"The Left Is Killing Free Speech"

[PoliticalChic]

Had to be. Right-wing publishing at its worst: The Silencing by Kirsten Powers

Fox sure loves their angry barbie dolls...

I believe the answer to the following query will identify you correctly:

Have you read the book?

I'm reading the reviews. The cover alone is enough to keep me away. Why didn't she just wear a bikini or pose in her underwear? And $28 to read a couple hundred pages of "liberals suck and are oppressing me because I'm a Christian at Fox news"? I get that here, for free.

Stop tap-dancing.

In truth, you prognosticate and pontificate about a subject that you've admitted you have no knowledge.

As usual.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives seem to have no problem spouting their hate. Just because they are criticized for it does not impact their free speech

Be sure to stay with this thread: you have much to learn.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And a a highly educated person has "cool" views of those who believe the first man was named Adam and the first woman was made from one of his ribs (one version of two)? Now there's a shocker for you.

David Mamet puts you in your place:

"The Left says of the Right, “You fools, it is demonstrable that dinosaurs lived one hundred million years ago, I can prove it to you, how can you say the earth was created in 4000BCE?”

But this supposed intransigence on the part of the Religious Right is far less detrimental to the health of the body politic than the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy, all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder."

He doesn't put me anywhere, nor could he, and maybe he hadn't met the American Taliban, the evil little sister of the actual illiberals known as the real Taliban.

I fervently await you analysis of which hurts society, or civilization more, a religious belief by some....or this:

... the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy, all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder.

The left, at least here, doesn't have a love affair with any of that, and what hurts this country the most is the right-wing nonsense starting with Jesus was a capitalist, education is for dopes, or it's all left-wing propaganda, and that somehow this nation is exceptional therefore it can sit on its fat ass while the world leaves it in the dust.

 

[Seawytch]

Have someone explain these facts to you:
6. 53% of the faculty on college campuses had 'cool' and/or negative feelings toward evangelicals. [http://www.jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultyReligion07.pdf]

Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors, disagreed. What the poll reflects, he said, is "a political and cultural resistance, not a form of religious bias."

Nelson, a professor of English at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said the unfavorable feelings toward evangelical Christians probably have two causes: "the particular kind of Republican Party activism that some evangelicals have engaged in over the years, as well as what faculty perceive as the opposition to scientific objectivity among some evangelicals."
​

Is There Disdain For Evangelicals In the Classroom?


It is not translating into discrimination. There is no anti religious bias.

7. 82% of Liberal social psychologists surveyed said they would be prejudiced against a conservative applicant. [https://journals.cambridge.org/images/fileUpload/documents/Duarte-Haidt_BBS-D-14-00108_preprint.pdf]

Your link does not work.

A new study, however, challenges that assumption — at least in the field of social psychology… Just over 37 percent of [social psychologists] surveyed said that, given equally qualified candidates for a job, they would support the hiring of a liberal candidate over a conservative candidate. Smaller percentages agreed that a “conservative perspective” would negatively influence their odds of supporting a paper for inclusion in a journal or a proposal for a grant.

Here’s an interesting thing though… social psychology as a field of research is heavily involved in studying implicit biases. And there is a long tradition in social psych of studies showing that people do not have access to the psychological processes that produce these biases and cannot even recognize that they have biases.​

Are social psychologists biased against conservatives, or do they just think they are?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Had to be. Right-wing publishing at its worst: The Silencing by Kirsten Powers

Fox sure loves their angry barbie dolls...

I believe the answer to the following query will identify you correctly:

Have you read the book?

I'm reading the reviews. The cover alone is enough to keep me away. Why didn't she just wear a bikini or pose in her underwear? And $28 to read a couple hundred pages of "liberals suck and are oppressing me because I'm a Christian at Fox news"? I get that here, for free.

Stop tap-dancing.

In truth, you prognosticate and pontificate about a subject that you've admitted you have no knowledge.

As usual.

The premise of her book is nonsense. You haven't read it either so STFU, at least about that. And that is your rule, not mine.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

a. The Left survives on demonization of the Right…rather than debating ideas: they teach their drones that the Right is not wrong, but evil…

Which liberals on this forum refuse to debate the issues?

Oh you folks debate, usually on a different topic than is being discussed.

You try and derail threads by off topic posting and other games.

You refuse to accept facts even when pointed out in plain english and sourced to the max.

