Integrity vs Inflexiblity, Adaptability vs Flip-flopping.

[Thrawn]

I guess it depends on whose bull is getting gored (gosh I love that term).

Integrity is not always good.  When it flies in the face of a changing situation that one must react to.  What would you call a military officer that did the same thing over and over again, even when the situation has changed and it isn't working anymore...well I would call him Soviet.  The strength of NATO doctrin was that it allowed it's officers to be adaptible within the overall order.  

If we look at politics and Kerry's famous (infamous?) statement, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.".  We can see adaptibility in action.  He voted for the bill, the bill changed and then he voted against it.  I don't see how this could be bad.  If you agreed to a conditional contract because it suited your needs and then the contract was changed and it no longer suited your needs, would you be a "flip-flopper" for changing your mind?

Or what have the Bush administrations policies towards Falluja?  Is adapting to a changing tactical or perhaps straticigical situation on the ground a bad thing?

Adaptibility isn't always good either.  If it done without forethought it could lead to wasted resources where you are fixing something that isn't broken.  It can also lead to lack of understanding of the overall goal, and confusion.


Point being the terms; integrity, inflexiblity, adaptability, and a flip-flopping are all loaded with positive and negative connotations.  Which is great if we want to deal in rhetoric.

But I wonder if we can't find more neutral terms to use?

[anonymous]

policy in falluja is determined by iraqi govt since the handover. if the Marines had their way the problem would be solved drama over and everyone except a few perforated jerkoffs would be moving on. but thats not the case and it shouldnt be lest some think that the handover was for show only. you gotta admit throwing away "your" medals in protest of a war and then later having it revealed that "they werent actually my medals and it was symbolic in nature" is pretty funny in a scummy sort of way. "im tearing up my paycheck until the workers at this company are treated fairly!". "well as ceo i have bills to pay to it was a symbolic gesture it wasnt actually MY paycheck".

[Thrawn]

The purpose of my examples was to help clarify my POV regarding,
"Point being the terms; integrity, inflexiblity, adaptability, and a flip-flopping are all loaded with positive and negative connotations.".


I don't see why we should go into what happened in Falluja after the hand over, nor what Kerry did with his medals.  My post isn't about Bush or Kerry, it's about us.  And how we chose to communicate with each other on this BBS.

The reason I decided to bring this up now, is because the level of animosity between Bush and Kerry supporters is bothersome.  And I don't see the benefit of it.  I think it detracts from a meaningful dialogue on the platforms of each canadidate and how they plan on dealing (or not dealing) with issues that face the US today, and which is the better candidate based on that criteria.

[GRUNHERZ]

So you are saying it's a virtue that Kerry getting his way was more important to him than the welafre of the troops.

Hey but it's not the first time Kerry sold out US soldiers for his own political whims..

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
So you are saying it's a virtue that Kerry not getting his way was more important to him than the welafre of the troops.

No.

Hey but it's not the first time Kerry sold out US soldiers for his own political whims..

Be it the case or not, it is totally irrelevant to this thread.

[GtoRA2]

Thrawn,

 I do not see integrety as inflexability.


 For the issue you chose, why did Kerry change his vote? What did they add?

If he changed his vote to look more anti Iraq war (playing politics),  I would say the flip flopper tag still applies, but if he changed it cause they hid something he really did not like in the bill, then he can back out with integrety intact.


Part of this is comunication, and telling the truth about why he changed his opinion.
Do you know? I do not.

[GRUNHERZ]

It's prefectly relevant.

He sold out his fellow soldiers as members of Ghenghis  Khans horde for his political whims.  He then sold out soldiers by not voting for the 87 billion because he didnt get his way.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
Thrawn,

 I do not see integrety as inflexability.

It is by definition inflexible...wait a second.  If your moral code has flexibility integrated into it that it could be flexible, but it has been my experience that most people think of flexibility in ones morals to be a sign of wishy-washyness.

For the issue you chose, why did Kerry change his vote? What did they add?

For sake of the example let's assume he did it for right reasons.  I probably should have used the names Cornelious and Allouicious for the examples instead of Bush and Kerry.  Those names are just to loaded.

[GtoRA2]

True they are loaded.


Ok so yes, integrety is sticking to your moral, code, but back to the example, and it is not necasarily an example of morals.

But if the change in the bill, that caused him to reverse himself was because it went agaist a strong belief, then his is still a man of integrety. If it was because the smell in the air said, it was better for him to vote no cause his party or the people who wants to vote for him didnt like it, then he is a flip flopper.


