DeSantis and his stupid laws

[BuckSwope 654]

25 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Should penthouse forum be in libraries? 

I will answer that after you finally answer my question about what your specific line in the sand is with sexual content.   You've still never addressed that, and I've been more than willing to answer all the questions you lob at me.  

[jonmx 1,590]

16 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Take a listen to MLK Jr’s final Sunday sermon at the Washington National Cathedral. He destroys this same argument… which tells you how long racists have been pushing it.

 

17 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Take a listen to MLK Jr’s final Sunday sermon at the Washington National Cathedral. He destroys this same argument… which tells you how long racists have been pushing it.

We live in a world that is vastly different than what we had in 1960's.  Besides, it is the same federal bastards who killed JFK/RFK/MLK which you bow down to and wish to cede all the power too.  The left is no longer liberal, they are authoritarian. 

[craftsman 1,045]

The only racists I see in this country are the leftist democrats who believe black people are not capable of taking care of themselves in life. 

[Dizkneelande 839]

23 minutes ago, jonmx said:

Lol...what a moron.  It is a government f-ing school.  Teachers aren't paid to express their idiotic views. They are paid to do the job taxpayers pay them for.  This has nothing to do with censorship.  You really can't make up how f-ing stupid the leftist arguements are.  

Lefties have had control of the public education system in this country for 50 years and like everything else the left gets involved in, it’s been a massive failure. It’s time the taxpayers had a say in what is taught and isn’t taught. On a price per pupil basis and comparative standardized testing, could we do any worse? 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,648]

28 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Take a listen to MLK Jr’s final Sunday sermon at the Washington National Cathedral. He destroys this same argument… which tells you how long racists have been pushing it.

No progress since 1968? 

[craftsman 1,045]

9 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

No progress since 1968? 

1968 is way in the future of the minds of the liberals. In their heads they are still dealing with the 1820s. 

[Voltaire 4,559]

56 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Lots of people on this thread love government censorship, as long as the stuff being censored is stuff they dislike.

Anybody that says issues of racism “are long since solved” is living in a fantasy world.

Stories are rare and most of the ones that generate national news anymore turn out to be Smollet-esque or involve fake nooses.

It's become a farce all the fake racism, over 2/3, it's become essentially a non-relevant issue.

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

2 hours ago, Voltaire said:

Tim, you're of the opinion that the country is systemically racist against black people. There's the biggest lie.  There have been no laws or policies holding anyone back for sixty years but if any do still exist, point them out so we can seek to change it together. It's the exact opposite, our entire lives, the country has bent over backwards to help black people. The left has abandoned equal protection and colorblindness and embraced this anti-racism nonsense, which is what actually really is the only legally endorsed racism of any significance in 2023, and it goes too far.

These issues of racism against black people were true but also old and are long since solved. The left obsesses over laws and situations that date back to pre-1964 as if the country hasn't changed in sixty years. 

 

Of course the country has changed, for the positive, since 1964. Of course I believe there are still aspects of systemic racism, particularly with regard to law enforcement. 
But my question wasn’t about my opinion. It was about the proposed course being full of lies. I asked for specific examples of lies. So far, only jon mx offered one, an assertion that 1619 says that slavery was the primary reason for the American Revolution. I asked for proof that the 1619 project actually argues this because I doubt that they do. He hasn’t provided it. 

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

In any event, Voltaire, even if I agreed with you 100% about racism basically ending in 1964, I would still want this course taught. Because I think honor students should be exposed to all sorts of ideas, including some ideas that I might personally find repellent. That’s what academic freedom is all about. I don’t want to force views on anyone and that is exactly what Florida is trying to do. And it will ultimately fail because you can’t clamp down on thought. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,517]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

In any event, Voltaire, even if I agreed with you 100% about racism basically ending in 1964, I would still want this course taught. Because I think honor students should be exposed to all sorts of ideas, including some ideas that I might personally find repellent. That’s what academic freedom is all about. I don’t want to force views on anyone and that is exactly what Florida is trying to do. And it will ultimately fail because you can’t clamp down on thought. 

And yet, your side of the aisle, the MSM and Big Tech have been colluding and trying to do just that to conservatives since at least 2016.

