Total posts: 8,696
Posted in:
gosh I thought this would be more popular....nothing worse than geeking out on one's own.
name ONE favorite US President
I should say Abe & take the most unimpeachable claim off the table but I'll play the game and say Jimmy Carter (no, fuck you)
name ONE excellent Presidential biography/autobiography
Carl Sandburg's "Abraham Lincoln"
name ONE favorite fictional President
Morgan Freeman as President Tom Beck in "Deep Impact"
describe ONE excellent presidential movie scene briefly
Dr Strangelove: President Merkin Muffley calls the drunk Russian Premier to apologize for a rogue nuclear strikegroup launch against the Soviet Union.
I'm sorry too, Dmitri. I'm very sorry. All right, you're sorrier than I am. But I am sorry as well. I am as sorry as you are, Dmitri. Don't say that you're the more sorry than I am because I am capable of being just as sorry as you are. So we're both sorry, all right? All right.
cite ONE excellent presidential portrait or painting
I think Norman Rockwell's Richard NIxon is a cut above all others- a frankly handsome democratic portrait- a man before you in close consultation. Boy did Tricky Dick not merit such a splendidly American treatment: I admire the portrait rather more than the man.
name ONE US citizen who you’d like to see as president
Travis Kauffman
summarize ONE favorite presidential anecdote OR cite TWO favorite presidential quotes
Harry S Truman was insistent that no period should follow his middle name, since the S was not an initial but simply his middle name. Most journalists and biographers have ignored Truman's fairly sensible request.
Compliment prior posters generously
Polytheist-Witch is my hero for bothering
Created:
If you redefined a term as 50 years long, I'd say we're already pretty close to achieving your vision. In the big picture, Republican vs Democrat are just oppositional labels without much inherent ideology. Democrats and Republicans have virtually flipped ideological polls over the past century. I'd rather see a candidacy that embraces the spectrum as worthy- can we make healthcare affordable without growing government, for example. Can we project global military power without spending half our taxes on unproductive weapons, etc.
Created:
Well, God waited until Abraham commited his filicide before staying his hand, right? Morality is a human construct irrelevant to god’s will. If god is real then obedience is due and morality is little more than useless human critique on god’s irrefutable plan. If God is not, then your vivid dream is delusion & a sustainable moral code is essential for dodging self-delusion
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
depends on whether Putin’s Trump gambit succeeds, I guess. If Trump is still POTUS 12 years from now I think we can safely say America is done-zo
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Western Rome lasted, what, four hundred and fifty years after the Senate lost power?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Created:
Posted in:
Intelligence Squared debates makes this work because you have a nice fresh studio audience every week. We have a pretty limited pool of voters most of whom are practiced at seeing both sides of an issue & therefore less likely solidly within one sphere.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
better a full blown retard than a retard who’s never blown at all.
Created:
Posted in:
Nicely done, Poly. I also think Powell could have been a terrific president. My understanding was that his wife said “hell no”
Ok so Teddy’s off the table - the good ones are going fast
Created:
Posted in:
name ONE favorite US President
name ONE excellent Presidential biography/autobiography
name ONE favorite fictional President
describe ONE excellent presidential movie scene briefly
cite ONE excellent presidential portrait or painting
name ONE US citizen who you’d like to see as president
summarize ONE favorite presidential anecdote OR cite TWO favorite presidential quotes
NEVER repeat any ANSWER
Compliment prior posters generously
Created:
Posted in:
And now.....
The complete lyrics to Captain and Tenille’s masterwork: “Muskrat Love”
Muskrat, Muskrat, candle light
Doing the town and doing it right in the evening
It's pretty pleasing
Muskrat Suzie, Muskrat Sam
Do the jitterbug out in Muskrat Land
And they shimmy... Sam is so skinny
And they whirl and they twirl and they tango
Singing and Jinging a Jango
Floating like the heavens above
Looks like Muskrat Love
Nibbling on bacon, chewing on cheese
Sam says to Suzie, Honey, would you please be my Mrs.
