DeVos Crashes bicycle, requires surgery

[Elixir]

I'm guessing Toni doesn't actively enjoy anyone's pain, but rather just thinks Devos deserves it.

I still can't conceive it. A good person does not wish pain and suffering on another, even if they deserve it. We do not reduce ourselves to that level. A good physician will treat and hope to alleviate the suffering of the most monstrous among us. We have to maintain the higher ground.

This is because you are a good person. Apparently better than most.

I'd like to see Devos leave office, but don't wish harm or pain to her. I'd be happier if she left office for other reasons.

Like maybe grief over the death of her son Eric?
>>----------------------------Running away ------------------>>>

 

[Toni]

You are much nicer than I am. I am completely indifferent to her pain, no matter how extreme it is. Aside from vaguely hoping that it's on the extreme side.

OTOH, I'm certain she will avail herself of all the best possible drugs to ensure that any pain she might experience is immediately if not preemptively alleviated.

I consider it a good thing that you're not a nurse or a doctor.

Are you really sure I'm not a nurse or a doctor?

I'm not but this is the internets......


In all seriousness, as noted in the OP, Betsy DeVoss is expected to make a full and complete recovery and is presumably enjoying the best possible medical care that can be had. Including adequate pain relief.

If there had been any real doubt about that: her ability to access excellent medical care and to recover as pain free as possible, I wouldn't have written that comment. IRL, I've known a number of people who are actually fairly terrible human beings, including a few who have tried to do me actual harm (up to and including attempted rape and murder of myself), yet I haven't actually wished any of them any pain or harm. I only caused as much pain to keep myself safe in that particular moment: to stop the actual attack, not to inflict any lasting or permanent damage. I would have much preferred if my No had been accepted and the attack stopped immediately. Indeed, when it was possible, I did my best to ensure that they would be protected from pain and suffering: I did not tell those who would have had no compunction about beating the living shit out of the POS who tried to hurt me. While I think it was right for me to not cause any of those POS to be beaten, I also wrestle with the fact that to my knowledge, at least one of them went on to continue to harm other people. So, there's some guilt there. But I digress. The same goes for those more hypothetical cases where there is a more or less public figure who is injured or ill or who is experiencing some grave personal loss: I don't wish them harm. I might wish them out of power or out of any position to harm another person but I fall short of actually wishing them harm.


In the case of Betsy DeVoss, I believe I said that I was indifferent to her pain. Which position I allowed myself only because it was impossible that she would be expected to endure any pain. At all. As far as I can determine, she is indeed completely indifferent to the pain and suffering of others so it seems reasonable to assume that she doesn't experience any pain herself: she seems to have no empathy for others.


Since her access to excellent medical care and excellent pain relief is pretty well guaranteed, I don't feel any particular need to feel much concern on her behalf. She certainly has many people, perhaps not all of them paid, to be concerned about her recovery, pain relief and certainly millions of hopes and prayers directed towards her complete and full recovery. Why add my own?

However, it was insensitive of me to write that on the internets.


I deeply apologize if I have offended anyone because of my indifference to the pain of someone who seems to be guaranteed all opportunity to avoid pain with out my well wishes.

 

[Toni]

I'm guessing Toni doesn't actively enjoy anyone's pain, but rather just thinks Devos deserves it.

I still can't conceive it. A good person does not wish pain and suffering on another, even if they deserve it. We do not reduce ourselves to that level. A good physician will treat and hope to alleviate the suffering of the most monstrous among us. We have to maintain the higher ground.

I don't disagree in the least.


I'm not charged with her care. Were I to be in a position to be charged with any aspect of her care, I would do my utmost to ensure that she received the best possible care and as much pain relief as necessary to ensure her full and complete recovery without incurring a debilitating drug dependency or any such evil.

I don't actually wish Betsy DeVos pain. Or suffering. Even though her actions have and will certainly cause unnecessary pain and suffering to millions of students who are trying to better their lives. Even though her actions are harmful to our nation and to the world as a whole.

I don't actually wish her pain.

