The Solipsistic Left v The First Amendment

The Solipsistic Left v The First Amendment

Notices

» Site Navigation
Home Page The Villages Maps The Villages Activities The Villages Clubs The Villages Book Healthcare Rentals Real Estate Section Classified Section The Villages Directory Home Improvement Site Guidelines Advertising Info Register Now Video Tutorials Frequently Asked Questions
» Newsletter Signup
» Premium Tower
» Advertisements
» Trending News
» Tower Sponsors




















» Premium Sponsors
» Banner Sponsors
» Advertisements
 
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 08-27-2017, 04:09 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Join Date: n/a
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
The Democrat Party hijacking by the ultra-Liberals dates from the 1960s. The transition of the government from classic Democrats to ultra-liberal positions came with the change in the Presidency from Jack Kennedy to Lyndon Johnson, father of "The Great Society."

But, the most significant factor in the transition was not as much in the political arena as in the area of education. The very unpopular Vietnam War caused an uprising against the Draft among college students, in particular those who were resisting being drafted and sent to fight in Vietnam.

These resisters in the anti-war movement also trended towards the "free love" breakdown of the nations' moral code. And, these "anti-establishment" people found themselves attracted to the profession of school teaching. It was an opportunity to spread their philosophy, while taking the least challenging courses offered at the university level. (No offense to our teachers, but a teaching degree is obviously not as difficult to obtain as a degree in law, medicine, or engineering.)

So..............now, for decades, successive generations of our impressionable children have been indoctrinated with the tenets of the Liberal agenda.

This has resulted in universities (which should be bastions of Free Speech) with severely circumscribed areas of Free Speech, bans against "offensive words," charges of "microaggression" in some cases of offensive speech, and the ultimate classic new Liberal nonsense of "Safe Spaces."

Who? --- Liberal activists.
What? --- Indoctrinated our children.
When? --- Beginning in the 1960s.
Where? --- In the schools.
Why? --- To gain power over our people.
How? --- By subverting our Constitution and laws.


Carl in Tampa

.
Actually, it was the early 70s. I know that well. There may have been civil unrest, but the "selling out" began in the 70s. I was a democrat, and an active one when I left the Navy. I recall making a decision in early 70s....sorry the EXACT year escapes me, but standing in a hotel room in Harrisburg Pa. I spoke for hours to the state Democratic head and told him because I thought they sold out, I had to leave and I did.

I differ with you guys who blame young people, or activists. They have been around well before the 50s, but we had no mass coverage of anything.....everyone was stupid...now, everyone thinks they are experts and trust me,,.they are more "run" by their political party than ever before, whichever party it is.

Young people by nature are liberal thinkers..always have been. I was exposed to pretty much all conservatives until JFK.

Again, I am what I think is a true conservative. I simply believe this President is not only destroying our presidency, but the Republican Party. He is closer to democratic philosophy than Republican except on immigration and race. But that appears to be what folks on here are interested in. I prefer legislation and moving the country forward

He is the anthesis of what this country needs, and is simply magnifying the bad, and ignoring what it takes to govern. Rallies full of lies do not a President make. He is making a mockery of all our systems and I predict those who suffer will be the Republican Party. As he has said....."he will still be rich" (and of course, contrary to his promise, he has not divested and is making millions off us)

  #12  
Old 08-27-2017, 05:36 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Join Date: n/a
Location: n/a
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
"There are certain harms that are non-actionable, offense is one of them. If I say something that you find is duly offensive, you may protest, you may speak, but what you may not do is to sue me in order to silence me or get compensation from me.

Everybody offends everybody a large fraction of the time.

Those who advocate controlling speech tend to want only their sense of what's offensive to count and nobody else.

Yet the fundamental tenet of classical free speech law is that the rules ought to be "viewpoint neutral". Nobody can use force against nobody, regardless of their viewpoint; but anybody can express his view, irrespective of how offensive everybody else will want to regard it.

Even more complicating, controversial speech often isn't conducted between two people alone but is shouted from the soapbox. How much offense is required before government pulls the plug?

People now have every motivation to ratchet up their level of indignation in order to say, "Look you really hurt me." As a result you make racial, ethnic, religious and social sensibilities an art form.

One recent technique of of doing so is called microaggression. At which point can nobody talk? if you drop the "micro" and keep the aggression then, since you aggressed against me I can now use force against you in self-defense.

This is the part of the modern left wing First Amendment
law which holds that anything you say that offends me is a form of violence to which I can respond with by use of force."

Richard A. Epstein
Professor University of Chicago/
New York University
One of the world's foremost legal academics
America's leading intellectual Libertarian ( he defines himself as "classical liberal)
WSJ August26-27-17

Personal Best Regard
I must admit before I started this response I had to look up the word solipsistic which for anyone else who doesn't know what that means: "I am the only mind which exists"

To which I would reply currently there is a deep division in this country between right and left! So much so that years ago the Major Network News were called out as the:

LAME STREAM MEDIA

The left of center gets there news from MSNBC, which is moving to the center, and Huffington Post, while the right gets there news Fox and the internet like the Washington Times.