Suzie says yes with her kisses
Now he's tickling her fancy, rubbing her toes
Muzzle to muzzle, now, anything goes as they wriggle,
Sue starts to giggle
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
i think that’s just goldtop’s quirky way of asking you out sometime. Happy Valentine’s, fellas.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Is there any legal dox proving he is been convicted
Even so, forced chemical castration is abuse when the child does not want it
forced chemical castration is your term for hormone therapy which does sometimes result in sterility after prolonged use. The therapy is considered by doctors to be mostly reversible so castration seems like a sloppy & exaggerated term to me. I think I share some of your concerns regarding this kind of therapy when applied to pre-pubescent children but I can say with confidence that neither you nor I know what James wants or does not want. I'd be surprised if James knows and I'm frankly embarrassed that such small, intimate family dramas would be the subject of our inquiries here.
Created:
Posted in:
Sorry, Sup, but none of this is real.
James dad is defending his son because James mother wants him chemically castrated to be a girl when James does not want it. Proof of what a liberal society does
Ask yourself why the mainstream media hasn't picked this story up over the past six months. Fox News loves stories like this but they've barely twittered on this one. We can't know everyone's motive for certain because the only person talking is Jeff Younger, James' dad. That is, the only reason we are talking about a six-year-old's sexual identity is because his father is actively promoting the story in an effort to raise money. His mother, a successful pediatrician refuses to discuss the matter in public.
We can know for certain that Jeff Younger is a liar and a grifter. Anne Georgulas was granted an annulment from Younger after she discovered that he had lied about prior marriages, lied about working as a college professor (in fact, he had been unemployed for years), lied about having any money at all, really, lied about being a veteran, etc. Stupidly, Younger signed a pre-nup that fenced him out of all of her money and even left him owing her $40,000 for a truck she bought him. Now he's raising a bunch of money in Christian circle by playing on traditional Christian phobias surrounding sex and sexuality. The website definitely implies that there's some kind of big legal defense underway but the fact is that the most of the courtroom stuff is done. Jeff lost custody. Jeff lost multiple restraining orders. He's been found guilty of fraud and is permanently restricted from having much opinion about his twin sons, given his inability to adhere to court orders. I guess you can choose to believe what Jeff says about his ex-wife's intention but we can be certain she's not sharing her opinions with him. Chemical castration is a fairly overhyped description for hormone therapy but I see nothing that suggest that Anne seeks to impose some kind of therapy. I guess you can choose to believe what Jeff says about his child's intentions but it seems that Jeff is the last person likely to achieve James' confidence.
We can see that several judges, social workers, police have evaluated the situation and while those authorities are not at liberty to describe the actual dynamic they seem to consistently favor the mother's position: which would seem unlikely in Texas if the mom were actually placing an undue burden on her child. Most likely, Georgulas is following established guidelines for pediatricians and for mothers when addressing transgendered expressions of identity- (guidelines which discourage hormone therapy until adulthood).
I'm sure if we look hard enough, we can find a mom who is selfishly pressuring her child to transgendered expressions but this case ain't that and I'd strongly recommend sending this loser a check.
Created:
Posted in:
Please identify 3 internet sources you generally trust for recent news.
Created:
Posted in:
My tendencies fall certainly within the majority- T1 and T4.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
look at how much attention this thread got. and my abortion thread. i am singlehandedly keeping DART alive
Pretty much. The DDO intra-personal relationship stuff is, for me, like reading about a party I failed to attend but your capacity for generating interest is undeniable. A community isn't much without the women and this site sorely needs more chicks with your chops.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
good answers on such short turn around. I’d put his worst decisions around WWI, myself, the Ottoman fleet siezures, Gallipoli, & repartition of the Middle East, perhaps but I like the readiness of this reply.
Created:
Posted in:
Pls. list five favorite alien (non-human) cultures from any Sci-Fi media.
Created:
Posted in:
love my funky little square red car
looks after me and he takes me far
he likes to speed a bit above the bar
watch out for sheriffs shouting out radar
junky spunky little squirrel red car
worn black plastic wrap interior
pop out the backseats time to make some
take this piano to the bride and groom
honda civic frame with four wheel drive
four thousand down trips up old I-twentyfive
not much on comfort no she's not much on looks
got extra bungie cords on extra hooks
okee dokee little hunchback car
looks after me and she takes me far
keep chugging on and away we'll wander
roll down the road with me a little longer
Created:
Lawrence of Arabia is famously a movie with no speaking parts for women and makes no mention of Gertrude Bell, a colleague and frequent fellow traveler of T. E. Lawrence. I'll blame Lawrence's problematic autobiography more than Hollywood for the snub, which conveniently omits many others as well of Lawrence's collaborators during the Arab Revolt. A case can be made today that Bell's insights into Arab society have proved more prescient than Lawrence's, certainly the Arab world remembers Bell's contribution more fondly than Lawrence in retrospect.