I wouldn't mind if she disappeared. Or if she had to spend a year in subsidized housing, living on public assistance and food stamps and could only get free if she could successfully complete a 2 year AA degree while holding down 3 minimum wage jobs and graduated with $100K in student debt for her efforts, which she could never pay back at her $35K/year job.

But that might be painful. So I had better not wish that on her.

 

[Worldtraveller]

I'm guessing Toni doesn't actively enjoy anyone's pain, but rather just thinks Devos deserves it.

I still can't conceive it. A good person does not wish pain and suffering on another, even if they deserve it. We do not reduce ourselves to that level. A good physician will treat and hope to alleviate the suffering of the most monstrous among us. We have to maintain the higher ground.

I don't disagree in the least.


I'm not charged with her care. Were I to be in a position to be charged with any aspect of her care, I would do my utmost to ensure that she received the best possible care and as much pain relief as necessary to ensure her full and complete recovery without incurring a debilitating drug dependency or any such evil.

I don't actually wish Betsy DeVos pain. Or suffering. Even though her actions have and will certainly cause unnecessary pain and suffering to millions of students who are trying to better their lives. Even though her actions are harmful to our nation and to the world as a whole.

I don't actually wish her pain.

I wouldn't mind if she disappeared. Or if she had to spend a year in subsidized housing, living on public assistance and food stamps and could only get free if she could successfully complete a 2 year AA degree while holding down 3 minimum wage jobs and graduated with $100K in student debt for her efforts, which she could never pay back at her $35K/year job.

But that might be painful. So I had better not wish that on her.

I disagree with WAB's entirely black and white, naive view of the world. It wouldn't have been wrong to wish pain on Hitler, for instance. Sure, we strive to be more humane, but we're also human. For instance, if someone hurt my cat or my wife, I would likely kill them. I would also be rather inclined to make it painful.

Oh well. Guess I'm not a good person.

I'm ok with that.

 

[Treedbear]

...
I disagree with WAB's entirely black and white, naive view of the world. It wouldn't have been wrong to wish pain on Hitler, for instance. Sure, we strive to be more humane, but we're also human. For instance, if someone hurt my cat or my wife, I would likely kill them. I would also be rather inclined to make it painful.

Oh well. Guess I'm not a good person.

I'm ok with that.

You could probably run for POTUS and win. Take your pick of party.

 

[Derec]

Outside of her making harder for students scammed by for-profit schools to get justice,

I agree with that.

her making it easier for public schools to do less for disabled students,

In what way. I am not familiar with that controversy.

her demonstrated ignorance about public education, what's not to like?

You wish pain on her for that? Interesting.

I did not ask why people disagree with her. She is a Trump nominee, of course people will disagree with her. But this visceral hatred seems over the top.

Ignoring your blatant mischaracterization,

Not a mischaracterization, but an accurate description of the policy.

your position appears to be as long as it makes it easier to get away with rape at colleges, she is ok. Wow.

As usual, you would be wrong. I do not want rapists to get away with rape. However, I do not want to water down penitentiary standards or make it more difficult for accused students to defend themselves (by for example not allowing them to have counsel, or to confront their accuser or to submit exculpatory evidence like text messages). All these things increase the rate of false positives, i.e. expelling innocent students. I think that expelling innocent students and labeling them "rapists" is a far greater evil than allowing a potential rapists to stay on campus because there isn't sufficient evidence that he is guilty. I guess we disagree on that.

 

[laughing dog]

You wish pain on her for that? Interesting.

I did not wish her pain.

I did not ask why people disagree with her. She is a Trump nominee, of course people will disagree with her. But this visceral hatred seems over the top.

Wow, given your demonstrations of visceral hatred over the years, that is pretty ironic.

Not a mischaracterization, but an accurate description of the policy.

Nope.

As usual, you would be wrong. I do not want rapists to get away with rape.

Technically that is true, but operationally that is false.

 

[Derec]

Technically that is true, but operationally that is false.

In what way? I just want
- a fair process, where the accused student can adequately defend himself
- use "clear and convincing proof" standard that lowers the chance of false positives.