Both sides would think each source only presents a solipsistic side on the issue. Given this position we would never be able to agree on anything! But we have for 200 years we may not like the compromise...

Now for microaggression, this is a NEW issue mostly limited to college campus's. There is a TED talk about it which I haven't taken the time to listen to. But I do have some college professor friends with whom I have had some discussions.

To me is like the college admissions quotas in California for a number of years Asian's received additional slots however in California the Asian population grew so the community wanted them broken down into Japanese, Korean..... As I remember it didn't go well for them

As the resident racist likes to point out to us, the minorities are going to overwhelm us at some point. On college campuses that has already begun, seriously nobody would use a racial slur on a collage campus today. So now they complain about micoaggressions.....google it for a laugh!

COPUFF OUT WEST IN THE MILE HIGH STATE!
Sponsored Links
Different experience.
  #13  
Old 08-27-2017, 05:47 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Join Date: n/a
Location: n/a
Posts: n/a
Post Different experience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
Rockyrd

Actually, it was the early 70s. I know that well. There may have been civil unrest, but the "selling out" began in the 70s. I was a democrat, and an active one when I left the Navy. I recall making a decision in early 70s....sorry the EXACT year escapes me, but standing in a hotel room in Harrisburg Pa. I spoke for hours to the state Democratic head and told him because I thought they sold out, I had to leave and I did.

I differ with you guys who blame young people, or activists. They have been around well before the 50s, but we had no mass coverage of anything.....everyone was stupid...now, everyone thinks they are experts and trust me,,.they are more "run" by their political party than ever before, whichever party it is.

Young people by nature are liberal thinkers..always have been. I was exposed to pretty much all conservatives until JFK.

Again, I am what I think is a true conservative. I simply believe this President is not only destroying our presidency, but the Republican Party. He is closer to democratic philosophy than Republican except on immigration and race. But that appears to be what folks on here are interested in. I prefer legislation and moving the country forward

He is the anthesis of what this country needs, and is simply magnifying the bad, and ignoring what it takes to govern. Rallies full of lies do not a President make. He is making a mockery of all our systems and I predict those who suffer will be the Republican Party. As he has said....."he will still be rich" (and of course, contrary to his promise, he has not divested and is making millions off us)
Our difference in perspective is probably explained by our differing life experiences. I graduated from a very conservative school in 1958, and we were seeing an infiltration of Liberal professors even then. Mainly in the area of History and The Arts (Stage acting, Oil Painting, Classical Music appreciation.)

And, as I've already observed, President Johnson gave the Party an entirely new emphasis on Social Programs after the death of President Kennedy in 1963.

And, I attended and provided security for the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968. I was in the lobby of the Conrad Hilton Hotel the night that the Party nominated Hubert Humphrey for the presidency. I watched the mob that overwhelmed hotel security and chanted "You killed the party" at every convention delegate who entered the hotel that evening.

As the thin line of Chicago Police ringed the Hilton to repulse rioters, a rain of urine, feces, and even heavy glass ashtrays rained down on them from the windows of the hotel. We discovered the source of the thrown objects was staff members of an unsuccessful Liberal candidate for the presidency. There are allegations that the assaults stopped when the candidate's Secret Service detail leader lifted the candidate's Chief of Staff off of the floor and slammed him against a wall. I cannot confirm this event.

I must disagree with your claim that youthful activists "have been around well before the 50s." I can recall no such activism in the war years, or the immediate post-war period, which was a period of prosperity. In 1952, I busily handed out "I Like Ike" pamphlets, much to the chagrin of my Democrat father, and there was never an encounter or confrontation with any Democrats.

With regard to the damage that you believe President Trump is inflicting on the Republican Party, there are those who believe that a shake up of the old line party incumbents is well overdue. The Republican legislators in Washington seem to be in bed with their Democrat counterparts, so little or none of the Republican agenda is accomplished.

You mention immigration. As one who has traveled to over 30 foreign countries, I am a great supporter of tightly sealed borders and vigorous opposition to illegal immigration. I appreciate moves to reverse Obama's failure to enforce our immigration laws, which allowed illegal aliens to flood into our country.


Carl in Tampa

.
  #14  
Old 08-27-2017, 06:27 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Join Date: n/a
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
Our difference in perspective is probably explained by our differing life experiences. I graduated from a very conservative school in 1958, and we were seeing an infiltration of Liberal professors even then. Mainly in the area of History and The Arts (Stage acting, Oil Painting, Classical Music appreciation.)

