Sick Idiot

[Ike Bana]

I never liked her much.

If you weren't dutiful, long suffering wives to her baby boys you were fucked forever. She was particularly vindictive and vicious with asshole Neil's first wife Sharon. When Sharon decided she was done with Neil and his addiction to Thai and Hong Kong hookers, that was the end of the line for her with her mother-in-law. When it was the end of the line for you with Barbara, it was the end of the line for you with the whole fucking family. And if you're a family member and you don't go along with Barbara's edicts...it's the end of the line for you.

That said...RIP.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Chicks

The “point” of these threads of yours is to show some obscure “lefty” as a fool, so that the lunatic fringe, far better-known idiots you support, like Hannity, Stone and Donny, are somehow “balanced out” in your feeble mind. It never works here. You simply wind up looking like a bigger fool.

Oh really? Was that my "point"? I thought I was just pointing out the behavior of a sick idiot. Sounds like you're the one who is desperate to make more out of this than intended. Wonder why that is?

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by barbara

A word about Barbara Bush from Roger Stone.

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/entert...132928624.html

Wonder if this is part of the Trump Team's MO?
Attacks Mueller, Comey and now Mrs. Bush.
Roger Stone is one sick bastard.

[finnbow]

It looks like the former Presidents and spouses, plus Melania, will attend the funeral. The vile Dotard won't be attending.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/18/polit...ump/index.html

[Chicks]

Whell, you’re as transparent as Donny, and squeal like a pig when your motivations are accurately revealed, just like Donny. You’re as sad as Donny, and because you can vote (unless you’re a felon), dangerous to our precious democracy.

[Chicks]

Lol, you never fail to provide a good laugh, Whell! You’re precious.

[whell]

Interesting take from the NY Times, by the way, for the few of you left here willing to think expansively about something like this (so Chickie, Finn and Bob and skip this post):

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/o...mentsContainer

I agree with some of what she's saying here, but she's looking at this from a purely First Amendment perspective, which I think misses the point. For example:

There is, however, no “grotesque” exception to the First Amendment. “Randa Jarrar’s speech is constitutionally protected, and Fresno State cannot, consistent with the First Amendment, discipline her for it,” Ari Cohn of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education told me. “On top of that, the public announcement of an investigation, with clear statements from the university president indicating that he would like to take some kind of serious action against Jarrar, itself can violate the First Amendment.”

I think Mr Cohn incorrect in this case. An organization can take action against employees for acting in a way that brings harm or bad publicity to the organization. If Jarrar simply took to Facebook and made a post, and didn't in that post directly refer to her job and her employer, she might be in far less hot water. The University in this case could make the case that her conduct and speech caused harm to the University if donations start to drop.

I actually like the point she makes at the end of the piece (though I think its a point that needs to be made out side of Ms Jarrar's conduct:

In comparing left-wing and right-wing transgressions against free speech, there’s a danger of getting into an escalating cycle of whataboutism, in which the silencing of one side becomes an excuse for silencing the other. This is a mistake. Ultimately, if the power of the First Amendment is eroded on college campuses, it’s the people with the least power who have the most to lose.

The uproar around Jarrar shows how easily arguments for speech restrictions can be turned against progressives. Writing to The Fresno Bee, an infuriated alumnus of Fresno State called for her firing: “Hiding behind freedom of speech doesn’t work anymore. Just as professors are fired for making racist or insensitive comments, she should meet the same fate.” To explain why she shouldn’t, people on the left need to rediscover the right to offend.

She's saying that exercising free speech - even if such speech is offensive - is that right that should be protected. I agree.

However, Jarrar was not simply exercising free speech. She also spat venom and made a political statement using the University's podium and cloaked as a professor / employee of the Univerity. I think there's a difference. As the saying goes, "your right's end where my nose begins". The Univeristy's nose has been tweaked pretty hard here, and they have a right not be used in that way.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Aww, poor little Whellie has a persecution complex. How cute. Par for the course for a Trump apologist (from Alex Jones to Hannity to O'Reiley to our very own Liddle Whellie).

Originally Posted by Chicks

Lol, you never fail to provide a good laugh, Whell! You’re precious.

Still wanna make this thread about me, huh? As I said, I'm flattered. However, your "whataboutery" and deflection really say far more about you then me.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Interesting take from the NY Times, by the way, for the few of you left here willing to think expansively about something like this (so Chickie, Finn and Bob and skip this post)...

The wingnut fringe to which you belong whine constantly about people being offended by those of their ilk (Ann Coulter, Roger Stone, Alex Jones, Milo, Richard Spencer, Diamond and Silk, Laura Ingraham, Ted Nugent, Dana Loesch ...) spouting tasteless inanities. Now you chose to be offended by this unknown gal thousands of miles away? Are you equally outraged by Roger Stone's comments about Mrs. Bush or do you remain blissfully unaware of them because you limit yourself to wingnut news sources?

[donquixote99]

'You' is all your threads can be about, Whell. Your basic stance makes intelligent discussion of issues impossible. Like, your response to anything we say pretty much boils down to 'Boy are you stupid to think that!'

Except when you can't find even an implausible hook for a 'boy how stupid' comment. Then you say nothing.