Thirty years ago today

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18810
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Thirty years ago today

#1 Post by Bob78164 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:35 am

Thirty years ago today, there was a huge train crash with numerous fatalities in what was then the Soviet Union. On most other days, that would have been the lead story on national newscasts. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, news broke that Ayatollah Khomeini had died shortly before midnight (local time). On almost any other day, that would have been the lead story on national newscasts. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, my middle sister had her 20-somethingth birthday. There is no day on which that would have shown up even in a local newscast. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, Tienanmen Square happened.

As an epilogue, a number of the student protestors were charged with showing disrespect to the Chinese flag. At the time, a bill was pending in Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment to overrule the Court's then-recent decision in Texas v. Johnson, which held that flag desecration laws violated the First Amendment. After Tienanmen Square, that bill sank quietly out of sight, never to be heard from again.

And happy birthday, sis. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

Spock
Posts: 2811
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm

Re: Thirty years ago today

#2 Post by Spock » Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:21 pm

Bob78164 wrote:Thirty years ago today, there was a huge train crash with numerous fatalities in what was then the Soviet Union. On most other days, that would have been the lead story on national newscasts. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, news broke that Ayatollah Khomeini had died shortly before midnight (local time). On almost any other day, that would have been the lead story on national newscasts. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, my middle sister had her 20-somethingth birthday. There is no day on which that would have shown up even in a local newscast. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, Tienanmen Square happened.

As an epilogue, a number of the student protestors were charged with showing disrespect to the Chinese flag. At the time, a bill was pending in Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment to overrule the Court's then-recent decision in Texas v. Johnson, which held that flag desecration laws violated the First Amendment. After Tienanmen Square, that bill sank quietly out of sight, never to be heard from again.

And happy birthday, sis. --Bob
Gee, big surprise. The man who lives for tactical, partisan politics uses Tiananmen Square to attack conservatives from 30 years ago. Maybe, this would be a more relevant discussion to be having today.

"Twitter Takes Down Accounts of China dissidents ahead of Tiananmen Anniversary."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/01/busi ... anmen.html

https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/01/twitt ... -takedown/

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18810
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Thirty years ago today

#3 Post by Bob78164 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:47 pm

Spock wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Thirty years ago today, there was a huge train crash with numerous fatalities in what was then the Soviet Union. On most other days, that would have been the lead story on national newscasts. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, news broke that Ayatollah Khomeini had died shortly before midnight (local time). On almost any other day, that would have been the lead story on national newscasts. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, my middle sister had her 20-somethingth birthday. There is no day on which that would have shown up even in a local newscast. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, Tienanmen Square happened.

As an epilogue, a number of the student protestors were charged with showing disrespect to the Chinese flag. At the time, a bill was pending in Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment to overrule the Court's then-recent decision in Texas v. Johnson, which held that flag desecration laws violated the First Amendment. After Tienanmen Square, that bill sank quietly out of sight, never to be heard from again.

And happy birthday, sis. --Bob
Gee, big surprise. The man who lives for tactical, partisan politics uses Tiananmen Square to attack conservatives from 30 years ago. Maybe, this would be a more relevant discussion to be having today.

"Twitter Takes Down Accounts of China dissidents ahead of Tiananmen Anniversary."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/01/busi ... anmen.html

https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/01/twitt ... -takedown/
Do you want government controlling (via regulation) the content that a private business must or must not allow on its site? If so, how do you reconcile that view with opposition to net neutrality?

And what exactly did I say that "attacked" anyone? The pendency of that proposed amendment is historical fact. So are the identities of its supporters. I didn't identify them as conservatives or even imply that they were conservatives. So the perception of an attack here is on you. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 10617
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Thirty years ago today

#4 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:58 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Spock wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Thirty years ago today, there was a huge train crash with numerous fatalities in what was then the Soviet Union. On most other days, that would have been the lead story on national newscasts. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, news broke that Ayatollah Khomeini had died shortly before midnight (local time). On almost any other day, that would have been the lead story on national newscasts. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, my middle sister had her 20-somethingth birthday. There is no day on which that would have shown up even in a local newscast. But . . .

Thirty years ago today, Tienanmen Square happened.