And, as I've already observed, President Johnson gave the Party an entirely new emphasis on Social Programs after the death of President Kennedy in 1963.

And, I attended and provided security for the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968. I was in the lobby of the Conrad Hilton Hotel the night that the Party nominated Hubert Humphrey for the presidency. I watched the mob that overwhelmed hotel security and chanted "You killed the party" at every convention delegate who entered the hotel that evening.

As the thin line of Chicago Police ringed the Hilton to repulse rioters, a rain of urine, feces, and even heavy glass ashtrays rained down on them from the windows of the hotel. We discovered the source of the thrown objects was staff members of an unsuccessful Liberal candidate for the presidency. There are allegations that the assaults stopped when the candidate's Secret Service detail leader lifted the candidate's Chief of Staff off of the floor and slammed him against a wall. I cannot confirm this event.

I must disagree with your claim that youthful activists "have been around well before the 50s." I can recall no such activism in the war years, or the immediate post-war period, which was a period of prosperity. In 1952, I busily handed out "I Like Ike" pamphlets, much to the chagrin of my Democrat father, and there was never an encounter or confrontation with any Democrats.

With regard to the damage that you believe President Trump is inflicting on the Republican Party, there are those who believe that a shake up of the old line party incumbents is well overdue. The Republican legislators in Washington seem to be in bed with their Democrat counterparts, so little or none of the Republican agenda is accomplished.

You mention immigration. As one who has traveled to over 30 foreign countries, I am a great supporter of tightly sealed borders and vigorous opposition to illegal immigration. I appreciate moves to reverse Obama's failure to enforce our immigration laws, which allowed illegal aliens to flood into our country.


Carl in Tampa

.
First allow me to correct a typing mistake. I said activists have been around since well before the 50s, and I was directly referring to your comment in the 60s and thus meany before the 60s, and if you recall, the 50s included much civil strife on race. In fact a lot of strife.

My reference was to when, in my opinion, the Democrats began to use this strife, despite your comment on LBJ.

Mine was personal and we will just agree to disagree. I was employed by the Demicratic party, and it was in the 70's when I....ME...not you....found the party was "using" this issue, not to solve any problems. Of course I am aware of the 60s movement...never said I was not. I am speaking of when I felt it began in early 70s a Democratic misuse of the race issue.

In 1968, I recall it well. Maybe we passed each other at the hotel during that embarrassing convention.

We certainly and for sure disagree on Washington today...100 % disagree. Not going to even give it words, because as I read posting on here, I appear to be considered the dumb guy, a conservative who thinks Trump is an enemy of progress and any kind of meaningful legislation. You folks think him disrupting and accusing and mean spirited attitude as positive. I think we need to talk to each other, and not alienate. Since 2001, this has been festering and it needs to become...what is good for the country, not what is good for individuals.

No sense in discussing it in here.. Always becomes a discussion of race, religion and how this side or the other is responsible for all the ills of the world, mostly liberals are the bad guys simply because you folks are into the labels and such. ALL liberals are not bad people, and ALL Republicans are not good.

To finalize....I am a conservative, and have been for about 44 years or so. An ACTIVE Republican. I did change to Independent as a result of Trump candidacy.

I also, despite what people keep slamming believe in tighter immigration. I do not think Trump, other than on race and immigration, is not even close to a conservative, and surely not a Republican.

I deplore beyond words the labeling of people for any reasons. That includes blaming all ills of the world on liberals, conservatives, blacks, whites or Muslims or any other group. THAT is a sure way to insure no legislation, which is the only way to move forward. You mentioned "shaking up" and to me, a moral President who engages both sides openly without labeling would be my shake up. Increasing or supporting hate driven language and accusations is not the way to change, move forward, or "shake up" anything.

My opinion...I know you guys feel differently.

PS...I apologize for my typing. I find it difficult to type on this damn IPad and then compounded by trying to pay attention to the press conference. I just seem to give those obscene uninformed folks more reason to call me names, but if you don't support Trump, I suppose we should stay off, and let me careful, a forum that "appears" to be populated by mostly white nationalists. As you can tell, I am older, and finding it difficult to absorb how making America great again includes lying, false accusations, unwarranted and unsubstantiated attacks on American institutions, degrading of so many if our institutions and doing it publicly, internationally and again, with no basis of fact. That, and so many who tolerate such behavior is just distasteful to me. But maybe the AGAIN part does not go back as far as my age.
  #15  
Old 08-27-2017, 08:34 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Join Date: n/a
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
I must admit before I started this response I had to look up the word solipsistic which for anyone else who doesn't know what that means: "I am the only mind which exists"

To which I would reply currently there is a deep division in this country between right and left! So much so that years ago the Major Network News were called out as the:

LAME STREAM MEDIA

The left of center gets there news from MSNBC, which is moving to the center, and Huffington Post, while the right gets there news Fox and the internet like the Washington Times.

Both sides would think each source only presents a solipsistic side on the issue. Given this position we would never be able to agree on anything! But we have for 200 years we may not like the compromise...

Now for microaggression, this is a NEW issue mostly limited to college campus's. There is a TED talk about it which I haven't taken the time to listen to. But I do have some college professor friends with whom I have had some discussions.

To me is like the college admissions quotas in California for a number of years Asian's received additional slots however in California the Asian population grew so the community wanted them broken down into Japanese, Korean..... As I remember it didn't go well for them

As the resident racist likes to point out to us, the minorities are going to overwhelm us at some point. On college campuses that has already begun, seriously nobody would use a racial slur on a collage campus today. So now they complain about micoaggressions.....google it for a laugh!

COPUFF OUT WEST IN THE MILE HIGH STATE!
Don't bother...TED talks are political correctness talks. You won't get the truth there if it will be negative to anyone.

ALL quotas are discrimination against white men...the ones who always get screwed and lose their EARNED slot.

The resident truth teller...they're already at 51% and growing rapidly...America IS overwhelmed within 30 years...unless we DO SOMETHING to stop it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
Our difference in perspective is probably explained by our differing life experiences. I graduated from a very conservative school in 1958, and we were seeing an infiltration of Liberal professors even then. Mainly in the area of History and The Arts (Stage acting, Oil Painting, Classical Music appreciation.)

And, as I've already observed, President Johnson gave the Party an entirely new emphasis on Social Programs after the death of President Kennedy in 1963.

And, I attended and provided security for the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968. I was in the lobby of the Conrad Hilton Hotel the night that the Party nominated Hubert Humphrey for the presidency. I watched the mob that overwhelmed hotel security and chanted "You killed the party" at every convention delegate who entered the hotel that evening.

As the thin line of Chicago Police ringed the Hilton to repulse rioters, a rain of urine, feces, and even heavy glass ashtrays rained down on them from the windows of the hotel. We discovered the source of the thrown objects was staff members of an unsuccessful Liberal candidate for the presidency. There are allegations that the assaults stopped when the candidate's Secret Service detail leader lifted the candidate's Chief of Staff off of the floor and slammed him against a wall. I cannot confirm this event.

I must disagree with your claim that youthful activists "have been around well before the 50s." I can recall no such activism in the war years, or the immediate post-war period, which was a period of prosperity. In 1952, I busily handed out "I Like Ike" pamphlets, much to the chagrin of my Democrat father, and there was never an encounter or confrontation with any Democrats.

With regard to the damage that you believe President Trump is inflicting on the Republican Party, there are those who believe that a shake up of the old line party incumbents is well overdue. The Republican legislators in Washington seem to be in bed with their Democrat counterparts, so little or none of the Republican agenda is accomplished.

You mention immigration. As one who has traveled to over 30 foreign countries, I am a great supporter of tightly sealed borders and vigorous opposition to illegal immigration. I appreciate moves to reverse Obama's failure to enforce our immigration laws, which allowed illegal aliens to flood into our country.


Carl in Tampa

.
Enough flooded in over the last 30 or so years to deposit 50 million anchor babies whose children are now having children and Hispanics ARE the majority of babies being born and have been, for the last 7 years.

America is lost within 30 years.
  #16  
Old 08-28-2017, 04:40 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Join Date: n/a
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
I must admit before I started this response I had to look up the word solipsistic which for anyone else who doesn't know what that means: "I am the only mind which exists"

To which I would reply currently there is a deep division in this country between right and left! So much so that years ago the Major Network News were called out as the:

LAME STREAM MEDIA

The left of center gets there news from MSNBC, which is moving to the center, and Huffington Post, while the right gets there news Fox and the internet like the Washington Times.

Both sides would think each source only presents a solipsistic side on the issue. Given this position we would never be able to agree on anything! But we have for 200 years we may not like the compromise...

Now for microaggression, this is a NEW issue mostly limited to college campus's. There is a TED talk about it which I haven't taken the time to listen to. But I do have some college professor friends with whom I have had some discussions.

To me is like the college admissions quotas in California for a number of years Asian's received additional slots however in California the Asian population grew so the community wanted them broken down into Japanese, Korean..... As I remember it didn't go well for them

As the resident racist likes to point out to us, the minorities are going to overwhelm us at some point. On college campuses that has already begun, seriously nobody would use a racial slur on a collage campus today. So now they complain about micoaggressions.....google it for a laugh!

COPUFF OUT WEST IN THE MILE HIGH STATE!
I am rushed this early AM and will respond later in the day but the author used the term "solipsistic to explain those on the left who desire to manipulate Free Speech solely to their advantage. I believe any of us can be solipsistic to some degree?

Personal Best Regards:
 

Tags
force, offensive, people, speech

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:21 PM.