Trump the Needler

[Teallaura]

Sorry that you're feeling poorly and I hope you feel better soon.

I think that NWS has a responsibility to the people in its area -- the morons included. That takes precedent over how the President might react and, as Juvenal says above, if we can't expect the President to react with the standard of maturity we demand of middle-school graduates ... well, that's a big problem.

--Sam

Thank you.



Answering the phone when Alabama wasn't expected to be in the area of effect and therefore wasn't in emergency response mode is not a crisis.

And having been a government employee, I seriously doubt B'ham followed protocol. At. All. (See my first post - not explaining it again.)

Keep kicking the dog, don't be surprised that it bites.

[Sam]

Yes, there are morons in Alabama - thought I covered that already.

Did the response tweet improve matters - or did it create a heck of a lot of work trying to smooth feathers that shouldn't have been ruffled?

Given that they are still dealing with it, the latter. A little tact and probably non of the rest would have happened.

Sorry that you're feeling poorly and I hope you feel better soon.

I think that NWS has a responsibility to the people in its area -- the morons included. That takes precedent over how the President might react and, as Juvenal says above, if we can't expect the President to react with the standard of maturity we demand of middle-school graduates ... well, that's a big problem.

--Sam

[Juvenal]

You are arguing that rudeness is effective communication with Trump.

No one else thought the response was rude, either.

My counterargument: How'd that actually work out?

The entire country laughing at him?

You see, what you're arguing for is America playing co-dependent to the President of the United States. I'm going to respectfully disagree on that. Personally, I'd like to think when it comes to that point, the right thing to do is to call for him to resign.

Looking at the never-Trumpers, and the George Will's, and the Max Boot's out there, and the George Conway's, and an ever-growing list of conservative stalwarts besides, we don't have to touch the partisan left to see this isn't just me. Dude is losing it. He's gotta go.

My biggest concern is that Nancy will prolong the damage to the country in the interest of letting him drag his whole party down with him in the swirly that's shaping up to be the 2020 election.

[Teallaura]

Ok, then



Emphasis added

--Sam

Yes, there are morons in Alabama - thought I covered that already.

Did the response tweet improve matters - or did it create a heck of a lot of work trying to smooth feathers that shouldn't have been ruffled?

Given that they are still dealing with it, the latter. A little tact and probably non of the rest would have happened.

[Teallaura]

It wasn't an attempt to commit fraud, it was his public attempt, another lie, to cover for his mistake rather than admitting to it.

Jim, I'm not in the mood. If no fraud, no legal issue. We were discussing the misapplication of statute.

Gah, laws aren't supposed to be asininely legalistic!

You worded it wrong, but in concept, yeah, pretty much. He was fighting back after being called a liar - who wouldn't?

[Teallaura]

I was in that situation once when I had called for an ambulance upon finding a man passed out in a parking lot of a drugstore. My shift commander heard me call for the squad, and arrived on scene and ordered me to cancel the ambulance. I was trying to tell him the guy was in a serious medical condition, but my shift commander kept insisting the guy was a drunk, and just needed to be taken to the drunk tank. I ended up getting pretty 'insubordinate', because I believed the guy wouldn't make it to the drunk tank alive.

Just then, the city doctor happened by, on his way home from a benefit. He checked out the victim, and immediately announced the man was in insulin shock and needed immediate attention as he was slipping into a diabetic coma.

(I had just been to breathalyzer training, and this was a textbook case of insulin shock vs inebriation)

I'm not taking issue - but was rudeness the first club out of your bag - or did the insubordinate part come after he would not listen?

[Teallaura]

Sam's post made plenty of sense and summed up my point well (as did myth's similar recounting of workplace incidences where tact had to go out the window.) Seriously, is everything okay? It's really odd that you're doubling down on this, and your resorting to ad homs is uncharacteristic.

I already conceded it may have made sense to others - it LITERALLY DID NOT MAKE SENSE TO ME. Don't tell ME what I do or do not understand!

I've felt bad for a week.

President or pauper, the go to response should not be disrespect.

You are arguing that rudeness is effective communication with Trump. I only see him fighting back against each time - whether he was right or wrong to begin with and things go predictably, hilariously wrong.

Here's the case I understand you guys to be making: if it's an emergency, publicly embarrassing a superior is a good plan.