Created:
Along the same lines as St. Jacques but perhaps less forgivable is the rewrite of Dr Susan Calvin of the I, Robot short story collection. Asimov's Calvin is is a stone-cold detective, a proto-Spock cum Sherlock, solving cybernetic mysteries by clarity of reason. She is one of Wingrove's ten "Immortals of Science Fiction. Harlan Ellison's screenplay ( a work I'd like to see on film) depicts Calvin as:
...a small woman, but there is a towering strength in her face. Tensile strength, that speaks to endurance, to maintaining in the imperfect world. Her mouth is thin, and her face pale. Grace lives in her features, and intelligence; but she is not an attractive woman. She is not one of those women who in later years it can be said of them, "She must have been a beauty when she was younger". Susan Calvin was always plain. And clearly, always a powerful personality"
In the movie, Calvin barely registers as Will Smith's action bimbo. To be fair, the movie never set out to employ any of Asimov's narrative and just tacked on the name to improve interest by deception. Still, they should have left Susan Calvin's name out of the script since the result is only indignity.
Again, a ten-part Netflix series true to the short stories could be really good Sci-Fi. Great role for any actress: Nicole Kidman comes to mind immediately.
Created:
The Bourne movies are back on HBO and I'm reminded that these movies did a grave disservice to the literary character of Jason Bourne's wife, Marie St Jacques. In the books, Marie is the brains of the operation as Bourne is too carefully programmed to effectively investigate his identity. She is a brilliant economist and Canadian diplomat who saves Jason's bacon more often than he saves her. As the novels progress, Marie marries Bourne and they have two children. She continues to support Bourne's missions with intel from home base. In the movies, she's an aimless drifter who's relatively overmatched by circumstances and is merely added to the carnage early in the second installment. Some argue that the feats of deduction that assemble an assassin's biography, (the core narrative of the novel), would play less well than karate with a rolled-up newspaper on screen. Maybe. But Bourne is also stripped of the dynamic that makes him more than the cinematic killing machine. Marie's character is why Jason Bourne is teaching linguistics at Georgetown- healing, progressing, discovering new loyalties that sustain 12 literary installments of interest in Bourne's story, while the static brute of the movie versions get uninteresting by the third story.
I'd like to see a more faithful adaptation of the original Bourne Trilogy, set in the 1980s, something like a 12 part Netflix series might be the best venue. Casting? I think Julia Stiles would be great as Marie....try Tom Hardy as Bourne.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Somebody
Uh oh. The fact that u don’t recognize the incomparable Al Swearengen redounds to yer discredit everlastingly. “Leviathan fuckin smiles”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Man, when I was a kid I could not get enough SHC. I’d love that
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I have no reason to disbelieve you. Question is: given the Snopes debunk, how will you convince others of what u saw?
Created:
Posted in:
Good thread. Good back & forth. Ramshutu wins. More topics like this pls
Created:
Posted in:
Deadwood, Serenity, Ken Burns anything, Ethics in America, Star Trek, Angels in America, Top Chef, Monty Pythons Flying Circus, The Goode Life, Mad Men, The Wire, The Good Place, Pants Off Dance Off, RuPaul’s Drag Race, KBDI’s Teletunes, Brent Sadler’s live drive through Tikrit
Created:
Posted in:
FACT CHECK: Did Donald Trump Say Republicans Are the "Dumbest Group of Voters"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
thx- I wasn’t aware that Vereen also critiqued blackface in the same performance but that makes sense to me. I think he sang “Waiting on Robert E Lee” which....what would Lincoln say. I far prefer Vereen’s approach and Arceneaux’s many years later: kill the stereotype by adding nuance rather than banning the act or banishing the actor.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
i agree- it’s the coverup that kills
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I graduated high school in 1984 and I have to disagree that everybody knew not to joke about blackface. Ronald Reagan’s inaugural ball featured a nationally televised blackface performance. Saturday morning kiddy television- The 3 Stooges and Merry Melodies did lots and lots of blackface bits coming as they did out of vaudeville. Trading Places and Soul Man and many big movies of the mid ‘80s did blackface. TV did lots and of blackface. If you went to a big enough Halloween party, you were almost guaranteed to see blackface. Certainly, there were also plenty of folks objecting to these performances but the tolerance level for offensive speech was far higher- at least, saying or doing something racist was not generally cause for dismissal and blackface was a fairly minor offense. By the mid-80s, perhaps everybody knew blackface was offensive but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t ordinary, the way gay jokes or rape jokes were both offensive and commonplace
Created:
Posted in:
For the record, this goes far, far beyond anything that President Trump, Roseanne Barr, heck, even Richard Spencer, Strom Thurmond, or George Wallace had ever said. If this guy gets a relative pass (that is, if he faces consequences that are comparatively light and his career survives), then that's it. Anybody on the Right will be deserving of a pass for virtually anything they say from that point on.
