Country over party

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Message
Author
User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 7783
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: Country over party

#51 Post by tlynn78 » Wed Apr 20, 2022 3:02 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 2:52 pm
wbtravis007 wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 1:08 pm
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 11:17 am
She doesn't represent you, bob. She represents the citizens who elected her. What she does is represent the wishes of the people who sent her to Congress. And she votes on the things that affect you based on the way that the proposed law affects her constituents. They get to decide whether she remains in office NOT YOU OR PEOPLE LIKE YOU. Do you not understand that, bob? Is that too complicated for you?
I'm not worried about her. I'm just sick and tired of your ilk f**king with and gaming the system for your own benefit.
Oh good grief. Are you really this dumb, and blind ?
That question is rhetorical, right? --Bob
LMAO!!! Says the 'very fine' attorney who didn't remember what's in his oath...
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine
You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. -Ayn Rand

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#52 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:26 pm

tlynn78 wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 3:02 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 2:52 pm
wbtravis007 wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 1:08 pm
Oh good grief. Are you really this dumb, and blind ?
That question is rhetorical, right? --Bob
LMAO!!! Says the 'very fine' attorney who didn't remember what's in his oath...
The only oath that above average lawyers honor is to stick to the story they decide upon to defend their position, regardless of whether it has any relation to the truth or not. They must WIN. Truth has no part in it.
bob practices that here.
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24871
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Country over party

#53 Post by Bob Juch » Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:12 pm

Image
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
Estonut
Evil Genius
Posts: 10291
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Location: Garden Grove, CA

Re: Country over party

#54 Post by Estonut » Wed Apr 20, 2022 11:47 pm

Bob Juch wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:12 pm
Image
How cute, coming from the guy with the second-most insulting avatar on the Bored!
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
Groucho Marx

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24871
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Country over party

#55 Post by Bob Juch » Thu Apr 21, 2022 12:04 pm

Estonut wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 11:47 pm
Bob Juch wrote:
Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:12 pm
Image
How cute, coming from the guy with the second-most insulting avatar on the Bored!
My stalker can't even appreciate cuteness.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
themanintheseersuckersuit
Posts: 7536
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Country over party

#56 Post by themanintheseersuckersuit » Sat Apr 23, 2022 4:56 pm

. On Friday, however, an Arizona judge ruled against one of the latest rounds of lawsuits, this time from voting groups seeking to prevent Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs, both Republicans from Arizona, as well as State Rep. Mark Finchem, a fellow Republican from the state, from appearing on the ballot
Suitguy is not bitter.

feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive

The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24871
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Country over party

#57 Post by Bob Juch » Fri Apr 29, 2022 7:24 am

Heather Cox Richardson
April 28, 2022 (Thursday)

It has been hard for me to see the historical outlines of the present-day attack on American democracy clearly. But this morning, as I was reading a piece in Vox by foreign affairs specialist Zack Beauchamp describing Florida governor Ron DeSantis’s path in Florida as an attempt to follow in the footsteps of Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, the penny dropped.

Here’s what I see:

Before Trump won the presidency in 2016, the modern-day Republican Party was well on its way to endorsing oligarchy. It had followed the usual U.S. historical pattern to that point. In the 1850s, 1890s, 1920s, and then again in the modern era, wealthy people had come around to the idea that society worked best if a few wealthy men ran everything.

Although the Democrats had represented those people in the 1850s and the Republicans in the 1890s, 1920s, and 2000s, they had gotten there in the same way. First, a popular movement had demanded that the government protect the equality of opportunity and equal justice before the law for those who had previously not had either and that popular pressure had significantly expanded rights.

Then, in reaction, wealthier Americans argued that the expansion of rights threatened to take away their liberty to run their enterprises as they wished. To tamp down the expansion of rights, they played on the racism of the poorer white male voters who controlled the government, telling them that legislation to protect equal rights was a plan to turn the government over to Black or Brown Americans or immigrants from southern Europe or Asia, who would use their voting power to redistribute wealth.

The idea that poor men of color voting meant socialism resonated with white voters, who turned against the government’s protecting equal rights and instead supported a government that favored men of property. As wealth moved upward, popular culture championed economic leaders as true heroes, and lawmakers suppressed voting to “redeem” American society from “socialists” who wanted to redistribute wealth. Capital moved upward until very few people controlled most of it. Then, after an economic crash made ordinary Americans turn against the system that favored the wealthy, the cycle began again.

When Trump was elected, the U.S. was at the place where wealth had concentrated among the top 1%, Republican politicians denigrated their opponents as un-American “takers” and celebrated economic leaders as “makers,” and the process of skewing the vote through gerrymandering and voter suppression was well underway. But the Republican Party still valued the rule of law. It’s impossible to run a successful business without a level playing field, as business people realized after the 1929 Great Crash when it became clear that insider trading had meant that winners and losers were determined not by the market but by cronyism.

