We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, June 4. 2016
Wolves (dogs) were domesticated twice
I would guess, more than twice. Puppies are cute. Cave men brought them home.
Facebook, Twitter Agree to Self-Censor for EU
What???? Unbelievable. For the EU?
European Union Declares War on Internet Free Speech
The Empire imitates China, Cuba, and North Korea
Yale Students Demand That Major English Poets Be Abolished for Being Heterosexual White Males
Global-Warming Alarmists, You're Doing It Wrong
Megan omits from her discussion the likelihood that real, meaningful warming, were it to ever occur, might be good for the planet and for humanity. It certainly was with past warmings.
Students Demand That Major English Poets Be Abolished for Being
Heterosexual White Males - See more at:
New York Magazine Writer Begs Media to ‘Stop Bugging Hillary Clinton!’
San Jose Mayor blames Trump for violent, leftist mob
Get out of the German Empire, Brits
Why History Matters: The 1967 Six-Day War
Tracked: Jun 05, 10:01
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Bring on the PC Clowns
To quote Anglelyne (Althouse blog): (Aside: This campaign season calls the old "it takes a thief" adage to mind - as it takes a thief to catch a thief, it takes a clown to out the clowns.)
“But then the big buffoon, the big clown shows up, and the more his opponents call him out as a buffoon, the more their own buffoonery is revealed. The more they complain about his contemptuous manners toward his opponents, the more contemptible those opponents appear.
A whole lot of transparently foolish speech put out by a lot of foolish people didn't seem to register with large swathes of the electorate for what it really was - the speech of foolish and incompetent people. Trump, the clown, is apparently pushing a significant number of those people to rub their eyes, clear their ears, and ask themselves, "Why on earth have I been taking these other chuckleheads seriously?")”
Whatever the outcome, Trump has pulled back the curtain and done a fair amount of damage to the political class and all the other hangers on.
I don't know about Obama's economy; the frogs have been warming up for some time now. He is just another in a long line of paid off shills with deflecting and distracting rhetoric.
If you happen to prefer what is unique about America, or the Bill of Rights, or American sovereignty, being vilified goes with the territory. These, things, especially American sovereignty, are incompatible with the interests of the skimming class; the global elites and financial corporatists. This is why nobody else has stepped up to coopt the Trump message; the usual paymasters aren’t about to ante up.
Milo's Epic Battle Against the Fascist Left ... bastion of a particular brand of progressive fascism characteristic of the new Left
No. Just because someone wants to limit free speech doesn't make them a fascist, except in the loosest sense of the word, and certainly not the political sense of the word which is being used here.
Call yourself what ever you want, if you are in favor of limiting free speech - besides the obvious speech that is logically limited, yelling fire...etc - you are an enemy of liberty.
B Hammer: Call yourself what ever you want, if you are in favor of limiting free speech - besides the obvious speech that is logically limited, yelling fire...etc - you are an enemy of liberty.
We're not in favor of limiting free speech. Feel free to call people "fascist", and we'll feel free to correct the use of the term.
Normal Person: [Makes valid observation.]
Zachs: [Inserts vague diversion only superficially on Normal Person's topic. Prepares diversionary looping routine. Waits for response.]
Normal Person: [Makes another related valid observation.]
Zachs: WE [sic] WEREN'T REFERRING TO THAT, LOSER!
Zachs: GOT YA!
Zachs: [Insert last word, deploy another vague diversion only apparently on topic. Launch Google, search term returning the vaguest hits, select random items. Deploy random third party cite(s) with link(s) from this endless library of seemingly but only peripherally related items. Prepare diversionary looping routine. Wait for response. END: GOTO START.]
And that's why, when I see Zachriel's name on a comment, I often just skip the whole thread.
Once again you set up a straw man argument as a point of disagreement.
You really don't understand rational thought.
DrTorch: Once again you set up a straw man argument as a point of disagreement.
Don't see the straw man. The claim concerns the "fascist left" and the evidence is disruption of campaigns. The protesters are not fascist by any reasonable definition of term.
Normal Person, observes common reality, remarks: The Fascist Left is bastion of a particular brand of progressive fascism.
Zachs: [INVOKE 45% TOPIC=VALID] Limiting free speech isn't fascism. Not here it isn't.
Normal Person, extends thought, observing shared human perception, rational definitions, and associated labels: If you're in favor of limiting free speech ... you are an enemy of liberty.
Zachs: [DEFENSE=HEIGHTENED L3, TOPIC=OPTIONAL] We [sic] don't favor fascism. Call people "fascist", and our [ sic] programming will correct you per our [sic] said programming. [Slight odor of warming circuits.]
Normal Person: You don't reliably do rational thought, Programmed Response Unit.