I can turn this around too and say that "operationally" you want innocent men to be expelled.

 

[Toni]

In what way. I am not familiar with that controversy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...for-disabled-students/?utm_term=.fbfc0988b205

You wish pain on her for that? Interesting.

I did not ask why people disagree with her. She is a Trump nominee, of course people will disagree with her. But this visceral hatred seems over the top.

You seem to be confusing posters. I am the one who said that I am indifferent to her possible pain re: bicycle accident/surgical repair. Further elaborated to explain that I don't actually wish her pain, that I am confident she will have the best possible medical care and probably won't even come out of it with an addiction to pain pills. I would like to clarify: If she isn't already addicted. I'm not suggesting that she is. I have no idea. I don't wish any actual harm on the woman. I do wish she'd be booted out of her position for which she is frankly unqualified and which she seems to be utilizing to further line her own pockets and those of her family.

She's not a nice person. She's actively working against the best interests of current and future students and is working to cripple our nation. She really needs to be removed from her position.

I
As usual, you would be wrong. I do not want rapists to get away with rape. However, I do not want to water down penitentiary standards or make it more difficult for accused students to defend themselves (by for example not allowing them to have counsel, or to confront their accuser or to submit exculpatory evidence like text messages). All these things increase the rate of false positives, i.e. expelling innocent students. I think that expelling innocent students and labeling them "rapists" is a far greater evil than allowing a potential rapists to stay on campus because there isn't sufficient evidence that he is guilty. I guess we disagree on that.

I am assuming that you have data about these 'false positives?'

Or at least a list of 'innocent students' who have been expelled due to allegations of rape? I'd be interested in seeing that data.

 

[laughing dog]

In what way? I just want
- a fair process, where the accused student can adequately defend himself
- use "clear and convincing proof" standard that lowers the chance of false positives.

You say that, but your posts about alleged victims, your degradation and minimization of their pain, and your persistent ignorant conflation of criminal justice with civil justice indicate otherwise.

I can turn this around too and say that "operationally" you want innocent men to be expelled.

You could. Of course, it would help if you could point to a long posting history of denigrating these innocent men by me, but you can't.

 

[WAB]

I don't disagree in the least.


I'm not charged with her care. Were I to be in a position to be charged with any aspect of her care, I would do my utmost to ensure that she received the best possible care and as much pain relief as necessary to ensure her full and complete recovery without incurring a debilitating drug dependency or any such evil.

I don't actually wish Betsy DeVos pain. Or suffering. Even though her actions have and will certainly cause unnecessary pain and suffering to millions of students who are trying to better their lives. Even though her actions are harmful to our nation and to the world as a whole.

I don't actually wish her pain.

I wouldn't mind if she disappeared. Or if she had to spend a year in subsidized housing, living on public assistance and food stamps and could only get free if she could successfully complete a 2 year AA degree while holding down 3 minimum wage jobs and graduated with $100K in student debt for her efforts, which she could never pay back at her $35K/year job.

But that might be painful. So I had better not wish that on her.

I disagree with WAB's entirely black and white, naive view of the world. It wouldn't have been wrong to wish pain on Hitler, for instance. Sure, we strive to be more humane, but we're also human. For instance, if someone hurt my cat or my wife, I would likely kill them. I would also be rather inclined to make it painful.

Oh well. Guess I'm not a good person.

I'm ok with that.

You would kill someone who hurt your cat?

And my view of the world is not naive or black and white. Good people do not ape the behavior of bad people. Mine is simply a reasonable, rational view of the world.

 

[thebeave]

I don't disagree in the least.


I'm not charged with her care. Were I to be in a position to be charged with any aspect of her care, I would do my utmost to ensure that she received the best possible care and as much pain relief as necessary to ensure her full and complete recovery without incurring a debilitating drug dependency or any such evil.

I don't actually wish Betsy DeVos pain. Or suffering. Even though her actions have and will certainly cause unnecessary pain and suffering to millions of students who are trying to better their lives. Even though her actions are harmful to our nation and to the world as a whole.