[craftsman 1,045]

8 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

In any event, Voltaire, even if I agreed with you 100% about racism basically ending in 1964, I would still want this course taught. Because I think honor students should be exposed to all sorts of ideas, including some ideas that I might personally find repellent. That’s what academic freedom is all about. I don’t want to force views on anyone and that is exactly what Florida is trying to do. And it will ultimately fail because you can’t clamp down on thought. 

Underage "honor students". Can't wait a couple months before they go to college? Gotta get em as young as you possibly can.  

Liberals will fight for as young as they can get their hooks into the kids. Cause if they let them grow to think for themselves, then liberals lose them. 

[RLLD 3,455]

6 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

In any event, Voltaire, even if I agreed with you 100% about racism basically ending in 1964, I would still want this course taught. Because I think honor students should be exposed to all sorts of ideas, including some ideas that I might personally find repellent. That’s what academic freedom is all about. I don’t want to force views on anyone and that is exactly what Florida is trying to do. And it will ultimately fail because you can’t clamp down on thought. 

If exposure as you have outlined it were truly a component of liberalism there would be no “safe spaces” nor “cancel culture”.

Liberalism is intolerance masked in a faux cloak of virtue.

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

2 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

And yet, your side of the aisle, the MSM and Big Tech have been colluding and trying to do just that to conservatives since at least 2016.

The mainstream media and “Big Tech” are private entities. In a free society they can do as they want. When you come up with an example of a Democrat being in favor of GOVERNMENT censorship then I’ll join you in denouncing him or her. Govt. censorship is the only kind that matters. 

[jonmx 1,590]

7 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

 It was about the proposed course being full of lies. I asked for specific examples of lies. So far, only jon mx offered one, an assertion that 1619 says that slavery was the primary reason for the American Revolution. I asked for proof that the 1619 project actually argues this because I doubt that they do. He hasn’t provided it. 

I Helped Fact-Check the 1619 Project. The Times Ignored Me. - POLITICO

 

n August 19 of last year I listened in stunned silence as Nikole Hannah-Jones, a reporter for the New York Times, repeated an idea that I had vigorously argued against with her fact-checker: that the patriots fought the American Revolution in large part to preserve slavery in North America.

Hannah-Jones and I were on Georgia Public Radio to discuss the path-breaking New York Times 1619 Project, a major feature about the impact of slavery on American history, which she had spearheaded. The Times had just published the special 1619 edition of its magazine, which took its name from the year 20 Africans arrived in the colony of Virginia—a group believed to be the first enslaved Africans to arrive in British North America.

Weeks before, I had received an email from a New York Times research editor. Because I’m an historian of African American life and slavery, in New York, specifically, and the pre-Civil War era more generally, she wanted me to verify some statements for the project. At one point, she sent me this assertion: “One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.”

 

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

Just now, RLLD said:

If exposure as you have outlined it were truly a component of liberalism there would be no “safe spaces” nor “cancel culture”.

Liberalism is intolerance masked in a faux cloak of virtue.

It can be. Intolerance is not necessarily a bad thing. I want to live in a society that is intolerant of Nazis, or racists etc. intolerance can also be a bad thing as well. 
Same with cancel culture. I like that some people have been “cancelled”: Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby, for example. There are other examples of people who IMO have been unfairly cancelled. But overall I think it’s been a positive aspect of woke culture. 

[RLLD 3,455]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

The mainstream media and “Big Tech” are private entities. In a free society they can do as they want. When you come up with an example of a Democrat being in favor of GOVERNMENT censorship then I’ll join you in denouncing him or her. Govt. censorship is the only kind that matters. 

I might disagree. And I would disagree if it were true that conservatives enjoyed the protections afforded by tech and media.

What they are doing is wrong, with no caveats.

Media owes our so much better, and the unholy alliance that has existed between big tech, media and government is not acceptable 

[RLLD 3,455]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

It can be. Intolerance is not necessarily a bad thing. I want to live in a society that is intolerant of Nazis, or racists etc. intolerance can also be a bad thing as well. 
Same with cancel culture. I like that some people have been “cancelled”: Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby, for example. There are other examples of people who IMO have been unfairly cancelled. But overall I think it’s been a positive aspect of woke culture. 