Why debate with your side, it is like trying to teach a pig to sing, it annoys the pig and waste your time...............

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"In The Silencing, Kirsten Powers, herself a proud liberal—but from a far more tolerant Jeffersonian tradition—exposes the illiberal left. In The Silencing, you’ll learn:

• Why the illiberal left has become an Orwellian “big brother,” policing what it deems acceptable speech and opinions
• How the illiberal left is obsessed with delegitimizing Fox News
• How illiberal left pundits—even self-proclaimed “feminists” (and Powers names names)—engage in outrageously misogynistic and sexist dismissals of their female opponents
• How illiberal colleges and universities limit freedom of expression to tightly regulated “free speech zones” and ban speakers (even liberals) with whom the illiberal left disagrees
• How “truth” matters little to the illiberal left, for whom ideology is everything

How is it that liberalism, once associated with open-mindedness and reason, has become a vehicle for irrational prejudice, ideological conformity, and the marginalization and punishment of alternative opinions? Kirsten Powers chronicles this troubling trend in perhaps the most important—and chilling—political book of the year."
The Silencing by Kirsten Powers


What the hell does Fox do to normal people to make them into such right-wing hacks sprouting propaganda? They must have that down to a science.

 

[rightwinger]

Conservatives seem to have no problem spouting their hate. Just because they are criticized for it does not impact their free speech

Be sure to stay with this thread: you have much to learn.

Cut and paste is such a learn'n tool

 

[Mac1958]

The PC Police hate this book, and therefore its author.

It was predictable. Good for her, very brave. And now, she's not the only one.

• Bill Maher Rails Against Crazy Political Correctness From Liberals Tells Media Matters to Shut The F ck Up Video RealClearPolitics
• Jerry Seinfeld says political correctness is hurting comedy - CBS News
• Don Lemon weighs in on PC culture Liberals are the most easily offended and the least tolerant - Salon.com
• Not a Very P.C. Thing to Say -- NYMag
• Liberal Turley against political correctness in News Forum
• Are Liberals Becoming Too Sensitive and Politically Correct
• The Charges Against Laura Kipnis and P.C. -- NYMag

.

 

[frigidweirdo]

This is just another thread designed by one side to bash the other.

Free speech is all well and good, but you have this right to say anything you want as long as it doesn't hurt others, and then you talk complete and utter nonsense.

Yes, it's your right to do so. However, it's still complete and utter nonsense. The right does it, the left does it, they bash each other and this forum is so full to overflowing with this nonsense it's ridiculous.

Try having a decent debate. Whenever I talk about something and make my case, I get no replies. People reply to the crap, not to the decent stuff. It's ridiculous.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The PC Police hate this book, and therefore its author.

It was predictable. Good for her, very brave. And now, she's not the only one.
.

She works for Fox, and it's a right-wing attack job published by a right-wing publisher. What, exactly, is the brave part?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

This is just another thread designed by one side to bash the other.

Free speech is all well and good, but you have this right to say anything you want as long as it doesn't hurt others, and then you talk complete and utter nonsense.

Yes, it's your right to do so. However, it's still complete and utter nonsense. The right does it, the left does it, they bash each other and this forum is so full to overflowing with this nonsense it's ridiculous.

Try having a decent debate. Whenever I talk about something and make my case, I get no replies. People reply to the crap, not to the decent stuff. It's ridiculous.

This site is to debate what peanut butter is to a dog's mouth.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

This is just another thread designed by one side to bash the other.

Free speech is all well and good, but you have this right to say anything you want as long as it doesn't hurt others, and then you talk complete and utter nonsense.

Yes, it's your right to do so. However, it's still complete and utter nonsense. The right does it, the left does it, they bash each other and this forum is so full to overflowing with this nonsense it's ridiculous.

Try having a decent debate. Whenever I talk about something and make my case, I get no replies. People reply to the crap, not to the decent stuff. It's ridiculous.

Exactly what I think about the left.

I really would like some decent conversation, sans all the hate and character assassinating rhetoric.

An opponent who would actually concede when they were wrong and presented with linked, undeniable facts.

What we want and what reality is are two very different things.

 

[Mac1958]

The PC Police hate this book, and therefore its author.

It was predictable. Good for her, very brave. And now, she's not the only one.
.

She works for Fox, and it's a right-wing attack job published by a right-wing publisher. What, exactly, is the brave part?

Great example of my point, thanks.

.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The PC Police hate this book, and therefore its author.