I don't actually wish her pain.

I wouldn't mind if she disappeared. Or if she had to spend a year in subsidized housing, living on public assistance and food stamps and could only get free if she could successfully complete a 2 year AA degree while holding down 3 minimum wage jobs and graduated with $100K in student debt for her efforts, which she could never pay back at her $35K/year job.

But that might be painful. So I had better not wish that on her.

I disagree with WAB's entirely black and white, naive view of the world. It wouldn't have been wrong to wish pain on Hitler, for instance. Sure, we strive to be more humane, but we're also human. For instance, if someone hurt my cat or my wife, I would likely kill them. I would also be rather inclined to make it painful.

Oh well. Guess I'm not a good person.

I'm ok with that.

You would kill someone who hurt your cat?

And my view of the world is not naive or black and white. Good people do not ape the behavior of bad people. Mine is simply a reasonable, rational view of the world.

I was a little taken aback by that cat comment as well. Killing someone (or as WT is basically saying, torturing them in the process) who who hurt your cat would put you in jail for a very long time. Your life is not only ruined, but that of your wife (and kids, if any) as well as she has now lost her life partner and source of support. Honestly, its really bizarre reading about the sadistic mindset of some on the left on this forum. I would have expected better.

 

[WAB]

You would kill someone who hurt your cat?

And my view of the world is not naive or black and white. Good people do not ape the behavior of bad people. Mine is simply a reasonable, rational view of the world.

I was a little taken aback by that cat comment as well. Killing someone (or as WT is basically saying, torturing them in the process) who who hurt your cat would put you in jail for a very long time. Your life is not only ruined, but that of your wife (and kids, if any) as well as she has now lost her life partner and source of support. Honestly, its really bizarre reading about the sadistic mindset of some on the left on this forum. I would have expected better.

I think it's about the hierarchy of emotions. No-one is immune to feelings of revenge: it's reptilian, basic, it's deep in all of us. My point is that we must try to find a way to allow the higher emotions to overpower the lesser ones, the more primal ones. If someone killed one of my sons, I would probably want to seriously harm or even kill that person. But my better side wants me to prefer a better option: remove that person from society, make sure they can never harm another individual. Maintain the higher moral ground. Perhaps this is counter-intuitive? I am not suggesting that the feeling for revenge is wrong or unnatural - only that a rational person should try to rise above the immediate desire for payback, the initial reptilian urge.

 

[thebeave]

You would kill someone who hurt your cat?

And my view of the world is not naive or black and white. Good people do not ape the behavior of bad people. Mine is simply a reasonable, rational view of the world.

I was a little taken aback by that cat comment as well. Killing someone (or as WT is basically saying, torturing them in the process) who who hurt your cat would put you in jail for a very long time. Your life is not only ruined, but that of your wife (and kids, if any) as well as she has now lost her life partner and source of support. Honestly, its really bizarre reading about the sadistic mindset of some on the left on this forum. I would have expected better.

I think it's about the hierarchy of emotions. No-one is immune to feelings of revenge: it's reptilian, basic, it's deep in all of us. My point is that we must try to find a way to allow the higher emotions to overpower the lesser ones, the more primal ones. If someone killed one of my sons, I would probably want to seriously harm or even kill that person. But my better side wants me to prefer a better option: remove that person from society, make sure they can never harm another individual. Maintain the higher moral ground. Perhaps this is counter-intuitive? I am not suggesting that the feeling for revenge is wrong or unnatural - only that a rational person should try to rise above the immediate desire for payback, the initial reptilian urge.

You're right on that. I'm a very non-violent person myself, and try to stay away from conflict and drama as much as possible. However, I do often wonder if there is a killer inside of me, and what circumstances it would take to bring him out. I would like to think I would only do what was necessary to defuse a situation (which could quite possibly be killing) and not resort to torture or revenge out of spite, but I guess no one really knows until they're in that situation. Would certainly not kill someone for harming my pet though, however much I thought about it.