Zachs: [INVOKE ROTE; EMPHASIS=L4] WE'RE [sic] NOT STRAWMANNING, NORMAL PERSON.
Zachs: [Prepare last word, search terms DEFINITIONS=A, OMIT DEF B-Z; ENGAGE PARTISAN DISRUPTIONS, POPULAR; PEDANTRY=LEFTIST, organize random cite(s) and link(s) from hits returned, insert RANDOM DIFFUSE LENSING, SKEW L4, WARP L4.]
Zachs: [Prepare diversionary looping routine. Wait for response. END: GOTO START.]
OK, here's yet another example of your lies and distortion.
As you note, the headline was "Milo's Epic Battle Against the Fascist Left" and in the article, the author referred to a certain college as a "bastion of a particular brand of progressive fascism characteristic of the new Left."
You have criticized those words because you argue that "just because someone wants to limit free speech doesn't make them a fascist."
But the author of the article NEVER claimed that desiring to limit free speech makes one a fascist. It may or it may not, but that's not an argument the author was making.
If I stated that the fat, ugly clown made a dumb statement, I'm not arguing that uttering a dumb statement makes one a fat clown (although that's what your logic would claim). I'm simply providing a good description of the clown. Leftists, like yourself, do this all the time, as in: The WHITE policeman shot the (18 year old, 260 pound) black child. Shooting black males doesn't make one white (the majority of black males are shot by other black males), but the left wing media makes sure to include this modifier whenever possible.
The author was simply reminding us of the general nature of this particular college and its administration and professors as in fascism, a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control. Seems pretty accurate and appropriate given the intolerance of the university when it comes to the voicing of any conservative opinion. Like they say, "if the shoe fits, wear it."
PS - As always, we can explain these things for you, but we can't understand them for you. You're still batting .1000 in the dumbass contest.
Mike M: The author was simply reminding us of the general nature of this particular college and its administration and professors as in fascism, a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.
But "strong autocratic or dictatorial control" is not intrinsically fascism, except in the loosest use of the term. Fascism is a specific political philosophy that entails extreme nationalism, xenophobia, and national aggression.
Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe, influenced by national syndicalism. Fascism originated in Italy during World War I and spread to other European countries. Fascism opposes liberalism, Marxism and anarchism and is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.
Facebook, Twitter Agree to Self-Censor for EU
There are historical reasons for hate speech laws in Europe, though they are probably outmoded. Hate will be expressed one way or another, so it is best to expose it to sunlight.
By the way Facebook and Twitter already censor hate speech.
Facebook removes hate speech, which includes content that directly attacks people based on their:
Sex, gender, or gender identity, or
Serious disabilities or diseases.
Organizations and people dedicated to promoting hatred against these protected groups are not allowed a presence on Facebook. As with all of our standards, we rely on our community to report this content to us.
That's their story and they're sticking to it. It seems false to me.
Sam L: That's their story and they're sticking to it.
Who is they? Facebook? Europe?
Which story? That Facebook already censors hate speech?
Editor At Vox: “If Trump Comes To Your Town, Start A Riot”
Statement on Emmett Rensin
"On Thursday night, Emmett Rensin, the deputy editor of Vox’s first person section, sent a series of tweets that, among other things, urged people to riot if Donald Trump comes to their town.
"We at Vox do not take institutional positions on most questions, and we encourage our writers to debate and disagree. But direct encouragement of riots crosses a line between expressing a contrary opinion and directly encouraging dangerous, illegal activity. We welcome a variety of viewpoints, but we do not condone writing that could put others in danger.
"In this case, Emmett’s tweets violated Vox’s standards and Emmett has been suspended as a consequence."
If Britain fails to extricate itself from the EU, should Americans and Canadians execute a rescue and recover mission to bring the Magna Carta and other documents into the free world?
Please be careful with sarcasm in the morning. I almost spilled my coffee onto the keyboard.
Speaking of sarcasm, Zach's comment "Just because someone wants to limit free speech doesn't make them a fascist, except in the loosest sense of the word..." WAS sarcasm, wasn't it?
The brownshirts came out in San Diego, paid for by Democrats through La Raza, the unions and Acorn. But don't worry it's only fascism in the loosest sense of the word.
GoneWithTheWind: Speaking of sarcasm
You are conflating tactics with ideology. There are disruptive people on the political left and on the political right. Disruptive tactics are not confined to fascists.
Sam L: That's their story and they're sticking to it.
Trump has previously encouraged violence against demonstrators.
And where was the violence he was supposed to have encouraged? And what was the reaction by some on the media and politicians on the left? Some denounced what they say as encouraging violence but some in the media and some Democrats, like the Mayor of San Jose excused it. There is the high likelihood that some of it was paid for by George Soros. Actually some of the violence was against the US rather than just Trump.
mudbug: And where was the violence he was supposed to have encouraged?
There have been numerous incidents of protesters inside Trump rallies being punched and pushed, with Trump egging them on.
mudbug: Some denounced what they say as encouraging violence but some in the media and some Democrats, like the Mayor of San Jose excused it.
San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo: "I condemn all acts of violence committed against people who exercise their rights to free speech and assembly, regardless of their political views. Nothing that Donald Trump says absolves those individuals of responsibility for their violent conduct last night."
Donald Trump: “I’d like to punch him in the face, I’ll tell you that.”
One idiot at a Trump rally punched a "protester". Sorry, there is no comparison. There are no similar "protests" outside or inside a Bernie or Hillary event.
“At some point Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,” Liccardo said.
I see, Trump says some things (some of which I do not support - but in any case do not cause mass violence) and Trump is supposed to take responsibility for the mass violence around his events. As I said, that violence was only partially directed at him, a substantial amount was anti-US (flag burning, waving the Mexican flag, etc.).
mudbug: One idiot at a Trump rally punched a "protester".
It was an ongoing pattern of roughing up protesters. There's no excuse for incitement, and there's no excuse for either side to resort to violence.
Z: There are disruptive people on the political left and on the political right.
That's a cheap defense. The left is the side responsible for most of the violence. For example: Conservative speakers often need security when they speak on college campuses. When they speak they are often shouted down or they are rushed by leftists. Many G7 summits are disrupted by rioters who trash stores and police cars. Black Lives Matter employs the same tactics. Most political assassinations are executed by someone on the left. The left disrupts and subverts immigration law often violently. And most recently, the left has promoted violence against Trump supporters.
For a counterexample, consider the Bundy's armed uprising, or for a farcical example, the Brooks Brothers Riot.
I guess trying to steal a presidential election isn't provocation enough to start a riot. Neither is the war on the west where the government owns almost half the land in the west and through environmental regulations and increasing grazing fees appears to be trying put ranchers and farmers out of business.
I guess that's the best you can do. Sorry, even if those incidents were completely unjustified, there's no comparison to the violence from the left.
mudbug: Sorry, even if those incidents were completely unjustified, there's no comparison to the violence from the left.
Directly, not figuratively, taking up arms against the government certainly qualifies as violence by the right.
In any case, the use of the term fascism is an unjustified distortion of history.
Z: In any case, the use of the term fascism is an unjustified distortion of history.
Fascist is a term the left used against the right since the '60s.
The intolerance of many on the left to any dissenting opinion merits the name, in my view. Ignoring the law you have pledged to uphold merits it also. It's certainly now worse than 'hater', 'racist', 'homophobe', 'bigot', 'islamophobe', and probably a dozen more I can't remember off hand.
mudbug: Fascist is a term the left used against the right since the '60s.
Well before then.
mudbug: The intolerance of many on the left to any dissenting opinion merits the name, in my view.
Fascism is characterized by more than just intolerance, but the subjugation of the individual to the nation under an authoritarian leader, a rejection of liberalism as weakness, strident xenophobia, and the belief that the virility of the nation is best expressed through violent aggression.
Just like racism and the other characterizations used by the left against the right. In fact those on the left are the ones decrying how somebody or something associated with white males are automatically to be discounted. What's your point? That fascism is used somewhat euphemistically? What the left do and want isn't that much different from the Nazis did except not as severe. They are largely against Jews, the want the state to control via taxation, regulation, and crony capitalism the means of production, they do not tolerate dissenting opinions - even scientific ones, etc. So in the end, I'd say the fascist label for the is pretty reasonable.
mudbug: Just like racism and the other characterizations used by the left against the right.
There's no doubt such characterizations are often bandied about without justification.
mudbug: In fact those on the left are the ones decrying how somebody or something associated with white males are automatically to be discounted.
Overgeneralization. There are outliers on either political extreme that one could point to.
The current political problem is that the right wing in the U.S. has nurtured these outliers so that now the Republican Party is set to nominate a birther who has claimed that he can't get a fair hearing at court from a judge because the judge is "Mexican". (The judge was born in Indiana.)
mudbug: That fascism is used somewhat euphemistically?
Is it? The right wing has been attempting to define the term the last several years, something that only seems to have currency in the right wing echo chamber.
mudbug: So in the end, I'd say the fascist label for the is pretty reasonable.
Ah, so it's not euphemistic.
The last U.S. invasion of another country went so well. Why not!
re: Dogs being domesticated twice... Konrad Lorenz had proposed this, even identifying the same ancestral sources, some 60 years ago based on behavior and gross physical traits. Also, I agree with your assertion, Bird Dog, that wolf pups were often taken home. I also suspect wolves that needed help were smart enough to seek out a good human. Now how do we test that theory?
ama: I also suspect wolves that needed help were smart enough to seek out a good human. Now how do we test that theory?
Dogs may have been domesticated many times, but not left any descendants.
So much is going on in genetics which is an immature field that we are bound to hear much more about Dogs in the future. Much that we have learned about humans (including sacrilegious ideas about our cousins the neanderthals and others) has been leveraged into recent dog studies. I look forward to hearing from this group in particular and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the news contradicts our current fuzzy picture: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/04/feature-solving-mystery-dog-domestication
It was "common knowledge" that dogs come from wolves until this UCLA study: http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1004016
or the predigested summary if you don't like reading research papers: http://www.futurity.org/dogs-evolved-people-started-farming/
The Dingo was reclassified as neither wolf nor dog in 2014, in part due to this study.
Here are a few links I have enjoyed: http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Origin_of_the_domestic_dog
I like this place, but if you continue to permit "Zachriel" to pollute the site, I may have to stop reading.
We assume the links are posted for discussion. When we post comments, we try to stay on topic, and always attempt to support our position with appropriate evidence.
Many of influence have been wielding truthiness to garner power for a generation. Even the military disasters and economic debacles of the Bush Administration were insufficient to force a reevaluation of these tactics. A concerted attack was mounted on Obama, the first U.S. black president, as either a Kenyan Communist or an Indonesian Muslim or some sort of "other". This has culminated with the presumptive Republican nominee for President being a birther! Think about it.
In light of this, when someone wrongly claims that disruptive protesters are fascists, rendering the term devoid of its historical meaning; or that climate change has no scientific support; then it is reasonable to point out why those views are wrong.
Nonetheless, we will attempt to tone it down a bit.
Where was Obama born? The hospital he claims to have been born in didn't exist when he was born. The address given for his mother at the time was not her address. His SS # belongs to a dead man from Connecticut. In his book he claimed to have been born in Kenya. In his application for college he claimed to be a foreign student. When the White House FINALLY released his birth certificate it was proved to have been a fake created from someone else's birth certificate. So where was he born???
I here your point, but think of Zach as a very capable and articulate spokesman for the left. This gives you insight into what they believe and sometimes why they believe what they do. It also illustrates how in some/many cases they must lie to make their case.
To be honest, an open debate is not a good forum for the left. The sunlight and the ability to disprove their claims will destroy much of what they say. They would be wise to stick to chanting crowds disrupting free speech and fascist brown shirts attacking citizens that step out of line. That is where the liberal philosophy is at it's best.
I vote for freedom of speech for everyone.
this is getting tiring. this guy doesn't debate, he lectures and its clear, very clear, he doesn't read his own sources and has almost no personal knowledge about any of the sources or topics.
DING DING DING DING - We have a winner!
The Z person isn't capable or articulate. His facts are typically distorted or fabricated, his reasoning is vacuous and his logic is fallacious. In other words, he's a typical Leftist - and one who cannot decide if he's a male or female (hence his typical reference to himself as "we").
Note: I refer to him in the generic masculine because I usually refuse to use the politically correct (and time wasting) he/she just as I would call Carly Fiorina the former chairman of HP.
Mike M: His facts are typically distorted or fabricated, his reasoning is vacuous and his logic is fallacious.
Then it shouldn't be a problem to point to the distortion and fabrications, or the fallacies.
Normal People: [Issue valid point, fact, premise, etc.]
Zachsbot: [Make rhetorical trap, tangential diversion, or commit outright fallacy.]
Normal People: [Engage fallacy. Attempt to reason against fallacy. Become co-dependent, the first stage to defeat.]
Zachbot: [Build on fallacy. Completely unhinge "conversation".]
Normal People: [Observe rubbish but do not grasp Zachbot programming. Codependency deepens.]
Zachbot: [Repeat. Engage looping function. Distance from topic all but entirely. Rub silicon gleefully.]
Normal People: [Protest where they find themselves, which is down the 'bot's rabbit hole.]
Zachbot: Shouldn't be hard to refute our [sic] point [where "point" is something completely unrecognizable to Normal People's original valid fact, premise, etc. Return daily and rerun program.]
See here and here for possible relevancy.
It's unfortunate that one poster has been allowed to disrupt (frankly, "ruin" is a better word) one the best sites on the Internet. By the time one gets through all his inane contributions, and I don't mean actually reading them, the entire value of the comment section is lost.
you should try conversing sometime.
most people are sick to fuck of your preaching.