Friday morning links

Ray: I thought that the 14th amendment prohibited all forced labor.

The 14th Amendment granted power to Congress to enforce equal protection under the law. Someone operating a public accommodation is prohibited from engaging in discrimination.

#1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 10:43 (Reply)

Ha! Let them try that with a Muslim florist and see what happens.

#1.1.1 Stargazer on 2021-07-09 10:57 (Reply)

That's a ridiculous interpretation of the amendment, and as usual you are wrong, which is why you didn't actually quote it.

Capricious judicial rulings may make that claim, but the inconsistency of them and their application demonstrates that this is wholly not true.

You are always reliably wrong.

#1.1.2 DrTorch (Link) on 2021-07-09 11:19 (Reply)

DrTorch: That's a ridiculous interpretation of the amendment, and as usual you are wrong, which is why you didn't actually quote it.

QUOTE:

14th Amendment
Section 1: nor shall any State deprive ... any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in public accommodations, was one of several civil rights laws passed under this provision.

#1.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 11:27 (Reply)

Every time I challenge to post facts, it always turns out that I'm right.

How about that?

#1.1.2.1.1 DrTorch (Link) on 2021-07-09 13:00 (Reply)

DrTorch: How about that?

Not sure what you are claiming. As noted, the 14th Amendment grants Congress the power to enforce equal protection of the laws, and that is the clear language of the Amendment.

#1.1.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 13:03 (Reply)

QUOTE:

CRT teaches not only that people are defined by their skin color but also that paler skin is inherently evil.

Critical race theory studies history and social structures through the prism of race. The fact is that society has often defined people by their skin color. Critical analysis does not show that paler skin is inherently evil, but does note that those in power tend to take actions to remain in power, and then rationalize their actions after the fact.

QUOTE:

It’s Critical Race Theory That Is Un-American, Not Laws Banning It: The concepts of “systemic racism,” “white privilege,” “anti-racism,” and “equity [as opposed to equality]” all stem from critical theory. Since this ideology is obviously false and toxic

Systemic racism and white privilege are strongly supported empirical claims.

#2 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 10:40 (Reply)

My god, you're gullible.

#2.1 SK on 2021-07-09 11:04 (Reply)

Opinions masquerading as psuedo-facts, using "QUOTE" instead of providing citations: An obsolete concept; I'm surprised they are paying out for such poor quality.

https://twitter.com/JamesHeartfield/status/1411905764348862464

#2.2 Aggie on 2021-07-09 11:47 (Reply)

Aggie: Opinions masquerading as psuedo-facts, using "QUOTE" instead of providing citations

Huh? We quoted the linked article, "It’s Critical Race Theory That Is Un-American, Not Laws Banning It".

#2.2.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 12:40 (Reply)

Found a new place to troll, did you? Beat it.

#2.3 Brother John on 2021-07-09 12:10 (Reply)

They are narratives...straight from Marxist Critical Theory.

#2.4 indyjonesouthere on 2021-07-09 13:40 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Tucker Carlson Responds To Unmasking In Blistering Monologue, Discusses With Glenn Greenwald

McDougal v. Fox News:

QUOTE:

This “general tenor” of the show should then inform a viewer that he is not “stating actual facts” about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in “exaggeration” and “non-literal commentary... Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson’s reputation, any reasonable viewer “arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism” about the statements he makes.

#3 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 10:47 (Reply)

I guess the same could be said about a lot of the talking heads and politicians. From where I stand most of them are very loose with their "facts".

#3.1 Don (Link) on 2021-07-09 10:56 (Reply)

Don: I guess the same could be said about a lot of the talking heads and politicians. From where I stand most of them are very loose with their "facts".

Most mainstream journalists, including analysts, are held to account, if not by their publishers, then by the courts. Fox News argued, successfully in court, that these rules to not apply to their bloviators.

#3.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 11:07 (Reply)

And what did they say about Rachael Maddow?

#3.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2021-07-09 13:44 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: And what did they say about Rachael Maddow?

Has Maddow been sued for libel or slander? Did her publisher try to avoid accountability by claiming in court that "no reasonable viewer" would take her seriously?

#3.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 14:08 (Reply)

A federal judge on Friday dismissed a $10 million defamation lawsuit by One America News (OAN) against Rachel Maddow, finding that a "reasonable viewer" would know the MSNBC prime-time host was only offering her opinion when she called the right-leaning network "paid Russian propaganda."

#3.1.1.1.1.1 Christopher B on 2021-07-09 14:59 (Reply)

Corrected formatted link

That ruling, by the way, predates the ruling on Carlson's similar libel suit.

