Ok, This Predates 01/01/2020

[Kathianne]

Have I mentioned I hate 2020?

https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/07/07/150-writers-academics-sign-letter-justice-open-debate/


I read about the letter, saw this commentary yesterday. Be sure to look at the follow up today:

Harper’s Magazine has published a letter on “open debate” which is signed by 150 journalists, writers and academics, from Noam Chomsky to J.K. Rowling. The letter itself is relatively brief and takes plenty of shots at the right on the way to making a point about left’s growing fondness for cancel culture.


You can read it all here. (https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/) The letter praises “powerful protests” for social justice and then warns that “forces of illiberalism” (they name Trump as an ally of these forces) are “gaining strength.” The letter warns “resistance must not be allowed to harden into its own brand of dogma.” And that’s really the main point of the letter.

...


So far, so good.

Then, this:

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2020/07/08/course-signatories-harpers-letter-criticizing-cancel-culture-begin-cancel/


Cancel Culture Begin To Cancel Themselves
ED MORRISSEYPosted at 8:41 am on July 8, 2020

This reads like a satire from Jonathan Swift or George Orwell, and if it were a movie, it would be the film of our times. John wrote yesterday about the letter signed by 153 “prominent artists and intellectuals,” as the New York Times describes them, decrying cancel culture and defending free speech and open debate. They argued at Harper’s that the Left’s cancel culture had become “an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.”


When the Left set about proving it, it didn’t take long for the signatories to start surrendering to the very phenomenon they protested:

The letter, which was published by Harper’s Magazine and will also appear in several leading international publications, surfaces a debate that has been going on privately in newsrooms, universities and publishing houses that have been navigating demands for diversity and inclusion, while also asking which demands — and the social media dynamics that propel them — go too far.




And on social media, the reaction was swift, with some heaping ridicule on the letter’s signatories — who include cultural luminaries like Margaret Atwood, Bill T. Jones and Wynton Marsalis, along with journalists and academics — for thin-skinnedness, privilege and, as one person put it, fear of loss of “relevance.” …






Amid the intense criticism, some signatories appeared to back away from the letter. On Tuesday evening, the historian Kerri K. Greenidge tweeted “I do not endorse this @Harpers letter,” and said she was in touch with the magazine about a retraction. (Giulia Melucci, a spokeswoman for Harper’s, said the magazine had fact-checked all signatures and that Dr. Greenidge had signed off. But she said the magazine is “respectfully removing her name.”)


Come on, man. Harper’s wasn’t just going to take someone’s word that the other 152 signatories put their names to the letter. Of course they checked it out. Greenidge simply quailed at the first sign of criticism and tried to construct a cover story. That certainly says something about cancel culture, but it says even more about Greenidge’s personal and professional credibility.


Others retreated after getting blasted for the company they kept rather than the principles they espoused.


Another person who signed, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in an effort to stay out of the growing storm, said she did not know who all the other signatories were when she agreed to participate, and if she had, she may not have signed. She also said that the letter, which was about internet shaming, among other things, was now being used to shame people on the internet.


Not everyone was anonymous about embracing their guilt-by-association conviction (via Twitchy):

...

[jimnyc]

I think it all started mainly in November of 2016.

Just prior, at the Dem convention, they ranted along with Michelle Obama about “When they go low, we go high”. And not only did they want tolerance for EVERYONE, they demanded it.

Then when Trump won, it was onto stating that the Democrats will obstruct every step of the way. And they have followed through with that. And they still insisted on tolerance for everyone, and demanded that everyone accept every single person no matter what, no matter any gender or sex, and to accept the opinions of them and of everyone.

Then came the #metoo crap and Kavanaugh, or the other way around? Women, accusers, MUST be heard. The unbelievable was believable. Nothing from a respected justice was believed, and was lied about and belittled. And when Tara Reade does the same and makes claims of sexual assault against Joe Biden, they said it MUST be heard and the same stuff. Ok, I kid, I kid, of course they treated it 100% differently. They believed Biden with little words he spoke as gospel. Didn't investigate nor believe Tara Reade. Quite a few Democrats outright referred to the "NY Times investigation" as all they needed to hear/know.