I would be willing to put Roseanne Barr and Liam Neeson in the same category- just actors talking. They've committed no crimes nor have they said anything unforgivable. I see no reason for them to suffer professional or financial consequence- a simple stfu would do. I suspect that most people have made the mistake of transferring guilt for a specific crime to a general class at some point in their lives. Hell, we invaded Iraq out of revenge for 9/11- at least Liam had the self-restraint not to act and I appreciate that he is thoughtful about the experience in retrospect.
Politicians who have acted to disenfranchise whole classes of people, by word or by deed, for the sake of political gain have committed real harm to real people. Those people qualify for some circle of hell, at least. Depending on the circumstances, impeachment, disbarment, etc. may be appropriate.
Unrelatedly, the McDonald's of my childhood was the one where Wallace was shot- I think I heard it is gone now.
Created:
Posted in:
Decriminalization is here on the ballot May 7th (our mayoral elections). I have not seen any polling data or much debate either way so far. I think generally Denverites have had a positive experience with legalizing marijuana five years ago and the consensus seems to be that criminalizing drugs has done more harm than good. I would not be surprised if the measure passes and I would be surprised if decriminalization resulted in a measurable social impact either way. I will probably vote yay unless I see some surprisingly compelling argument.
Created:
Posted in:
I'm sure others have suggested this elsewhere but I strongly believe that the first forfeit in any debate should garner an automatic loss- no voting, no waiting. This would really process through a lot of debates with lower interest levels, experiments, absences, etc and help focus the audience on debates where both sides are engaged. Yes, that means a much smaller set of debates running but I think it would increase the number of debates & interest in them over time.
I like the idea of weekly themes or key words to encourage people to talk about the same things. The more topical the better.
I like the idea of more frequent, low value recognition: have a thread where people nominate best forum topic & response of the week/ best debate/ best RFD, etc. Last week's winner chooses this week's winner, etc. Something like this can get little support in the beginning but even if it's lame in the beginning it incentivizes good writing, research, and calls attention to posts that inspire the next week. I think something like DDO's Olympics was a good idea but the timeframes were killing interest. I think you're better off doing quick cycles with a few participants that might potentially grow over iteration.
More women. Ask more women about how to attract more women. Women are the majority of society- no social activity can be said to be really buzzing without a lot on interest & content from and for women. A site like might always be dude-heavy but if we want something interesting here, we need to be always trying to improve the ration of women to men.
If a category of forum or debate isn't getting a lot of love, axe it. If a category is getting most of the attention, divide it. Right now the cars forum has 5 topics and 42 posts. Why not stick those threads under technology
Created:
I’ll debate you, Mharman. You forfeit a lot but you’re capable of making a cogent arg which is rare enough. I’ve played mafia w/ u on DDO but i don’t think we’ve ever debated. We were on opposite sides on the California misgender law topic & I think we disagree on plenty of politics. I was thinking about an anti-bravehwart debate or space colonization but I’m prettty flex- I’ll even instigate if u want
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Master Musicians of Jajouka- sufi mystic music performed in a cave in Morrocco. The musicians have been handing down their instruments and music for 4,000 years- perhaps starting as a proto-Pan ritual. the gods have changed a few times over the years but the form of worship remains the same.
One of my deepest shames is my affection for the music of the Maccabeats- Yeshiva University's Orthodox Jewish all-mall a capella choir. It is super gay, quite geeky- guess that's why I like it.
Black gospel is the best kind of religious group singing- current but rooted in history, American but universally powerful. Few American churches achieve or even seek the kind of ecstasy of spirit that can be achieved by a really rolling gospel choir.
