Has the Left changed that much? During the Obama administration ICE used the exact tactics they are using today. There were no riots or protests. What changed?
What's in a question...". Here's a scenario...
I say something. It could be anything but for the sake of argument, "I hope Trump runs for a third term."
People in hearing range are heard to ask (examples):
- What do you mean by that?
- Umm, have you read the Constitution?
- Why?
- How do you think that benefits the country?
My interest... Which, if any, of those questions might be considered an invitation to dialogue? Which might elicit a defensive or angry response? If we accept a premise that Our country is being damaged by polarization and hostility, how do we engage with one another to explore the why's behind opinions held? What is your base response when someone asks you a question?
I have observed what I think is shift in definition (or perception) regarding the purpose of a question. To some extent, I think the use and nature of questions has been placed in a negative light. And, that is hazardous to Our ability to gather and analyze information as well as Our opportunities communicate about important societal issues.
At a base level, how much does tone of voice matter? Does who asked -how they look- matter? Does the choice of words affect your response? The time or place? How much of your response is determined primarily by how you interpret the question versus how the questioner might have intended it?
Additional circumstances where I wonder about questions and what they mean or do...
- How often does a politician who represents you ask your opinion before voting on a matter?
- Are public polls and surveys able to collect opinion fairly? (I.E., Shouldn't there generally be a "None of the above" option for almost everything you've ever been asked? Or, data about who is taking the poll and for what purpose? I am tired of being forced to answer in a way that defines my 'social box' incorrectly.)
- Particularly with regard to evaluation of programs, we are asked to place ourselves in various classifications. Income, race, faith, address, age - you know what I mean. These "metrics" are quantitative and objective but... Who decides on the ranges?; Who decides on definitions? When we are measuring whether the quality of someones life has improved, do we need more 'humetrics'?
Have I perhaps managed to kindle curiosity in a dark corner ? :-) It seems to me that this is worth thinking and talking about. It may be part of healing and finding our individual agency to affect the world. It might also be a part of solving problems in a way that promotes positive-sum outcomes.
What's in a question...". Here's a scenario...
I say something. It could be anything but for the sake of argument, "I hope Trump runs for a third term."
People in hearing range are heard to ask (examples):
- What do you mean by that?
- Umm, have you read the Constitution?
- Why?
- How do you think that benefits the country?
My interest... Which, if any, of those questions might be considered an invitation to dialogue? Which might elicit a defensive or angry response? If we accept a premise that Our country is being damaged by polarization and hostility, how do we engage with one another to explore the why's behind opinions held? What is your base response when someone asks you a question?
I have observed what I think is shift in definition (or perception) regarding the purpose of a question. To some extent, I think the use and nature of questions has been placed in a negative light. And, that is hazardous to Our ability to gather and analyze information as well as Our opportunities communicate about important societal issues.
At a base level, how much does tone of voice matter? Does who asked -how they look- matter? Does the choice of words affect your response? The time or place? How much of your response is determined primarily by how you interpret the question versus how the questioner might have intended it?
Additional circumstances where I wonder about questions and what they mean or do...
- How often does a politician who represents you ask your opinion before voting on a matter?
- Are public polls and surveys able to collect opinion fairly? (I.E., Shouldn't there generally be a "None of the above" option for almost everything you've ever been asked? Or, data about who is taking the poll and for what purpose? I am tired of being forced to answer in a way that defines my 'social box' incorrectly.)
- Particularly with regard to evaluation of programs, we are asked to place ourselves in various classifications. Income, race, faith, address, age - you know what I mean. These "metrics" are quantitative and objective but... Who decides on the ranges?; Who decides on definitions? When we are measuring whether the quality of someones life has improved, do we need more 'humetrics'?
Have I perhaps managed to kindle curiosity in a dark corner ? :-) It seems to me that this is worth thinking and talking about. It may be part of healing and finding our individual agency to affect the world. It might also be a part of solving problems in a way that promotes positive-sum outcomes.
“When discourse ends, violence begins,”. From the Small Stage to Center Stage
Kirk co-founded Turning Point USA when he was just 18 years old. What started as a small group of like-minded college students grew into one of the most influential youth movements in the United States.
Kirk traveled from campus to campus, never shying away from hard questions or loud opposition. For him, the university wasn’t a battlefield — it was a classroom where young minds could (and, more importantly, should) wrestle with ideas, disagree passionately, and still walk out the door as neighbors.
“When discourse ends, violence begins,” Kirk was fond of saying.
Charlie Kirk’s Legacy
Kirk’s death is a painful reminder that when we equate one’s political opinions with their morality, we undermine our own. When we stop listening to each other and focus solely on our differences, we lose sight of all we have in common.
America was built by people of different cultures, faiths, and colors who believed that we could live in harmony and even prosper, not because we agree on everything, but because freedom allows us to be the best version of ourselves.
That is what Charlie Kirk fought for — and what he died for.
Today, Kirk’s voice was silenced — but his message endures.
May he rest in peace.
- The Wellness Company
Attempted Trump Assasination- Was he actually hit by a bullet? (meta commentary: I imagine the future of uptrust will host more conversations of this nature… so let’s see how we navigate it)
On Saturday, former president Donald Trump was the target of an attempted assassination.
Two things I want to talk about–
Was Trump actually hit by a bullet? I’m skeptical that a bullet grazed his ear, and think it’s more likely that a piece of shrapnel clipped him. I’m not intending to minimize the fact that someone definitely tried to kill him, but rather I am irritated by his spinning and inflation of the story if there is a truer thing to be said about what happened.
The secret service really fucked up. How on earth do they miss a lone sniper on a roof that many of the bystanders identified before them? I don’t think there is a conspiracy theory here, but do believe someone should probably be fired for their oversight.
I’d like to hear others’ opinions on this + where your credibility comes from. Name your news source or experience that leads you to believe what you’re sharing.
Attempted Trump Assasination- Was he actually hit by a bullet? (meta commentary: I imagine the future of uptrust will host more conversations of this nature… so let’s see how we navigate it)
On Saturday, former president Donald Trump was the target of an attempted assassination.
Two things I want to talk about–
Was Trump actually hit by a bullet? I’m skeptical that a bullet grazed his ear, and think it’s more likely that a piece of shrapnel clipped him. I’m not intending to minimize the fact that someone definitely tried to kill him, but rather I am irritated by his spinning and inflation of the story if there is a truer thing to be said about what happened.
The secret service really fucked up. How on earth do they miss a lone sniper on a roof that many of the bystanders identified before them? I don’t think there is a conspiracy theory here, but do believe someone should probably be fired for their oversight.
I’d like to hear others’ opinions on this + where your credibility comes from. Name your news source or experience that leads you to believe what you’re sharing.