a class of people who can flout the rule of law.

        So now we stand at the precipice and there is still a few seconds life for us to step back…

        Anyone who says that there is no difference between the two parties isn’t paying attention…

        And anyone who expects Clinton to be more honest than her ruthlessly dishonest opposition isn’t living in reality.

      • Trump represents the Mr. Hyde of the GOP. He is extreme, but he is not saying things too differently from the where the party has landed.

      • I agree Keith.

        I just commented on Facebook that the racism and classist elitism was once said in code language. Now it’s being said openly and Trump is doing the country a service.

        Now I’d like him to take on the politically correct right wing wing; especially it’s politically correct insistence, despite the evidence, that Bush was ‘mistaken’ about Iraq.

        I read an article two days ago that applauded Donald Trump for ‘smashing through’ the PC left and it’s ‘stranglehold’ on discourse.

        However, the writer took Trump to task for his dishonest accusation that Bush lied us into Iraq.

        I find it hard to believe that the son of a former director of the CIA did not have the most accurate data at his disposal; and if he didn’t, it is still the President’s job to take responsibility for not being fastidious about verifying the accuracy of the data.

        Hundreds of thousands of people are dead and wounded and these self righteous clowns want to play word games.

        We must be careful about Hillary because she is ‘dishonest’ but we are supposed to accept, without question, the idea that George W. Bush was the ‘best’ possible person to have in power during the days and weeks that followed the attacks of 9/11.

        If that is not the stranglehold of politically correct thought on public discourse than I’m not a member of the BLT community.

        🙂

      • Robert, one of the few things that Trump was truthful on at the SC debate ten days ago was Bush was president during 9/11 and lied about the WMD. He was booed and it rattled him. This man has said so many lies and he gets booed when he actually told the truth. People forget that Scooter Libby, who worked beneath Cheney/ Rove, went to jail for outing Valerie Plame’s husband and ruined her career as a CIA agent. Her husband a former ambassador did recon on one area and found no WMD trail. When his recon was used incorrectly, he wrote an Op-Ed in the New York Times called “What I did not find.” My other beef with Bush is he did not listen to our generals and send “the surge” in initially, he did not listen to the right people on the ground, he did not arm our troops with the right equipment and he did not have enough Farsi speakers.

        As for Clinton, she does need to answer for some questions, but she is also being targeted unfairly in some respects as well. I am not letting her off the hook for the questions, but she will get hammered even more since she is a woman, the front runner and been in politics a long time. But, I like Bernie as well, so we shall see how it turns out. The lone GOP candidate worth anything is Kasich and unless he does well on Super-Tuesday, will need to ride off into the sunset. Given stances on climate change, poverty, civil liberties, healthcare, LGBT issues, women’s rights, guns, etc. I just worry about a GOP president. Climate change inaction scares me the most.

        Good feedback. Keith

      • Agreed. A good debate question might be to get a GOP candidate to respond to the fact Exxon-Mobil is being sued by the New York State Attorney General for misrepresenting to investors and shareholders the impact of climate change on its business projections. I have heard they have a good case. To me, what the fossil fuel industry did (and does) to perpetuate the global warming is a hoax story using well-paid PR people, is the biggest conspiracy in America. This is the big lie being told by far too many GOP politicians and candidates. And, this will and is harming America and our planet. You may recall George W. Bush did not want any scientific paper by a federal agency to have the words global warming or climate change. The White House Council on the Environment was a former petroleum lobbyist and he would blacken out those words and send them back for redoing.

      • I resent the fact that our electoral process has been humiliated by the very people who are sworn to uphold it.

        The only people who seem to understand what it means to govern are the Democrats. And it’s not that they are less corrupt…what makes them different is that their corruption isn’t driven by the passionate racism that seems to drive the republican base.

      • We “let” them get this far because while we weren’t paying attention they garnered massive wealth and started buying candidates that would guarantee that they continue to grow that wealth uninterrupted. Meanwhile the rest of us were busy watching football and playing video games.

  6. Note to Readers: One of the candidates received the following endorsement from David Duke. He said not voting for Donald Trump is an act of treason. You may recall that Mr. Duke is a former Grand Dragon of the KKK who gained additional notoriety for supporting former Iran President Amadinjead (sic) when he said the Holocaust was a hoax. I will let you interpret the meaning of this endorsement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s