FreeThinker
-
Posts
805 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by FreeThinker
-
-
In the United States, Bill Clinton signed into law the Communications Decency Act of 1996, passed by the Republican controlled congress at the time, which outlawed not just photographic material but written material as well. However, the Supreme Court struck down the prohibition on written material unless it's of a truly extreme nature on the grounds that it violated the First Amendment guarantee of free speech. However, that was before George W. Bush sent John Roberts and Samual Alito to the Court. Now, God only knows what the Supreme Court would do if, Heaven forbid, the Republicans should retake both houses of Congress. This is a very real danger, not just in Britain--which doesn't have the stronger free speech protections of the US, but in the US, as well. We need only look at Russia (or the American South) to see what happens when religious conservatives run amock.
I might add that even if I am offended by some of what I read on other sites, I do not have the right to censor it. Censorship is a slippery slope. Where do we stop. Do we stop? I am disgusted and revolted by Holocaust deniers, but it is illegal in Europe to deny the Holocaust. What will the European Parliament decide next is unacceptable? According to Foreign Policy magazine, Stephen Harper has decreed (apparently the PM in Canada has this power- how frightening) that no scientist receiving Federal money can express support of the "theory" of climate change-- apparently because Harper's home province of Alberta is being turned into a vast wasteland for the production of oil from tar sands and too many Conservative Party members are become fabulously wealthy in the process. Restricting the Freedom of Speech is insidious. One step and then another and then another...
-
I voted for President Obama, donated money to his campaigns, and walked my precinct for him. I would still vote for him and I still consider him better than McCain and Romney. My disappointment is that he doesn't understand the nature of the opposition to him. Perhaps he is naive. Frontline has found there was a meeting on the night he was first inaugurated, a meeting attended by Frank Luntz, a Republican strategist, Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and others in which it was decided that the Republican strategy would be to oppose and block absolutely everything the President proposed. This involved filibustering everything, refusing to ever approve his budgets, refusing to pass debt ceiling extensions without concessions, etc., and they have done just that. Knowing that, Obama still tried to reason with implacable opposition, still tried to compromise and negotiate with unwavering hatred. He has ignored the advice of elders in his own party that he needs to stand up to the Republicans more. Perhaps he is idealistic. I don't know, but he has disappointed me and many others who worked for his election and re-election by not fighting his opposition harder. Despite the fantasies pushed by the right-wing media that he is the most devious, socialistic, corrupt President in American history, he has simply been Neville Chamberlain without the spine.
-
An article on the web site of The New Republic describes the civil war that has brewed in the Republican Party between the establishment Republicans--the grown-ups in the party who know the consequences of their actions- and what the author calls The New Radicals, the old Southern segregationists and their descendants who have united with the anti-Wall Street, anti-union, anti-immigrant forces who supported Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan in the nineties. He describes how an anti-tax movement organized by some establishment Republicans such as Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed (the "Christian" lobbyist who was taking kick-backs from both sides of several lobbying issues in the nineties) as grown out of their control, financed, ironically, by some of the very people the grass-roots members hate--i.e millionaires and billionaires) forces who tried to use the Tea Party members for their own purposes but are now losing control of them.
He says that the big money that has always run the Republican Party is beginning to realize that the primary fuel of the Tea Party movement--anger and hatred-- is damaging the party as a whole. They use an analogy what the Democratic Party experienced after the sixties, in which the New Left base took the party over with the nomination of George McGovern and was unable to win national elections until the party grew out of that radicalism. They argue that it may take just as long, now, for the Republicans to do the same thing, grow out of their radical right-wing base, before they can recover from the damage being done by the radicals who have cowed their leaders, such as Boehner.
I take issue with some of what he says. I was a libertarian Republican--to my embarrassment and shame-- when I was young. But, after I saw from inside the companies for whom I worked and the Republican campaigns in which I participated, just what happens when business people run unfettered by regulations and how lying and corrupt many Republican politicians are, I moved to the left as I grew older and wiser. I have profound respect for McGovern now and many of the goals of the old New Left and I see what happens when you allow a few billionaires to control the fund-raising in a party-- as we see now in the Republican Party. Its one thing to be idealistic libertarians. Its another to see what people with unfettered money and power do when they have no checks on their power. The Tea Party is motivated by unwavering hatred of anyone who doesn't conform to their narrow views one hundred percent and they turn on their own with even greater venom than they do to the black man in the White House whom they despise so viciously. I pray that the Republican Party goes into the wilderness for a while because the radicalism of the Tea Party is too great for the vast majority of Americans.
This article explains how and why it may happen.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115134/gop-death-watch-final-days-republican-party
By the way, President Obama should say to the Tea Party: The United States does not negotiate with terrorists. We do not negotiate with a gun to our head. We don't allow Al Quada to hold a gun to our head--we sure as Hell won't let the Republicans, either." Of course, though, our weak-spined President has caved again to the GOP and negotiated, after he said he wouldn't. The reason the GOP has such contempt for him is that he has no backbone. He has caved to the Republicans repeatedly and he's doing so again.
