Sunday School

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Jake,

When did Hannibal diversify into Davy Crockett’s territory of killin’ bar?

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Robert,

The Big Lie didn’t start in 2015, nor did “Alternative Facts” start with Kellyanne Conway.

Basically, MAGA just looked at the Postmodern/Critical Theory/Identitarian students who’ve spent 60 years repeating: “Hey!-Hey! Ho!-Ho! Western Civ Has Got To Go!” and telling of “My Truth! His Truth! Her Truth!” and MAGA replied:

“Hold my beer!”

And The Fairness Doctrine is the notion that biased speech is not free speech and in practice it just meant that TV and radio stations avoided trouble with regulators and put their contraversial topics on non-Prime Time slots on Saturday or Sunday at the crack of dawn…if they even aired controversial topics at all. The Fairness Doctrine was even used by various Administrations to suppress opposition viewpoints as the same Wiki page pointed out further down:

The fairness doctrine has been used by various administrations to harass political opponents on the radio. Bill Ruder, Assistant Secretary of Commerce in the Kennedy administration, acknowledged that “Our massive strategy [in the early 1960s] was to use the Fairness Doctrine to challenge and harass right-wing broadcasters and hope that the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited and decide it was too expensive to continue.”[24] Former Kennedy FCC staffer Martin Firestone wrote a memo to the Democratic National Committee on strategies to combat small rural radio stations unfriendly to Democrats:

The right-wingers operate on a strictly cash basis and it is for this reason that they are carried by so many small stations. Were our efforts to be continued on a year-round basis, we would find that many of these stations would consider the broadcasts of these programs bothersome and burdensome (especially if they are ultimately required to give us free time) and would start dropping the programs from their broadcast schedule.[25]

Today, without the Fairness Doctrine, there is information and every viewpoint imaginble on broadcast, cable, and in cyberspace if nowhere else. Finding Truth in all this and evaluting it is still the job of the one who beholds it.

It helps to remember also that there is a Logical Fallacy called Argument to Moderation or The Golden Mean Fallacy. Just as fallacious as False Binary, only turned inside out. Not everything in the middle is automtically right; evidence and syllogistic logic still carries the day.

Argument to Moderation–Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation

• This reply was modified 3 weeks ago by  TheEncogitationer. Reason: Speling correction, because getting readers to understand isn't fair

[_Robert_Participant]

Well, we allow billionaires who own mass media channels and social media websites to contribute hundreds of millions to political candidates.

Go ahead and tell me about “free” speech. What a crock of bullshit. Speech is not free…it is for sale and is owned by billionaires.

Having professional, educated people who are experts in their areas and who care about being moral, determining truth and reporting on all points of view is necessary for this or any democracy to survive. Of course, those who have other ideas who are not onboard with government “of the people”. And of course they attack any truthful press. It’s the authoritarian playbook 101.

Well, here we are, Enco. You should be happy. This is what you want. Government is getting smaller every day. Every key official is a first-class, kiss-ass, boot licker too. Just think how efficient The Christian Nationalist States of America is becoming. You can even buy any Tesla model you want! You do know Atheists are on the bad list, right? I think we better see the light and come to Jesus pretty quick.

 

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Robert,

You do know that the biggest opponents of Citizens United v. The Federal Elections Commission were all corporations in the mainstrem media like The New York Timees, The Christian Science Monitor, and The Corporation for Public Brodcasting? And that the ruling sure didn’t make opposing politcians choosy about donations?

And you do know that the Supremes who were the majority in Citizens United saw dontions as an emanation of the penumbra of free speech, just as Griswald v. Connecticut affirming the right to practice contraception and Roe v. Wade affirming the right to aborton upheld emanations of the penumbra of the rights recognized in the Forth and Forteenth Amendments. Citizens United was defending anyone’s right to express themselves via donations.

What It Takes to Speak Freely: A Defense of Citizens United
Written By Eli Solomon
https://hulr.org/fall-2024/what-it-takes-to-speak-freely-a-defense-of-citizens-united

Just think how efficient The Christian Nationalist States of America is becoming. You can even buy any Tesla model you want! You do know Atheists are on the bad list, right? I think we better see the light and come to Jesus pretty quick.

You do know that Christian Nationalists don’t favor free expresion for anyone who doesn’t believe as they do and would regiment their opponents as surely as you sound like you would. And “come to Jesus”? Are you even listening to yourself?