I do not think cancel culture is acceptable. For now the cancellations might suit you, but what if that power were misused? No thank you.

[jonmx 1,590]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

The mainstream media and “Big Tech” are private entities. In a free society they can do as they want. When you come up with an example of a Democrat being in favor of GOVERNMENT censorship then I’ll join you in denouncing him or her. Govt. censorship is the only kind that matters. 

The MSM and Big Tech showed they are connected at the hip and they faithfully follow direction from the government.  They are not independent media or platforms, but are in fact agents of the government acting to suppress speech.   It is a disgusting display of government censorship and you should be ashamed for defending such.  But then I have never known you to be a defender of the First Amendment.  

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

Just now, jonmx said:

I Helped Fact-Check the 1619 Project. The Times Ignored Me. - POLITICO

 

n August 19 of last year I listened in stunned silence as Nikole Hannah-Jones, a reporter for the New York Times, repeated an idea that I had vigorously argued against with her fact-checker: that the patriots fought the American Revolution in large part to preserve slavery in North America.

Hannah-Jones and I were on Georgia Public Radio to discuss the path-breaking New York Times 1619 Project, a major feature about the impact of slavery on American history, which she had spearheaded. The Times had just published the special 1619 edition of its magazine, which took its name from the year 20 Africans arrived in the colony of Virginia—a group believed to be the first enslaved Africans to arrive in British North America.

Weeks before, I had received an email from a New York Times research editor. Because I’m an historian of African American life and slavery, in New York, specifically, and the pre-Civil War era more generally, she wanted me to verify some statements for the project. At one point, she sent me this assertion: “One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.”

 

So when you wrote it was the PRIMARY reason you were making that up. Somehow Im not surprised. 
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 1619 Project arguing that preserving slavery was one of the reasons for the American revolution. It’s true as far as it goes. If they argued that it was the primary or focal reason I would have a problem with that. But per your article they didn’t. So you still haven’t provided an example of how the course in question is spreading lies. 

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

3 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I might disagree. And I would disagree if it were true that conservatives enjoyed the protections afforded by tech and media.

What they are doing is wrong, with no caveats.

Media owes our so much better, and the unholy alliance that has existed between big tech, media and government is not acceptable 

Unless they are corrupt and break laws, there is no right and wrong when it comes to private entities. If you disapprove of their decisions, you’re free to stop using their products. That’s capitalism 101 

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

1 minute ago, jonmx said:

The MSM and Big Tech showed they are connected at the hip and they faithfully follow direction from the government.  They are not independent media or platforms, but are in fact agents of the government acting to suppress speech.   It is a disgusting display of government censorship and you should be ashamed for defending such.  But then I have never known you to be a defender of the First Amendment.  

This is all hogwash. You have absolutely no evidence for any of these assertions and they’re all false. Basically you’re full of crap. 

[jonmx 1,590]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is all hogwash. You have absolutely no evidence for any of these assertions and they’re all false. Basically you’re full of crap. 

I see you completely ignore the Twitter files.   It is all documented the meetings between government and big tech and the media and what stories and who to censor.  Of course you agree with censorship because you buy into the BS that stuff that goes against our government is all misinformation

[RLLD 3,455]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Unless they are corrupt and break laws, there is no right and wrong when it comes to private entities. If you disapprove of their decisions, you’re free to stop using their products. That’s capitalism 101 

I am gratified you support capitalism, I also trust in it as well. Which is why I support the right of bakers to not make cakes for people they disagree with.

And it does appear to be working in media to some extent. We have seen Fox rise to the top of the heap in news media. And CNN has been making moves to edge away from their sycophant dedication to liberal activism 

[jonmx 1,590]

6 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

So when you wrote it was the PRIMARY reason you were making that up. Somehow Im not surprised. 
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 1619 Project arguing that preserving slavery was one of the reasons for the American revolution. It’s true as far as it goes. If they argued that it was the primary or focal reason I would have a problem with that. But per your article they didn’t. So you still haven’t provided an example of how the course in question is spreading lies. 