Created:
Well, Sen. Sanders says that Medicare would cost about $3.25 billion for the first ten years. Americans presently spend $3.5 billion ($10,740 per capita). So, we'd have to redirect roughly 92% of our present healthcare spending to taxes- an increase in tax for an avg. family of four of $25,760 but an overall savings of $2,240. That assumes that the healthcare system maintains it present level of care, which, while I believe is an achievable end, cannot be guaranteed. If we emulate successful prior models and learn from their mistakes we could theoretically bring that cost way down over ten years. With improved efficiencies and adept technological adaptation we might reasonably get the cost down to $12-13,000 a year which is about what Canadians and Germans do their healthcare for.
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
me too and whew boy
Updated ranking from before:
Empire Strikes Back
Rogue One
New Hope
Last Jedi
Revenge of the Sith
Force Awakens
Attack of the Clones
Phantom Menace
Return of the Jedi, which y'know, I still love it, I'll definitely watch it again.
animated tv shows
chewbacca's tv christmas special
Solo
Created:
Posted in:
Speaking of unnecessary, I haven't seen reference to a single actual citation for violation of this code. I see two early challenges by Christian organizations that were soon withdrawn for lack of funding. I don't see any current challenges to this law in the courts after what, 19 months on the books. I wonder if somebody else has an irl example or is tracking a challenge.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Thx, A.Spec, for your thoughtful response.
1) You're assuming a plethora of personal beliefs in "common courtesy". For example, in my homeland of Australia, looking someone in the eyes as you pass them and say "g'day" is normally done amongst white people, but is seriously offensive for Aboriginal people. It's also offensive for any Koreans over here, but it's polite to English people. "Common courtesy" is not a fixed term, as you assume here.Relating specifically to the topic at hand, let's say a particular culture considers it offensive to call someone a homosexual (perhaps Southern part of the U.S.). Therefore, when someone asks to be referred to as a homosexual, it's going to conflict with what a Southerner would consider "common courtesy", and thus the Southerner is referring to someone else he/she might respect in a derogatory way. Moreover, whose "common courtesy" is correct?Another specific example to the topic at hand: Aboriginal people considered hermaphrodites to be magical people, and revered them as such. However, I doubt many hermaphrodites would consider themselves to be magical people. So, despite Aboriginal people respecting these hermaphrodites, their "common courtesy", whilst also seeing hermaphrodites as positive, is wildly different to a non-Aboriginal conception of hermaphrodites. Again, whose "common courtesy" is correct?
Isn't that the distinction between common courtesy and mere courtesy? Courtesies are the rules of polite behavior according to a variety of social divisions but common courtesies are those rules that apply at any court, across social division. (i.e. the manners of the courts of the Kings of England are quite different from those of courts the Kings of Siam but common courtesies are those behaviors that show and demand respect in any court, whatever the culture or social division) When I say common courtesy I mean behaviors due to and from any human, whatever the social context.
2) Yes, it could be common courtesy, in a sense of the word, to refer to someone as they request. Personally, unless the person was hostile, I would accommodate his/her request for particular pronouns.
good on ya, mate.
However, a mere request is different from a state imposed threat. The difference is that the person you're talking to essentially has your wallet/purse open, and threatens to steal money from you, in order to give to the government. Imagine that when a person requests that they be referred to in a certain way, that he/she proceeds to open your wallet/purse, and holds several hundred dollars, waiting to see if he/she is allowed to give this money to the government. That is essentially what is occurring.
Every criminal penalty is a state imposed threat. Every criminal penalty carries some potential of taking your money from your criminal's metaphorical wallet, right? Therefore every potential victim has their metaphorical hand in your criminal's wallet. I understand you don't think your criminal is a criminal but how is this metaphor meant to illustrate that point? I think you are suggesting that common courtesies are "mere requests" and violation ought never merit criminal penalty but we know that's not true: it is common courtesy to not strangle strangers for cash but if you do you'll risk criminal penalty in any court, correct? Many common courtesies are enforced by law.
Referring to someone in a particular way, and physically imposing your will upon someone, are different, and thus should be treated differently. For example, saying that you prefer to greet people with French kisses, rather than handshakes, is very different from actually forcing a French kiss upon someone, especially when you know the other person not only prefers handshakes, but actively dislikes French kisses. The physicality holds the infringement, and it shouldn't be lumped into mere personal preference/beliefs.