• This reply was modified 3 weeks ago by  TheEncogitationer. Reason: Grammar and spelling, while I'm still free to edit

[jakelafortParticipant]

Enco,

I wasn’t going to bother responding to the ideologue. Just one more instance in which an ideologue is utterly blind to his ideology.

But he is a self-proclaimed patriot. Patriots high tail it out of the country
to Toronto when things get dicey. Right? I am good with him finding a home on the moon. I am gonna kill the fucking baar today.

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Jake,

I take it you mean Jason Stanley from the other thread. Academia and NPR/CPB are just self-sabotagiing. You don’t even have to be Trump or MAGA to either help them along or enjoy it,

Trump and MAGA are also self-sabotaging with Signalgate. Except for the fact that Islamofascists, Russia, and Red China could be getting intel, this would be just as funny.

Well, if you go killin’ bar, don’t tell PETA or ALF, they’ll be on you like skunk spray! And don’t tell RFK JR, he’ll put the bar in his trunk and drive off the Chappaquidick Bridge!

[PopeBeanieModerator]

TheEncogitationer wrote:

[…]Citizens United was defending anyone’s right to express themselves via donations.

What It Takes to Speak Freely: A Defense of Citizens United Written By Eli Solomon https://hulr.org/fall-2024/what-it-takes-to-speak-freely-a-defense-of-citizens-united

That article emphasizes more than once, I’m paraphrasing, that “meaningful speech” requires payment of money in order to be heard, e.g. via media. No mention of the contra-coralary is made, of course, that by definition, this means that smaller money efforts automatically lose to bigger money efforts to exercise free speech.

What does “free speech” even mean when it cannot reach the eyes and ears of people after big money has bought all the channels available for speech? This problem could not have been predicted when written in the constitution and amendments over a couple hundred years ago.

Another perspective on this. What if every voting-eligible citizen had an equal right to be heard, regardless of money paid? Every employee of a corporation has this right, yet a corporation when defined as an entitled entity on it’s own has additional power of speech above and beyond each employee/citizen making up the corporation?

Obviously, politicians themselves, especially incumbents, are not interested in limiting big money in political campaigns.

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

PopeBeanie,

That article emphasizes more than once, I’m paraphrasing, that “meaningful speech” requires payment of money in order to be heard, e.g. via media. No mention of the contra-coralary is made, of course, that by definition, this means that smaller money efforts automatically lose to bigger money efforts to exercise free speech.

What does “free speech” even mean when it cannot reach the eyes and ears of people after big money has bought all the channels available for speech? This problem could not have been predicted when written in the constitution and amendments over a couple hundred years ago.

Small spenders of like mind, however, can and do pull their funds together to form newsletters, think tanks, public interest law firms, political lobbies, and other groups that have the ear of officials. That is also what is defended in Citizens United.

Another perspective on this. What if every voting-eligible citizen had an equal right to be heard, regardless of money paid? Every employee of a corporation has this right, yet a corporation when defined as an entitled entity on it’s own has additional power of speech above and beyond each employee/citizen making up the corporation?

Obviously, politicians themselves, especially incumbents, are not interested in limiting big money in political campaigns.

The other side of this is that employees, whether unionized or organized, and shareholders of corporations can and do share interests with the corporation too. And Citizens United applied to unions and other legitimate organiztions too.

And another thing to think about is that if private individuals are restricted from spending their own money on causes or candidates of their choice, doesn’t it set the precedent for government to monopolize funding of elections and control outcomes for the benefit of the encumbent establishment?

Money in politics is really a symptom and a peripheral, not the disease. The disease is the pervasiveness of government into every aspect of life. If government were limited to protection of citizen’s rights and not redistibution of wealth or legislating of strictly private decisions, it wouldn’t be something people would want to spend money on to ply infleunce.

[jakelafortParticipant]

I think i’ve made it clear how antiprogressive/far left i am. I can’t speak as intelligently on issues like DEI and wokeness. The Jew hating religion on other hand i am more than a little conversant.

Recently Gazans have at thier peril begun to protest in numbers against Hamas. Incidentally they have also called out Al Jazeera which is not covering the protests. Big surprise there. Can’t put a pin in the balloon of resistance!