If he did it cause they threw in a line in there that would force wellfare people to pick up garbage, and he truely felt it was wrong, he is fine.

He does have to make that clear to us.

[Gunslinger]

thrawn,

to me it is more a matter of convictions than flexability.

"I actually voted for the 87B before I voted against it"

That to me is not flexability that is pandering for votes.  It would have been alot different if the quote were this.

"the orriginal bill that I signed was indeed a good bill, BUT amendment XXX wich says BLA BLA BLA was added to it and I didnt think that was in the best interest of the troops so YES I voted against it and stand by my decision"

That shows me that he is a man of convictions even though I beleive that Kerry needs the wind to blow and a gallop poll of the local area before he announces were he stands.

That is one thing Bush has bigtime over Kerry.  I know what he stands for and against.  I dont agree with him on everything but I know what I'm getting in return for my vote.

All I know about Kerry is he is a vietnam vet who's service has come into question and he panders to what ever audience he's talking to.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
True they are loaded.


Ok so yes, integrety is sticking to your moral, code, but back to the example, and it is not necasarily an example of morals.

No, it isn't the problem with me communicating  properly about this sematical issue is that ingretity/adaptability is like Ouroboros (the snake that's eating it's tail...I could of just said "a snake eating it's tail", but I'm a pretentious ****).

In a given action is one adapting because they have integrity, or because they haven't?

I don't like the idea of people imbueing the terms I mentioned with any sort of innate essences.  Such as "integrity" is "good".  Not necessarily, the most salwart Nazi has a crapload of integrity.  

And the term "flip-flopping" taken within the context of my example (were Kerry changed his mind because there was say too much pork added to the bill), is even worse because by it's very meaning it's negative.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Thrawn
No, it isn't the problem with me communicating  properly about this sematical issue is that ingretity/adaptability is like Ouroboros (the snake that's eating it's tail...I could of just said "a snake eating it's tail", but I'm a pretentious ****).

In a given action is one adapting because they have integrity, or because they haven't?

I don't like the idea of people imbueing the terms I mentioned with any sort of innate essences.  Such as "integrity" is "good".  Not necessarily, the most salwart Nazi has a crapload of integrity.  

And the term "flip-flopping" taken within the context of my example (were Kerry changed his mind because there was say too much pork added to the bill), is even worse because by it's very meaning it's negative.

Well when referring to true "flipp Flopping" what do you think of kerry slamming Bush on troop reductions when he himself said the same thing in an ABC interview.

Again, he would not be hammered for "flip-flopping;" by most not zealots if he wasnt just pandering for votes.

This goes along with NO ONE knowing what Kerry stands for.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
It's prefectly relevant.

He sold out his fellow soldiers as members of Ghenghis  Khans horde for his political whims.  He then sold out soldiers by not voting for the 87 billion because he didnt get his way.

No it is not.

"Point being the terms; integrity, inflexiblity, adaptability, and a flip-flopping are all loaded with positive and negative connotations. Which is great if we want to deal in rhetoric.

But I wonder if we can't find more neutral terms to use?"


I already explained the purpose of my examples.  This discussion isn't supposed to be yet another venue to bash Bush and/or Kerry.  But to examine the use of certain terms and concepts that are used alot in the O'Club and elsewhere.

Now quit breaking the forum rules.

"2- Threads should remain on topic, do not "hijack" topics."

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
Well when referring to true "flipp Flopping" what do you think of kerry slamming Bush on troop reductions when he himself said the same thing in an ABC interview.

Again, he would not be hammered for "flip-flopping;" by most not zealots if he wasnt just pandering for votes.

This goes along with NO ONE knowing what Kerry stands for.

I suppose I would use the term hypocracy.  I would have to see the context.  I was always under the impression the "flip-flopping" referred to a person changing their mind about something and having a much more general meaning.  Which I guess part of the reason why I don't like the term as I understand it.  Too general.

Hypocracy seems to me to have a much more specific meaning and fits the situation you discribe above.

[slimm50]

Originally posted by Thrawn
I guess it depends on whose bull is getting gored (gosh I love that term).

Integrity is not always good.  When it flies in the face...

Thrawn, you're talkin about two very different concepts: integrity and inflexibility. Having either one does not imply the other. Now, being too proud can be detrimental. As in being too proud to bend, or change. IMO GW's got lots of integrity, and he's not the type to be too proud to admit his mistakes.