Rand Paul presses education secy nominee on transgender athletes

[Sammy]

Based Rand!

 

[jmdrake]

Based Rand!

But supposedly people think Rand sold out to become popular with the establishment because he voted to confirm Biden's secretary of defense under the same circumcstances that republicans voted for Trump's secretary of defense and because he voted to confirm Bootyjudge.

 

[dannno]

bump

 

[dannno]

https://twitter.com/joesanders33/status/1352118337090813956

They are already accusing Rand Paul of "misgendering" in his arguments.

 

[Sammy]

But supposedly people think Rand sold out to become popular with the establishment because he voted to confirm Biden's secretary of defense under the same circumcstances that republicans voted for Trump's secretary of defense and because he voted to confirm Bootyjudge.

Don't forget rand voted for John Kerry to be Obama's Secretary of State too. Kerry voted for the Kosovo war,for the iraq war & he was in favor of the war in libya.
If I was Rand I would have voted no on Kerry,Pompeo,Lloyd Austin & buttigieg.

 

[TheTexan]

I self identify as a toaster.

They should allow me to be included in the Consumer Reports top 10 toasters

https://www.consumerreports.org/toasters/best-toasters-from-consumer-reports-tests/

 

[Invisible Man]

Hopefully in pursuing this line of argument, Rand didn't mean to imply that he supports current DOE policies that rely on Title IX to prop up women's college athletics.

 

[dannno]

Hopefully in pursuing this line of argument, Rand didn't mean to imply that he supports current DOE policies that rely on Title IX to prop up women's college athletics.

No, he just informed them that is the law, that is the law that for decades the left fought for, and that now they are tearing down that law and making things worse than they have ever been.

 

[Invisible Man]

No, he just informed them that is the law, that is the law that for decades the left fought for, and that now they are tearing down that law and making things worse than they have ever been.

It's not the law. It's a policy that the Executive branch came up with as its interpretation of the law. If universities chose to give all their athletic scholarships based on athletic merit, without giving any special benefits to female athletes just for being female (as the federal government now requires them to do through those Executive branch non-law policies), they would be well within the letter of the law.

You are right that this policy is something that for decades the left has fought for. I don't see that as a point in that policy's favor though.

 

[dannno]

It's not the law. It's a policy that the Executive branch came up with as its interpretation of the law. If universities chose to give all their athletic scholarships based on athletic merit, without giving any special benefits to female athletes just for being female (as the federal government now requires them to do through those Executive branch non-law policies), they would be well within the letter of the law.

You are right that this policy is something that for decades the left has fought for. I don't see that as a point in that policy's favor though.

It is in this case. This bad policy is infinitely better than the one they are pushing, which kills this policy, a policy the left helped push for, for decades.

Do you understand what persuasion is? Rand isn't going to convince them to take the position that girls sports shouldn't be as well funded as boys sports. Even if they agreed with Rand, they would lose their elections and/or funding if they agreed with him publicly. He can convince them that the current policy, which we know is bad, is far better than the one they are pushing, which is completely disastrous.

 

[Invisible Man]

It is in this case. This bad policy is infinitely better than the one they are pushing, which kills this policy, a policy the left helped push for, for decades.

Do you understand what persuasion is? Rand isn't going to convince them that girls sports shouldn't be as well funded as boys sports. He can convince them that the current policy, which is bad, is far better than the one they are pushing, which is completely disastrous.

What makes the current policy of forcing schools to give athletic scholarships to female athletes who wouldn't be able to get those scholarships on the basis of their athletic merit if they had to compete against male athletes for them infinitely better than a policy in which they do have to compete against male athletes for them?

It seems to me that if the policy they're pushing does kill the current policy, as you say, then that would be a silver lining.

 

[dannno]

What makes the current policy of forcing schools to give athletic scholarships to female athletes who wouldn't be able to get those scholarships on the basis of their athletic merit if they had to compete against male athletes for them infinitely better than a policy in which they do have to compete against male athletes for them?

It seems to me that if the policy they're pushing does kill the current policy, as you say, then that would be a silver lining.

You don't seem to be able to see the forest through the trees.

In a vacuum, you are correct. We are not in a vacuum, we are on a slippery slope.

 

[Invisible Man]

You don't seem to be able to see the forest through the trees.

In a vacuum, you are correct. We are not in a vacuum, we are on a slippery slope.