So far it is essentially the same for the lefty pro-palestinian Jew haters abroad. I’d like to see that everything is not always so predictable. The narrative concerning genocide in Gaza for the most morally upstanding war utterly as i expected. Any opportunity to smear Jews/Israel and have foggy glasses otherwise is taken. Pinning historical obloquy and allowing the connotations of those vile words to rest on the victims is part of the M.O.

Obviously if they were not mindless ideologues or intensely stupid and actually cared about humanitarian issues this BS would stop. And so would the proliferation of Jew hatred that has been unleashed by the lefties. And incidentally it has permeated not only higher institutions but all the way down into elementary schools and high schools. Another generation of Jew hatred and all the harm it will do. Gee thanks lefties.

Illustrative of the hypocrisy concerning the newly erupted protests i quote from an article just published in the J. Post.

“I thought, wow, maybe they are out here to support the hundreds of thousands of Gazans who have been demonstrating against Hamas and demanding the end of the terror group’s rule. Instead, these demonstrators were repeating the same old tired slogans and made no mention or reference to Gazans who are putting their lives on the line. The tone-deafness of the protesters was astonishing, almost as if they were deliberately trying to obfuscate what was happening in Gaza.”

Alkhatib wrote that in addition to challenging Hamas, these Gaza protesters were exposing the fraud of the mainstream “pro-Palestine solidarity” movement in the West, “one that only cares about Palestinian lives when they fit a narrow anti-Israel agenda and apply selective outrage but never toward an Islamist fascist terrorist organization that destroyed the Palestinian national project and harmed the Palestinian people. Shame on all who are still silent!”

[_Robert_Participant]

The country is chock full of “single issue” voters who align with one party or the other. I do not agree that hating Jews or supporting Hamas is “liberal” or “left”.

White Christian Nationals despise Jews. Israel is just a necessary piece of the prophecy that brings their Jeebus back. If Israel goes away without the rapture, so does the whole story they sell.

I have a bandmate who is liberal in every way except he loves guns and shooting. He told me he voted for MAGA. He works for a government contractor. They just gave him his pink slip today. Mid 60’s, slowing economy, he is fucked. I told him better net depend on Social Security, either. Shadow president Musk wants it gone.

[jakelafortParticipant]

Robert: The country is chock full of “single issue” voters who align with one party or the other. I do not agree that hating Jews or supporting Hamas is “liberal” or “left”.

Classical liberalism. Agreed. Classical liberals i think are more apt to see a thing for what it is. They will be aghast at the sex slavery, FGM, absence of rights for women and minorities, execution of gays etc. It does not have to fit any narrative. It is not settled on a narrow and childish world view in which oppressors are bad guys and indigenous are good guys. They don’t have to pretend that Jews in Israel are White colonialist settler apartheid genociders of indigenous innocents. Islam is the greatest or certainly one of the greatest sources of every form of oppression and humanitarian crises. So a classical liberal would presumably oppose Islam. Maybe i am wrong there. IDK. Classical liberals would support women’s rights, gay rights, civil rights. Far left are out and out racists. No bones about it. And they are supporters of the Islamic screwdriver in censoring Muslim women who want the truth about Islam to be revealed, censors of people who expose the antisemitims emanating from the far left. And obviously in promoting a super destructive protection from criticism of Islam in their stinking islamophobia. Direct consequences of that stance in legal matters, in media, in discourse. etc.

As far as single issue voters i found the following but only based on a poll of a thousand. Top priorities for single-issue voters
Voters were asked if any one issue is so important that it would determine their support for or against a candidate.

Protecting democracy or constitutional rights
19%
Abortion
18
Immigration or border security
14
Guns
9
Israel-Hamas war
5
LGBTQ issues
4
None of these
21
Source: The national NBC News poll was conducted Nov. 10-14 and surveyed 1,000 registered voters nationally. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points for all voters and larger for the subsamples.

Robert: White Christian Nationals despise Jews. Israel is just a necessary piece of the prophecy that brings their Jeebus back. If Israel goes away without the rapture, so does the whole story they sell.

Agreed.

Have not contemplated whether single issue voters are a good or bad thing compared to right or left wing ideologues. Obviously both the Trump cultists and the progressives are a cancer. Reading some of the social media drech from Trump cultists it is mind numbingly freakish how stupid so many of them are. Absolutely no capability of discerning the most obvious lies.

[Author]

Posts