CSNbbs

(03-09-2021 01:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:20 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:13 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 11:48 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]This really has to be the only country where no one scratches their head at a group of people who tirelessly work to remove books from being distributed, let alone being looked at, then the same group waddles home at night and screeches that the other side is a bunch of Nazis.

Who exactly is "working tirelessly to remove books from being distributed"? Is that a thing? If so... who is doing it?

Don't feed the disingenuous troll comment.

Good point.

Funny thing is if you open your eyes, it is all over your side of the map, My Friend. I mean, you all have replaced and supplanted the Moral Majority as the screaming fanatics of what should and should not be discussed, or printed, or even said.

Running from that sad fact with cute, pithy comments seems to be your path. Fun, fun, fun. (Apologies in advance for the cute, pithy, last sentence there, but it kind of highlights the issue, does it not?)

So who is tirelessly working to remove books from distribution? I have yet to hear anybody advocate for that but you seem to think that it is a thing.

(03-09-2021 03:46 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 01:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:20 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:13 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]Who exactly is "working tirelessly to remove books from being distributed"? Is that a thing? If so... who is doing it?

Don't feed the disingenuous troll comment.

Good point.

Funny thing is if you open your eyes, it is all over your side of the map, My Friend. I mean, you all have replaced and supplanted the Moral Majority as the screaming fanatics of what should and should not be discussed, or printed, or even said.

Running from that sad fact with cute, pithy comments seems to be your path. Fun, fun, fun. (Apologies in advance for the cute, pithy, last sentence there, but it kind of highlights the issue, does it not?)

So who is tirelessly working to remove books from distribution? I have yet to hear anybody advocate for that but you seem to think that it is a thing.

Amazon. for any number of books, mind you. Ebay. The list goes on. Here is one for ya: When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment.

The rationale is all in the 'ose nose someone will have hurt feelings'. Kind of a progressive mantra and chant these days.

Or, how about any book or article on the 2020 election that lays down any sort of issue on how it might not have been the whitest thing since brushed snow?

Or, how about the nixing of any article in the runup to the 2020 election on the computer of White Nose Biden?

I mean, you must live in one hell of an isolated outpost not to notice that. Otay.

Seriously, the progressives have now supplanted the Moral Majority in terms of acceptance of censorship. I guess not in your eyes. Again, otay.

Seems to me a whole slew of progressives have found the censorship virus in the last 4 years. It might have escaped from the Wuhan Level 4 lab.

But good ole, 93 -- draw down on the 'I am ignorant on that point' card. Lolz.

(03-09-2021 04:53 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 03:46 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 01:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:20 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]Don't feed the disingenuous troll comment.

Good point.

Funny thing is if you open your eyes, it is all over your side of the map, My Friend. I mean, you all have replaced and supplanted the Moral Majority as the screaming fanatics of what should and should not be discussed, or printed, or even said.

Running from that sad fact with cute, pithy comments seems to be your path. Fun, fun, fun. (Apologies in advance for the cute, pithy, last sentence there, but it kind of highlights the issue, does it not?)

So who is tirelessly working to remove books from distribution? I have yet to hear anybody advocate for that but you seem to think that it is a thing.

Amazon. for any number of books, mind you. Ebay. The list goes on. Here is one for ya: When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment.

So now Amazon and Ebay = the progressive movement? Weird. Wait... am I entitled to shares based on my vote for Biden???

Quote:The rationale is all in the 'ose nose someone will have hurt feelings'. Kind of a progressive mantra and chant these days.

You made it sound like certain progressives were advocating book burning. Now I see it's more of a general scream into the void about SJWs.

Quote:Or, how about any book or article on the 2020 election that lays down any sort of issue on how it might not have been the whitest thing since brushed snow?

Now you are talking about certain media outlets not covering questions on the integrity of the election enough. So not the distribution of books.

Quote:Or, how about the nixing of any article in the runup to the 2020 election on the computer of White Nose Biden?

See above.

Quote:I mean, you must live in one hell of an isolated outpost not to notice that. Otay.

You accused progressives of wanting to ban books and now I see that, when pressed, it is not that. Otay.

Quote:Seriously, the progressives have now supplanted the Moral Majority in terms of acceptance of censorship. I guess not in your eyes. Again, otay.

I'll ask you again which progressives want to ban books. Some names would be great. How about some editorials where a progressive lists the books he/she feels should be disappeared? Please don't tell me Amazon and ebay.

Quote:Seems to me a whole slew of progressives have found the censorship virus in the last 4 years. It might have escaped from the Wuhan Level 4 lab.

But good ole, 93 -- draw down on the 'I am ignorant on that point' card. Lolz.

I remain perplexed that you tried to push forward an idea that progressives are "working tirelessly" to ban books. You have provided no evidence to support this claim but you (of course) fall back on lashing out. Where did you get this idea anyway? Have you been listening to Alex again, Tanq?

(03-09-2021 08:53 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 04:53 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 03:46 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 01:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 12:20 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]Good point.

Funny thing is if you open your eyes, it is all over your side of the map, My Friend. I mean, you all have replaced and supplanted the Moral Majority as the screaming fanatics of what should and should not be discussed, or printed, or even said.

Running from that sad fact with cute, pithy comments seems to be your path. Fun, fun, fun. (Apologies in advance for the cute, pithy, last sentence there, but it kind of highlights the issue, does it not?)

So who is tirelessly working to remove books from distribution? I have yet to hear anybody advocate for that but you seem to think that it is a thing.