I agree that simple reference or address is quite a different context than imposition. Where we disagree is that not all imposition needs be physical to merit sanction. In the specific context of long-term care, the State is the majority investor in every licensed long-term care facility. Few long-term facilities did or could exist except for massive Medicaid funding (something like $12 billion last year in California). Every long-term care facility is financed and guaranteed by the state. The populace benefits from tremendous efficiencies in skilled healthcare and expensive equipment but one of the costs is that the state has an essential responsibility and representative interest in the nature and quality of healthcare, subject to oversight and even sanction. A healthcare provider in a LTC receives the majority of their compensation from the state and is licensed by the state and therefore represents the state to a liable degree. No law says you can't be cruel to the dying. This law says that if you are cruel to the dying while working as a State of California healthcare provider, whether or not you lose your job you may be subject to a fine.
I hear the argument that making a special protection for LGBT folks is redundant given the good protections available under earlier law. As I've said twice, the law is probably less necessary in California than anywhere and if someone opposed the law as political grandstanding or time-wasting they might find me in agreement. The question we're working on here is whether the law is tyranny. My answer remains no.
I wonder what is your opinion re: the state of transgender rights in Australia?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Hi Greyparrot. I generally refrain from replying to your posts since it is pretty clear your contribution is less about dialogue then about maximizing discord. Although I've only been reading these forums for a month, I've notice a certain tell in your posts- when your writing exhibits complete thoughts, that is because they are plagiarized. In this case, you've cut & pasted from Nathaniel Darnell's 2012 article @ American Vision, an end-of-the-worlder Christian hate group that preaches public execution of gays and the forceful submission of the US to the law of Moses. Here is the article you pasted without attribution:
I guess that's why they call you parrot.
Sort of along the same lines I note your profile pic celebrates SS Gruppenfuhrer Heinz Reinefarth who is best known for the liquidation of 60,000 Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto and then dodging the death penalty by ratting out his fellow Nazi's at the Nurenberg Trials. A man no American ought to admire- an official enemy of the US, in fact. I wonder what you see in him?
I guess that's the grey you're parroting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Most Liberals only care about voter fraud in 1. Red States and 2. When the "victims" are illegals.
Liberalism is the political philosophy of human equality and suffrage. The American Revolution was an explicitly liberal assumption of power codified in the first words of the first American act: all men are created equal. All Americans who swear an oath to uphold the US Constitution are Liberals by definition and sworn intent (whether or not they understand the meaning of the word).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I see no evidence of an investigation at all- just another corrupt politician with another list of political enemies.
Texas was found guilty last year of stripping US citizens of their voting rights because they didn't like those voters' shade of brown. The Attorney General was arrested nearly four years ago and is still dodging judge and jury. Those facts aren't pending any investigation. I am concerned at the blatant, unapologetic, and unchecked nature of Texan corruption, as would be any American citizen worthy of the franchise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
There are many good reasons to be highly skeptical of this factoid.
* Trump retweeted this morning, which is all by itself a fairly reliable bullshit alarm.
* The same office has been ruled to be in willful violation of Federal Voting Rights Act 4 times in the last 14 months and was shown to be deliberately targeting Black & Hispanic citizens.
* Sec of State Whitley advises that the list is a compilation of currently registered voters who presented evidence of legal US residency to the DMV at least once. About 50,000 legal residents in Texas become US citizens each year- almost all of whom likely got a State ID card before becoming citizens. Over the course of 22 years, we should expect Whitley's list to contain something closer to 1 million names but the Sec of State's office has winnowed that list down to a tenth of that number. Using what methodology? The Sec of State won't say but I think its safe to assume given Texas' present track record that the list is heavy on Manuels and Mohammeds and light on Svens and Borises. Essentially, the Sec of State has created a list of likely democratic voters and has invited registrars to revisit their citizenship. Some percentage will inevitably miss or ignore the demand to prove citizenship within 30 days and thereby likely prevented from voting next time around. Whitley himself advises registrars that his office has not performed any investigation of these 95,000 and characterizes the list as WEAK name matches (emphasis Whitley). That is, a guy named Juan Castro who voted in 2016 may or may not be a Juan Castro who got a driver's license using proof of legal residency in 1998- Whitley hasn't checked himself but registrars should feel free to drop this Juan from the voting rolls if he doesn't respond within 30 days.
* It is possible that of the 58,000 some non-citizens will be found to have voted but not likely and certainly not in the ten of thousands, or even the thousands or even the hundreds. Ten? Almost certainly not. The University of Texas surveyed Texan registrars from 2000 to 2010 and found 10 credible claims of voter fraud less: than an average of one per election and none implicated non-citizens. The Texas AG has prosecuted 130 cases of voter fraud since 2005 but has only secured 3 convictions- one of which was a non-citizen. Doesn't that 97.7% failure rate suggest that Texas has major dysfunction when identifying voter fraud? Why are we even paying attention to a source that gets it wrong so consistently? Let's remember that this is the Texas AG who was indicted for felony fraud in 2015 and still manages to have no trial date set, 3 1/2 years later. If you're looking for corruption in Texas, why not start with the top?
But think on it- the State of Texas and the President of the United States have blithely accused 58,000 citizens of a crime with a potential sentence of up to 20 years without even really trying to assemble evidence or caring that we know that they're, at best, exagerating by 4 or 5 orders of magnitude. And by the time it gets to Fox the headline is little more than "voter fraud in Texas, folks, oh god look at these numbers." knowing the principle effect is entirely distorted, pretending at false problems to forestall responsible governance.
Oh well, now I'm just getting disgusted. Thx, Swag, anyway for sharing.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't think that narrowing it to care facilities does anything to address the central principle. That principle is that, to consider this speech to be 'harassment', the government has to decide what people who hold to a certain belief can express on the subject. If someone does not believe that a transgendered woman is a woman, this law would force them to lie.
The government is expressly prohibited from ever deciding what people can do based on belief system and stop hiding behind belief systems. If your belief system requires you to tell gay people they're going to hell or to be unkindly honest to elderly people entrusted to your care, then it is time to double-check your belief system; it need not waste the government's time. There is no sympathetic circumstance by which a service provider would repeatedly misgender after correction.
Your question is so it's unkind- isn't it protected speech? The answer is yes, except when there's criminal intent.
. If it's a matter of courtesy, the employer can fire them. If they are actually treating these people unfairly in some tangible way, that could certainly be an issue. But being punished for speaking in a way which corresponds with their beliefs about what reality is by the government strikes at the heart of the first amendment. I'm sure that a Muslim saying that he thinks that unrepentant gay people going to hell is offensive to gay people. The government cannot punish him for saying it. I'm sure that a lunatic who is convinced that he is a can-opener would be very distressed at being called a man. The government cannot force a man to call the lunatic a can-opener.
I can show in a court of law that the can-opener is hallucinating. Can you show in a court of law that a transgendered person is hallucinating? As far as I can tell, gender dysphoria is just another human condition, well enough documented to seem present in every time and culture. Established enough to be present in law. I suppose there is a critique-worthy element of fashion to our present embrace of trans culture but fashion skews queer and ultimately I believe that increasing our human expression of gender is just that, increasing our human expression, which I consider beneficial.
Look- if the lunatic can-opener said "call me man one more time and I'll jump" and you say "man" and the lunatic jumps, you are probably going to get charged with something and we both know there's some justice in such a charge. There are circumstances when protected speech becomes crime and so forfeits protection. Willfully violating another citizen's (potentially fragile) identity in the privacy of their homes, in a time of exegesis, that rises to the level of crime. The State of California sees that as minor crime. Why can't you?
Perhaps his employer could punish him for doing such things discourteously. But what if the home is owned by people who don't think that a transgendered woman is a woman, and who agree with the employee? That's the crucial issue: the government would force everyone in that situation to lie under punishment of a fine. I don't think that such a case would survive in front of the SC.
The Supreme Court has delivered many unworthy readings of the Constitution, I wouldn't trust it to define my sense of right and wrong.
The whole general environment surrounding pronouns remind me of Chesterton's prophecy:"The great march of mental destruction will go on. Everything will be denied. Everything will become a creed. It is a reasonable position to deny the stones in the street; it will be a religious dogma to assert them. It is a rational thesis that we are all in a dream; it will be a mystical sanity to say that we are all awake. Fires will be kindled to testify that two and two make four. Swords will be drawn to prove that leaves are green in summer. We shall be left defending, not only the incredible virtues and sanities of human life, but something more incredible still, this huge impossible universe which stares us in the face."
Great essay, an appeal for orthodoxy in a book about heretics. I'm not sure that you get that Chesterton's being positive here embracing new heresies to better perfect his orthodoxy. He expects that everyone will have their own dogma eventually and such is the natural state of humanity. A fairly heretical orthodoxy for a Catholic, wouldn't you say?
Here is more from the same essay:
Created: