The Gaming Den

I and everyone I know have shat on Ted Cruz for the past several years and are more than happy to dogpile his rat-fink fucker face. Having any chance to shit on his public reputation is a good once, and arguing that it isn't deserved right now is a very odd angle to take. Ted Cruz fled the state while I personally froze my ass off in my power-less apartment that still doesn't have water, he fled the state while I helped my friend evacuate his apartment because water flooded in from upstairs, and he fled the state while people died in their garages trying to heat themselves.
I don't care if it's an emotional response. Fuck Ted Cruz and fuck anyone who defends his actions.

We all pick and choose what we think is worth the time to post over. I don't post every little or big thing that I get upset over. Not every injustice in the world upsets me as much as injustices that are more familiar to me. What you decide to get upset and post over though has implications to others. Like say if you're never complaining about the state of the unjust very bad system but consistently post that other people should stop complaining about it.

Likewise the decision to come out in defense of someone terrible isn't a good look but it can be a thing you do to show an audience that you are a 'fair' judge. What dead is doing isn't defending his actions necessarily. He's trying to construct a defense from the criticism that Cruz is receiving. He's saying that while what he did was bad in an optics sense it wasn't morally wrong. This is true if your moral system does not require that a person with the power to act for the good of others does so. Dead is laying this out in a lot of words. He could say the same thing in less words like I presented last time and not embarrass himself half as much. I think that this is not a good moral system because it's a system that pretty much oks some pretty horrible shit as long as there are enough steps between the person not acting and the horrible shit that happens.

I like Spider-Man and that whole great power, great responsibility thing has really stuck with me over the years. I believe that at a certain point if you have the power, resources, ability to help others in need you are absolutely are morally obligated to do so. Of course we are not all equally capable and it would be pretty a pretty insane ask to have everyone working on this to capacity. It is much easier to look toward people vested with a lot of power and resources to act. While everyone can do 'something' to help out my willingness to judge someone as being morally wrong for failing to act drops as we go from member of one of the most powerful congressional bodies on the planet down to just a random citizen. While accounting for exact numbers may get fuzzy I can very comfortably say in this situation that Cruz could've easily helped a lot of people out, that as a community leader and elected official going out of his way to leverage his power to help his constituents was his duty, and not only did he choose not to do anything he did so while removing himself from the situation. So yes. At least for people like me who believe that people in power ought to act for the good of the people Cancun Cruz's actions represent a moral failing.

This is actually the upper bound of Ted Cruz' helpfulness. He doesn't do anything to actually help people, but he can put in the effort to be an extra-unbelievable asshole, which increases the chances that he might be replaced by someone who might actually help people. That may seem like little, and indeed it is.

Kaelik wrote:

Thaluikhain wrote:Yeah, not seeing much practically useful he could do by staying, but c'mon, stay there and get in front of a camera and promise that things will be sorted out. Making sure they get sorted out would help as well, though.

I think it is important to distinguish between the fact that Ted Cruz OBVIOUSLY wouldn't do anything good to help people if he did stay with what he COULD have done.

That's certainly true, yes.

More Vulcan logic, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. Cruz fucked that up as a Vulcan.

I'm now eagerly anticipating what dead's wife (a historian!) thinks about this

Lets not even consider Spock.

Machiavelli would condemn Cruz for doing it wrong.

He was really big on at least going to the effort of appearing to do the right thing being a major part of this sort of job.

In interesting news, I've seen this argument that Cruz shouldn't be expected to do anything elsewhere.

It was attributed to Ben Shapiro.

Well known fail tier Vulcan Romulan Klingon Ferengi, Ben Shapiro.

As an Australian, I'm surprised to learn that elected officials aren't supposed to fuck off to nicer places in times of calamitous weather.

In seriousness, when our PM did that while the country was on fire, he too tried the "Look I don't hold a hose" excuse, while ignoring that people in positions of power can release funds for specific emergencies, can tell different departments to work together on solutions, can create or authorise specific emergency task forces and so on. Now, since then, he has forced a woman to shake his hand (which makes sense given they're now revealed to be the party of rapists), promised a bunch of money (which was never delivered where actually promised), then handed some money over to key electorates that vote for him, mostly just gifting it to friends.