Trump’s election brought a new right-wing ideology onto the political stage to challenge the rule of law. He was an autocrat, interested not in making money for a specific class of people but rather in obtaining wealth and power for himself, his family, and a few insiders. The established Republican Party was willing to back him so long as he could deliver the voters that would enable them to stay in power and continue with tax cuts and deregulation.

But their initial distancing didn’t last. Trump proved able to forge such a strong base that it is virtually a cult following, and politicians quickly discovered that crossing his followers brought down their wrath. Lawmakers’ determination to hold Trump’s base meant they acquitted him in both impeachment trials. Meanwhile, Trump packed state Republican machinery with his loyalists, and they have helped make the Big Lie that Trump won the 2020 election an article of faith.

It is not clear whether Trump can translate his following back into the White House, both because of mounting legal troubles and because his routine is old and unlikely to bring the new voters he would need to win. It may be that another family authoritarian can, but that is not obvious right now.

Still, his deliberate destabilization of faith in our democratic norms is deadly dangerous, creating space for two right-wing, antidemocratic ideologies to take root.

Texas governor Greg Abbott pushes one. He embraces a traditional American states’ rights approach to attack the active federal government that has expanded equality since World War II. The Trump years put the states’ rights ideology of the Confederacy on steroids, first to justify destroying business regulation, social welfare legislation, and international diplomacy, and then absolve the federal government from responsibility for combating the coronavirus pandemic. Then, of course, the January 6 insurrection saw state legislatures refusing to accept the results of a national election and rioters carrying the Confederate flag into the United States Capitol.

That Confederate impulse has been a growing part of the South’s mindset since at least 1948 when President Harry S. Truman announced the federal government would desegregate the armed forces, and white southerners who recognized that desegregation was coming briefly formed their own political party to stop it.
Abbott and the Texas legislature have tapped into this traditional white southern ideology in their quest to hijack the right-wing. Texas S.B. 8, which uses a sly workaround to permit a state to undermine the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision declaring abortion a constitutional right, has become a model for other Republican states. In June 2021, along with Arizona Governor Doug Ducey, Abbott asked other state governors to send state national guard troops or law enforcement officers to the Mexican border because, he said, “the Biden administration has proven unwilling or unable to do the job.”

Abbott’s recent stunt at the border, shutting down trade between Mexico and the U.S., was expensive and backfired. Still, it was also a significant escalation of his claim of state power: he essentially took the federal government’s authority to conduct foreign affairs directly into his own hands.

The other new ideology at work is in the hands of Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who, as Beauchamp pointed out, is trying to recreate Orbánism in the U.S. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has eroded Hungary’s democracy since he took power for the second time, about a decade ago. Orbán has been open about his determination to overthrow the concept of western democracy, replacing it with what he has, on different occasions, called “illiberal democracy” or “Christian democracy.” He wants to replace equality at the heart of democracy with religious nationalism.

To accomplish his vision, Orbán has taken control of Hungary’s media, ensuring that his party wins all elections; has manipulated election districts in his favor; and has consolidated the economy into the hands of his cronies by threatening opponents with harassing investigations, regulations, and taxes unless they sell out. Beauchamp calls this system “soft fascism.”

DeSantis is following this model because observers believe that Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill was modeled on a similar Hungarian law. DeSantis’s attack on Disney mirrors Orbán’s use of regulatory rules to punish political opponents (although the new law was so hasty and flawed, it threatens to do DeSantis more harm than good). DeSantis is not alone in his support for Orban’s tactics: Fox News Channel personality Tucker Carlson openly admires Orbán, and next month the Conservative Political Action Committee will hold its conference in Hungary, with Orbán as a keynote speaker.

Trump’s type of family autocracy is hard to replicate right now, and our history has given us the knowledge and tools to defend democracy in the face of the ideology of states’ rights. But the rise of “illiberal democracy” or “soft fascism” is new to us. The first step toward rolling it back is recognizing that it is different from Trump’s autocracy or states’ rights and that its poison is spreading in the United States.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#58 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 7:46 am

The US Democrat party has taken control of America’s media [as well as their institutions of higher 'education', of which I am a prime example], ensuring that their party wins all elections; has manipulated election districts in their favor; and has consolidated the economy into the hands of their cronies by threatening opponents with harassing investigations, regulations, and taxes unless they sell out. Beauchamp calls this system “soft fascism.”
Fixed it for her.
I somewhat disagree with every word she wrote. As well as her punctuation.
And I'm sure there are many other 'experts' with just as impressive credentials and much more real world experience that would wipe the floor with her assertions.
You might as well have asked bob to write this garbage.
But thanks for sharing.
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 20477
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Country over party

#59 Post by silverscreenselect » Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:27 am

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 7:46 am
And I'm sure there are many other 'experts' with just as impressive credentials and much more real world experience that would wipe the floor with her assertions.
Those experts have degrees from Prager University or the Tucker Carlson School of Broadcasting.