It was predictable. Good for her, very brave. And now, she's not the only one.
.

She works for Fox, and it's a right-wing attack job published by a right-wing publisher. What, exactly, is the brave part?

Great example of my point, thanks.

.

It's not an example of anything. Tell me what's brave about this? Am I brave if I say Bill Clinton should have kept his pants on?

 

[Mac1958]

The PC Police hate this book, and therefore its author.

It was predictable. Good for her, very brave. And now, she's not the only one.
.

She works for Fox, and it's a right-wing attack job published by a right-wing publisher. What, exactly, is the brave part?

Great example of my point, thanks.

.

It's not an example of anything. Tell me what's brave about this? Am I brave if I say Bill Clinton should have kept his pants on?

Ugh.

As you know, she's a proud, long-time Democrat who hates seeing what has become of much of her party. Just as a proud, long-term Republican would on their side.

She wrote this knowing full well that she would be attacked, as we see here, by her own party, and that it would probably cost her certain relationships and opportunities. I call that brave, you are not required to.

Please don't be obtuse.

.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Have someone explain these facts to you:
6. 53% of the faculty on college campuses had 'cool' and/or negative feelings toward evangelicals. [http://www.jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultyReligion07.pdf]

Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors, disagreed. What the poll reflects, he said, is "a political and cultural resistance, not a form of religious bias."

Nelson, a professor of English at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said the unfavorable feelings toward evangelical Christians probably have two causes: "the particular kind of Republican Party activism that some evangelicals have engaged in over the years, as well as what faculty perceive as the opposition to scientific objectivity among some evangelicals."
​

Is There Disdain For Evangelicals In the Classroom?


It is not translating into discrimination. There is no anti religious bias.

7. 82% of Liberal social psychologists surveyed said they would be prejudiced against a conservative applicant. [https://journals.cambridge.org/images/fileUpload/documents/Duarte-Haidt_BBS-D-14-00108_preprint.pdf]

Your link does not work.

A new study, however, challenges that assumption — at least in the field of social psychology… Just over 37 percent of [social psychologists] surveyed said that, given equally qualified candidates for a job, they would support the hiring of a liberal candidate over a conservative candidate. Smaller percentages agreed that a “conservative perspective” would negatively influence their odds of supporting a paper for inclusion in a journal or a proposal for a grant.

Here’s an interesting thing though… social psychology as a field of research is heavily involved in studying implicit biases. And there is a long tradition in social psych of studies showing that people do not have access to the psychological processes that produce these biases and cannot even recognize that they have biases.​

Are social psychologists biased against conservatives, or do they just think they are?

"It is not translating into discrimination. There is no anti religious bias."

Be serious.

1. So, this California school had a clever fund raiser, in which one would ‘purchase’ bricks to be used for a walkway. You would purchase the bricks, and have them monogrammed with a message or quote.

Two folks had five or six bricks printed with biblical quotes that they found inspirational.

The school district refused to allow their bricks in, but when they sued, cancelled the program and refunded some $45,000 to all the contributors.
California School District cancels memorial fundraiser over Bible verse bricks Daily Mail Online


2. CRANSTON, R.I. (WPRI) - The prayer banner hanging in the Cranston High School West gym that's now at the center of a lawsuit by the ACLU reads in full:

Our Heavenly Father,
Grant us each day the desire to do our best,
To grow mentally and morally as well as physically,
To be kind and helpful to our classmates and teachers,
To be honest with ourselves as well as with others,
Help us to be good sports and smile when we lose as well as when we win,
Teach us the value of true friendship,
Help us always to conduct ourselves so as to bring credit to Cranston High School West.
Amen

Though the banner has hung in the gym for decades, the ACLU points to Supreme Court decisions over the separation of church and state, as well as the Cranston School District's policy which states that "the proper setting for religious observance is the home and the place of worship."
http://www.wpri.com/dpp/news/cranston-west-prayer-banner-text-detail


3. Speaking in Ireland this week, President Obama stated that Catholic schools were divisive: “If towns remain divided—if Catholics have their schools and buildings and Protestants have theirs, if we can’t see ourselves in one another and fear or resentment are allowed to harden—that too encourages division and discourages cooperation.”
Catholics Fire Back at Obama over School Comments Anti-Faith Secular Agenda Shamelessly on Full Display - Breitbart



4. Compton Unified School District in California rejected the two applications for a charter school because the applicant was a church leader.
Read more: Christian Applicant Denied Charter School Because of Faith | Godfather Politics Christian Applicant Denied Charter School Because of Faith


Think the NYTimes influences national policy in every Liberal University?
5. "Plenty of people — Ed Morrissey and Mollie Hemingway among them — have neatly dissected New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller’s perfect storm of ignorance and bias when it comes to the religious beliefs of those running for the GOP presidential nominee. Keller identified Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum as “all affiliated with fervid subsets of evangelical Christianity,” when Santorum is Catholic, Bachmann is Lutheran, and Perry is a Methodist. Keller hauls out the boogeyman of “dominionism,” when none of his targets are dominionists, and so on. The response (such as it is) to this criticism by Keller and the rest of the establishment media is nearly as telling as the original smears.


NYT’s Keller is hardly alone in falsely playing the “Crazy Christian” card. Similarly erroneous, x-degrees-of-separation journalism has been committed by Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, NPR’s Fresh Air, Ryan Lizza at the New Yorker and Michelle Goldberg, a senior contributing writer for Newsweek/The Daily Beast. From there, the bogus story gets treated as a serious topic of discussion at forums including the WaPo, CNN and USA Today.

Thus does the establishment media function the way Hillary Clinton once claimed the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy operated. Thus does the establishment media again operate with the sort of “epistemic closure” that the Julian Sanchezes, Conor Friedersdorfs and Andrew Sullivans of the world are so quick to condemn in the conservative media (when they aren’t busy ignoring Sullivan’s obsession with the status of Sarah Palin’s uterus). Ironically, Sullivan has been foaming at the mouth about “Christianism” for years.

Indeed, almost all of those soooo concerned about bogus memes circulating in a conservative echo chamber will never treat Rachel Maddow the way they treat Glenn Beck. (Indeed, they won’t blink over the fact that a religious left activist — the Rev. Al Sharpton — now hosts a show on MSNBC.) They will never view NewsBeast the way they view WorldNetDaily. They will never compare Bill Keller to Sean Hannity — and rightly so. After all, Hannity correctly identified the theology of Obama’s longtime church and interviewed Rev. Wright. Hannity committed more actual journalism on this subject than Keller did. More self-aware lefties in the media, like TNR’s Jonathan Chait, should take note that this is another example of the magical thinking of liberals."
Bill Keller s Beclowning Achievement Hot Air

 

[MsnBama]

6. 53% of the faculty on college campuses had 'cool' and/or negative feelings toward evangelicals. [http://www.jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultyReligion07.pdf]

Think this sort of bigotry would be allowed if it targeted blacks or gays?

Bigotry? Pardon me?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Had to be. Right-wing publishing at its worst: The Silencing by Kirsten Powers

Fox sure loves their angry barbie dolls...

I believe the answer to the following query will identify you correctly:

Have you read the book?

I'm reading the reviews. The cover alone is enough to keep me away. Why didn't she just wear a bikini or pose in her underwear? And $28 to read a couple hundred pages of "liberals suck and are oppressing me because I'm a Christian at Fox news"? I get that here, for free.

Stop tap-dancing.

In truth, you prognosticate and pontificate about a subject that you've admitted you have no knowledge.

As usual.

The premise of her book is nonsense. You haven't read it either so STFU, at least about that. And that is your rule, not mine.

You haven't read the book...you gasbag....you're the explanation of why the Hindenburg ended up the way it did.


And here is the proof of the premise...right from your post: "STFU,"

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The PC Police hate this book, and therefore its author.

It was predictable. Good for her, very brave. And now, she's not the only one.
.

She works for Fox, and it's a right-wing attack job published by a right-wing publisher. What, exactly, is the brave part?

Great example of my point, thanks.

.

It's not an example of anything. Tell me what's brave about this? Am I brave if I say Bill Clinton should have kept his pants on?

Ugh.

As you know, she's a proud, long-time Democrat who hates seeing what has become of much of her party. Just as a proud, long-term Republican would on their side.

She wrote this knowing full well that she would be attacked, as we see here, by her own party, and that it would probably cost her certain relationships and opportunities. I call that brave, you are not required to.

Please don't be obtuse.

.

1. She works for Fox. She slit her own throat on that when she took the blood money.
2. I don't see anyone attacking her but me so far, and I'm mostly attacking her book, but now that I know she was fucking Anthony Weiner and thinks Jesus came to visit her the fun can begin.