TheCat

Thanks nigello...yes, its the obvious advice, I guess im just puzzled as to why I should have to ask...for the people in the room to introduce themselves as a matter of course would seem like the standard thing to do to me. They already know who I am (they, literally, just called my name)... Perhaps I should have put my OP in the tiny things that cause irrational rage thread instead:).....

Sounds like you've had some better experiences than I have Spartacus. I have indeed occasionally asked who people are, but often one can feel bundled-in/rushed/put-upon, and perhaps a bit flustered which doesnt always make it easy. I might add that each time this has been a problem its not me who is the patient, and my focus is usually on trying to make sure the actual patient is okay. If its a stressful and rushed appointment, interrupting to ask for intro's isnt always as easy as it perhaps should be!

I appreciate that generally medical clincians are under time pressure for most appointments, and need to get people in and out. But why is it that they generally never introduce themselves? (At least not in my experience) Im not talking about a GP or consultant appointment, as thats generally a 1-to-1 and you know who you are meeting ahead of time. But Im referring to going to hospitals, medical centres etc for tests, scans, asessments etc etc and walking into a room where there might be 3 or 4 people...none of whom introduce themselves or even say what their role is...I.e. Are you a doctor? A nurse? A radiographer? A specialist? a student? the janitor? I have great respect for many medical practitioners, but I think its probably easy to become a little desensitised to the invasive and/or highly personal nature of many of these interactions. While they may see x-many people per day, for each individual patient, being there is likely to be quite a big deal, and will likely feel vulnerable/intimidated/overwhelmed with 3-4 total strangers all either staring at them, prodding them or telling them to do this and that. And I would think a quick intro to who is in the room would go a long way to at least providing some level of comfort. This struck me as a problem both times my wife was pregnant, and we would go to hospital for antenatal appointments...at one ultrasound, I counted 5 people in the room (not including my wife and I) and a couple more coming in and out from time to time, not a pleasant environment when quite personal things are being done, and quite emotional subjects are being discussed. Also recently, I had to take my 7 year old son to hospital for a long appointment...yes, of course we knew the overarching reason we were there, but he walks into a room with 3 women all staring at him, firing questions at him questions, and I cant even provide him with the modicom of comfort as to who the heck these people even are.... Anyway....anyone else find this is something that concerns them?

Interesting topic. I think most people will struggle with being able to seperate out and isolate out this one characteristic from their overall view of a politican. Another feature of the all or nothing/ tribal type way that public debate has gone. But it is indeed possible....probably the most powerful example I can think of is Adolff Hitler. Its pretty hard to argue that he wasnt a highly skilled orator....

My comment is not meant to be supportive of trump in anyway. Or intended to compare Biden's administration directly to Trumps as you have done. The discussion of the US should be about so much more then Biden Vs Trump...my comment is on Biden...versus the history of the US in global conflict and global affairs If you think Biden has done great by the overall standards of US statesmanship(not versus Trump), then that surprises me....

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Boris has a six point plan > > Sometimes I wonder if he is being used by > NATO/USA/EU to Rope a Dope Putin. > > I can't believe he comes up with stuff without > talking about it with our allies first. Havent seen what Boris has said today. But overall it does feel that the complete lack of leadership coming from the US President at present has created something of a vacuum, and the result (at least from a laymans perspective) seems to be a pretty disjointed 'front' from the west. You have the EU saying and doing some things, Nato saying and doing other things, the UN making pointless symbolic resolutions, Macron going off trying to be a hero unilaterally, Boris doing whatever boris does, plus various other world leaders chipping in from time to time.... Perhaps this is how these things always are, but in the past the US repoinse has dominated the news cycle so its less noticeable what other bodies/nations are doing and saying.... In the absence of a dominant US voice in global affairs, it doesn make everyone else in the 'west' look a bit like a pen of headless chickens....