And if any part of that sounds familiar, well... yeah. The Zodiac Killer could and should have done a lot of things, he was in a position to do that with his influence and official capacity, and he didn't, but will do his best to turn the crisis into an opportunity to enrich his friends.

Koumei wrote:In seriousness, when our PM did that while the country was on fire, he too tried the "Look I don't hold a hose" excuse

There are... so many extra things about that because our current PM never met a Train wreck he couldn't smash 5 more trains into.

But I'll restrain myself to adding these two.

1) He went on vacation to Hawaii. Lied that he wasn't there. Got caught out. Lied that he was coming back immediately. Did not come back immediately Then lied that anyone lied about it.

2) The guy who was PRIME MINISTER just two Prime ministers (and not that long) ago. Nutbag, asshole and (by current standards only mild) fascist that he is at the very least should be credited for BEING AN ACTUAL VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTER WHO ACTUALLY FIGHTS FIRES. They actually used the "well the PM isn't going to fight fires personally" while another PM was fighting fires personally.

PhoneLobster wrote:
Well known fail tier Vulcan Romulan Klingon Ferengi, Ben Shapiro.

What do you mean by this? It can be seen in poor taste to compare a jewish person to a Ferengi.

Whatever wrote:Hey deaddm, are you going to clarify which pre-2020 wildfires you meant, or did you straight up forget that California elected Kamala Harris to the Senate in 2016 when Sen Boxer retired?

I got Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein confused. They were both senators when I lived in California, and Feinstein was older. Yes, I forgot which one retired.

You can look at any natural disaster in any state at any time and basically find that the Senator wasn't there or didn't do anything and it was fine.

The reaction to Ted Cruz is not about any specific action or inaction - it is entirely about the perceived disregard for the suffering of others. While that's consistent with his demonstrated personality, it is ABSOLUTELY unfair to assign the worst motives in a case like this.

When a hurricane is barreling toward your coastal town, you evacuate. If you're unable or unwilling, after the hurricane hits and you lose everything, you relocate. If you lost power and water and went to a hotel, you wouldn't expect people to judge you harshly - those are important things and going to where they are available is absolutely normal behavior. If Cruz had done that IN TEXAS, I don't think anyone would have batted an eye.

lol

deaddmwalking wrote:When a hurricane is barreling toward your coastal town, you evacuate. If you're unable or unwilling, after the hurricane hits and you lose everything, you relocate.

lol

Leress wrote:

PhoneLobster wrote:
Well known fail tier Vulcan Romulan Klingon Ferengi, Ben Shapiro.

What do you mean by this? It can be seen in poor taste to compare a jewish person to a Ferengi.

I was unaware. Ben Shaprio is a person?

In all seriousness though, we both know that it was a criticism of Shapiro personally, and one that very much matches him, personally and individually.

Don't go trundling out the hair trigger dishonestly attributed antisemitism bus, even in jest, that's a whole politics thread on its own.

deaddmwalking wrote:the perceived disregard for the suffering of others

lol

Guys, it's really important we give benefit of the doubt to Ted Cr-- bahahahahahaha. Holy shit lol

Elected leaders aren't just bureaucrats with particularly high positions in the org chart. We have a lot of those appointed by the executive branch, and nobody notices or cares if they telecommute from the Bahamas for the entire goddamn year.

An elected leader has an additional duty to lead. To promote unity within their constituency by being someone that their constituency can believe in, and to promote faith in the system by visibly working to make the system serve the needs of their constituency. One of his duties as a leader that when things get bad for his constituency, he bunkers down with them and promises they'll get through it together, not because that significantly increases his ability to practically deal with the crisis, but because it demonstrates solidarity with the people who can't flee the storm as well as faith in his and the Texan state government's ability to resolve the crisis.

Obviously, Ted Cruz was never going to do any of that, but it is in fact an important part of his job. Morale matters.