My counterargument: How'd that actually work out? IF this had mattered (didn't in the emergency response) the controversy itself would have been more destructive - and was pointless. There was no need to publicly call out the president in that particular manner. It only caused a fight - and didn't help Alabama in the least.

Whether he should or shouldn't respond as you (guys) expect him to is irrelevant. If you (general) know he's a grease fire waiting to happen, quit tossing water on it.

[Juvenal]

No, he really wasn't - it did not make sense. Maybe you understood him - but it was gibberish to me.

Literally everyone else reading this thread understood him just fine.

"When your last fifteen of those impossible! girlfriends dump ya, maybe the problem is you."

Teal, your friends, and that includes me, are getting worried about ya. You okay?

[Juvenal]

By "city doctor", I meant the particular doctor who was contracted to the city for services to employees and the incarcerated.

Every party needs its pooper.

[Teallaura]

Teal, Sam is talking sense. You're simply unwilling to listen. What's that phrase, people believe what they want to believe? Yeah.

Is there literally no circumstance for which you would publicly make your boss like a moron? Literally nothing? Including people's lives and livelihoods? Because we are talking about that here.

No, he really wasn't - it did not make sense. Maybe you understood him - but it was gibberish to me.


To topic:

What happens when you publicly embarrass someone? They fight back. If that person has more authority than I do, what will happen? They will almost always win. Net result: the bad info wins.

So no, stupid and ineffectual is not my go to response.

All my patients got the medicine they needed because I had enough sense to not mistreat my doctors for simple mistakes - or assume the worst about them. Give people a chance to fix their errors- and publicly humiliating folks doesn't do that.

The result of embarrassing people publicly is totally predictable. It is almost never positive.

[Cow Poke]

I've been in towns that small before, likely even smaller. There's a lot of them in the foothills of the rockies, from Colorado south to the border, where they try to bump their cred on highway signage by leaving out the pop and replacing it with elevation.

At a glance, at 70 mph, the towns look bigger that way.

By "city doctor", I meant the particular doctor who was contracted to the city for services to employees and the incarcerated.

[Juvenal]

Seriously, is everything okay?

This.

[Juvenal]

Just then, the city doctor happened by ...

I've been in towns that small before, likely even smaller. There's a lot of them in the foothills of the rockies, from Colorado south to the border, where they try to bump their cred on highway signage by leaving out the pop and replacing it with elevation.

At a glance, at 70 mph, the towns look bigger that way.

[Cow Poke]

I've had to say rude things, in public, to supervisors before. You know what? It WAS ok to be rude, when the wrong person was about to be arrested. Or when someone needs immediate medical attention and is literally dying.

I was in that situation once when I had called for an ambulance upon finding a man passed out in a parking lot of a drugstore. My shift commander heard me call for the squad, and arrived on scene and ordered me to cancel the ambulance. I was trying to tell him the guy was in a serious medical condition, but my shift commander kept insisting the guy was a drunk, and just needed to be taken to the drunk tank. I ended up getting pretty 'insubordinate', because I believed the guy wouldn't make it to the drunk tank alive.

Just then, the city doctor happened by, on his way home from a benefit. He checked out the victim, and immediately announced the man was in insulin shock and needed immediate attention as he was slipping into a diabetic coma.

(I had just been to breathalyzer training, and this was a textbook case of insulin shock vs inebriation)

[Juvenal]

I understand the concept, and recall the basics from the several college courses I took when finishing my degree.

What I'm saying is, when I listen with my own ears and read with my own eyes the President's words, that corroborates the fact that Trump has a casual relationship with the truth. I get that what I just said is anecdotal (which has it's own sampling problems), but I'm not aware of better sources of information regarding Trump's truthfulness.

Are you prepared to argue that Trump is MORE honest, in general, than other politicians? Because if not, then the sampling bias in Politifact's process isn't all that interesting to me. My point is, he's a liar.

No worries. My (geeky) point isn't likely to be interesting to anyone other than other geeks. My point is that he's a liar because he lies, not because his pants-on-fire ratio is higher than the competition.

The fact checkers' principle contribution isn't in the raw counts or ratios, but in the detailed rebuttals. Their secondary contribution is in outing the partisans too invested in their politics to be held accountable to the truth.