RIP Shane Warne

I suspect in this context, 'decadence' may not only refer to material or monetary posessions, but also to the fact that most of western population don't have to deal with a great deal of 'real' problems...i.e religious or ethnic persecution (I'm not talking about an -ism or a phobia, but actual persecution), or until recently not having to worry about pestilence or access to drinkable water etc)...so increasingly trivial problems are often manufactured... I.e. it must all sound a bit ridiculous for people with actual bombs dropping on their heads to hear phrases like 'silence is violence', or that oxford students suffer 'violence' when they walk past a statue of Cecil Rhodes.... I'm not saying we shouldn't have those discussions, and Im not intending to start a debate on idenitarian politics. Just making the point, that us having the luxury to debate and argue about such things must seem very 'decadent' to many of those those in less developed nations....

I wouldn't think it's a problem to just straight up ask them if you run into them and are striking up a conversation...I.e Nice weather we've been having? How are the kids? What do you make of everything going on in Ukraine?....that's not rude at all in my book, and also if asked in that fashion doesn't pre-suppose anything about how they might answer...and also leave them free to not really commit to any sort of answer if they don't want to....but I'd be surprised if a native Russian didn't have a view, and people generally love being asked their opinion on something they care about...

SpringTime Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > jazzer Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > "We shouldn't be using gas anyway. No one > > should." > > > > Gotta say that's a pretty daft comment; How do > you > > heat your home, cook food, dry your clothes, > stay > > warm etc........ > > We've done well without gas for tens of thousands > of years. We did 'well' without basically every modern convenience for tens of thousands of years too.

Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Europe takes (from memory) 40% of > their supply. That is basically the answer to your question Spartacus....this stuff doesn't grow on trees:)

I get where you're coming from seabag, the term is starting to lose a little bit of meaning, but this obsession goes both ways though I think....it seems like just mentioning the word 'woke' in a negative context gets progressive folk lashing out... If Muhammad Ali was still around, he might even call it woke-a-dope....:)

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "Based on my first-hand experience, I contend that > my views have a solid foundation are more > objective and better represent reality." > > But I would state the opposite - it's all > subjective. > > If you have a Anti-Woke/Leave versus Woke/Remain > agenda whichever side you are on you can't unite > more than about half. My apols John for perhaps being a bit trivial. But I think we need to not conflate having a 'view' or 'opinion' with having a 'agenda'.... Too often, people making uninformed assumptions about other people's 'agenda' torpedoes what could actually often be quite constructive discussions I also don't believe that agreement on a whole range of things isn't possible between people who might hold opposing views on others in some critical areas. There's of course even the concept opposing positions being discussed and debated, which result in compromises and concessions to reach a consensus view. Of course, all that said, this is the EDF....where division and tribalism is king...so ignore everything I said:)

P3girl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Another contributor got you responses got it spot > on a few months ago when he/she said...... > > "Sephiroth constantly twisting the focus of the > discussion with general 'whataboutery" to avoid > ever having to make any concessions on anything. > That's a fact too. > > Plus ca change! > > Let's hear it Seph - a detailed and considered > response. > Good luck with that. Great quote though:)

I have a green plaque. Which says that someone who loves high utility bills lives here.....

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thousands of innocent women and children being > blown out of their homes by an illegal invasion, > and someone wants to deflect the conversation onto > a pro-Putin hypothetical that it wouldn't have > happened under Trump. > > Sigh all you want Cat, you're shameless... All this coming from a poster....who on the first page of this very thread has attempted to draw lines of inference between Putin's actions and Brexit, as well as between Putin's actions and Johnson's 'boosterism' and lack of action on Russian money in the UK. So it seems according to DR it's not shameless to make those linkages, and apportion some blame to Brexit and Boris.....but to imply the that actions of the leader of the free world might have a linkage....well that, apparently, is shameless.. You truly are beyond parody.

So you and DR know 'what I am'.....so I ask again...I'd appreciate if you'd let me know....