#3.1.1.1.1.1.1 Christopher B on 2021-07-09 15:07 (Reply)

Christopher B: A federal judge on Friday dismissed a $10 million defamation lawsuit by One America News (OAN) against Rachel Maddow, finding that a "reasonable viewer" would know the MSNBC prime-time host was only offering her opinion when she called the right-leaning network "paid Russian propaganda."

The argument was quite different. Maddow made clear she was referring to a report that OAN reporter, Kristian Rouz, had been paid to write for Sputnik, which is funded by the Russian government. OAN has been ordered to pay MSNBC's legal fees. Fox News' argument was that nothing Carlson said should be taken at face value.

#3.1.1.1.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 16:18 (Reply)

...and it was all reliably vetted by at least 17 intelligence agencies.

#3.1.1.1.1.1.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2021-07-09 16:47 (Reply)

It's disgusting that any American (are you?) would accept and excuse the IC illegally unmasking and illegally releasing information gained from that unmasking on ANY American, regardless of whether or not they are (or even claim to be) a journalist.

Now run along back to your room and think about what a horrible, illiberal, authoritarian, hypocritical twit you are.

By the way, Otto, didn't you disappear right around the time the Meuller report was released? Or was it one of the IG reports? Whatever it was, it was a welcome respite from your pompous drivel.

#3.2 SK on 2021-07-09 11:15 (Reply)

SK: excuse the IC illegally unmasking and illegally releasing information gained from that unmasking on ANY American

The only source for the report is Carlson, whose own publisher asserts he shouldn't be trusted. However, if Carlson was trying to set up an interview with Putin, then it's obvious his communications would have been intercepted. Duh.

#3.2.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 11:20 (Reply)

"Duh"?

Sounds about right for you, Otto. Do you drool on yourself when that eructation exits your pie hole?

The issue is not the fact that he was recorded trying to set up an interview with Putin, something many American journalists have done. The problem is that someone in the IC made an unmasking request, and then someone released the results of that. Every citizen of this country has the right to expect that the power of the IC won't be unethically and illegally used against them.

The bigger problem is that the left doesn't have a problem with this terrifically dangerous of abuse of power, as long as it's of people with the "wrong" politics.

Your attitude is fantastically dangerous to the republic and to freedom itself.

By the way, Jonathan Swan's Axios article essentially does all the confirming of the story any reasonable person needs--but don't look at it--it won't confirm your biases.

#3.2.1.1 SK on 2021-07-09 11:41 (Reply)

SK: The issue is not the fact that he was recorded trying to set up an interview with Putin, something many American journalists have done.

Actually, that was Carlson original complaint, saying, "The Biden administration is spying on us." He has since modified his complaint to one about unmasking. Even if we accept his claims at face value — against the advice of his own publisher — there is no evidence that unmasking was done with nefarious intent. Remember that until the person is unmasked, agents don't know who it is they are unmasking. That's rather the point.

That Carlson was purportedly given a heads-up, that could be an issue within the spy agency.

#3.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 12:34 (Reply)

Unmasking IS spying. Releasing the information obtained when it is done is illegal and of "nefarious intent" by its very nature. Your defense and excusing of it is odious. THAT'S rather the point.

Shame on you.

Shouldn't you be on the phone with NSA, ratting out a neighbor or family member for being a radical extremist? While you're at it, why don't you rat me out?

#3.2.1.1.1.1 SK on 2021-07-09 13:32 (Reply)

SK: Unmasking IS spying.

According to his own updated account, they apparently weren't spying on him, but on aides to Putin.

SK: Releasing the information obtained when it is done is illegal and of "nefarious intent" by its very nature.

The information wasn't released to the public, only to Carlson. That's assuming you accept his account at face value — contrary to his own publisher's admonition.

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 13:43 (Reply)

When they unmasked, it became spying on an American citizen, and you know it. And yet you continue to deflect and defend the IC for having done it because you don't like Carlson. Or was it someone in the administration who ordered the unmasking? Is Samantha Power up to her old tricks?

The information was released to multiple journalists and confirmed to Jonathan Swan. If you don't know that it's only because you refuse to believe it.

With all of this back and forth you have yet to make a defense of what is clearly your unstated central thesis--that it's OK for the IC--or the Biden admin--to abuse the rights of a US citizen.

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1 SK on 2021-07-09 14:00 (Reply)

SK: When they unmasked, it became spying on an American citizen, and you know it.

Just because he is an American citizen doesn't mean he can't be unmasked. There are rules for unmasking. At this point, we don't know whether those rules were followed or not. Meanwhile, you are relying on Carlson's account — even though his own employer claimed in court that he engages in “non-literal commentary."

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 14:04 (Reply)

Yes there are rules--some of those rules are in the form of laws.

Those laws were broken when the results of the unmasking were leaked to people in the press. I've already named one journalist, a left winger, to whom they were obviously leaked. There are more.

You know those laws were broken. One more time--why do you consider it OK that those laws were broken and that Carlson's rights--and the public trust--were violated?

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 SK on 2021-07-09 14:12 (Reply)

SK: Those laws were broken when the results of the unmasking were leaked to people in the press.

According to Carlson, the information was provided to him. Carlson is the one who made it public. The government can certainly warn someone about their contacts with foreign agents.

SK: You know those laws were broken.

Please provide the law that you claim was broken.

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 14:22 (Reply)

SK: By the way, Jonathan Swan's Axios article essentially does all the confirming of the story any reasonable person needs

Swan has two articles on Axios. Neither confirm your account, and, indeed, directly contradict it. From the 7/7 article:
https://muckrack.com/jonathan-swan/articles

QUOTE:

1. Axios has not confirmed whether any communications from Carlson have been intercepted, and if so, why.

2. Tucker Carlson was talking to U.S.-based Kremlin intermediaries about setting up an interview with Vladimir Putin shortly before the Fox News host accused the National Security Agency of spying on him, sources familiar with the conversations tell Axios. {These sources are probably at Fox News. Axios is investigating something that Fox News should investigate, but you know ...)

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 14:42 (Reply)

He knows about Carlson talking to Putin's people because the information was leaked to him. It's very easy to understand. The sources were NOT at Fox news, but at NSA, and you know it as well as I do.

Again, why are you defending the abuse of the powers of the IC? You know perfectly well they leaked that info.

I have a theory--you're actually Samantha Power!!!

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1 SK on 2021-07-09 17:18 (Reply)

SK: The sources were NOT at Fox news, but at NSA, and you know it as well as I do.

You had said, “ Jonathan Swan's Axios article essentially does all the confirming of the story any reasonable person need.” However, the article appears to contradict your claim, specifically stating they had not confirmed that Carlson’s communications had, in fact, been intercepted.

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-09 21:02 (Reply)

It’s clear why you disappeared after the Meuller and IG reports came out—both of them put the lie to your foolish and downright dangerous defense of the IC, diplomatic corps and law enforcement communities and their abuse of power around the 2016 election.

And here you are doing it again. And spinning in circles trying to blame Carlson himself for having his rights violated.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1 SK on 2021-07-10 01:25 (Reply)

Let us know if you decide to make a substantive reply.

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2021-07-10 07:38 (Reply)

I've made nothing but substantive replies, and you damned well know it.

Let me know when you decide to defend the constitutional rights of all people, people even if you disagree with their politics.

#3.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1 SK on 2021-07-10 13:25 (Reply)

"We think, condom on a banana, and that’s enough, and then we’re confused as to why there’s a consent problem. We’re still teaching the golden rule and we should be teaching the platinum rule: to treat others the way they want to be treated."

Better to teach the Iron Rule: pull up your socks, do your job, no backchat, and behave like a responsible adult. Deviations earn you a kick in the pants or slap upside the head.

#4 Mike Anderson (Link) on 2021-07-09 11:03 (Reply)

Now they call being a Republican treason? I call that more projection.

#5 Brother John on 2021-07-09 12:13 (Reply)

Re: urban blight is back ... seems like a good time to re-watch the original “Death Wish”. The nightmarish, chaotic, lawless hellscape portrayed in it is already reality thanks to awful mayors and prosecutors under the spell of George Soros’ brilliant ideas and billions of $$$. Chicago has been releasing accused murderers awaiting trial, either no bail or very cheap.

#6 Jeff Brokaw (Link) on 2021-07-09 12:30 (Reply)

Democrats plan to zero out wall funding and reduce Border Patrol money amid historic surge

More proof, as if you need it, that the Democrats are not stupid, they're evil. The only way you could possibly think this is a good idea is if your idea of "good" is the exact opposite of what most people would consider "good".

And the silence from the MSM over what they claimed to be outraged, shocked, appalled and sickened by when Trump was doing it, only less, is deafening.

#7 Jerryskids on 2021-07-09 13:16 (Reply)

This is cool: "Two European birds, the great tit and the blue tit, locate insects that are attacking pine trees by detecting the volatile chemicals the stressed trees release...."

#8 Texan99 on 2021-07-09 13:54 (Reply)

Audubon concluded his research much too soon. My husband has the habit of leaving meat that's "high" out for the birds, and is always surprised how quickly the crows and magpies swoop in. Same when he's trapped a mouse and laid the corpse out. It may be sight, but suspect they have really good olfactory glands as well.

The sparrows, on the other hand, are obviously going be sound, as even a late evening filling of the feeder brings them out.

#9 Frances on 2021-07-09 23:05 (Reply)

Since the teachers union wants to teach CRT, then all white teachers must be fired, as they are racist.

#10 Dennis Lukas on 2021-07-09 23:55 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Friday, July 9. 2021

Friday morning links