So This is how Liberty Dies, To Thunderous Applause

Providence Colt

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
5,219
Reaction score
531
Points
113
Location
Boston, MA
I do not recall Ron Paul ever advocating the repeal of civil rights laws, but thanks for replying. I am wondering because I am a big fan of Paul the elder.
To be fair, I don’t know if he ever advocated for repealing them but he said he would have opposed them:


The popular meme amongst libertarian fanfictionalists then became “WELL IF WE JUST REPEAL THOSE LAWS THEN THE FREE MARKET WILL TAKE CARE OF IT ANYWAY!”

I believe that if we give businesses the right to discriminate then they’ll find a niche market to “own the libs” and it’ll become shockingly more mainstream.
 

foobahl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,075
Points
113
Location
the only Henniker on earth
To be fair, I don’t know if he ever advocated for repealing them but he said he would have opposed them:


The popular meme amongst libertarian fanfictionalists then became “WELL IF WE JUST REPEAL THOSE LAWS THEN THE FREE MARKET WILL TAKE CARE OF IT ANYWAY!”

I believe that if we give businesses the right to discriminate then they’ll find a niche market to “own the libs” and it’ll become shockingly more mainstream.
to be even more fair, he opposed almost all legislation, even bills he sponsored. When asked why he said my constituents asked for the bill so I sponsored it, I don't agree that is is constitutional so I voted against it.
 

Beaglebay

Houndsight is 20/20
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
26,534
Reaction score
9,832
Points
113
Location
Eastham, MA
Website
www.tanjantstudios.com

foobahl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,075
Points
113
Location
the only Henniker on earth
Steph Stradley's Twitter page brought me here. This is a great example of needing laws to allow all individuals to achieve their full potential:

Yes, my mother said that Florida had the same kind of laws. She said she had to go in front of a judge to buy a house in Cocoa.
 

foobahl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,075
Points
113
Location
the only Henniker on earth

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
1,294
Points
113
Location
Michigan
Steph Stradley's Twitter page brought me here. This is a great example of needing laws to allow all individuals to achieve their full potential:

No. 100% backwards. Remove asinine laws, don't add new laws. Whatever rules that disallowed a women from owning property were wrong. Remove them. Problem solved.

wash, rinse, repeat.
 

spacecrime

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
6,863
Reaction score
1,109
Points
113
Location
Down the lane

Not sure if this is the right thread for this (there are so many), but I am interested in a Christian viewpoint.

Excerpt:
As fallout continues from the deadly siege on the U.S. Capitol, Ed Stetzer, head of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College, has a message for his fellow evangelicals: it's time for a reckoning.

Evangelicals, he says, should look at how their own behaviors and actions may have helped fuel the insurrection. White evangelicals overwhelmingly supported President Trump in the 2020 election.

Some in the protest crowd raised signs with Christian symbolism and phrases.

"Part of this reckoning is: How did we get here? How were we so easily fooled by conspiracy theories?" he tells NPR's Rachel Martin. "We need to make clear who we are. And our allegiance is to King Jesus, not to what boasting political leader might come next."

In the interview, Stetzer also laments that evangelicals seem to have changed their view of morality in order to support Trump.

"So I think we just need to be honest. A big part of this evangelical reckoning is a lot of people sold out their beliefs," he says.


Here are excerpts from the Morning Edition conversation.

You write that "many evangelicals are seeing Donald Trump for who he is." Do you really think that's true? There have been so many other things that Trump has said and done over the past four to five years that betray Christian values and their support didn't waver. You think this time it's different?

I think it's a fair question and I've been one for years who was saying we need to see more clearly who Donald Trump is and has often not been listened to. But I would say that for many people, the storming of the Capitol, the desecration of our halls of democracy, has shocked and stunned a lot of people and how President Trump has engaged in riling up crowds to accomplish these things. Yeah, I do think so. I think there are some significant and important conversations that we need to have inside of evangelicalism asking the question: What happened? Why were so many people drawn to somebody who was obviously so not connected to what evangelicals believe by his life or his practices or more.
 

spacecrime

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
6,863
Reaction score
1,109
Points
113
Location
Down the lane
No. 100% backwards. Remove asinine laws, don't add new laws. Whatever rules that disallowed a women from owning property were wrong. Remove them. Problem solved.

wash, rinse, repeat.
Nice thought, and I'm with you 100%, but I believe this is generally impossible. Laws propagate into other laws and ordinances. That's why lame-duck presidents (any party) need to be constrained after election day.
 

foobahl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,075
Points
113
Location
the only Henniker on earth

Not sure if this is the right thread for this (there are so many), but I am interested in a Christian viewpoint.

Excerpt:
As fallout continues from the deadly siege on the U.S. Capitol, Ed Stetzer, head of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College, has a message for his fellow evangelicals: it's time for a reckoning.

Evangelicals, he says, should look at how their own behaviors and actions may have helped fuel the insurrection. White evangelicals overwhelmingly supported President Trump in the 2020 election.

Some in the protest crowd raised signs with Christian symbolism and phrases.

"Part of this reckoning is: How did we get here? How were we so easily fooled by conspiracy theories?" he tells NPR's Rachel Martin. "We need to make clear who we are. And our allegiance is to King Jesus, not to what boasting political leader might come next."

In the interview, Stetzer also laments that evangelicals seem to have changed their view of morality in order to support Trump.

"So I think we just need to be honest. A big part of this evangelical reckoning is a lot of people sold out their beliefs," he says.


Here are excerpts from the Morning Edition conversation.

You write that "many evangelicals are seeing Donald Trump for who he is." Do you really think that's true? There have been so many other things that Trump has said and done over the past four to five years that betray Christian values and their support didn't waver. You think this time it's different?

I think it's a fair question and I've been one for years who was saying we need to see more clearly who Donald Trump is and has often not been listened to. But I would say that for many people, the storming of the Capitol, the desecration of our halls of democracy, has shocked and stunned a lot of people and how President Trump has engaged in riling up crowds to accomplish these things. Yeah, I do think so. I think there are some significant and important conversations that we need to have inside of evangelicalism asking the question: What happened? Why were so many people drawn to somebody who was obviously so not connected to what evangelicals believe by his life or his practices or more.
Do not believe in organized religion at all, but this dude already was against Trump. Is religion aligning itself with whoever is in charge something new?
 

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
1,294
Points
113
Location
Michigan

Not sure if this is the right thread for this (there are so many), but I am interested in a Christian viewpoint.

Excerpt:
As fallout continues from the deadly siege on the U.S. Capitol, Ed Stetzer, head of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College, has a message for his fellow evangelicals: it's time for a reckoning.

Evangelicals, he says, should look at how their own behaviors and actions may have helped fuel the insurrection. White evangelicals overwhelmingly supported President Trump in the 2020 election.

Some in the protest crowd raised signs with Christian symbolism and phrases.

"Part of this reckoning is: How did we get here? How were we so easily fooled by conspiracy theories?" he tells NPR's Rachel Martin. "We need to make clear who we are. And our allegiance is to King Jesus, not to what boasting political leader might come next."

In the interview, Stetzer also laments that evangelicals seem to have changed their view of morality in order to support Trump.

"So I think we just need to be honest. A big part of this evangelical reckoning is a lot of people sold out their beliefs," he says.


Here are excerpts from the Morning Edition conversation.

You write that "many evangelicals are seeing Donald Trump for who he is." Do you really think that's true? There have been so many other things that Trump has said and done over the past four to five years that betray Christian values and their support didn't waver. You think this time it's different?

I think it's a fair question and I've been one for years who was saying we need to see more clearly who Donald Trump is and has often not been listened to. But I would say that for many people, the storming of the Capitol, the desecration of our halls of democracy, has shocked and stunned a lot of people and how President Trump has engaged in riling up crowds to accomplish these things. Yeah, I do think so. I think there are some significant and important conversations that we need to have inside of evangelicalism asking the question: What happened? Why were so many people drawn to somebody who was obviously so not connected to what evangelicals believe by his life or his practices or more.
You can and will find an outlier in any organization or faith to say what someone wants them to say. For instance, I can find Imans that will say that the current state of islam is horrible or Rabbi's that will die the same about Israel.

That said and in response to your bolded sentence, I say this:

Pragmatism. That is it in a nutshell. Evangelicals understand that they will never get someone on the right that espouses everything they believe (unlike the great panderer, China Joe does for the socialist left). With that in mind, who has been more in line with evangelical beliefs than Trump is terms of actually DOING things rather than just saying them.

It really is a simple question when you think in terms of getting as much of what you want as possible in todays day and age. This is otherwise known as pragmatism.

Think BLM rabidly supporting China Joe. They took what they could get.
 

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
1,294
Points
113
Location
Michigan
Ordered by whom?
I know what your point is trying to be, but the CORRECT question is why ordered? Why is Twitter interfering in Ugandan elections? This type of behavior mandates they lose government protections here in the US.

Either be a free part of the internet or lose the protections. Their demand to be free of rules in their ways and also to heave governmental protections is extremely problematic.

You don't worry about this right now, but if Twitter/Google/Apple/FB were acting in a 180 degree way by censoring liberals you would be screaming from the hills.

Be honest about that.
 
Last edited:

Beaglebay

Houndsight is 20/20
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
26,534
Reaction score
9,832
Points
113
Location
Eastham, MA
Website
www.tanjantstudios.com

Barack Obama promised that his administration would be the most transparent in history. Instead it became the most determined to limit information that the news media needed to hold the government accountable for its actions. It used White House websites and social media to bypass the news media in presenting its own version of reality to the public, in a precursor to how Donald Trump would later use Twitter. The Obama administration actively discouraged “unauthorized” interviews by government officials with the press, and it went to great lengths to combat leaks to reporters.

Most significantly, the Obama administration prosecuted 10 government employees and contractors for disclosing classified information to the press. Eight of the prosecutions were under the 1917 Espionage Act, which was enacted during World War I to protect the country against spies for foreign governments. It had been used only three times in the nine decades before Obama took office. In several of the cases, the Justice Department and the FBI secretly seized telephone and email traffic between sources and reporters for The New York Times, Fox News, and The Associated Press. National security journalists told me that those investigations had a chilling effect on government sources of information.

Yet, the Obama administration “never engaged in public rhetoric against the press,” noted University of Georgia media law professor Jonathan Peters. By contrast, Peters characterized Trump’s verbal attacks on the press as “a systematic effort to de-legitimize the news media as a check on government power.”

By the time Trump was elected president in November 2016, Americans appeared to be irreconcilably divided, not just politically, ideologically, and emotionally, but factually. Poll after poll showed that supporters and opponents of Trump believed very different versions of what they think of as facts because they depend primarily on sources of news and information they trust, regardless of their veracity. “People construct their own reality from a selection of media with which they agree,” Hofstra University journalism school dean Mark Lukasiewicz told me.



A video frame shows FBI agents on October 26, 2018, pulling a tarp over a van from Plantation, Florida, covered in pro-Trump stickers. The van was investigated in connection with package bombs sent to the CNN newsroom in New York and to other perceived critics of President Trump. (WPLG-TV via AP)
A video frame shows FBI agents on October 26, 2018, pulling a tarp over a van from Plantation, Florida, covered in pro-Trump stickers. The van was investigated in connection with package bombs sent to the CNN newsroom in New York and to other perceived critics of President Trump. (WPLG-TV via AP)


Trump’s attacks on press credibility​

CBS News correspondent Leslie Stahl told a Society of Professional Journalists gathering in New York in May 2018 about a chat she had with President-elect Trump, in his Trump Tower office, before a CBS “60 Minutes” interview with him in November 2016. “At one point, he started to attack the press,” Stahl said. “There were no cameras in there.

“I said, ‘You know this is getting tired. Why are you doing it over and over? It’s boring and it’s time to end that,’” Stahl recalled. “‘You know, you’ve won…why do you keep hammering at this?’”

“And he said, ‘You know why I do it? I do it to discredit you all and demean you all, so that, when you write negative stories about me, no one will believe you.’”

Recalling this exchange, Stahl told me at the beginning of 2020, “The thing that jumped out at me was how calculated it was. He plans it out.

“And I was wrong,” she said about what she thought then that the impact of Trump’s attacks on the press would be. “When you say something over and over, it’s had a huge impact. Repetition is part of its impact.”
 

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
1,294
Points
113
Location
Michigan

Barack Obama promised that his administration would be the most transparent in history. Instead it became the most determined to limit information that the news media needed to hold the government accountable for its actions. It used White House websites and social media to bypass the news media in presenting its own version of reality to the public, in a precursor to how Donald Trump would later use Twitter. The Obama administration actively discouraged “unauthorized” interviews by government officials with the press, and it went to great lengths to combat leaks to reporters.

Most significantly, the Obama administration prosecuted 10 government employees and contractors for disclosing classified information to the press. Eight of the prosecutions were under the 1917 Espionage Act, which was enacted during World War I to protect the country against spies for foreign governments. It had been used only three times in the nine decades before Obama took office. In several of the cases, the Justice Department and the FBI secretly seized telephone and email traffic between sources and reporters for The New York Times, Fox News, and The Associated Press. National security journalists told me that those investigations had a chilling effect on government sources of information.

Yet, the Obama administration “never engaged in public rhetoric against the press,” noted University of Georgia media law professor Jonathan Peters. By contrast, Peters characterized Trump’s verbal attacks on the press as “a systematic effort to de-legitimize the news media as a check on government power.”

By the time Trump was elected president in November 2016, Americans appeared to be irreconcilably divided, not just politically, ideologically, and emotionally, but factually. Poll after poll showed that supporters and opponents of Trump believed very different versions of what they think of as facts because they depend primarily on sources of news and information they trust, regardless of their veracity. “People construct their own reality from a selection of media with which they agree,” Hofstra University journalism school dean Mark Lukasiewicz told me.



A video frame shows FBI agents on October 26, 2018, pulling a tarp over a van from Plantation, Florida, covered in pro-Trump stickers. The van was investigated in connection with package bombs sent to the CNN newsroom in New York and to other perceived critics of President Trump. (WPLG-TV via AP)
A video frame shows FBI agents on October 26, 2018, pulling a tarp over a van from Plantation, Florida, covered in pro-Trump stickers. The van was investigated in connection with package bombs sent to the CNN newsroom in New York and to other perceived critics of President Trump. (WPLG-TV via AP)


Trump’s attacks on press credibility​

CBS News correspondent Leslie Stahl told a Society of Professional Journalists gathering in New York in May 2018 about a chat she had with President-elect Trump, in his Trump Tower office, before a CBS “60 Minutes” interview with him in November 2016. “At one point, he started to attack the press,” Stahl said. “There were no cameras in there.

“I said, ‘You know this is getting tired. Why are you doing it over and over? It’s boring and it’s time to end that,’” Stahl recalled. “‘You know, you’ve won…why do you keep hammering at this?’”

“And he said, ‘You know why I do it? I do it to discredit you all and demean you all, so that, when you write negative stories about me, no one will believe you.’”

Recalling this exchange, Stahl told me at the beginning of 2020, “The thing that jumped out at me was how calculated it was. He plans it out.

“And I was wrong,” she said about what she thought then that the impact of Trump’s attacks on the press would be. “When you say something over and over, it’s had a huge impact. Repetition is part of its impact.”
Obama destroyed anyone in his way.

Obama - Spied on and imprisoned journalists
Trump - called journalists bad names


Come back to this topic when you have something real to share.
 

vertigho

Active member
Joined
Sep 3, 2013
Messages
993
Reaction score
54
Points
28
Location
Virginia
Obama destroyed anyone in his way.

Obama - Spied on and imprisoned journalists
Trump - called journalists bad names


Come back to this topic when you have something real to share.
Can you name which journalists Obama imprisoned? From what I can glean, he did not imprison any journalists; his DOJ prosecuted those who leaked information, not those who reported said leaked information.

The parallel to the Trump administration is Reality Winner.

It's a pot/kettle type of situation - both administrations prosecuted those who leaked classified information.
 
Top