Amazon. for any number of books, mind you. Ebay. The list goes on. Here is one for ya: When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment.

So now Amazon and Ebay = the progressive movement? Weird. Wait... am I entitled to shares based on my vote for Biden???

Quote:The rationale is all in the 'ose nose someone will have hurt feelings'. Kind of a progressive mantra and chant these days.

You made it sound like certain progressives were advocating book burning. Now I see it's more of a general scream into the void about SJWs.

Quote:Or, how about any book or article on the 2020 election that lays down any sort of issue on how it might not have been the whitest thing since brushed snow?

Now you are talking about certain media outlets not covering questions on the integrity of the election enough. So not the distribution of books.

Quote:Or, how about the nixing of any article in the runup to the 2020 election on the computer of White Nose Biden?

See above.

Quote:I mean, you must live in one hell of an isolated outpost not to notice that. Otay.

You accused progressives of wanting to ban books and now I see that, when pressed, it is not that. Otay.

Quote:Seriously, the progressives have now supplanted the Moral Majority in terms of acceptance of censorship. I guess not in your eyes. Again, otay.

I'll ask you again which progressives want to ban books. Some names would be great. How about some editorials where a progressive lists the books he/she feels should be disappeared? Please don't tell me Amazon and ebay.

Quote:Seems to me a whole slew of progressives have found the censorship virus in the last 4 years. It might have escaped from the Wuhan Level 4 lab.

But good ole, 93 -- draw down on the 'I am ignorant on that point' card. Lolz.

I remain perplexed that you tried to push forward an idea that progressives are "working tirelessly" to ban books. You have provided no evidence to support this claim but you (of course) fall back on lashing out. Where did you get this idea anyway? Have you been listening to Alex again, Tanq?

I guess you are blissfully ignorant about the push to ban books. Must be fun.

Funny thing is that they are being taken out.

And, I hate to tell you, it aint the conservatives who are making sure that "When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment" is taken off of the list to be bought.

And no, I dont listen to Alex, Chuckles. Sorry to burst your bubble, no matter how many times you click your ruby shoes together and try to keep that tired trope engaging. But, you are strangely in the dark about topics, books, articles, being scrubbed out. Funny that. If you are, you are as ignorant as Alex, mind you.

Answer a direct question if you can: do you deny that books are being removed for sale because of their topic? do you deny that articles on Hunter Snow Boy were blocked? I mean, it takes a special level of ignorance to say 'no' to that, but, somehow I think we just might find one in you here.

And, if perchance you are aware of that, who do *you* think is in back of it? Liberatarians? Elves? The newsroom at the NY Times who squeals anytime anyone right of Che Guevara show up in their offices?

Or, are you going to hide behind the favorite 93/Sergeant Schultz comment of 'uh, I dunno, nor do I care to use my noggin to figger it out'?

I wont hold my breath on anything from you short of either: a) you are unaware and dont believe that active censorship is occurring; b) if it is, you do the classic 93 punt of you dont have a clue what types of groups are doing it/ pressuring for it; or c) just vapid silence to the question overall.

My guess is either b) or c) from you.

(03-09-2021 08:53 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]So now Amazon and Ebay = the progressive movement?

Not really interested in getting into the rest of this discussion, but Amazon is certainly reacting to 'the demands of the progressive movement'. I really don't know how you can argue that they're not. The 'best' you could say is that Bezos is himself part of the progressive movement and is taking actions that he himself supports in that capacity... but I think given the history of the company that it is vastly more likely that after getting slapped around a bit in his desires to expand his company (by the left) that he is trying to curry favor with them through relatively small financial measures with big 'presence' like this.

Quote:Now you are talking about certain media outlets not covering questions on the integrity of the election enough. So not the distribution of books.

In fairness he DID begin by talking about books, and said 'or how about' implying that it was an additional example and not the same ... so yeah. Why is giving another example somehow not appropriate??

Quote:See above.

yes, see above.

Quote:You accused progressives of wanting to ban books and now I see that, when pressed, it is not that. Otay.

I'm not following you. That's exactly what he said and he gave examples.

Quote:I'll ask you again which progressives want to ban books. Some names would be great. How about some editorials where a progressive lists the books he/she feels should be disappeared? Please don't tell me Amazon and ebay.

wow... how the tide turns. A few years ago it would have been Republicans seeking to hide their personal desires (or following the desires of their customers) behind a corporate veil.

To argue that a company doesn't do whatever they do because they either...
a) leadership wants it done or
b) leadership has decided that it is good for their business because a segment of their customers want it done.

Now if you're saying Amazon hasn't banned any books, or that what they have done doesn't represent a progressive value, that's fine.... but instead you seem to be arguing that you can't use Amazon as an example of the progressive left, OR reacting to the progrerssive left.

I seem to recall it was perfectly acceptable to use Hobby Lobby as an example of 'the Christian Right'.... or to protest chic-fil-a because of the way its owner spent his money.

Isn't this thread about cancel culture? Is that a vast right wing conspiracy? Who wants to cancel who, and why?

Quote:Isn't this thread about cancel culture? Is that a vast right wing conspiracy? Who wants to cancel who, and why?

Apparently no progressives are into the wiping of books, articles, and speech. Anyone who thinks that might be happening is put on the same level as Alex Jones.

But funny, when I make a comment comparing Cardi B and Dr Suess, one progressive deems a fair response to be 'racy != racism'.