-
I think Colin's point was what Stephen Fry was talking about in that video I posted a few months ago in which he said basically, "Language evolves. Get over it."
-
They both appeared on October 4, 1957, fifty-six years ago today. The Soviet Union launched the world's first artificial satellite and ushered in The Space Age on the same day that CBS premiered the iconic sitcom of Fifties-suburban-American life, Leave it to Beaver.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/04/leave-it-to-beaver_n_4043189.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/04/sputnik-anniverary-world-space-week_n_4037540.html
-
Athletes and other students at the University of Mississippi interrupted a student production of The Laramie Project with anti-gay slurs and insults on Tuesday, October 1. The play is the story of the murder of Matthew Shepard, a gay college student in Wyoming in 1998. Football players and other students stood up during the presentation and yelled the slurs, interrupting the play and insulting the actors and audience.
The play has been opposed by "family" groups in other situations. High School productions have been banned in other states, as well.And a book is being written that ludicrously claims Shepard and one of his killers were lovers and meth dealers. The desperation of the radical right to justify their hate continues...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/03/laramie-project-university-of-mississippi-_n_4037793.html
-
First let me apologize for the typo in the title of this posting. I was thinking of "we" and "may" and it came out as "Way" and I didn't proofread the title. Apparently, the board software doesn't provide for changing posting titles.
The Guardian Style Guide has now given us permission to loosen the rules of English Grammar. I don't agree with all of their suggestions, but this is interesting.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/30/10-grammar-rules-you-can-forget
-
A movement within Evangelical churches to beat and starve children into Bible-sanctioned submission to the will of the parents has begun gaining ground within the right-wing. Children have been murdered when beaten or starved and the killers are claiming their pastors advised them to based on the three-thousand year-old practices of a small tribe of goat-herders in a desert in the Middle East. This article on Salon.com infuriates me. Children should be loved, not beaten into submission. I don't object to a tap on the butt occassially, but beatings, starvation, "breaking the will of the disobediant child" is unforgivable.
-
This interesting blog on The New York Times site discusses lost words in English and the dangers of writing period or historical works in which one tries to use the lingo of that period. She discusses the danger of losing the modern reader when trying to capture the air of the earlier period. It's a intersting article with lots of fun, achaic words.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/21/the-lost-slumgullions-of-english/?ref=opinion&_r=0
-
"The words get in the way," as the song goes.
One of my favorite sixties songs is Peter, Paul, and Mary singing "I dig Rock 'n Roll" and they use that line about the Mama's and the Papa's. "They got a good thing going when the words don't get in the way!" I;m wondering what the M&P's lyricist thought of that?
-
LOL! You go James!
Actually, I can;t think of a state I;d rather nuke more than NC. Unless it's Texas.:-)
-
Mike's put a lot of work into this, so everyone listen! It's awesome! Or Oarsome, LOL
Also, I think the sound quality is superior to Pandora's. its a much clearer signal or greater bandwidth or more bytes or something. It's the clearest sound I've heard online.
-
I considered it but decided against it for several reasons. I want to store my files myself and not in one of Google's server farms. I also don't like Google Docs as a word processor. And, you don't have a hard drive with one. You can use only the programs that are already in the flash memory or which you buy from the Google store and use online. But the main reason is that I don't want Google to know absolutely everything about me. They store everything. They give you the programs. They control the word processor. They control everything. Its bad enough to use Microsoft, but for Google to run and know everything... I'm just not ready to let Big Brother in the form of Google take over my life yet. I know its coming, I just want to resist as long as possible before I join the collective.
-
The author of the blog post was commenting on how pleasant and helpful to the writing process it can be to go outside, that she often finds nature gets the creative juices flowing and she can think more clearly in the sunlight, listening to the birds and feeling the breeze. I find it helpful, as well. Sitting at the park helps me concentrate and when I need a break, looking at the clouds in the sky or the squirrels running across the grass is refreshing. I don;t think it matters what medium you choose to write in, but environment can often facilitate the process.
-
An interesting column in the New York Times on how writing outside frees the mind and enhances creativity. I have a favorite park and a favorite bench where I used to write my stories. Since I started hanging out at a coffee house with free wifi, I've forsaken my old sanctuary and I miss it. I realize now that I need to return.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/16/time-to-write-go-outside/?ref=opinion
-
Several weeks ago, I posted about a new blog Britain's Guardian is publishing that examines the differences between the way Americans and Britons speak and think. Lately, they have blogged about what Americans should do when visiting London (stay south of the river and not north because the only people you meet up there are gits), the differences in American and British fashion, and the useless word "Quite." The blog is prepared by staffers in both the London and New York bureaus (the Guardian now publishes an American edition- Praise the Lord), but I think most of them are women--or queer-- because of the emphasis on fashion, (Oh dear. Am I stereotyping?). Be sure to scroll because they leave a lot of white space (or blue) between each post and you might think you're at the end when there is lots more.
-
I want to see Ted Cruz's birth certificate! LOL
-
My statement that we might as well have elected McCain or Romney was sarcasm. I would still vote for Obama, despite the cowardice and lack of judgement he has shown in dealing with the Republicans. In the health care debate, he compromised away the public option and the single-payer option right off the bat in an attempt to get Republican support before he even began. He was governing then not as a President or a leader, but as a community organizer seeking to build consensus. That doesn't work in the White House. A President has to lead.
Even worse, he gave legitimacy to the Republican tactic of holding the economy hostage on the last debt ceiling vote by agreeing to negotiate. He should never have strengthened them by doing so. He should have said, "The United States does not negotiate with terrorists," which is precisely what the Republicans were acting like. You do not threaten to destroy the full-faith and credit of the US Government over cheap political tricks and he should have said so. He has shown very little backbone in standing up to them and that is more the point I was trying to make with my sarcastic remark about McCain and Romney.
I, too, supported Hillary over Obama for the nomination in '08, though I wonder now who among the Democrats I trust in 2016 to stand up to the intelligence community. I have absolutely no faith that Hillary will and she is too cozy with the big money people her husband courts. She is almost like a Republican-- well, the way Republicans used to be before they drank the Kool-Aid and lost their minds.
As for Australia, Abbot and the Coalition won. I am sorry for Australia. I can understand the disillusionment with Labor over the constant leadership battles between Rudd and Gillard. I just hope by 2016 and the next election they sort it out. And, I rather hope Abbot, as one commentator suggested, goes too far to the right and the country rebels. That's my hope for America, as well, that the Republicans go too far and nominate someone scary such as Cruz.
-
This video appeared on NBC's Today and it makes me think. My liberal side says it is cool that his parents are so understanding and encouraging, but there is a conservative part of me that wonders if, perhaps, they should try to get a little help from a professional to determine how serious the boy is about this. I want to say, "Good for you. be who you are." I know that I was playing with dolls, among other things, at that age, though I never wanted to be a girl. I do have some effeminate traits and have since I was young, much to the distress of my family, but I wonder if my reluctance to fully embrace what these parents are doing is a result of the years of socialization and training I experienced.
Should the boy be encouraged? I know I should scream YES. Still... I wonder.
-
I am hoping the polls are wrong, but The Guardian is predicting a forty seat plurality for the Coalition over Labor. It is frightening to see almost all the English-speaking world sinking to the right. In Britain, the Conservatives just barely voted to rebel against Cameron on Syria, and GCHQ is as bad as the NSA. In Canada, Foreign Affairs magazine says that Harper has almost dictatorial control over the Conservatives and is giving the oil companies in Alberta everything they want. He has even decreed that no scientist receiving funds from the government may publicly express support for the evidence for global warming. There was a time when we progressives in the US looked to Canada as a liberal and enlightened haven. Oh well. And, now Australia is set to elect a hateful, vicious conservative member of the misnamed Liberal Party as their new Prime Minister. Even here, where I voted for a liberal Democrat for President, I find that Barack Obama is little better than a moderately conservative Republican. He's basically carrying out George W. Bush;s foreign policy. His abortion of a health care reform is almost word for word the Heritage Foundation's proposed alternative to HillaryCare in 1993. And, he is gutless and spineless in standing up to the NSA and the other fascists in the intelligence community. We might as well have elected McCain or Romney. What in the hell is happening to the world?
-
Wow. I was just being silly when I made the comment about the pound sign. I thought the Guardian blog was humorous.. Its interesting how these threads go off topic, so... quoting from the translation chart (see the original link so you can translate)
"With the greatest respect...I'm a bit disappointed... though I'm sure it's my fault..."
-
It is not often the I find myself agreeing with Peggy Noonan on much of anything. The former speechwriter for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, Ms. Noonan is a moderate conservative who supported the Iraq invasion and believed Junior Bush's lies about WMD. However, I just read a column she penned for the Wall Street Journal and I agree with her. It gives me hope when liberals, moderates, and conservatives can agree that the national security complex has grown too powerful. What the government can do, it will do and if we don't stop it, it can and will do more, all in the name of security. This is an important and thought-provoking column.
-
And, here is the aforementioned blog post about the Geico gecko. I hesitate to say "It's very interesting," lest our British friends-- as the chart on the about page says-- will interpret it as meaning, "It's complete nonsense." :-)
-
In an attempt to explain American English to the British and British English to Americans, The Guardian, a glorious UK paper that may save the US Constitution from the NSA, and which has two editions, one British and one American, has begun a feature called "English to English, an attempt to decide, as they say, whether the pound sign is "#" or " L with a dash in the middle" (my American keyboard doesn't have one of those funny L-things and Firefox doesn't offer me one). Anyway.... check it out. It's very entertaining. Currently, they are discussing the accent of the Geico gecko. (Does Geico sell insurance in the UK?)
Scan to donate
Smarter Brits
in News & Views
Posted
I have to admit that my sex life has gotten rather boring of late, but I can't imagine being so jaded that I find a toaster to be arousing. Might I suggest an Osterizer next time?