For someone who seems supportive of unfettered capitalism it strikes me as ... ironic ... funny ... sadly overwrought ... to object when a private entity makes a decision about its own property.
Glad to. I was raised by history professors and educators. I don't agree with government directed censorship, both because I believe in grappling with hard ideas, and because it distorts the historical record.
I detest the ideas of bigotry and discrimination of any kind - anti-Semitism, misogyny, racism to name a few - an objection rooted as much in my Christian faith as in my desire for clean scholarship. I know of no way to fight them however if they are allowed to be hidden under a bushel whether that hiding is done by a school board, or by burning what you think are every copy of the tome in question. I also believe that public sanction and censure for those spouting the ideas is a necessary condition of a functional society. And I do celebrate when bigots get taken downs hard in the public square.
As to corporate censorship - I'm not a fan either, though I do find it ironic that so many people who object to corporations limiting speech while applauding corporations who do all sorts of other unethical things in the name of profit. We live in a nation and a time where, with limited personal resources, I have to choose which to fight more. And frankly I choose government, because history teaches us over and over that government censorship is far more pernicious.
You know. The stuff that will get you to say “But Corporations can do whatever they want!” as if that’s not a phrase that you’re going to choke on someday.
Has it not ever occurred to you that I use that phrase both sarcastically and ironically, mostly to throw it back in the face of the "blow up the regulatory state and let capitalism reign free" conservatives, who invariably are all a twitter (the old kind) when businesses do something they don't like (like mandating getting vaccinated to keep working)?
Of the 4.4 million African Americans in the US before the war, almost four million of these people were held as slaves; meaning that for all African Americans living in the US in 1860, there was an 89 percent* chance that they lived in slavery.
Point of Order - The ACA underwent 72 hours of Senate Debate after 13 months of negotiations and committee hearings. There were also 147 Amendments form Republicans added to the bill in Committee. Granted, most of those were technical in nature, but they were introduced, and in most cases voted on. And the ACA was based on Heritage Foundation concepts and ideas, so it was the Minority's idea to start with.
And yet, even with that level of inclusion, it was denounced as partisan and voted against by every member of the GOP caucus in the Senate and House.
You weren't paying attention then and you aren't now. A publisher deciding not to continue publishing a book is not the same thing as a government entity removing a book from a public sphere.
True - like the "states rights" debate that swirls around the Civil War. As soon as you ask "States Rights To What" defenders always withdraw because they don't want to state publicly what the southern states plainly described in their articles of secession.
in one sense he's not wrong. Had the slaves been counted as full persons the souths proportional representation in the House would have been significantly greater, and probably drive policy choices and legislation that would have kept slavery intact for decades beyond its end.
Of the 4.4 million African Americans in the US before the war, almost four million of these people were held as slaves; meaning that for all African Americans living in the US in 1860, there was an 89 percent* chance that they lived in slavery.
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other Persons
Who do you believe the 3/5ths of all other persons applies to?
Over and over and over I and others have presented you significant, numerical evidence that both lack of equality of opportunity and lack of equality of outcome exist in this country for racial and ethnic minorities, women, and LGBTQ+ people. And over and over you have rejected that evidence, sometimes politely, sometimes impolitely. Judging you by both your words and your actions you don not want to be convinced that racism exists, much less that its a problem. That's my experience of years of interacting with you, and watching others interact with you. So yes, on this topic I do believe you are writing in bad faith. You are no doubt since in your beliefs and conclusions, but you are no more open to changing your beliefs on this then you are on abortion.
As to the 3/5ths compromise, it was done to keep southern states from garnering overwhelming political power since if all the slaves had been counted as full persons their population would have dwarfed the northern states. What makes it evil and ALSO about race is that it was only applied to enslaved black people. That it served two purposes is, incidental, intersectionality and one of the core principals that CRT seeks to elide.
Since I don't want to be convinced that differences in outcome are proof of racism, I see a lot fewer signs of racism in today’s culture.
Fixed it for you. I also disagree that CRT implies, much less declares, that our founding documents and principles are so flawed that racism can never be fixed. CRT quite rightly shows in those documents and the systems springing from them how racism shaped, and still shapes the nation. CRT also invites us to make changes to eliminate those flaws. Its like how the 13th Amendment corrected the evil of counting blacks as only 3/5ths of a person. That was never meant to be the end of the discussion, but a significant necessary step.
I'll just leave this right here, since pointing it out means I'm tossing venom into the public sphere and contributing to the demise of society:
A Manhattan restaurant where Sarah Palin was spotted dining indoors while unvaccinated over the weekend confirmed that the former Alaska governor returned to dine outdoors on Wednesday, just a few days after testing positive tor Covid.
At issue are current local guidelines that advise people who tested positive to remain in isolation for five days after their positive test.
Palin, who is in Manhattan for her defamation trial against the New York Times, tested positive for Covid-19, a federal judge presiding over her case said Monday, delaying the start of the trial. It's unclear what day Palin first tested positive.
"She is, of course, unvaccinated," said US District Judge Jed Rakoff Monday, according to Reuters.
So how do you propose we attacked the venom of racism and sexism without talking about and describing racism and sexism? That's what the CRT fight is about - don't talk about America's racial history and how it influences todays society.
The GOP only struggled with Bork because members of his party voted against him after he was given full hearings in Committee. Democrats struggled with Garland because the GOP didn't even conduct hearings, much less a floor vote. Apples and ice cubes.
Ridgeland Mayor Gene McGee is withholding $110,000 of funding from the Madison County Library System allegedly on the basis of his personal religious beliefs, with library officials stating that he has demanded that the system initiate a purge of LGBTQ+ books before his office releases the money.
We've gamed that out in at least three other threads. He won't switch parties because even in WV, he's not right wing enough to survive a primary challenge. He wants to stay in the senate, and that requires running where he is. Heritage Action gives him a 20% lifetime conservative score.
On “Supreme Court Justice Breyer Retiring At End Of Term”
For someone who seems supportive of unfettered capitalism it strikes me as ... ironic ... funny ... sadly overwrought ... to object when a private entity makes a decision about its own property.
"
Glad to. I was raised by history professors and educators. I don't agree with government directed censorship, both because I believe in grappling with hard ideas, and because it distorts the historical record.
I detest the ideas of bigotry and discrimination of any kind - anti-Semitism, misogyny, racism to name a few - an objection rooted as much in my Christian faith as in my desire for clean scholarship. I know of no way to fight them however if they are allowed to be hidden under a bushel whether that hiding is done by a school board, or by burning what you think are every copy of the tome in question. I also believe that public sanction and censure for those spouting the ideas is a necessary condition of a functional society. And I do celebrate when bigots get taken downs hard in the public square.
As to corporate censorship - I'm not a fan either, though I do find it ironic that so many people who object to corporations limiting speech while applauding corporations who do all sorts of other unethical things in the name of profit. We live in a nation and a time where, with limited personal resources, I have to choose which to fight more. And frankly I choose government, because history teaches us over and over that government censorship is far more pernicious.
"
You know. The stuff that will get you to say “But Corporations can do whatever they want!” as if that’s not a phrase that you’re going to choke on someday.
Has it not ever occurred to you that I use that phrase both sarcastically and ironically, mostly to throw it back in the face of the "blow up the regulatory state and let capitalism reign free" conservatives, who invariably are all a twitter (the old kind) when businesses do something they don't like (like mandating getting vaccinated to keep working)?
"
What do you consider censorship from the left?
On “Alternate Electors: The Illusion and Pretense of Lawfulness to the Unlawful”
one hopes this both continues and gets media traction:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/27/economy/us-fourth-quarter-2021-gdp/index.html
On “Supreme Court Justice Breyer Retiring At End Of Term”
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1010169/black-and-slave-population-us-1790-1880/
On “Filibuster Rule Change For Voting Rights Legislation Fails 52-48 in Senate”
Point of Order - The ACA underwent 72 hours of Senate Debate after 13 months of negotiations and committee hearings. There were also 147 Amendments form Republicans added to the bill in Committee. Granted, most of those were technical in nature, but they were introduced, and in most cases voted on. And the ACA was based on Heritage Foundation concepts and ideas, so it was the Minority's idea to start with.
And yet, even with that level of inclusion, it was denounced as partisan and voted against by every member of the GOP caucus in the Senate and House.