Yet, when it is noted that he is now directly noting Dr Suess (or his works) as racist, the poster cannot even accept *that* responsibility in light of his own response.

I guess he threw out 'racism' for some odd, screwball reason that he only knows about, since he now tries to say that he wasnt equating Dr Suess to racism. Kind of an odd coincidence I guess. I mean, it is the same poster he screams 'systemic racism' breathlessly as the bane of life and everything from time to time, so perhaps that odd placement of 'racism' there shouldnt surprise me.

Then, anything that challenges his in place views, he simply tries to wash it off by invoking and comparing that to his pet nasty creature of Alex. Quite the enlightened one that one is.

And the funny thing is, that when pressed, he has no issue with the withdrawal of the Dr Suess books. Doesnt have a care in the world about that. I guess that goes hand in hand with his apparent disavowal that anything is being censored.

What mainstream progressives campaigned or argued to get the Dr Suess books banned?

(03-09-2021 10:48 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]What mainstream progressives campaigned or argued to get the Dr Suess books banned?

Who do you think championed the removal of the books? Skinheads? Elves? Libertarians? Do those sound more likely than progressive sources?

Chinese hackers? Maybe Trump had a meeting with Russian secret agents to put that into motion?

Perhaps it happened because a convergence of the Sun and Aquarius?

(03-09-2021 09:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Isn't this thread about cancel culture? Is that a vast right wing conspiracy? Who wants to cancel who, and why?

Apparently no progressives are into the wiping of books, articles, and speech. Anyone who thinks that might be happening is put on the same level as Alex Jones.

But funny, when I make a comment comparing Cardi B and Dr Suess, one progressive deems a fair response to be 'racy != racism'.

Yet, when it is noted that he is now directly noting Dr Suess (or his works) as racist, the poster cannot even accept *that* responsibility in light of his own response.

You clearly don't read my posts. I already explained that I wasn't calling Dr. Seuss' books racist when I said that you were using an apples to oranges comparison.

The concern over those Seuss books was the potential racist imagery ("Racism"). I'm not calling the books racist but that's the concern that made the estate pull them. The concerns over the CardiB song was racy lyrics ("Racy"). That's why I called it an apples to oranges comparison.

I never called those Seuss books racist but by all means ignore my posts and continue with your fever dream.

Quote:I guess he threw out 'racism' for some odd, screwball reason that he only knows about, since he now tries to say that he wasnt equating Dr Suess to racism. Kind of an odd coincidence I guess. I mean, it is the same poster he screams 'systemic racism' breathlessly as the bane of life and everything from time to time, so perhaps that odd placement of 'racism' there shouldnt surprise me.

Wrong but keep going with your fever dream.

Quote:Then, anything that challenges his in place views, he simply tries to wash it off by invoking and comparing that to his pet nasty creature of Alex. Quite the enlightened one that one is.

I'm still trying to figure out who told you that progressives were working tirelessly to ban books. Not Alex then. Tucker?

Quote:And the funny thing is, that when pressed, he has no issue with the withdrawal of the Dr Suess books. Doesnt have a care in the world about that. I guess that goes hand in hand with his apparent disavowal that anything is being censored.

I said that I think it's fine for the estate to make the decision that they made. I also said that I'm for having those books available in libraries, etc. Don't read my words though... your fever dream seems more fulfulling for you.

(03-09-2021 09:23 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 08:53 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]So now Amazon and Ebay = the progressive movement?

Not really interested in getting into the rest of this discussion, but Amazon is certainly reacting to 'the demands of the progressive movement'. I really don't know how you can argue that they're not. The 'best' you could say is that Bezos is himself part of the progressive movement and is taking actions that he himself supports in that capacity... but I think given the history of the company that it is vastly more likely that after getting slapped around a bit in his desires to expand his company (by the left) that he is trying to curry favor with them through relatively small financial measures with big 'presence' like this.

I have yet to hear a single prominent Progressive call for the banning of any book. I don't know how these big companies decide how to market themselves and what decisions they make will be more attractive to their customers. Were there some voices that raised a fuss about Tanq's transgender book example? I imagine there were. Are these mainstream progressives? I'm sure they weren't.

How about when there is a a gay kiss on TV and the network gets a bunch of calls from Evangelicals? Are we to assume that Republicans are "working tirelessly" to eradicate gay people from the airwares?

Quote:

Quote:Now you are talking about certain media outlets not covering questions on the integrity of the election enough. So not the distribution of books.

In fairness he DID begin by talking about books, and said 'or how about' implying that it was an additional example and not the same ... so yeah. Why is giving another example somehow not appropriate??

His initial post made it sound like progressives were having book burning parties. He didn't seem to be able to back that up so he pivoted to "Well... networks didn't cover the Biden scandal enough".

Quote:

Quote:See above.

yes, see above.

Quote:You accused progressives of wanting to ban books and now I see that, when pressed, it is not that. Otay.

I'm not following you. That's exactly what he said and he gave examples.

Quote:I'll ask you again which progressives want to ban books. Some names would be great. How about some editorials where a progressive lists the books he/she feels should be disappeared? Please don't tell me Amazon and ebay.

wow... how the tide turns. A few years ago it would have been Republicans seeking to hide their personal desires (or following the desires of their customers) behind a corporate veil.

To argue that a company doesn't do whatever they do because they either...
a) leadership wants it done or
b) leadership has decided that it is good for their business because a segment of their customers want it done.