In fact, latest VP frontrunner that I have been mentioning, Tammy Duckworth, in 2018 about Kavanaugh:


2018: "Dr. Ford spent her time talking about the laughter she still hears ringing in her ears from that night: the night that an older, stronger, drunker boy forced her to learn what it was like to feel helpless. Her voice quivered. But she herself never wavered. Steadfast in the truth—in the memory of those few moments that changed her life forever. Judge Kavanaugh, meanwhile, spent his time interrupting and attacking the committee members. Shouting over senators and dressing them down—appearing belligerent and outraged that anyone would dare keep him from getting what he feels entitled to." - Oct. 4, 2018, in a floor speech opposing Kavanaugh's confirmation


2020: Fox News has reached out to Duckworth for comment multiple times on the Tara Reade allegations, including on Wednesday. She has not responded. Fox News was also unable to find any public comments from Duckworth on the Reade allegation, which broke more than a month ago.

Interesting. But as to the NYT investigation and a few other notable Dems, or nothing at all, no care. Or a media investigation is appropriate.

Elizabeth Warren - no reply

Amy Klobuchar


2018: "She was so graceful and so dignified, went through every question you could imagine... What she was doing was basically laying out the fact that you have so well articulated during the show, is that she actually has talked about this in the past, she said it to a therapist, her husband had remembered the name Brett Kavanaugh, she has with some detail remembered the assault. And all she's asked is that the FBI figure out when Mark Judge was working at this Safeway when she saw him later because that would help her get the exact date." - Sept. 27, 2018 to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow


2020: "[I]n this case -- and your listeners should look at the story -- there was a thorough review by The New York Times. And I think that's very important to have, especially involving public figures. But I think when I look at -- when I see Vice President Biden, someone I worked with, I see him on -- a leader on domestic abuse -- led the bill before people were even willing to talk about those horrific crimes and has really been a champion of abuses of power against women and has used his voice on the domestic abuse front in such a big way." - April 14, 2020 to NPR

Kamala Harris


2018: "Ours was not a search to determine whether a crime occurred. Ours was not a search to determine whether we had enough facts to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime had occurred. No, ours was an investigation to figure out enough about what happened to determine if Brett Kavanaugh is fit to serve on the highest court in our land. Is he fit to be a jurist in the place where we have said justice in our country occurs? In the house where we listen to evidence and truth and make determinations based on the veracity and truthfulness of what has occurred. That is our role when it comes to Dr. Ford’s allegations, and we fell short. We fell short. We did not do her justice. We did not do the American people justice." - Oct. 5, 2018, in a floor speech opposing Kavanaugh's confirmation


2020: "First of all, I have spent the bulk of my career fighting against abuse of women and children and for empowerment of women and children and all people. Listen, this woman has a right to tell her story and I believe that and I believe Joe Biden believes that, too. I've spent my whole career fighting like you said, Joe, to give women a voice and this brings up I think a bigger structural issue frankly, which is that women must be able to speak without fear of retaliation. And I can only -- on the issue of Joe I mean I can only speak to the Joe Biden I know. He's been a lifelong fighter in terms of stopping violence against women. He's been the leader, I think really most people would agree, in the United States Senate on VAWA, the Violence Against Women Act. So, you know, as I said she has a right to tell her story and she shouldn't face any repercussions for that, but the Joe Biden I know is somebody that really has fought for women and empowerment of women and women's equality and rights." -- April 17, 2020 to the "It's All Political" podcast by San Francisco Chronicle

Fox News reached out to Harris for comment after the "Larry King Live" video resurfaced, which occurred after her interview with "It's All Political," but did not receive a response.