Agreed Mal. For the record (and it's disappointing that I even need to say this), I thought:think Trump was a total disaster and embarrassment to the US (and the 'free world').... The 'fault' for the invasion of Ukraine lies squarely with Putin, and it's only people with an axe to grind against me personally, who could somehow contort themselves to imply that my initial comment suggested anything otherwise. Furthermore, in a wide ranging discussion on the whole issue, why should Biden escape criticism (as he seemingly has on this entire thread, and from people who typically aren't shy about criticising governments and their actions). And why is it not legitimate to compare his actions against the president who held office immediately prior to him? Apparently though it is. Apparently saying something not totally negative about Trump means implicit support of everything about the man. Apparently citing the views of 60 percent of the US population (according to polls) is a waste of time for the intelligentsia of the EDF. Because thinking about such things is only for the 'dumbest' or those pushing their devious agenda. Apparently, mentioniung such things, and doing so in the name of objectivity is grounds for being mocked for not being objective. Because, apparently, to some others, 'objectivity' doesn't involve thinking about things from different perspectives. It warrants mockery and dismissal. Mal...you ask in another thread why people don't contribute to discussions in the Lounge...unfort for every poster such as yourself who will respect most posters and different perspectives, there are another two who prefer to bully people into not really bothering....

Sigh. I don't know why you people need to make everything a 'fight'.... Very similar to a certain Russian President we all know....

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ''Just becuase you are incapable of being a > neutral or objective observer. Please don't assume > others cannot.'' > > If only that were true, if only. > > Over the years I've learnt that with Cat's posts > it's not so much about what he writes, but why he > writes, today's gambit being a perfect example. > > We know what you are... If you could please let me know 'why' I wrote today's 'gambit'....I would really appreciate it.... (As an aside, it's really quite a skill that you and seph have to turn what was really a fairly innocuous initial post into some sort of indignant crusade against my devious hidden agenda)

Just becuase you are incapable of being a neutral or objective observer. Please don't assume others cannot. I don't know whether I agree with those views or not..im not the expert in international defence strategy that you apparently have recently become. It would seem to me that some of that commentary is not totally unreasonable from 30secends of cursory thought. Polls have shown that over 60 percent of US citizens seem to think Ukraine invasion was less likely if Trump was still in office, and Biden's approval ratings with respect to how he has dealt with this are very poor. Again, I don't know if that's the right or wrong view (I'm sure you'll helpfully tell me who you view as a credible observer..my guess is someone who already agrees with you?). So anyway, perhaps a discussion over the issue isn't so fringe/outrageous/ridiculous/shameful as you seem to think it is.

Honestly. Do you have an alert set up whenever I post, so you can wind up your 'indignant' meter with an overly aggressive and unessary post? This seeming obsession with rubbishing or shaming every post I make is totally unnessary. Im sorry my very existence seems to irritate you so. I made an observation, which is factually true. There is indeed a lot of commentary to that effect. I'm not ashamed of that in the slightest.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The situation is indeed worrying. > > One thing we all have to be thankful for is that > Trump is no longer in charge. > > DulwichFox There's quite a lot of analysis and commentary around suggesting the whole thing was very unlikely to have taken place had Trump still been in power. In anycase, I can't say I'm feeling particularly encouraged by the 'leadership' old sleepy Joe has shown.....

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't generally agree with the Cat's views but I > do like his/her style. Nothing wrong with being > provocative Many Thanks mal. The thing is, it's often only regarded as provocative if the views are at odds with the zeitgeist.... Step back and look at how 'provocative' some of the comments here are that are of the right view.....

Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No one is with you cat. > > No one Luckily, I have more conviction and independent though that most of the mob. But I'm glad you take solace in the fact that others agree with you (also...there are people outside of DR and KK....just so u know) I'm happy for you. If anyone could make a russia v Ukraine thread a brexit thread, it's the edf......