Now if you're saying Amazon hasn't banned any books, or that what they have done doesn't represent a progressive value, that's fine.... but instead you seem to be arguing that you can't use Amazon as an example of the progressive left, OR reacting to the progrerssive left.

I don't think what Amazon did represents a progressive value. They probably decided that however many emails they received was more trouble than its worth for a book with what I assume were meager sales.

Quote:I seem to recall it was perfectly acceptable to use Hobby Lobby as an example of 'the Christian Right'.... or to protest chic-fil-a because of the way its owner spent his money.

OK... but how about if somebody said that Hobby Lobby = the Republican party?

(03-09-2021 11:19 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 10:48 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]What mainstream progressives campaigned or argued to get the Dr Suess books banned?

Who do you think championed the removal of the books? Skinheads? Elves? Libertarians? Do those sound more likely than progressive sources?

Chinese hackers? Maybe Trump had a meeting with Russian secret agents to put that into motion?

Perhaps it happened because a convergence of the Sun and Aquarius?

Are you open to the possibility that the estate considered the imagery in those books problematic on its own and made the decision without pressure from outside forces?

(03-10-2021 12:24 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 09:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Isn't this thread about cancel culture? Is that a vast right wing conspiracy? Who wants to cancel who, and why?

Apparently no progressives are into the wiping of books, articles, and speech. Anyone who thinks that might be happening is put on the same level as Alex Jones.

But funny, when I make a comment comparing Cardi B and Dr Suess, one progressive deems a fair response to be 'racy != racism'.

Yet, when it is noted that he is now directly noting Dr Suess (or his works) as racist, the poster cannot even accept *that* responsibility in light of his own response.

You clearly don't read my posts. I already explained that I wasn't calling Dr. Seuss' books racist when I said that you were using an apples to oranges comparison.

The concern over those Seuss books was racist imagery ("Racism"). The concerns over the CardiB song is racy lyrics ("Racy"). That's why I called it an apples to oranges comparison.

I never called those Seuss books racist but by all means ignore my posts and continue with your fever dream.

Quote:I guess he threw out 'racism' for some odd, screwball reason that he only knows about, since he now tries to say that he wasnt equating Dr Suess to racism. Kind of an odd coincidence I guess. I mean, it is the same poster he screams 'systemic racism' breathlessly as the bane of life and everything from time to time, so perhaps that odd placement of 'racism' there shouldnt surprise me.

Wrong but keep going with your fever dream.

Quote:Then, anything that challenges his in place views, he simply tries to wash it off by invoking and comparing that to his pet nasty creature of Alex. Quite the enlightened one that one is.

I'm still trying to figure out who told you that progressives were working tirelessly to ban books. Not Alex then. Tucker?

Quote:And the funny thing is, that when pressed, he has no issue with the withdrawal of the Dr Suess books. Doesnt have a care in the world about that. I guess that goes hand in hand with his apparent disavowal that anything is being censored.

I said that I think it's fine for the estate to make the decision that they made. I also said that I'm for having those books available in libraries, etc. Don't read my words though... your fever dream seems more fulfulling for you.

The funny thing is that you still cant allow yourself to say that books, articles, and topics *are* the subject of censorship and cancellation.

Even that little bit is blindingly obvious. But...... the stalwart that 93 is simply cant seem to get that it is happening in the first place. Cant even cede that first painfully obvious thing.

Because, if you do, then the painful question becomes 'who'. Apparently one of two things is prevalent in your theism: a) no canceling, no censorship is taking place; or b) if there is, it simply *cannot* be progressivism. Which of the two is it, pardner?

As for 'who told me that', well, since I crossed out libertarians, elves, Santa Claus, my postman, a conspiracy between Trump and FSB agents, and George Floyd's fentanyl dealer --- there are only some very obvious candidates left. Imagine that.

Who do *you* think is championing of the censoring of works? Aside from your garbage attempt at bringing in Alex Jones at every attempt possible...... Is that your sole type of comeback to anything that challenges your theism?

(03-09-2021 09:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Isn't this thread about cancel culture? Is that a vast right wing conspiracy? Who wants to cancel who, and why?

Apparently no progressives are into the wiping of books, articles, and speech. Anyone who thinks that might be happening is put on the same level as Alex Jones.

But funny, when I make a comment comparing Cardi B and Dr Suess, one progressive deems a fair response to be 'racy != racism'.

Yet, when it is noted that he is now directly noting Dr Suess (or his works) as racist, the poster cannot even accept *that* responsibility in light of his own response.

This is what I said on 3/5/2021 re: "racy/racist" when you said that I "directly noted Dr. Seuss (or his works) as racist:

Quote:I don't "unequivocally denote" Seuss books as racist. The recent kerfluffle over Seuss had to do with racist imagery whereas CardiB has racy lyrics. I wasn't commenting on my opinion as to how racist I thought the Seuss books were (I haven't studied them and I'm not making plans to). I was commenting on the fact that your post brings up two separate issues. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

So I explain myself... I try to clear up your understanding of my position... and a few days later you make the exact same erroneus claim. It is exhausting debating with the King of the Straw Man.

(03-09-2021 11:48 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]This really has to be the only country where no one scratches their head at a group of people who tirelessly work to remove books from being distributed, let alone being looked at, then the same group waddles home at night and screeches that the other side is a bunch of Nazis.

(03-10-2021 12:40 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 12:24 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 09:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Isn't this thread about cancel culture? Is that a vast right wing conspiracy? Who wants to cancel who, and why?

Apparently no progressives are into the wiping of books, articles, and speech. Anyone who thinks that might be happening is put on the same level as Alex Jones.

But funny, when I make a comment comparing Cardi B and Dr Suess, one progressive deems a fair response to be 'racy != racism'.

Yet, when it is noted that he is now directly noting Dr Suess (or his works) as racist, the poster cannot even accept *that* responsibility in light of his own response.

You clearly don't read my posts. I already explained that I wasn't calling Dr. Seuss' books racist when I said that you were using an apples to oranges comparison.

The concern over those Seuss books was racist imagery ("Racism"). The concerns over the CardiB song is racy lyrics ("Racy"). That's why I called it an apples to oranges comparison.

I never called those Seuss books racist but by all means ignore my posts and continue with your fever dream.

Quote:I guess he threw out 'racism' for some odd, screwball reason that he only knows about, since he now tries to say that he wasnt equating Dr Suess to racism. Kind of an odd coincidence I guess. I mean, it is the same poster he screams 'systemic racism' breathlessly as the bane of life and everything from time to time, so perhaps that odd placement of 'racism' there shouldnt surprise me.

Wrong but keep going with your fever dream.

Quote:Then, anything that challenges his in place views, he simply tries to wash it off by invoking and comparing that to his pet nasty creature of Alex. Quite the enlightened one that one is.

I'm still trying to figure out who told you that progressives were working tirelessly to ban books. Not Alex then. Tucker?

Quote:And the funny thing is, that when pressed, he has no issue with the withdrawal of the Dr Suess books. Doesnt have a care in the world about that. I guess that goes hand in hand with his apparent disavowal that anything is being censored.

I said that I think it's fine for the estate to make the decision that they made. I also said that I'm for having those books available in libraries, etc. Don't read my words though... your fever dream seems more fulfulling for you.

The funny thing is that you still cant allow yourself to say that books, articles, and topics *are* the subject of censorship and cancellation.

Sure. They are in some instances. Of course. But that doesn't mean that the average progressive supports it.

Quote:Even that little bit is blindingly obvious. But...... the stalwart that 93 is simply cant seem to get that it is happening in the first place. Cant even cede that first painfully obvious thing.

Because, if you do, then the painful question becomes 'who'. Apparently one of two things is prevalent in your theism: a) no canceling, no censorship is taking place; or b) if there is, it simply *cannot* be progressivism. Which of the two is it, pardner?

There's always going to be people calling for the removal of books, shows, commercials, plays, movies that they find offensive. In some cases companies will decide to listen.

Some will call for JK Rowling books to be pulled from schools over her statements about the transgender community.

Some will call for the removal of commercials that feature mixed-race couples.

I just don't get taking either example and then extrapolating it to the platform for either political party.

(03-10-2021 01:04 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 11:48 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]This really has to be the only country where no one scratches their head at a group of people who tirelessly work to remove books from being distributed, let alone being looked at, then the same group waddles home at night and screeches that the other side is a bunch of Nazis.

(03-10-2021 12:40 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 12:24 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 09:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Isn't this thread about cancel culture? Is that a vast right wing conspiracy? Who wants to cancel who, and why?

Apparently no progressives are into the wiping of books, articles, and speech. Anyone who thinks that might be happening is put on the same level as Alex Jones.

But funny, when I make a comment comparing Cardi B and Dr Suess, one progressive deems a fair response to be 'racy != racism'.

Yet, when it is noted that he is now directly noting Dr Suess (or his works) as racist, the poster cannot even accept *that* responsibility in light of his own response.

You clearly don't read my posts. I already explained that I wasn't calling Dr. Seuss' books racist when I said that you were using an apples to oranges comparison.

The concern over those Seuss books was racist imagery ("Racism"). The concerns over the CardiB song is racy lyrics ("Racy"). That's why I called it an apples to oranges comparison.

I never called those Seuss books racist but by all means ignore my posts and continue with your fever dream.

Quote:I guess he threw out 'racism' for some odd, screwball reason that he only knows about, since he now tries to say that he wasnt equating Dr Suess to racism. Kind of an odd coincidence I guess. I mean, it is the same poster he screams 'systemic racism' breathlessly as the bane of life and everything from time to time, so perhaps that odd placement of 'racism' there shouldnt surprise me.

Wrong but keep going with your fever dream.

Quote:Then, anything that challenges his in place views, he simply tries to wash it off by invoking and comparing that to his pet nasty creature of Alex. Quite the enlightened one that one is.

I'm still trying to figure out who told you that progressives were working tirelessly to ban books. Not Alex then. Tucker?

Quote:And the funny thing is, that when pressed, he has no issue with the withdrawal of the Dr Suess books. Doesnt have a care in the world about that. I guess that goes hand in hand with his apparent disavowal that anything is being censored.

I said that I think it's fine for the estate to make the decision that they made. I also said that I'm for having those books available in libraries, etc. Don't read my words though... your fever dream seems more fulfulling for you.

The funny thing is that you still cant allow yourself to say that books, articles, and topics *are* the subject of censorship and cancellation.

Sure. They are in some instances. Of course. But that doesn't mean that the average progressive supports it.

Quote:Even that little bit is blindingly obvious. But...... the stalwart that 93 is simply cant seem to get that it is happening in the first place. Cant even cede that first painfully obvious thing.

Because, if you do, then the painful question becomes 'who'. Apparently one of two things is prevalent in your theism: a) no canceling, no censorship is taking place; or b) if there is, it simply *cannot* be progressivism. Which of the two is it, pardner?

There's always going to be people calling for the removal of books, shows, commercials, plays, movies that they find offensive. In some cases companies will decide to listen.

Some will call for JK Rowling books to be pulled from schools over her statements about the transgender community.

Some will call for the removal of commercials that feature mixed-race couples.

I just don't get taking either example and then extrapolating it to the platform for either political party.

Got it. Some amorphous 'people'. Yep, makes perfect sense. Lolz. Kind of expected that answer from you, to be honest.

I find it interesting that with the plethora of censorship on conservative viewpoints, you still adamantly refuse to even acknowledge any iota of responsibility by progressives for that, nor really of the horrendous imbalance in censorship that is ongoing.

I would say that if the flow were reversed, and it was progressive materials being banned, I would say common sense dictates that conservatives were the champions of that. But, you cant even acknowledge that simple observation.

And, to the bolded, you support the across the board (making, selling, banning from sale, refusing to sell) censorship of the Suess books. Oh, I forgot, you are 'okay with it'. But Not supporting it. Lolz.

(03-10-2021 01:10 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 01:04 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 11:48 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]This really has to be the only country where no one scratches their head at a group of people who tirelessly work to remove books from being distributed, let alone being looked at, then the same group waddles home at night and screeches that the other side is a bunch of Nazis.

(03-10-2021 12:40 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 12:24 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 09:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Apparently no progressives are into the wiping of books, articles, and speech. Anyone who thinks that might be happening is put on the same level as Alex Jones.

But funny, when I make a comment comparing Cardi B and Dr Suess, one progressive deems a fair response to be 'racy != racism'.

Yet, when it is noted that he is now directly noting Dr Suess (or his works) as racist, the poster cannot even accept *that* responsibility in light of his own response.

You clearly don't read my posts. I already explained that I wasn't calling Dr. Seuss' books racist when I said that you were using an apples to oranges comparison.

The concern over those Seuss books was racist imagery ("Racism"). The concerns over the CardiB song is racy lyrics ("Racy"). That's why I called it an apples to oranges comparison.

I never called those Seuss books racist but by all means ignore my posts and continue with your fever dream.

Quote:I guess he threw out 'racism' for some odd, screwball reason that he only knows about, since he now tries to say that he wasnt equating Dr Suess to racism. Kind of an odd coincidence I guess. I mean, it is the same poster he screams 'systemic racism' breathlessly as the bane of life and everything from time to time, so perhaps that odd placement of 'racism' there shouldnt surprise me.

Wrong but keep going with your fever dream.

Quote:Then, anything that challenges his in place views, he simply tries to wash it off by invoking and comparing that to his pet nasty creature of Alex. Quite the enlightened one that one is.

I'm still trying to figure out who told you that progressives were working tirelessly to ban books. Not Alex then. Tucker?

Quote:And the funny thing is, that when pressed, he has no issue with the withdrawal of the Dr Suess books. Doesnt have a care in the world about that. I guess that goes hand in hand with his apparent disavowal that anything is being censored.

I said that I think it's fine for the estate to make the decision that they made. I also said that I'm for having those books available in libraries, etc. Don't read my words though... your fever dream seems more fulfulling for you.

The funny thing is that you still cant allow yourself to say that books, articles, and topics *are* the subject of censorship and cancellation.

Sure. They are in some instances. Of course. But that doesn't mean that the average progressive supports it.

Quote:Even that little bit is blindingly obvious. But...... the stalwart that 93 is simply cant seem to get that it is happening in the first place. Cant even cede that first painfully obvious thing.

Because, if you do, then the painful question becomes 'who'. Apparently one of two things is prevalent in your theism: a) no canceling, no censorship is taking place; or b) if there is, it simply *cannot* be progressivism. Which of the two is it, pardner?

There's always going to be people calling for the removal of books, shows, commercials, plays, movies that they find offensive. In some cases companies will decide to listen.

Some will call for JK Rowling books to be pulled from schools over her statements about the transgender community.

Some will call for the removal of commercials that feature mixed-race couples.

I just don't get taking either example and then extrapolating it to the platform for either political party.

Got it. Some amorphous 'people'. Yep, makes perfect sense. Lolz. Kind of expected that crapola answer from you, to be honest.

Dude... I think that asking books to be banned is super extreme. I don't support it and I don't believe that mainstream progressives are behind that idea either. So I can't tell you who is "behind" the calls to ban certain media but I can tell you that I find it to be an extremist position.

Who is "behind" QAnon, Tanq? Are Republicans working tirelessly to expose a DNC-Hollywood pedophile ring? Does every extremist group that is found on either side of the political spectrum represent the mainstream? Should the mainstream have to answer for all the extremists?

(03-10-2021 01:10 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 01:04 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 11:48 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]This really has to be the only country where no one scratches their head at a group of people who tirelessly work to remove books from being distributed, let alone being looked at, then the same group waddles home at night and screeches that the other side is a bunch of Nazis.

(03-10-2021 12:40 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 12:24 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 09:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Apparently no progressives are into the wiping of books, articles, and speech. Anyone who thinks that might be happening is put on the same level as Alex Jones.

But funny, when I make a comment comparing Cardi B and Dr Suess, one progressive deems a fair response to be 'racy != racism'.

Yet, when it is noted that he is now directly noting Dr Suess (or his works) as racist, the poster cannot even accept *that* responsibility in light of his own response.

You clearly don't read my posts. I already explained that I wasn't calling Dr. Seuss' books racist when I said that you were using an apples to oranges comparison.

The concern over those Seuss books was racist imagery ("Racism"). The concerns over the CardiB song is racy lyrics ("Racy"). That's why I called it an apples to oranges comparison.

I never called those Seuss books racist but by all means ignore my posts and continue with your fever dream.

Quote:I guess he threw out 'racism' for some odd, screwball reason that he only knows about, since he now tries to say that he wasnt equating Dr Suess to racism. Kind of an odd coincidence I guess. I mean, it is the same poster he screams 'systemic racism' breathlessly as the bane of life and everything from time to time, so perhaps that odd placement of 'racism' there shouldnt surprise me.

Wrong but keep going with your fever dream.

Quote:Then, anything that challenges his in place views, he simply tries to wash it off by invoking and comparing that to his pet nasty creature of Alex. Quite the enlightened one that one is.

I'm still trying to figure out who told you that progressives were working tirelessly to ban books. Not Alex then. Tucker?

Quote:And the funny thing is, that when pressed, he has no issue with the withdrawal of the Dr Suess books. Doesnt have a care in the world about that. I guess that goes hand in hand with his apparent disavowal that anything is being censored.

I said that I think it's fine for the estate to make the decision that they made. I also said that I'm for having those books available in libraries, etc. Don't read my words though... your fever dream seems more fulfulling for you.

The funny thing is that you still cant allow yourself to say that books, articles, and topics *are* the subject of censorship and cancellation.

Sure. They are in some instances. Of course. But that doesn't mean that the average progressive supports it.

Quote:Even that little bit is blindingly obvious. But...... the stalwart that 93 is simply cant seem to get that it is happening in the first place. Cant even cede that first painfully obvious thing.

Because, if you do, then the painful question becomes 'who'. Apparently one of two things is prevalent in your theism: a) no canceling, no censorship is taking place; or b) if there is, it simply *cannot* be progressivism. Which of the two is it, pardner?

There's always going to be people calling for the removal of books, shows, commercials, plays, movies that they find offensive. In some cases companies will decide to listen.

Some will call for JK Rowling books to be pulled from schools over her statements about the transgender community.

Some will call for the removal of commercials that feature mixed-race couples.

I just don't get taking either example and then extrapolating it to the platform for either political party.

Got it. Some amorphous 'people'. Yep, makes perfect sense. Lolz. Kind of expected that answer from you, to be honest.

I find it interesting that with the plethora of censorship on conservative viewpoints, you still adamantly refuse to even acknowledge any iota of responsibility by progressives for that, nor really of the horrendous imbalance in censorship that is ongoing.

I would say that if the flow were reversed, and it was progressive materials being banned, I would say common sense dictates that conservatives were the champions of that. But, you cant even acknowledge that simple observation.

[b][b]And, to the bolded, you support the across the board (making, selling, banning from sale, refusing to sell) censorship of the Suess books. Oh, I forgot, you are 'okay with it'. But Not supporting it. Lolz.[/b][/b]

Huh? Does being OK with the estate's decision to quit publishing those books equal "censorship"? Do you think that the estate should be compelled to continue publishing those books? Would you support a measure that compelled the estate to act against its wishes?

Do you think that I support banning the sale of those Seuss books? Because I don't. I think that if a business wants to sell those books they should be able to. I think libraries should carry the books. I would prefer if the publisher added a preface to those volumes explaining the imagery and how some of those depictions could be viewed as problematic. I would prefer that parents go over that idea with their children as they read the books with them.

I don't even know why I try to clarify my position with you because you will ignore it and build another Straw Man over the same thing in 48-72 hours.

(03-10-2021 01:15 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 01:10 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 01:04 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 11:48 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]This really has to be the only country where no one scratches their head at a group of people who tirelessly work to remove books from being distributed, let alone being looked at, then the same group waddles home at night and screeches that the other side is a bunch of Nazis.

(03-10-2021 12:40 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 12:24 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]You clearly don't read my posts. I already explained that I wasn't calling Dr. Seuss' books racist when I said that you were using an apples to oranges comparison.

The concern over those Seuss books was racist imagery ("Racism"). The concerns over the CardiB song is racy lyrics ("Racy"). That's why I called it an apples to oranges comparison.

I never called those Seuss books racist but by all means ignore my posts and continue with your fever dream.

Wrong but keep going with your fever dream.


I'm still trying to figure out who told you that progressives were working tirelessly to ban books. Not Alex then. Tucker?


I said that I think it's fine for the estate to make the decision that they made. I also said that I'm for having those books available in libraries, etc. Don't read my words though... your fever dream seems more fulfulling for you.

The funny thing is that you still cant allow yourself to say that books, articles, and topics *are* the subject of censorship and cancellation.

Sure. They are in some instances. Of course. But that doesn't mean that the average progressive supports it.

Quote:Even that little bit is blindingly obvious. But...... the stalwart that 93 is simply cant seem to get that it is happening in the first place. Cant even cede that first painfully obvious thing.

Because, if you do, then the painful question becomes 'who'. Apparently one of two things is prevalent in your theism: a) no canceling, no censorship is taking place; or b) if there is, it simply *cannot* be progressivism. Which of the two is it, pardner?

There's always going to be people calling for the removal of books, shows, commercials, plays, movies that they find offensive. In some cases companies will decide to listen.

Some will call for JK Rowling books to be pulled from schools over her statements about the transgender community.

Some will call for the removal of commercials that feature mixed-race couples.

I just don't get taking either example and then extrapolating it to the platform for either political party.

Got it. Some amorphous 'people'. Yep, makes perfect sense. Lolz. Kind of expected that crapola answer from you, to be honest.

Dude... I think that asking books to be banned is super extreme. I don't support it and I don't believe that mainstream progressives are behind that idea either. So I can't tell you who is "behind" the calls to ban certain media but I can tell you that I find it to be an extremist position.

Who is "behind" QAnon, Tanq? Are Republicans working tirelessly to expose a DNC-Hollywood pedophile ring? Does every extremist group that is found on either side of the political spectrum represent the mainstream? Should the mainstream have to answer for all the extremists?

So banning viewpoints and censoring materials with those viewpoints are extremist actions? I actually agree with that.

But, right now, the censoring of anything outside progressive orthodoxy is *far* more prevalent than QAnon whom you apparently now raise as a bugaboo.

And, to make things interesting, I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of QAnoners voted Republican. No fight there.

But, 93, books *are* being banned. Authors *are* being banned, and their contracts ignored. On a frighteningly regular basis. So, please dont give me the crapola attempt at rationalizing an equivalence between QAnon and those whom are championing the censorship of books and people.

I am glad you seemingly call those who champion censorship of ideas 'extremists'. They are. And, I hate to tell you they are far closer to mainstream progressivism than QAnon is to mainstream Republican.

If the censorship crowd is as extremist as you claim, are you worried that "When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment" was pulled? That is, a book that reached the top of two Amazon bestseller lists when it was released in 2018? I'm sorry, that action doesnt smack of an action in response to extremists -- it smacks of an action far closer to a mainstream.

But, maybe some Iranian computer hacker is behind that, since obviously there is zero progressive intent that could ever be suspect in the process to remove that book from sale.

(03-10-2021 01:37 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 01:15 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 01:10 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2021 01:04 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2021 11:48 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]This really has to be the only country where no one scratches their head at a group of people who tirelessly work to remove books from being distributed, let alone being looked at, then the same group waddles home at night and screeches that the other side is a bunch of Nazis.

(03-10-2021 12:40 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]The funny thing is that you still cant allow yourself to say that books, articles, and topics *are* the subject of censorship and cancellation.

Sure. They are in some instances. Of course. But that doesn't mean that the average progressive supports it.

Quote:Even that little bit is blindingly obvious. But...... the stalwart that 93 is simply cant seem to get that it is happening in the first place. Cant even cede that first painfully obvious thing.

Because, if you do, then the painful question becomes 'who'. Apparently one of two things is prevalent in your theism: a) no canceling, no censorship is taking place; or b) if there is, it simply *cannot* be progressivism. Which of the two is it, pardner?

There's always going to be people calling for the removal of books, shows, commercials, plays, movies that they find offensive. In some cases companies will decide to listen.

Some will call for JK Rowling books to be pulled from schools over her statements about the transgender community.

Some will call for the removal of commercials that feature mixed-race couples.

I just don't get taking either example and then extrapolating it to the platform for either political party.

Got it. Some amorphous 'people'. Yep, makes perfect sense. Lolz. Kind of expected that crapola answer from you, to be honest.

Dude... I think that asking books to be banned is super extreme. I don't support it and I don't believe that mainstream progressives are behind that idea either. So I can't tell you who is "behind" the calls to ban certain media but I can tell you that I find it to be an extremist position.

Who is "behind" QAnon, Tanq? Are Republicans working tirelessly to expose a DNC-Hollywood pedophile ring? Does every extremist group that is found on either side of the political spectrum represent the mainstream? Should the mainstream have to answer for all the extremists?

So banning viewpoints and censoring materials with those viewpoints are extremist actions? I actually agree with that.

But, right now, the censoring of anything outside progressive orthodoxy is *far* more prevalent than QAnon whom you apparently now raise as a bugaboo.

And, to make things interesting, I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of QAnoners voted Republican. No fight there.

I mean... there couldn't be a debate about that one.

Quote:But, 93, books *are* being banned. Authors *are* being banned, and their contracts ignored. On a frighteningly regular basis. So, please dont give me the crapola attempt at rationalizing an equivalence between QAnon and those whom are championing the censorship of books and people.

Wasn't creating an equivalence. Just pointing out that extremists reside on both sides and it's tiring to be asked constantly to defend those actions with which I don't agree.

Quote:I am glad you seemingly call those who champion censorship of ideas 'extremists'. They are. And, I hate to tell you they are far closer to mainstream progressivism than QAnon is to mainstream Republican.

If the censorship crowd is as extremist as you claim, are you worried that "When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment" was pulled? That is, a book that reached the top of two Amazon bestseller lists when it was released in 2018? I'm sorry, that action doesnt smack of an action in response to extremists -- it smacks of an action far closer to a mainstream.

Not seemingly. I don't like the idea that the book was pulled. Amazon can do what they want, though. I would have a big problem if elected officials were calling for the ban of the book. Was there a kerfluffle over this book before Amazon pullled it? I don't have any memory of that. Maybe Bezos decides to boot stuff off of his platform if he has a problem with the content? I think he has the right to do that.

Quote:But, maybe some Iranian computer hacker is behind that, since obviously there is zero progressive intent that could ever be suspect in the process to remove that book from sale.

It was probably Kamala Harris pulling the strings. She is, after all, the most despicable person on the planet according to some here.