On “Supreme Court Justice Breyer Retiring At End Of Term”
You weren't paying attention then and you aren't now. A publisher deciding not to continue publishing a book is not the same thing as a government entity removing a book from a public sphere.
"
True - like the "states rights" debate that swirls around the Civil War. As soon as you ask "States Rights To What" defenders always withdraw because they don't want to state publicly what the southern states plainly described in their articles of secession.
On “Alternate Electors: The Illusion and Pretense of Lawfulness to the Unlawful”
Not just the base . . .
On “Supreme Court Justice Breyer Retiring At End Of Term”
in one sense he's not wrong. Had the slaves been counted as full persons the souths proportional representation in the House would have been significantly greater, and probably drive policy choices and legislation that would have kept slavery intact for decades beyond its end.
"
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1010169/black-and-slave-population-us-1790-1880/
"
Who do you believe the 3/5ths of all other persons applies to?
"
Over and over and over I and others have presented you significant, numerical evidence that both lack of equality of opportunity and lack of equality of outcome exist in this country for racial and ethnic minorities, women, and LGBTQ+ people. And over and over you have rejected that evidence, sometimes politely, sometimes impolitely. Judging you by both your words and your actions you don not want to be convinced that racism exists, much less that its a problem. That's my experience of years of interacting with you, and watching others interact with you. So yes, on this topic I do believe you are writing in bad faith. You are no doubt since in your beliefs and conclusions, but you are no more open to changing your beliefs on this then you are on abortion.
As to the 3/5ths compromise, it was done to keep southern states from garnering overwhelming political power since if all the slaves had been counted as full persons their population would have dwarfed the northern states. What makes it evil and ALSO about race is that it was only applied to enslaved black people. That it served two purposes is, incidental, intersectionality and one of the core principals that CRT seeks to elide.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/three-fifths-compromise
"
Fixed it for you. I also disagree that CRT implies, much less declares, that our founding documents and principles are so flawed that racism can never be fixed. CRT quite rightly shows in those documents and the systems springing from them how racism shaped, and still shapes the nation. CRT also invites us to make changes to eliminate those flaws. Its like how the 13th Amendment corrected the evil of counting blacks as only 3/5ths of a person. That was never meant to be the end of the discussion, but a significant necessary step.
On “Yes Virginia, There Was A Coup”
do these folks look silly to you?
On “Supreme Court Justice Breyer Retiring At End Of Term”
And when did you first read it?
On “No, Virginia, Natural Immunity is Not Six Times As Good As Vaccine Immunity”
I'll just leave this right here, since pointing it out means I'm tossing venom into the public sphere and contributing to the demise of society:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/27/business-food/sarah-palin-covid-restaurant/index.html
On “Supreme Court Justice Breyer Retiring At End Of Term”
So how do you propose we attacked the venom of racism and sexism without talking about and describing racism and sexism? That's what the CRT fight is about - don't talk about America's racial history and how it influences todays society.
"
The GOP only struggled with Bork because members of his party voted against him after he was given full hearings in Committee. Democrats struggled with Garland because the GOP didn't even conduct hearings, much less a floor vote. Apples and ice cubes.
"
The hate is quite plain to see:
https://www.mississippifreepress.org/20068/ridgeland-mayor-demands-lgbtq-book-purge-threatens-library-funding/
On “Alternate Electors: The Illusion and Pretense of Lawfulness to the Unlawful”
IF that had happened they'd still be looking for work because the remedy would have been a new election, with new electors appointed after.
On “Supreme Court Justice Breyer Retiring At End Of Term”
We've gamed that out in at least three other threads. He won't switch parties because even in WV, he's not right wing enough to survive a primary challenge. He wants to stay in the senate, and that requires running where he is. Heritage Action gives him a 20% lifetime conservative score.
We are stuck with him and he with us.
"
Manchin also believes there's still bipartisanship to be had in the Senate. Unless Biden really biffs the nomination he'll play along.
On “No, Virginia, Natural Immunity is Not Six Times As Good As Vaccine Immunity”
Turns out if you dig enough you can find the data - sort of:
https://opendata.ncats.nih.gov/variant/activity