From Wikipedia:
Heather Cox Richardson is an American historian and professor of history at Boston College, where she teaches courses on the American Civil War, the Reconstruction Era, the American West, and the Plains Indians. She previously taught history at MIT and the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Richardson has authored six books on history and politics. In 2014, Richardson founded a popular history website, werehistory.org. Between 2017 and 2018, she co-hosted the NPR podcast Freak Out and Carry On. Most recently, Richardson started publishing "Letters from an American", a nightly newsletter that chronicles current events in the larger context of American history. The newsletter accrued tens of thousands of subscribers, making her, as of December 2020, the most successful individual author of a paid publication on Substack. Richardson also co-hosts the podcast Now & Then with fellow historian Joanne B. Freeman. In February 2022, Richardson interviewed President Joe Biden.

Born in 1962 and raised in Maine, Richardson attended Phillips Exeter Academy in Exeter, New Hampshire. She received both her B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard University, where she studied under David Herbert Donald and William Gienapp.
Note that Flock always claims that there are experts with just as impressive credentials who disagree with whatever Flock doesn't believe in. He just never seems to produce any of them, other than an embalmer from Alabama.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 11806
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Country over party

#60 Post by BackInTex » Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:38 am

silverscreenselect wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:27 am
Those experts have degrees from Prager University or the Tucker Carlson School of Broadcasting.

From Wikipedia:
Heather Cox Richardson is an American historian and professor of history at Boston College, where she teaches courses on the American Civil War, the Reconstruction Era, the American West, and the Plains Indians. She previously taught history at MIT and the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Richardson has authored six books on history and politics. In 2014, Richardson founded a popular history website, werehistory.org. Between 2017 and 2018, she co-hosted the NPR podcast Freak Out and Carry On. Most recently, Richardson started publishing "Letters from an American", a nightly newsletter that chronicles current events in the larger context of American history. The newsletter accrued tens of thousands of subscribers, making her, as of December 2020, the most successful individual author of a paid publication on Substack. Richardson also co-hosts the podcast Now & Then with fellow historian Joanne B. Freeman. In February 2022, Richardson interviewed President Joe Biden.

Born in 1962 and raised in Maine, Richardson attended Phillips Exeter Academy in Exeter, New Hampshire. She received both her B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard University, where she studied under David Herbert Donald and William Gienapp.
Note that Flock always claims that there are experts with just as impressive credentials who disagree with whatever Flock doesn't believe in. He just never seems to produce any of them, other than an embalmer from Alabama.
[/quote]

I'll note that SSS approves of sources where he approves of their rhetoric, and if they have "credentials" all the better. I will remind you that using credentials such as SSS seems to like to use to counter someone else's thoughts because they lack "credentials" is bigoted. Plenty of great people did not have pedigrees like SSS approves of and plenty of terrible people went to Harvard, teach, and have written books and have followers.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20626
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Country over party

#61 Post by Bob78164 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:43 am

BackInTex wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:38 am
silverscreenselect wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:27 am
Those experts have degrees from Prager University or the Tucker Carlson School of Broadcasting.

From Wikipedia:
Heather Cox Richardson is an American historian and professor of history at Boston College, where she teaches courses on the American Civil War, the Reconstruction Era, the American West, and the Plains Indians. She previously taught history at MIT and the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Richardson has authored six books on history and politics. In 2014, Richardson founded a popular history website, werehistory.org. Between 2017 and 2018, she co-hosted the NPR podcast Freak Out and Carry On. Most recently, Richardson started publishing "Letters from an American", a nightly newsletter that chronicles current events in the larger context of American history. The newsletter accrued tens of thousands of subscribers, making her, as of December 2020, the most successful individual author of a paid publication on Substack. Richardson also co-hosts the podcast Now & Then with fellow historian Joanne B. Freeman. In February 2022, Richardson interviewed President Joe Biden.

Born in 1962 and raised in Maine, Richardson attended Phillips Exeter Academy in Exeter, New Hampshire. She received both her B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard University, where she studied under David Herbert Donald and William Gienapp
Note that Flock always claims that there are experts with just as impressive credentials who disagree with whatever Flock doesn't believe in. He just never seems to produce any of them, other than an embalmer from Alabama.
I'll note that SSS approves of sources where he approves of their rhetoric, and if they have "credentials" all the better. I will remind you that using credentials such as SSS seems to like to use to counter someone else's thoughts because they lack "credentials" is bigoted. Plenty of great people did not have pedigrees like SSS approves of and plenty of terrible people went to Harvard, teach, and have written books and have followers.
Forget about the credentials. Why is Professor Richardson's analysis wrong? She showed her work. Pick it apart, if you can. --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
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#62 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:52 am

BackInTex wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:38 am
silverscreenselect wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:27 am

Those experts have degrees from Prager University or the Tucker Carlson School of Broadcasting.

