winsor

She doesn't hold a candle to John Reed.

I'll go with 'cooperation toward a common goal;' "compromise" has too many very negative definitions.

Any casual student of logic is familiar with the different types of definition, which often makes the meaning in one context entirely independent of the meaning in another. Definitions may be Lexical, Stipulative, Precising, Legal, Medical, Nautical, Technical et al.. "Fiber' to a dietician and to a material scientist are entirely different things, only vaguely related. In addition, the same word in another language is sometimes the same, sometimes related, and other times completely different. BSBD, Winsor

Feel free to use the killfile feature for posters whose content you find devoid of merit, it works great except for moderators. I lived in the next town from Skokie when the ACLU defended Nazis' right to march there; I'm not a big fan of that group, but I think denying them victimhood was a good call. I disagree strongly with the stance taken by one poster or another, but don't wish to find myself in an echo chamber by filtering out everything thing with which I disagree. YMMV, Winsor

Turns out abortion is a First Amendment issue: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/253547/the-satanic-temple-to-open-free-abortion-clinic-in-new-mexico Their approach reminds me of the SVNA, or Students for Violent Non Action, an activist in Chicago in the late '60s. The name, like that of the Samuel Alito's Mom's Satanic Abortion Clinic, was pretty much a raspberry to their detractors. This should be amusing.

According to Sun Tzu, it's better for an opponent to think you are weak where you are strong, and strong where you are weak. At least that is more or less what the translation says - my Chinese is remarkably weak.

Straw man. I contend no such thing.

If the allegations against him are true, he should not have been a free man - much less an armed one. The problem I have is that accusations of misbehavior are all too often used as an instrument of malice, and there are no consequences to using false allegations to obtaining a restraining order. It's stated with assurance that he was given to shooting everything in sight at the drop of a hat; a conviction on the basis of any of these incidents would have stripped him of '2nd Amendment Rights.' Actually, if the authorities had seen fit to bring charges for his alleged crimes, they would have been completely within their legal rights to disarm him while charges were pending. They were lazy and it bit them I contend that, if you want to wear a white hat, you have to follow the rules. By all means he should be subjected to Due Process (tm) and, if convicted, incarcerated/stripped of his rights. BSBD, Winsor

Agreed. I dislike him, as I do most politicians, but I'm comparatively indifferent to his verbal gaffes. If all one has is cheap shots, it doesn't do much to support their position.

How much is in it for us? Those space lasers aren't cheap, you know

That's the word I think it is. It's the other word that's something else.

Given the level of vitriol on this forum, it is often difficult to pick out a legitimate request for clarification from knee jerk gainsaying. The only activity I recommend being proscribed is the vivisection of children, though puberty blockers are about as bad. What the hell, if rendering a portion of the population sterile limits population growth, perhaps it's a backhanded benefit. BSBD, Winsor

Neither side of the aisle has a lock on batshit crazy.

I don't recall recommending sanctions for much of anything beyond child abuse. It may be all the same to you.

Jordan Peterson got sanctioned in Canuckistan for refusing to adopt trendy pronouns. I could scare up accounts of similar cases in the U S of A as well. I don't recall claiming that there was a proposal to mandate such stupidity by law, but since you put it on the interwebz it must be true.

Of course! All these things are predicated upon a juvenile concept of reality.

While I am largely indifferent to how someone 'identifies,' having lived and worked with people from all over the spectrum, I do have a problem with people gaming the system. Admittedly this is not U.S. News and World Report, but the basic story is legit: https://summit.news/2023/01/31/trans-criminals-who-raped-women-are-women-says-scottish-leader/ A friend has made a fortune surgically altering people's anatomy to mimic the genetalia of another sex, which is all well and good. I am not, however, convinced that the end product of his handiwork is fully interchangeable with someone born with original equipment. As far as pronouns go, one friend who is biologically female but does not present as such gets annoyed when someone calls her 'sir.' Generally I'm cool with going along with whatever makes them feel comfortable, but draw the line at it being mandated. That's the 'woke' part of the equation to which I object, where one group of people see fit to inflict their world view on everyone else. I also have a problem with people supporting permanent changes made to children on the basis of their juvenile concept of reality. If they want it when they are adult, fine. Until then, it should be a felony for people who perform such life-altering processes. BSBD, Winsor

Okay, for the hard of thinking I'll walk you through it. The video is of a male to female convert, doing a terrible job in a (women's) figure skating competition. The forum rules forbid linking to a video without commentary, so I included such verbiage as might attend the former male doing very well indeed. Since it was glaring obvious that my commentary couldn't be serious, I figured that only a moron couldn't put it together. Obviously I was wrong, and truly brilliant people took me seriously. Boy, have I been put in my place.

You don't think that watching the video might have revealed the narrative that has everyone's knickers twisted to be entirely facetious? Nah, what are the odds?

Okay, so you're not amused. Mick Jagger's comment regarding being able to take a joke comes to mind. Make that Bill Murray: "Lighten up, Francis."

You didn't watch the video. Whoosh.

Transgender men => wimmen have an unfair advantage in sporting events. There's no way a natural-born woman can keep up with someone who was born male. This is proof positive:

I think that's too onerous. If someone doesn't vote, a ballot will be cast for them - for the best candidate, of course.

They're quite impressive, but they get really shitty mileage.

I bought a Tracy Chapman cassette many years ago and gave it away after hearing the lyrics once. I was thinking more of having to run a gauntlet of booths supporting unrelated causes to get into an REM concert some time back. If the lyrics are overtly distasteful I don't go. If I'm there for tunes, and if it resembles a political convention I'm not up for it. I'm not into anybody's political convention.