I see what you're talking about. But I also see that the enemy here is pursuing a self-destructive path. What Rand is noticing here is unintended consequences of the left's policies, consequences that inevitably arise from its own irrationality. There is something to be said for letting them play out and destroy themselves. The current trend in favor of transgenderism (to the extent that such a trend even exists--in reality I think very few people buy into it) is doomed to fail. It is simply not sustainable.

On the other hand, getting back to your point in post #10 about persuasion, the question is what is the idea Rand wishes to persuade people to adopt. If the idea is that males should not be allowed to enter, and thus dominate, and thus destroy female athletics simply by choosing to label themselves as girls and women without any biological basis for that, and if persuading people were really the agenda, then I posit that Rand could most effectively persuade them of that by playing the devil's advocate and positively pushing letting males compete against females for the express purpose of destroying female athletics. Once that was identified as a goal of the right, rather than the left, the reaction against it would be swift, and Rand would have successfully persuaded people to adopt the policy he would have opposed (which is what, he ostensibly actually wants here). I am only saying this slightly tongue-in-cheek, since I really do mean that if Rand did that it truly would be an effective act of persuading people to adopt the policy he actually wanted them to in order to oppose the one he was pretending to support. But at the end of the day, I'm not sure I really see the virtue in persuading people of that.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

I self identify as a toaster.

They should allow me to be included in the Consumer Reports top 10 toasters

https://www.consumerreports.org/toasters/best-toasters-from-consumer-reports-tests/

You're in the top 15 at best. Try turning in more neighbors and voting harder.

 

[dannno]

I see what you're talking about. But I also see that the enemy here is pursuing a self-destructive path. What Rand is noticing here is unintended consequences of the left's policies, consequences that inevitably arise from its own irrationality. There is something to be said for letting them play out and destroy themselves. The current trend in favor of transgenderism (to the extent that such a trend even exists--in reality I think very few people buy into it) is doomed to fail. It is simply not sustainable.

On the other hand, getting back to your point in post #10 about persuasion, the question is what is the idea Rand wishes to persuade people to adopt. If the idea is that males should not be allowed to enter, and thus dominate, and thus destroy female athletics simply by choosing to label themselves as girls and women without any biological basis for that, and if persuading people were really the agenda, then I posit that Rand could most effectively persuade them of that by playing the devil's advocate and positively pushing letting males compete against females for the express purpose of destroying female athletics. Once that was identified as a goal of the right, rather than the left, the reaction against it would be swift, and Rand would have successfully persuaded people to adopt the policy he would have opposed (which is what, he ostensibly actually wants here). I am only saying this slightly tongue-in-cheek, since I really do mean that if Rand did that it truly would be an effective act of persuading people to adopt the policy he actually wanted them to in order to oppose the one he was pretending to support. But at the end of the day, I'm not sure I really see the virtue in persuading people of that.

That's Awaken with JP's job.

 

[tebowlives]

After the race was over at a local high school event, the top three finishers of the womens 100 meter event are about to receive their medals

Q:Before the medals are awarded how can one tell which one of the three is the winner?
A:The one with the boner.

 

[Occam's Banana]

[Rand] can convince them that the current policy, which we know is bad, is far better than the one they are pushing, which is completely disastrous.

Rand won't convince them of any such thing - because they don't care.
(And that's a good thing. Enough with this "lesser of evils" BS.)

For them, this is not about "fairness" or "[whatever] rights" or anything like that.

This is about power and control. Nothing more. Nothing less. Nothing else.

And the more disastrous, catastrophic and irrational the policy, the more their power is confirmed by its adoption.

Coexistence with them in the same polity is not possible, and people need to have their noses rubbed in this fact good and hard.

And the sooner, the better, before they can fully consolidate their grip over ... well, over everything ...

 

[tommyrp12]

“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”

― Theodore Dalrymple

They could have tranny only races but that's not the point.

 

[idiom]

Transgender people have been allowed in the olympics for two decades now. How many medals do you think they have won? Zero. The only medals have gone to naturally intersex people, like the androgen immune who are XY but look entirely like women naturally.

The most notable transgender highschool athlete is Mack Beggs who is a transman but whom Texas keeps forcing to wrestle girls. He has won every match two years in a row but is still not allowed to wrestle boys.

Rand is so far in the wrong here, setting up libertarianism once again as being the liberty to bully others.

Transgender people are coming for your sports same as Iraq is awash in WMDs.