From Wikipedia:
Heather Cox Richardson is an American historian and professor of history at Boston College, where she teaches courses on the American Civil War, the Reconstruction Era, the American West, and the Plains Indians. She previously taught history at MIT and the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Richardson has authored six books on history and politics. In 2014, Richardson founded a popular history website, werehistory.org. Between 2017 and 2018, she co-hosted the NPR podcast Freak Out and Carry On. Most recently, Richardson started publishing "Letters from an American", a nightly newsletter that chronicles current events in the larger context of American history. The newsletter accrued tens of thousands of subscribers, making her, as of December 2020, the most successful individual author of a paid publication on Substack. Richardson also co-hosts the podcast Now & Then with fellow historian Joanne B. Freeman. In February 2022, Richardson interviewed President Joe Biden.

Born in 1962 and raised in Maine, Richardson attended Phillips Exeter Academy in Exeter, New Hampshire. She received both her B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard University, where she studied under David Herbert Donald and William Gienapp.
Note that Flock always claims that there are experts with just as impressive credentials who disagree with whatever Flock doesn't believe in. He just never seems to produce any of them, other than an embalmer from Alabama.

I'll note that SSS approves of sources where he approves of their rhetoric, and if they have "credentials" all the better. I will remind you that using credentials such as SSS seems to like to use to counter someone else's thoughts because they lack "credentials" is bigoted. Plenty of great people did not have pedigrees like SSS approves of and plenty of terrible people went to Harvard, teach, and have written books and have followers.

If the stalker had an open mind, or any mind at all, he could easily find counterarguments to ANY of his rants expressed by some of the finest minds in the world. If there is a controversial subject, there are many opinions on it. What the stalker doesn't do is examine the issue for himself, think about the points expressed by anyone and everyone who has weighed in on the subject, then THINK FOR HIMSELF on what are the most credible and salient arguments.
He prefers to go the leftist route, which is the easiest. It allows the leftist to dispose of the hard work of thinking, because it has already been done for you, and is always designed to allow you to feel good about yourself, because you are doing the 'right' thing. How do you know it's the right thing? Because they have told you it is. So you can always have the high moral ground over those that disagree with you. And you can certainly act like you do. The stalker and bob have the acting part down pat.
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 20477
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Country over party

#63 Post by silverscreenselect » Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:14 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:52 am
What the stalker doesn't do is examine the issue for himself, think about the points expressed by anyone and everyone who has weighed in on the subject, then THINK FOR HIMSELF on what are the most credible and salient arguments. He prefers to go the leftist route, which is the easiest. It allows the leftist to dispose of the hard work of thinking, because it has already been done for you, and is always designed to allow you to feel good about yourself, because you are doing the 'right' thing.
So, instead of listening to people with years of education and expertise in a field who consistently reach a particular finding, you would instead prefer to listen to an enbalmer from Alabama who reaches the conclusion you'd like to believe is true. That makes you feel good about yourself because you're letting PragerU do your thinking for you.

I've never been to the moon, so I have no firsthand knowledge of its contents. But if hundreds of scientists (as well as the astronauts) say that it's made of volcanic rock, I tend to believe them rather than a nursery rhyme that says it's made of green cheese even though it would be a whole lot more fun if the moon was made of green cheese.

Much of Heather Richardson's article is about history, a subject about which she has considerably more education and training than you or me. You choose to reject her and the many others who have expressed similar views because they don't fit with your view of how the world should be.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

wbtravis007
Posts: 1135
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:15 pm
Location: Skipperville, Tx.

Re: Country over party

#64 Post by wbtravis007 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 1:32 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:52 am
BackInTex wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:38 am
silverscreenselect wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:27 am

Those experts have degrees from Prager University or the Tucker Carlson School of Broadcasting.

From Wikipedia:






I'll note that SSS approves of sources where he approves of their rhetoric, and if they have "credentials" all the better. I will remind you that using credentials such as SSS seems to like to use to counter someone else's thoughts because they lack "credentials" is bigoted. Plenty of great people did not have pedigrees like SSS approves of and plenty of terrible people went to Harvard, teach, and have written books and have followers.

If the stalker had an open mind, or any mind at all, he could easily find counterarguments to ANY of his rants expressed by some of the finest minds in the world. If there is a controversial subject, there are many opinions on it. What the stalker doesn't do is examine the issue for himself, think about the points expressed by anyone and everyone who has weighed in on the subject, then THINK FOR HIMSELF on what are the most credible and salient arguments.
He prefers to go the leftist route, which is the easiest. It allows the leftist to dispose of the hard work of thinking, because it has already been done for you, and is always designed to allow you to feel good about yourself, because you are doing the 'right' thing. How do you know it's the right thing? Because they have told you it is. So you can always have the high moral ground over those that disagree with you. And you can certainly act like you do. The stalker and bob have the acting part down pat.
Introspect.

