• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

"Criticism, Ridicule, and Humor Concerning Individuals, Groups, and Institutions. The First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech similarly protects programming that stereotypes or may otherwise offend people with regard to their religion, race, national background, gender, or other characteristics. It also protects broadcasts that criticize or ridicule established customs and institutions, including the government and its officials. The Commission recognizes that, under our Constitution, people must be free to say things that the majority may abhor, not only what most people may find tolerable or congenial. However, if you are offended by a station’s programming, we urge you to make your concerns known in writing to the station licensee."
Attaching a copy of the latest version of the FCC's "The Public and Broadcasting" available online (this bit is on page 10) for the record (also archived online here) because, you know, things have been known to .... happen these days ;)

OP edit to add link & archived link to document
 

Attachments

Last edited:
OK, then - maybe now I'M wearing the papist foil hat?

So far, the info-machine for Big Catholic Church seems to be leaning toward this guy.

I'm seeing this narrative track out there, now ....

Could only the crustiest, most jaded of political cynics consider all this even the tiniest move in this direction?

Now, technically, if he reportedly came >>>this<<< close to converting, my understanding is that he can't be declared a saint. Still, there may be some wiggle room out there:
 
OK, then - maybe now I'M wearing the papist foil hat?

So far, the info-machine for Big Catholic Church seems to be leaning toward this guy.

I'm seeing this narrative track out there, now ....

Could only the crustiest, most jaded of political cynics consider all this even the tiniest move in this direction?

Now, technically, if he reportedly came >>>this<<< close to converting, my understanding is that he can't be declared a saint. Still, there may be some wiggle room out there:


Who knows what goes on in the minds of old men who wear pointy hats?

Far be it from me to make sense of the "politics" of the church that I left behind soon after reaching the age of reason. However, there are still some who present a different opinion.

 
OK, then - maybe now I'M wearing the papist foil hat?

So far, the info-machine for Big Catholic Church seems to be leaning toward this guy.

I'm seeing this narrative track out there, now ....

Could only the crustiest, most jaded of political cynics consider all this even the tiniest move in this direction?

Now, technically, if he reportedly came >>>this<<< close to converting, my understanding is that he can't be declared a saint. Still, there may be some wiggle room out there:
Mission Reaction GIF


In all seriousness this is a disturbing development. Lots of very bad things have been done by people who are convinced they have God on their side while at the same time opponents of the Administration are being characterized as "enemies". I think the likelihood of radicals on both sides doing something deadly that might ignite a tinderbox is increasing daily.

:(
 
Who knows what goes on in the minds of old men who wear pointy hats?

Far be it from me to make sense of the "politics" of the church that I left behind soon after reaching the age of reason. However, there are still some who present a different opinion.
Full disclosure: the glasses I wear are those of a NARC (Non-active Roman Catholic), so everyone's mileage may vary :)
 
I think the likelihood of radicals on both sides doing something deadly that might ignite a tinderbox is increasing daily.
There's some science behind a controlled forest burn making the ground fertile for new growth.

Hypothetically speaking if the extreme left and extreme right smashed each other up and too each other out, everyone in the middle could move on and be prosperous.
 
There's some science behind a controlled forest burn making the ground fertile for new growth.

Hypothetically speaking if the extreme left and extreme right smashed each other up and too each other out, everyone in the middle could move on and be prosperous.
Except people aren’t forests and those people drag everyone else into the mix.

Easier to deradicalize than it is to try and let them ‘burn out’. Address why they have issues and usually the cause dies on it’s own.

The US would really benefit from a third political party which doesn’t cater to the extremists on both ends. Unfortunately with their defacto two party system it captures way more people under one umbrella than it really should and it gives way more power to a small but vocal minority than it should.
 
There's some science behind a controlled forest burn making the ground fertile for new growth.

Hypothetically speaking if the extreme left and extreme right smashed each other up and too each other out, everyone in the middle could move on and be prosperous.
Yeah….except it’s never that clean and simple.
 
There's some science behind a controlled forest burn making the ground fertile for new growth.

Hypothetically speaking if the extreme left and extreme right smashed each other up and too each other out, everyone in the middle could move on and be prosperous.
Have you seen Civil War?

There's a very simply pair of lines from a scene. Two lines, that's it. But it's absolutely terrifying when you think about the implications.

"We are American, Okay?"
"Okay... What kind of American are you?"
 
Except people aren’t forests and those people drag everyone else into the mix.
Obviously. People are the trees. We're all spacedust man.
Easier to deradicalize than it is to try and let them ‘burn out’. Address why they have issues and usually the cause dies on it’s own.
I'd say its easier to put a knife in their hands and arrest the survivor.

The left and right insanity isn't slowing down. Quite the opposite.

The US would really benefit from a third political party which doesn’t cater to the extremists on both ends. Unfortunately with their defacto two party system it captures way more people under one umbrella than it really should and it gives way more power to a small but vocal minority than it should.
Yeah.
 
There's some science behind a controlled forest burn making the ground fertile for new growth.

Hypothetically speaking if the extreme left and extreme right smashed each other up and too each other out, everyone in the middle could move on and be prosperous.
There's also the concept of only taking one stray butt or match to start a whole forest burning, too.
 
Have you seen Civil War?

There's a very simply pair of lines from a scene. Two lines, that's it. But it's absolutely terrifying when you think about the implications.

"We are American, Okay?"
"Okay... What kind of American are you?"
No, just read about it and seen clips.

That's a very gripping and haunting set of lines. I feel like the LPC under Trudeau were all on their way to channeling those vibes, but that's another topic.

At the end of civil war the corrupt US president serving an illegal 3rd term was removed form office. Democracy manifest eh?
 
For those asking, I never endorsedd what Carr was doing. However, he did it in the open, didn’t try hide it. He used the law (inappropriately?) but that can now be challenged in the proper forum of House, Senate and courts.

The democrats spent 4 years, in the shadows, breaking the law and gaslighting Americans via manipulated social networks, partisan news media, sworn officers using their positions for clandestine gain by lying, damaging democracy and subverting the rule of law. Hoping nothing contrary to their narrative ever took hold. And then they got caught. Did they apologize? Did they admit to lying to the citizenry? Were they ever charged? Nope, auto pen pardons all around.

If I had to choose, I'd pick the one that was honest and open about their intentions, whether misguided or not.

As opposed to the biden administation hiding in the shadows, using lies and whisper campaigns, breaking the very laws they swore to defend, standing behind an incorrigible, criminal family willing to sell out their country for 30 pieces of silver. Imagine if their criminal deceit was never found out?

I have zero trouble deciding on who to pillar, between the inept, but honest, FCC head or the biden criminal enterprise which includes all those high up 3 letter org stooges and enablers of the deep state.

The latter is a thousand times worse than the former. YMMV, but I've been clear in my stance and see no further reason to continue discussing it. It might not suit you, but there it is.
 
Last edited:
As opposed to those hiding in the shadows, using lies and whisper campaigns, breaking the very laws they swore to defend, standing behind an incorrigible, criminal family willing to sell out their country for 30 pieces of silver. Imagine if their criminal deceit was never found out?
I'm really confused, because I thought you were talking about Biden, but then you said this, and that is very clearly Trump.

The latter is a thousand times worse than the former. YMMV, but I've been clear in my stance and see no further reason to continue discussing it. It might not suit you, but there it is.

Aw, that's no fun.
 
And you have quotes from, say, a regulatory body or Biden himself hinting at/threatening to shut down Twitter, FB & social media when this happened? Happy to be educated, here.

Let's get realistic and quit splitting hairs. Both cases had one goal. Manipulation of the media. Asking for democrat quotes, etc that mirror 100% of Carr's, is an attempt to shut down a differing point of view. Was Carr's attempt illegal? Inept sure, but whether legal or not can be decided by the courts. The democrat attempt to shut down free speech was felonious and a good lawyer could probably make a RICO case for manipulating the media the way they did.



There's tons more, but I'm not wasting my time.

Suffice to say, the democrats are the ones that don't give a shit about freedom of speech. Carr, possibly, made a mistake. Nothing has been proven. Nor does his one single action come anywhere close to the myriad of illegal acts committed by democrats.

Either the courts will take up the Carr incident or it'll be completely forgotten as it's overwhelmed by next weeks scandal.
 
I'm really confused, because I thought you were talking about Biden, but then you said this, and that is very clearly Trump.

"As opposed to the biden administation hiding in the shadows, using lies and whisper campaigns..."

Fixed, so even the feeblest of minds can suss out the meaning.
 
"As opposed to the biden administation hiding in the shadows, using lies and whisper campaigns..."

Fixed, so even the feeblest of minds can suss out the meaning.
Well, sure, the statement is now more coherent, but it almost makes less sense because you are describing Trump but using Biden's name. I don't get it.
 
Ok, flippancy aside, I take specific umbrage with this line of this OPINION piece:

"Then, FBI officials created a special, secure online portal for Twitter staff, where the two sides could secretly exchange information about who was saying what on the platform and how that speech could be squelched. In this virtual "war room," the FBI made dozens of requests to censor political speech. Twitter chirpily complied."

Yet he doesn't provide any reference to those "dozens of requests". Further, the purpose of the security clearances and the portal was not to discuss "how that speech could be squelched", but it "provides critical information to the private sector in an effort to allow them to protect themselves and their customers," such as when they sent 10 documents to twitter, 8 of which "pertained to “malign foreign influence actors and activities.”


Also, the GOP isn't innocent either:

"But former Trump administration officials and Twitter employees tell Rolling Stone that theWhite House’s Teigen tweet demand was hardly an isolated incident: The Trumpadministration and its allied Republicans in Congress routinely asked Twitter to take downposts they objected to — the exact behavior that they’re claiming makes President Biden,the Democrats, and Twitter complicit in an anti-free speech conspiracy to muzzleconservatives online." (https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/117881/documents/HHRG-119-JU00-20250212-SD006-U6.pdf)
 
... I never endorsedd what Carr was doing. However, he did it in the open, didn’t try hide it. He used the law (inappropriately?) but that can now be challenged in the proper forum of House, Senate and courts ...
Yeah, I'm sure the House'll take care of that - oh, wait ....
I'm sure the Senate or courts'll lap it up shortly, though ... I'll wait ...
 
There's some science behind a controlled forest burn making the ground fertile for new growth.

Hypothetically speaking if the extreme left and extreme right smashed each other up and too each other out, everyone in the middle could move on and be prosperous.
There are a whole bunch of liberals and conservatives who had that same attitude in Germany when the red shirts and brown shirts were battling it out in the streets.
 
Back
Top