"In large part" vs. "primary" you are grasping at straws for a nit.  How the 1619 frames our history is disgusting.  

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

5 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I am gratified you support capitalism, I also trust in it as well. Which is why I support the right of bakers to not make cakes for people they disagree with.

And it does appear to be working in media to some extent. We have seen Fox rise to the top of the heap in news media. And CNN has been making moves to edge away from their sycophant dedication to liberal activism 

Actually you don’t support the rights of bakers in every instance. For example, a baker can’t refuse a to serve a black person because they’re black, or a Jew because he’s Jewish. We have laws against that. Whether those laws should be extended to protect gay people is an open question. I think they should, but others may disagree. 
 

Likewise I have no issue with the idea of regulating Big Tech, at least in theory. But it’s not regulated now so I think that the notion of censorship does not apply. 

[Voltaire 4,559]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

The system is no longer racist. Some people still are. There isn’t one law or regulation that exists that takes anyones race into account.  The implementation of those laws can be racist depending on the individual enforcing them. 

There are plenty but they like those ones.

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

7 minutes ago, jonmx said:

"In large part" vs. "primary" you are grasping at straws for a nit.  How the 1619 frames our history is disgusting.  

It’s not disgusting at all. I might take issue with it because it focuses on a negative: American slavery. Yet slavery is a central part of our history. 1619, from what I’ve seen, concentrates on the terrible aspects of slavery and not enough attention is given to the heroes that fought against it: the abolitionists and others. But that’s a personal opinion. Certainly there’s nothing disgusting about it. 

[Voltaire 4,559]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

No progress since 1968? 

The nice things about talking about the 60s all the time is that the left can actually find real racism without having  to Smolett it.

[shadrap 117]

4 hours ago, craftsman said:

Censorship is not coming from the right side of the aisle. Banning lies is not censorship. It's simply not teaching our kids lies. 

Safe spaces are actual places where liberals go to hide themselves from the reality of life. The liberal collective doesn't want the fantasy land going on in it's collective brain to be exposed to the truth of life. Liberals want there to be infinite number of sexes, they want there to be a black narrative that they don't have opportunities. They want the narrative to be that black people need white liberal help by saying out loud that black people are incapable of getting driver's licenses, therefore we need to change voting processes to accommodate. The white liberals believe that black people are incapable of being smart enough to get into some universities so they need to put black people in over more qualified white people because of this black "handicap". The white liberals feel that black people are not as qualified to get jobs as white people so therefore they need to change the way companies choose employees to join their companies. Base it all on skin color. It goes on and on how the liberal collective thinks black people are inferior to white people when it comes to anything related to having skills to get on with daily life.

And you are the same way. You don't think black people have choices in life. You don't think they are smart, capable of making good decisions in life, nor are they capable of taking care of themselves without your help.

 

your last sentence covers most liberals including hard left tim & buck(although not as much).

sad people cannot stand on their own two feet & accept blame for something they do rather than blame it on racism.  then you have a few posters that promote it.  not going to get anyone ahead.    at all.  might get a few in here though, to stay on their high horse & cry racism at the top of their collective lungs & go to sleep thinking they are really something & making a difference.

pathetic.  it really is.

 

 

[jonmx 1,590]

14 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s not disgusting at all. I might take issue with it because it focuses on a negative: American slavery. Yet slavery is a central part of our history. 1619, from what I’ve seen, concentrates on the terrible aspects of slavery and not enough attention is given to the heroes that fought against it: the abolitionists and others. But that’s a personal opinion. Certainly there’s nothing disgusting about it. 

It was not a central part of our foundation.   Slavery was a world wide institution and even most whites whi were brought to America in the mid 1600's were endentured servant, ie. slaves.  

[OldMaid 1,838]

6 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

I have been against any example I've seen of a book removed from a HS or public library.   If you are that interested, you can look at the examples of the most banned and challenged books each year.   

Just read in Virginia they banned a handful of Stephen King, Margaret Atwood’s Handmaid’s Tale and a handful of others. Not cool.

[OldMaid 1,838]

21 minutes ago, shadrap said:

your last sentence covers most liberals including hard left tim & buck(although not as much).

sad people cannot stand on their own two feet & accept blame for something they do rather than blame it on racism.  then you have a few posters that promote it.  not going to get anyone ahead.    at all.  might get a few in here though, to stay on their high horse & cry racism at the top of their collective lungs & go to sleep thinking they are really something & making a difference.

pathetic.  it really is.

 

 

Stop talking to yourself, idiot.

[craftsman 1,045]

12 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

Stop talking to yourself, idiot.

Oh gee. Good one. 

[craftsman 1,045]

44 minutes ago, shadrap said:

your last sentence covers most liberals including hard left tim & buck(although not as much).

sad people cannot stand on their own two feet & accept blame for something they do rather than blame it on racism.  then you have a few posters that promote it.  not going to get anyone ahead.    at all.  might get a few in here though, to stay on their high horse & cry racism at the top of their collective lungs & go to sleep thinking they are really something & making a difference.

pathetic.  it really is.

 

 

The liberal collective treats blacks like handicapped children. At least the conservatives respect the blacks that are willing to go out and take control of their lives and work towards what they want in life. With the exception of blacks like Maxine Waters and Jackson Lee who use their own race of people to up their own power in Washington and preach ignorant racist claims against those who are not racist.. 

Focking sell outs. 

[The Real timschochet 2,937]

5 minutes ago, craftsman said:

The liberal collective treats blacks like handicapped children. At least the conservatives respect the blacks that are willing to go out and take control of their lives and work towards what they want in life. With the exception of blacks like Maxine Waters and Jackson Lee who use their own race of people to up their own power in Washington and preach ignorant racist claims against those who are not racist.. 

Focking sell outs. 

I’ve never heard of this liberal collective you speak of. Sounds like a good name for a band though. 

[squistion 896]

5 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’ve never heard of this liberal collective you speak of. Sounds like a good name for a band though. 

The Victim Brotherhood is a much better band name and I'd never heard of them either until they were mentioned here.

[BuckSwope 654]

1 hour ago, shadrap said:

your last sentence covers most liberals including hard left tim & buck(although not as much).

sad people cannot stand on their own two feet & accept blame for something they do rather than blame it on racism.  then you have a few posters that promote it.  not going to get anyone ahead.    at all.  might get a few in here though, to stay on their high horse & cry racism at the top of their collective lungs & go to sleep thinking they are really something & making a difference.

pathetic.  it really is.

 

 

Nah, you can GTFO with that accusation.   0 chance you find a post of mine where I give any hint of thinking black people aren't smart, capable of doing things themselves, or whatever else b.s. you saw once from a liberal online and choose to project on to others you think are also liberals.    Speaking of pathetic.  

 

[BuckSwope 654]

48 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

Just read in Virginia they banned a handful of Stephen King, Margaret Atwood’s Handmaid’s Tale and a handful of others. Not cool.

Of course Handmaid's - they don't want their end goal revealed.   

Do you have a link?  Just curious where they banned it and what the reasons were.  

[jerryskids 5,206]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

So when you wrote it was the PRIMARY reason you were making that up. Somehow Im not surprised. 
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 1619 Project arguing that preserving slavery was one of the reasons for the American revolution. It’s true as far as it goes. If they argued that it was the primary or focal reason I would have a problem with that. But per your article they didn’t. So you still haven’t provided an example of how the course in question is spreading lies. 

It said "critical reason."  Just take the L on this and move on.

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Actually you don’t support the rights of bakers in every instance. For example, a baker can’t refuse a to serve a black person because they’re black, or a Jew because he’s Jewish. We have laws against that. Whether those laws should be extended to protect gay people is an open question. I think they should, but others may disagree. 
 

Likewise I have no issue with the idea of regulating Big Tech, at least in theory. But it’s not regulated now so I think that the notion of censorship does not apply. 

Of course not, but again you are sloppy with words.  The issue is not "serving," it's doing creative work.  

[OldMaid 1,838]

22 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Of course Handmaid's - they don't want their end goal revealed.   

Do you have a link?  Just curious where they banned it and what the reasons were.  

https://localtoday.news/va/complete-list-of-21-books-banned-by-the-virginia-school-board-82091.html