And, strive to be sufferable.

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#65 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:14 pm

wbtravis007 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 1:32 pm
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:52 am
BackInTex wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:38 am

If the stalker had an open mind, or any mind at all, he could easily find counterarguments to ANY of his rants expressed by some of the finest minds in the world. If there is a controversial subject, there are many opinions on it. What the stalker doesn't do is examine the issue for himself, think about the points expressed by anyone and everyone who has weighed in on the subject, then THINK FOR HIMSELF on what are the most credible and salient arguments.
He prefers to go the leftist route, which is the easiest. It allows the leftist to dispose of the hard work of thinking, because it has already been done for you, and is always designed to allow you to feel good about yourself, because you are doing the 'right' thing. How do you know it's the right thing? Because they have told you it is. So you can always have the high moral ground over those that disagree with you. And you can certainly act like you do. The stalker and bob have the acting part down pat.
Introspect.

And, strive to be sufferable.
I'm weird. Too bad for you.
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#66 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:58 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:43 am
BackInTex wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:38 am
silverscreenselect wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:27 am
Those experts have degrees from Prager University or the Tucker Carlson School of Broadcasting.

From Wikipedia:Note that Flock always claims that there are experts with just as impressive credentials who disagree with whatever Flock doesn't believe in. He just never seems to produce any of them, other than an embalmer from Alabama.
I'll note that SSS approves of sources where he approves of their rhetoric, and if they have "credentials" all the better. I will remind you that using credentials such as SSS seems to like to use to counter someone else's thoughts because they lack "credentials" is bigoted. Plenty of great people did not have pedigrees like SSS approves of and plenty of terrible people went to Harvard, teach, and have written books and have followers.
Forget about the credentials. Why is Professor Richardson's analysis wrong? She showed her work. Pick it apart, if you can. --Bob
I've done a cursory look. Has Ms. Cox EVER had to defend her views? Has she ever debated her views against any other historian who disagrees with her opinions? I would be glad to read the transcripts or view any debate that she's ever participated in if you can find one.

But I pretty much doubt it. Debate has become pretty much extinct these days. She is recognized as a scholar and a historian of note, and no doubt receives awards and accolades from her peers. Her peers in academia and on the left. But when does she have to defend her interpretation of history? I'm sure she is a regular go-to guest on all the leftist cable channels, radio shows and MSM. Has she just ONCE had a scholarly conversation with anyone who questions her opinions? Just show me one, please.

The average 'guest expert' on MSNBC, CNN or any network would NEVER expose themselves to anyone who would question their views from a different perspective. All they ever get is affirmation. Just like I suspect Ms. Cox only gets.

From my searches on her writings, I have the definite impression she is more of a TDS sufferer than a historian. Even the NYT has criticized her for her bias.
The New York Times, in reviewing her book, slammed her for not “check[ing] her politics at the door,” showing the inherent bias of her work. The Washington Post also said that Richardson, “overstates her case,” and “ultimately finds herself caught in the partisan trap, blaming Republicans — albeit only the conservative ones — for ruining the economy, fomenting racism, damaging American democracy and betraying their progressive roots.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/07/ ... than-this/
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/gett ... all-wrong/
https://www.professorwatchlist.org/prof ... richardson
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/jen- ... e-critique

I, and many others, disagree with her, credentials and all. She, to me, is a leftist parrot who can use big words. When she agrees to stoop down and defend her opinions against another historian with a different perspective, then I might take what she says seriously. I personally, would like to see her stoop down off her pedestal to talk to Mark Levin, who is also a noted historian. I am SURE he would, and probably has, invited her. But I doubt she would ever deign to 'dirty' herself like that. EWWWW!
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#67 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:24 pm

There, bob. I have spent significant time in answering your question directed at me. Like it or not.

I would appreciate it if you would stop practicing your lawyer shit and answer MY questions to you directly when I ask them of you. And everyone else, for that matter.
I have asked you several questions over the past few weeks, and you've redirected, thrown personal shit at me and just ignored them. As lawyers do.
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20626
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Country over party

#68 Post by Bob78164 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:31 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:24 pm
There, bob. I have spent significant time in answering your question directed at me. Like it or not.

I would appreciate it if you would stop practicing your lawyer shit and answer MY questions to you directly when I ask them of you. And everyone else, for that matter.
I have asked you several questions over the past few weeks, and you've redirected, thrown personal shit at me and just ignored them. As lawyers do.
I directed my question to BiT, not to you. And no, you didn't answer the question. Not even a little bit. You said that some other writers have disagreed with some other undisclosed things Professor Richardson has written for reasons not disclosed in your excerpt.

If you want to answer the question, tell us what specifically Professor Richardson wrote in the quoted language that you believe to be wrong, and what's your evidence for believing it to be wrong.

And I've been ignoring your questions because neither you nor the straw men you insist on erecting are worth the time. --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
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#69 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:44 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:31 pm
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:24 pm
There, bob. I have spent significant time in answering your question directed at me. Like it or not.

I would appreciate it if you would stop practicing your lawyer shit and answer MY questions to you directly when I ask them of you. And everyone else, for that matter.
I have asked you several questions over the past few weeks, and you've redirected, thrown personal shit at me and just ignored them. As lawyers do.
I directed my question to BiT, not to you. And no, you didn't answer the question. Not even a little bit. You said that some other writers have disagreed with some other undisclosed things Professor Richardson has written for reasons not disclosed in your excerpt.

If you want to answer the question, tell us what specifically Professor Richardson wrote in the quoted language that you believe to be wrong, and what's your evidence for believing it to be wrong.

And I've been ignoring your questions because neither you nor the straw men you insist on erecting are worth the time. --Bob
I gave you one example, bob. But you didn't bother to read it. I also said I disagreed with every word and punctuation mark in her OPINION.
If you had bothered to read any of the articles I linked to, they referenced errors and biases that specifically addressed the subject that was quoted. They specifically include evidence that she is wrong in her assumptions, and opinions. But you obviously did not, based on how fast you posted your kneejerk response.

You consistently show that you are not interested in debate or even thinking. It is you who are not worth anyone's time.
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24871
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Country over party

#70 Post by Bob Juch » Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:02 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:58 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:43 am
BackInTex wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:38 am
I'll note that SSS approves of sources where he approves of their rhetoric, and if they have "credentials" all the better. I will remind you that using credentials such as SSS seems to like to use to counter someone else's thoughts because they lack "credentials" is bigoted. Plenty of great people did not have pedigrees like SSS approves of and plenty of terrible people went to Harvard, teach, and have written books and have followers.
Forget about the credentials. Why is Professor Richardson's analysis wrong? She showed her work. Pick it apart, if you can. --Bob
I've done a cursory look. Has Ms. Cox EVER had to defend her views? Has she ever debated her views against any other historian who disagrees with her opinions? I would be glad to read the transcripts or view any debate that she's ever participated in if you can find one.

But I pretty much doubt it. Debate has become pretty much extinct these days. She is recognized as a scholar and a historian of note, and no doubt receives awards and accolades from her peers. Her peers in academia and on the left. But when does she have to defend her interpretation of history? I'm sure she is a regular go-to guest on all the leftist cable channels, radio shows and MSM. Has she just ONCE had a scholarly conversation with anyone who questions her opinions? Just show me one, please.

The average 'guest expert' on MSNBC, CNN or any network would NEVER expose themselves to anyone who would question their views from a different perspective. All they ever get is affirmation. Just like I suspect Ms. Cox only gets.

From my searches on her writings, I have the definite impression she is more of a TDS sufferer than a historian. Even the NYT has criticized her for her bias.
The New York Times, in reviewing her book, slammed her for not “check[ing] her politics at the door,” showing the inherent bias of her work. The Washington Post also said that Richardson, “overstates her case,” and “ultimately finds herself caught in the partisan trap, blaming Republicans — albeit only the conservative ones — for ruining the economy, fomenting racism, damaging American democracy and betraying their progressive roots.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/07/ ... than-this/
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/gett ... all-wrong/
https://www.professorwatchlist.org/prof ... richardson
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/jen- ... e-critique

I, and many others, disagree with her, credentials and all. She, to me, is a leftist parrot who can use big words. When she agrees to stoop down and defend her opinions against another historian with a different perspective, then I might take what she says seriously. I personally, would like to see her stoop down off her pedestal to talk to Mark Levin, who is also a noted historian. I am SURE he would, and probably has, invited her. But I doubt she would ever deign to 'dirty' herself like that. EWWWW!
Gee, you quote CNSNews supposedly quoting the New York Times and Washington Post's reviews. I can't find the actual reviews anywhere.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#71 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:59 pm

Bob Juch wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:02 pm
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:58 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:43 am
Forget about the credentials. Why is Professor Richardson's analysis wrong? She showed her work. Pick it apart, if you can. --Bob
I've done a cursory look. Has Ms. Cox EVER had to defend her views? Has she ever debated her views against any other historian who disagrees with her opinions? I would be glad to read the transcripts or view any debate that she's ever participated in if you can find one.

But I pretty much doubt it. Debate has become pretty much extinct these days. She is recognized as a scholar and a historian of note, and no doubt receives awards and accolades from her peers. Her peers in academia and on the left. But when does she have to defend her interpretation of history? I'm sure she is a regular go-to guest on all the leftist cable channels, radio shows and MSM. Has she just ONCE had a scholarly conversation with anyone who questions her opinions? Just show me one, please.

The average 'guest expert' on MSNBC, CNN or any network would NEVER expose themselves to anyone who would question their views from a different perspective. All they ever get is affirmation. Just like I suspect Ms. Cox only gets.

From my searches on her writings, I have the definite impression she is more of a TDS sufferer than a historian. Even the NYT has criticized her for her bias.
The New York Times, in reviewing her book, slammed her for not “check[ing] her politics at the door,” showing the inherent bias of her work. The Washington Post also said that Richardson, “overstates her case,” and “ultimately finds herself caught in the partisan trap, blaming Republicans — albeit only the conservative ones — for ruining the economy, fomenting racism, damaging American democracy and betraying their progressive roots.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/07/ ... than-this/
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/gett ... all-wrong/
https://www.professorwatchlist.org/prof ... richardson
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/jen- ... e-critique

I, and many others, disagree with her, credentials and all. She, to me, is a leftist parrot who can use big words. When she agrees to stoop down and defend her opinions against another historian with a different perspective, then I might take what she says seriously. I personally, would like to see her stoop down off her pedestal to talk to Mark Levin, who is also a noted historian. I am SURE he would, and probably has, invited her. But I doubt she would ever deign to 'dirty' herself like that. EWWWW!
Gee, you quote CNSNews supposedly quoting the New York Times and Washington Post's reviews. I can't find the actual reviews anywhere.
You want the reviews, you pay for it. I'll take their word for it, since it can easily be checked.
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 20477
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Country over party

#72 Post by silverscreenselect » Fri Apr 29, 2022 9:54 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:58 pm
From my searches on her writings, I have the definite impression she is more of a TDS sufferer than a historian. Even the NYT has criticized her for her bias.
The New York Times, in reviewing her book, slammed her for not “check[ing] her politics at the door,” showing the inherent bias of her work. The Washington Post also said that Richardson, “overstates her case,” and “ultimately finds herself caught in the partisan trap, blaming Republicans — albeit only the conservative ones — for ruining the economy, fomenting racism, damaging American democracy and betraying their progressive roots.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/07/ ... than-this/
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/gett ... all-wrong/
https://www.professorwatchlist.org/prof ... richardson
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/jen- ... e-critique
It appears that Flock's "searches" on her writings consisted of finding articles critical of her without regard to what they were criticizing or whether it had anything to do with the article BobJ posted. He also seems to think that Richardson is not legitimate unless and until she debates some right wing figure. And of course he won't answer Bob##'s question about specifically what in Richardson's article he disagreed with (saying everything is pretty much admitting you can't find anything specific to critique on defensible grounds). It boils down to "she wrote books critical of Republicans, therefore, she's biased against Republicans, therefore you can discount eveything she has to say."

And, by the way, if you look up Richardson on YouTube or Facebook, you can find several lengthy interviews and chats she has had over the last few years in which she discusses her views in depth and fields questions from those who heard the interview live. And by lengthy, I'm talking about 40 minutes to over an hour.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Estonut
Evil Genius
Posts: 10291
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Location: Garden Grove, CA

Re: Country over party

#73 Post by Estonut » Sun May 01, 2022 9:28 am

Bob Juch wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:02 pm
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:58 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:43 am
Forget about the credentials. Why is Professor Richardson's analysis wrong? She showed her work. Pick it apart, if you can. --Bob
I've done a cursory look. Has Ms. Cox EVER had to defend her views? Has she ever debated her views against any other historian who disagrees with her opinions? I would be glad to read the transcripts or view any debate that she's ever participated in if you can find one.

But I pretty much doubt it. Debate has become pretty much extinct these days. She is recognized as a scholar and a historian of note, and no doubt receives awards and accolades from her peers. Her peers in academia and on the left. But when does she have to defend her interpretation of history? I'm sure she is a regular go-to guest on all the leftist cable channels, radio shows and MSM. Has she just ONCE had a scholarly conversation with anyone who questions her opinions? Just show me one, please.

The average 'guest expert' on MSNBC, CNN or any network would NEVER expose themselves to anyone who would question their views from a different perspective. All they ever get is affirmation. Just like I suspect Ms. Cox only gets.

From my searches on her writings, I have the definite impression she is more of a TDS sufferer than a historian. Even the NYT has criticized her for her bias.
The New York Times, in reviewing her book, slammed her for not “check[ing] her politics at the door,” showing the inherent bias of her work. The Washington Post also said that Richardson, “overstates her case,” and “ultimately finds herself caught in the partisan trap, blaming Republicans — albeit only the conservative ones — for ruining the economy, fomenting racism, damaging American democracy and betraying their progressive roots.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/07/ ... than-this/
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/gett ... all-wrong/
https://www.professorwatchlist.org/prof ... richardson
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/jen- ... e-critique

I, and many others, disagree with her, credentials and all. She, to me, is a leftist parrot who can use big words. When she agrees to stoop down and defend her opinions against another historian with a different perspective, then I might take what she says seriously. I personally, would like to see her stoop down off her pedestal to talk to Mark Levin, who is also a noted historian. I am SURE he would, and probably has, invited her. But I doubt she would ever deign to 'dirty' herself like that. EWWWW!
Gee, you quote CNSNews supposedly quoting the New York Times and Washington Post's reviews. I can't find the actual reviews anywhere.
Try Google. I found both in a few minutes.
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
Groucho Marx

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 6204
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Country over party

#74 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Sun May 01, 2022 9:39 am

Estonut wrote:
Sun May 01, 2022 9:28 am
Bob Juch wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:02 pm
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:58 pm

I've done a cursory look. Has Ms. Cox EVER had to defend her views? Has she ever debated her views against any other historian who disagrees with her opinions? I would be glad to read the transcripts or view any debate that she's ever participated in if you can find one.

But I pretty much doubt it. Debate has become pretty much extinct these days. She is recognized as a scholar and a historian of note, and no doubt receives awards and accolades from her peers. Her peers in academia and on the left. But when does she have to defend her interpretation of history? I'm sure she is a regular go-to guest on all the leftist cable channels, radio shows and MSM. Has she just ONCE had a scholarly conversation with anyone who questions her opinions? Just show me one, please.

The average 'guest expert' on MSNBC, CNN or any network would NEVER expose themselves to anyone who would question their views from a different perspective. All they ever get is affirmation. Just like I suspect Ms. Cox only gets.

From my searches on her writings, I have the definite impression she is more of a TDS sufferer than a historian. Even the NYT has criticized her for her bias.



https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/07/ ... than-this/
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/gett ... all-wrong/
https://www.professorwatchlist.org/prof ... richardson
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/jen- ... e-critique

I, and many others, disagree with her, credentials and all. She, to me, is a leftist parrot who can use big words. When she agrees to stoop down and defend her opinions against another historian with a different perspective, then I might take what she says seriously. I personally, would like to see her stoop down off her pedestal to talk to Mark Levin, who is also a noted historian. I am SURE he would, and probably has, invited her. But I doubt she would ever deign to 'dirty' herself like that. EWWWW!
Gee, you quote CNSNews supposedly quoting the New York Times and Washington Post's reviews. I can't find the actual reviews anywhere.
Try Google. I found both in a few minutes.
None of the e-bigots are interested in doing any work in defending their views. Especially bob. The Stalker is only interested in insulting me personally, and getting BJ to do any thinking is like training an amoeba.
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... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd

User avatar
Estonut
Evil Genius
Posts: 10291
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Location: Garden Grove, CA

Re: Country over party

#75 Post by Estonut » Sun May 01, 2022 9:41 am

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:59 pm
Bob Juch wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:02 pm
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:58 pm

I've done a cursory look. Has Ms. Cox EVER had to defend her views? Has she ever debated her views against any other historian who disagrees with her opinions? I would be glad to read the transcripts or view any debate that she's ever participated in if you can find one.

But I pretty much doubt it. Debate has become pretty much extinct these days. She is recognized as a scholar and a historian of note, and no doubt receives awards and accolades from her peers. Her peers in academia and on the left. But when does she have to defend her interpretation of history? I'm sure she is a regular go-to guest on all the leftist cable channels, radio shows and MSM. Has she just ONCE had a scholarly conversation with anyone who questions her opinions? Just show me one, please.

The average 'guest expert' on MSNBC, CNN or any network would NEVER expose themselves to anyone who would question their views from a different perspective. All they ever get is affirmation. Just like I suspect Ms. Cox only gets.

From my searches on her writings, I have the definite impression she is more of a TDS sufferer than a historian. Even the NYT has criticized her for her bias.



https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/07/ ... than-this/
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/gett ... all-wrong/
https://www.professorwatchlist.org/prof ... richardson
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/jen- ... e-critique

I, and many others, disagree with her, credentials and all. She, to me, is a leftist parrot who can use big words. When she agrees to stoop down and defend her opinions against another historian with a different perspective, then I might take what she says seriously. I personally, would like to see her stoop down off her pedestal to talk to Mark Levin, who is also a noted historian. I am SURE he would, and probably has, invited her. But I doubt she would ever deign to 'dirty' herself like that. EWWWW!
Gee, you quote CNSNews supposedly quoting the New York Times and Washington Post's reviews. I can't find the actual reviews anywhere.
You want the reviews, you pay for it. I'll take their word for it, since it can easily be checked.
On many pay sites, you can Google the title of the article, or exact content, and then look at the cached page by dropping down the 3 dots at the end of the first line of the returned hit.
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
Groucho Marx

Post Reply