Kirsten Gillibrand


2018: "I believe Dr. Blasey Ford. Here’s why I believe her: She’s risked everything – her own safety – to come out on the record to say Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. She told her therapist and her husband about it five years ago. She told a friend about it a year ago. She told a reporter about it before Kavanaugh was ever named. She’s even taken a lie detector test. So why are my colleagues moving so fast – as fast as they possibly can – to confirm this judge?" - Sept. 26, 2018 floor speech opposing Kavanaugh confirmation


2020: "So when we say believe women, it’s for this explicit intention of making sure there’s space for all women to come forward to speak their truth, to be heard. And in this allegation, that is what Tara Reade has done. She has come forward, she has spoken, and they have done an investigation in several outlets. Those investigations, Vice President Biden has called for himself. Vice President Biden has vehemently denied these allegations and I support Vice President Biden," Gillibrand said before a reporter asked if there was a "contradiction" between how Democrats have handled the Biden allegations and the Kavanaugh allegations. "No, and I stand by Vice President Biden. He has devoted his life to supporting women and he has vehemently denied this allegation." - April 28, 2020, according to The Hill

A few more here - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vp-kavanaugh-biden-accusation

[Kathianne]

I think it all started mainly in November of 2016.

Just prior, at the Dem convention, they ranted along with Michelle Obama about “When they go low, we go high”. And not only did they want tolerance for EVERYONE, they demanded it.

Then when Trump won, it was onto stating that the Democrats will obstruct every step of the way. And they have followed through with that. And they still insisted on tolerance for everyone, and demanded that everyone accept every single person no matter what, no matter any gender or sex, and to accept the opinions of them and of everyone.

Then came the #metoo crap and Kavanaugh, or the other way around? Women, accusers, MUST be heard. The unbelievable was believable. Nothing from a respected justice was believed, and was lied about and belittled. And when Tara Reade does the same and makes claims of sexual assault against Joe Biden, they said it MUST be heard and the same stuff. Ok, I kid, I kid, of course they treated it 100% differently. They believed Biden with little words he spoke as gospel. Didn't investigate nor believe Tara Reade. Quite a few Democrats outright referred to the "NY Times investigation" as all they needed to hear/know.

In fact, latest VP frontrunner that I have been mentioning, Tammy Duckworth, in 2018 about Kavanaugh:





Interesting. But as to the NYT investigation and a few other notable Dems, or nothing at all, no care. Or a media investigation is appropriate.

Elizabeth Warren - no reply

Amy Klobuchar





Kamala Harris





Fox News reached out to Harris for comment after the "Larry King Live" video resurfaced, which occurred after her interview with "It's All Political," but did not receive a response.

Kirsten Gillibrand





A few more here - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vp-kavanaugh-biden-accusation


Good points.

I think it started with swatting. Then doxxing. Now canceling-hoping to harm those stepping off message with both social and economic hardship.

[jimnyc]

Good points.

I think it started with swatting. Then doxxing. Now canceling-hoping to harm those stepping off message with both social and economic hardship.

Like you said previously (think it was you...) the parenting failures, then slowly indoctrinate in schools and picking up speed in some HS and definitely in college. All the above and then some coddle them to death and give into all their whims and demands. This culture of demands and giving in and cancellations, followed again by all the above mentioned within this thread - and they created what we are now seeing in the streets. And they are still coddling them, still applauding and supporting them, protests to criminal actions, to giving in to demands and it keeps going.

What will our nation look like as our very near future unfolds? Will our nation support lawlessness and forced change? And what do we look like in 4-8 years alone if those making the demands and supporting them and applauding them - were to own the presidency, senate and house with little stopping any of their plans and agendas?

[Kathianne]

Like you said previously (think it was you...) the parenting failures, then slowly indoctrinate in schools and picking up speed in some HS and definitely in college. All the above and then some coddle them to death and give into all their whims and demands. This culture of demands and giving in and cancellations, followed again by all the above mentioned within this thread - and they created what we are now seeing in the streets. And they are still coddling them, still applauding and supporting them, protests to criminal actions, to giving in to demands and it keeps going.

What will our nation look like as our very near future unfolds? Will our nation support lawlessness and forced change? And what do we look like in 4-8 years alone if those making the demands and supporting them and applauding them - were to own the presidency, senate and house with little stopping any of their plans and agendas?
You're speaking to the choir.

Why is the President trying to lose this election or doing a good job of looking like that's what's up? The CDC had done a terrible job with predicting and reacting to the virus, then totally botched the testing. They went along with 'magical masks,' and actually cast doubt onto China hiding information-just like WHO.