As an epilogue, a number of the student protestors were charged with showing disrespect to the Chinese flag. At the time, a bill was pending in Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment to overrule the Court's then-recent decision in Texas v. Johnson, which held that flag desecration laws violated the First Amendment. After Tienanmen Square, that bill sank quietly out of sight, never to be heard from again.

And happy birthday, sis. --Bob
Gee, big surprise. The man who lives for tactical, partisan politics uses Tiananmen Square to attack conservatives from 30 years ago. Maybe, this would be a more relevant discussion to be having today.

"Twitter Takes Down Accounts of China dissidents ahead of Tiananmen Anniversary."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/01/busi ... anmen.html

https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/01/twitt ... -takedown/
Do you want government controlling (via regulation) the content that a private business must or must not allow on its site? If so, how do you reconcile that view with opposition to net neutrality?

And what exactly did I say that "attacked" anyone? The pendency of that proposed amendment is historical fact. So are the identities of its supporters. I didn't identify them as conservatives or even imply that they were conservatives. So the perception of an attack here is on you. --Bob
Passive aggressive is so yesterday.
Oh please.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18810
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Thirty years ago today

#5 Post by Bob78164 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 2:01 pm

Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Spock wrote:
Gee, big surprise. The man who lives for tactical, partisan politics uses Tiananmen Square to attack conservatives from 30 years ago. Maybe, this would be a more relevant discussion to be having today.

"Twitter Takes Down Accounts of China dissidents ahead of Tiananmen Anniversary."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/01/busi ... anmen.html

https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/01/twitt ... -takedown/
Do you want government controlling (via regulation) the content that a private business must or must not allow on its site? If so, how do you reconcile that view with opposition to net neutrality?

And what exactly did I say that "attacked" anyone? The pendency of that proposed amendment is historical fact. So are the identities of its supporters. I didn't identify them as conservatives or even imply that they were conservatives. So the perception of an attack here is on you. --Bob
Passive aggressive is so yesterday.
Again, how is the recitation of an historical fact -- a change in our country that was in fact triggered by Tienanmen Square -- in any way aggressive, passive or otherwise? Particularly when I made no reference whatsoever to the political leanings of the politicians who announced support for the amendment? Have you by any chance looked up the identities of the Justices who signed the majority opinion in Texas v. Johnson, and who dissented? Do you want the lesson China taught us about the value of free speech to be forgotten? --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 10617
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Thirty years ago today

#6 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 2:30 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Do you want government controlling (via regulation) the content that a private business must or must not allow on its site? If so, how do you reconcile that view with opposition to net neutrality?

And what exactly did I say that "attacked" anyone? The pendency of that proposed amendment is historical fact. So are the identities of its supporters. I didn't identify them as conservatives or even imply that they were conservatives. So the perception of an attack here is on you. --Bob
Passive aggressive is so yesterday.
Again, how is the recitation of an historical fact -- a change in our country that was in fact triggered by Tienanmen Square -- in any way aggressive, passive or otherwise? Particularly when I made no reference whatsoever to the political leanings of the politicians who announced support for the amendment? Have you by any chance looked up the identities of the Justices who signed the majority opinion in Texas v. Johnson, and who dissented? Do you want the lesson China taught us about the value of free speech to be forgotten? --Bob
So yesterday. There's always disingenui.......
Oh please.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18810
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Thirty years ago today

#7 Post by Bob78164 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 2:36 pm

Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote: Passive aggressive is so yesterday.
Again, how is the recitation of an historical fact -- a change in our country that was in fact triggered by Tienanmen Square -- in any way aggressive, passive or otherwise? Particularly when I made no reference whatsoever to the political leanings of the politicians who announced support for the amendment? Have you by any chance looked up the identities of the Justices who signed the majority opinion in Texas v. Johnson, and who dissented? Do you want the lesson China taught us about the value of free speech to be forgotten? --Bob
So yesterday. There's always disingenui.......
Do you take the position that our Constitution and the First Amendment are "so yesterday"? --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 10617
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Thirty years ago today

#8 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 2:47 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Again, how is the recitation of an historical fact -- a change in our country that was in fact triggered by Tienanmen Square -- in any way aggressive, passive or otherwise? Particularly when I made no reference whatsoever to the political leanings of the politicians who announced support for the amendment? Have you by any chance looked up the identities of the Justices who signed the majority opinion in Texas v. Johnson, and who dissented? Do you want the lesson China taught us about the value of free speech to be forgotten? --Bob
So yesterday. There's always disingenui.......
Do you take the position that our Constitution and the First Amendment are "so yesterday"? --Bob
Bobbobbob.
Oh please.

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 6845
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: Thirty years ago today

#9 Post by tlynn78 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:20 pm

Pomposity reigns
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 5163
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Thirty years ago today

#10 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:56 am

You KNOW the 'epilogue' came from the bat-phone. Just an addendum to some story bob-tel read written by some enterprising, indoctrinated so-called journalist.
Your friendly neighborhood racist. On the waiting list to be a nazi. Designated an honorary 'snowflake'. Trolled by the very best, as well as by BJ. Always typical, unlike others.., Fulminator, Hopelessly in the tank for trump... inappropriate... Flocking himself... Probably a tucking sexist, too... All thought comes from the right wing noise machine(TM)... A clear and present threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.. Doesn't understand anything... Made the trump apologist and enabler playoffs

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18810
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Thirty years ago today

#11 Post by Bob78164 » Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:08 am

flockofseagulls104 wrote:You KNOW the 'epilogue' came from the bat-phone. Just an addendum to some story bob-tel read written by some enterprising, indoctrinated so-called journalist.
You would be wrong about that. As far as I know, pretty much everyone has forgotten about the pendency of that amendment and who did and didn't support it. I think people also have forgotten about the flag-desecration statute that did pass Congress and was signed by the President, only to be overturned by the Court, relying on Texas v. Johnson. Which is why I try to keep its memory alive, for the next time someone is tempted to compel expressions of patriotism or punish perceived disrespect to the flag (say, by kneeling at a football game).

This came from my own head, with no source material but my memory and a Wikipedia check to discover that Khomeini had actually died (just before midnight) the day before June 4. I had thought June 4 was his date of death.

Who did you think writes the Batphone's material? (Didn't realize I had that kind of power, did you?)

So I'll ask again -- what in my original post made you think I was in any way targeting conservatives? Do you think they have a monopoly on empty jingoism? --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17015
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Thirty years ago today

#12 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:41 am

Bob78164 wrote: -- what in my original post made you think I was in any way targeting conservatives?
Because you posted it. Any time you or BobJ or I post something of a political nature, Flock tunes it out (not difficult because it usually requires thinking and reasoning) and instead trots out his lines about the Batphone and bobtel and Polly and whatever other cute little name he's thought up.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 18810
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Thirty years ago today

#13 Post by Bob78164 » Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:48 am

silverscreenselect wrote:
Bob78164 wrote: -- what in my original post made you think I was in any way targeting conservatives?
Because you posted it. Any time you or BobJ or I post something of a political nature, Flock tunes it out (not difficult because it usually requires thinking and reasoning) and instead trots out his lines about the Batphone and bobtel and Polly and whatever other cute little name he's thought up.
But it wasn't flock who first made that assumption. He was a latecomer to this particular thread. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 6845
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: Thirty years ago today

#14 Post by tlynn78 » Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:06 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:
Bob78164 wrote: -- what in my original post made you think I was in any way targeting conservatives?
Because you posted it. Any time you or BobJ or I post something of a political nature, Flock tunes it out (not difficult because it usually requires thinking and reasoning) and instead trots out his lines about the Batphone and bobtel and Polly and whatever other cute little name he's thought up.
But it wasn't flock who first made that assumption. He was a latecomer to this particular thread. --Bob

LOL - don't confuse the one trick pony.
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 10617
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Thirty years ago today

#15 Post by Beebs52 » Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:26 pm

silverscreenselect wrote:
Bob78164 wrote: -- what in my original post made you think I was in any way targeting conservatives?
Because you posted it. Any time you or BobJ or I post something of a political nature, Flock tunes it out (not difficult because it usually requires thinking and reasoning) and instead trots out his lines about the Batphone and bobtel and Polly and whatever other cute little name he's thought up.
You really should pay more attention.
Oh please.

Post Reply