However, most people do not follow any news thread for longer than they are impacted. CDC had decades worth of public trust built up. Trump? He has his deep core and the others, many of whom voted against Hillary or plan to vote against Pelosi & Co. So he attacks the CDC? It's Trump being Trump, I get that. What I don't get is the obviously smart guy choosing to get into a side fight that's unnecessary. It's all so very depressing.

[jimnyc]

Was going to make a new thread for this, but it would be appropriate in this one. I honestly don't know this woman, nor the show as it appears to be some talk show of sorts.

But the subject of the day is the Dad's out there creating babies, with multiple different women, and then what is the result, the fallout?

She points out that these 5 men together have 87 children among 50 different women!!! As she points out, that is 137 lives involved, and what the fallout is...

This was sent to me as usual in an email...

2 mins, great watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CsmBLFr8wU

[SassyLady]

Was going to make a new thread for this, but it would be appropriate in this one. I honestly don't know this woman, nor the show as it appears to be some talk show of sorts.

But the subject of the day is the Dad's out there creating babies, with multiple different women, and then what is the result, the fallout?

She points out that these 5 men together have 87 children among 50 different women!!! As she points out, that is 137 lives involved, and what the fallout is...

This was sent to me as usual in an email...

2 mins, great watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CsmBLFr8wU

Perhaps they need to rethink the "no heat, no judgement" motto.

[Abbey Marie]

Very good clip. I do think the moms involved also bear responsibility for the problems, even though they are at least the ones raising these kids. Why? Because they most likely knew they would end up being single moms if they got pregnant.

Please explain “no heat, no judgment”. Does that merely mean, “I’m not judging your behavior”?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Black Lives Matter does not want to speak to the ills of the black culture and the fact that black on black killings/murder is the leading cause of death among a certain group of black men. That crime runs as a glorified act in black culture. That resisting arrest is macho and the way one should respond to whitey- to any cop. No sir, they paint it as the black man or woman being arrested is automatically a saint, an innocent victim--that had every right to resist arrest, to attach the officer-even to shoot the arresting officer!
Folks, this is lunacy and blacks have millions of ignorant POS whites marching with them demanding blacks be made lords over whites-that all police be fired and a new black force/minority force be created.
Again absolute lunacy that the mainstream media, he ems promote and declare just!
These politicians, these vermin will sell their souls for the black vote.
With complete and utter disregard for truth, justice and law and order...
That is the dem party , its evil, its corruption, its abject betrayal of this nation and all of its citizens! A fact...--Tyr

[SassyLady]

Very good clip. I do think the moms involved also bear responsibility for the problems, even though they are at least the ones raising these kids. Why? Because they most likely knew they would end up being single moms if they got pregnant.

Please explain “no heat, no judgment”. Does that merely mean, “I’m not judging your behavior”?

I took it to mean the speaker wasn't trying to shame the men for not being responsible, just wanting to get facts out there. However, if there is no shame in having an average of 17 kids (87÷5) with 10 (50÷5) different women then how does the behavior stop?

Why is it ok to be so irresponsible?

[Abbey Marie]

I took it to mean the speaker wasn't trying to shame the men for not being responsible, just wanting to get facts out there. However, if there is no shame in having an average of 17 kids (87÷5) with 10 (50÷5) different women then how does the behavior stop?

Why is it ok to be so irresponsible?

Exactly. Why point it out and then say, “But I have no problem with it”? It’s almost worse than not bringing it up in the first place.

I just loathe our current, “no judgment“ culture. It’s a good thing when people are told their behavior sucks.

[Kathianne]

I took it to mean the speaker wasn't trying to shame the men for not being responsible, just wanting to get facts out there. However, if there is no shame in having an average of 17 kids (87÷5) with 10 (50÷5) different women then how does the behavior stop?

Why is it ok to be so irresponsible?


Exactly. Why point it out then say, “But I have no problem with it”? It’s almost worse than not bringing it up in the first place.

I just loathe our current, “no judgment“ culture. It’s a good thing when people are told their behavior sucks.

Funny how we all took it the same way. :smoke: