saxitoxin wrote: (1) Regardless of what some fancy lad at the New York Times writes, the United States flag does not "represent freedom." The United States flag is an heraldic identifier of 50 states operating in a corporate personality called "United States." Attempting to assign any greater significance to it is poetic but sophistic.
thegreekdog wrote:“We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in so doing we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents.”
This might be one of my favorite quotes of all time. Clearly the NY Times writer doesn't get it or pretends he doesn't get it.
Just as a heads up for you and Saxi, Stanley Fish isn't really a NYTimes writer- he just does guest columns. He's one of the more important American literary and linguist theorists, and a specialist in legal issues surrounding free speech and education.
He's also pretty conservative to my mind- a lot of his stuff deals with liberal bias in universities.
Anyway, it's not worth dismissing him out of hand.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
thegreekdog wrote:“We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in so doing we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents.”
This might be one of my favorite quotes of all time. Clearly the NY Times writer doesn't get it or pretends he doesn't get it.
Just as a heads up for you and Saxi, Stanley Fish isn't really a NYTimes writer- he just does guest columns. He's one of the more important American literary and linguist theorists, and a specialist in legal issues surrounding free speech and education.
He's also pretty conservative to my mind- a lot of his stuff deals with liberal bias in universities.
Anyway, it's not worth dismissing him out of hand.
I'm not dismissing him out of hand, I'm dismissing his critique of the Supreme Court's decision out of hand.
thegreekdog wrote:“We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in so doing we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents.”
This might be one of my favorite quotes of all time. Clearly the NY Times writer doesn't get it or pretends he doesn't get it.
Just as a heads up for you and Saxi, Stanley Fish isn't really a NYTimes writer- he just does guest columns. He's one of the more important American literary and linguist theorists, and a specialist in legal issues surrounding free speech and education.
He's also pretty conservative to my mind- a lot of his stuff deals with liberal bias in universities.
Anyway, it's not worth dismissing him out of hand.
I'm not dismissing him out of hand, I'm dismissing his critique of the Supreme Court's decision out of hand.
Fair enough, just wanted to point out that the guy has a pedigree, and he's a pretty deep thinker. I disagree with a lot of his stuff myself, but I thought this article was pretty interesting.
I guess a lot of people defend free speech as a principle, but don't really examine why they're doing so. It's a worthy ideal, but the way that ideal is applied is pretty changeable.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
I don't think it should be changeable. But I'm not a New York Times writer of editorials and I don't practice Constitutional Law (unfortunately). I think it should be absolute. But that's just me.
I think the dude's wrong about burning the flag. It's classic politically symbolic speech to burn the American flag.
thegreekdog wrote:I don't think it should be changeable. But I'm not a New York Times writer of editorials and I don't practice Constitutional Law (unfortunately). I think it should be absolute. But that's just me.
I think the dude's wrong about burning the flag. It's classic politically symbolic speech to burn the American flag.
Actually, I completely agree with you on that one. I thought it was by far and away the weakest point of his piece.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
In caveat, I couldn't be bothered to read any of the article in question, however, in many civilized nations the world over it is proscribed for the national flag to be used in advertising. If I am not mistaken - and I trust TheGreekDog will correct me if I am wrong - this could also be proscribed in the United States, while still permitting the burning of the U.S. flag for expressions of artistic and political value, if the U.S. Congress better policed - through legislative action - application of the rights of the juristic person. NADER has been advocating for this for the last 30 years.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
Symmetry wrote: Just as a heads up for you and Saxi
I have no idea why it was felt that I, Saxi Karl Toxin, needed a "heads-up."
saxitoxin wrote: (1) Regardless of what some fancy lad at the New York Times writes,
Was why you got included on the heads up regarding Professor Fish.
non sequitur
As we say in Latin- totally sequitur, yo.
Symmetry, I like your spunk and drive. Aside from the Valued Mods, you're one of the few intellectually competent people here who has die kugeln to stand up to my sometimes abusive tirades. I find all these sycophants so boorish.
This wasn't how it was like in the old days when I was runnin' and gunnin' on CC, scrappin' around and getting into all sorts of shenanigans and tomfoolery. These days the only way I can get a ban is if I give it to myself, not unlike my sex life in the last 40 years or so.
Thanks, Sym! - STX
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
saxitoxin wrote: Symmetry, I like your spunk and drive. Aside from the Valued Mods, you're one of the few intellectually competent people here who has die kugeln to stand up to my sometimes abusive tirades. I find all these sycophants so boorish.
This wasn't how it was like in the old days when I was runnin' and gunnin' on CC, scrappin' around and getting into all sorts of shenanigans and tomfoolery. These days the only way I can get a ban is if I give it to myself, not unlike my sex life in the last 40 years or so.
Thanks, Sym! - STX
Any further suggestions that you are familiar with my spunk and drive will be dealt with by the moderators. You don't have the right bring up tomfoolery, shenanigans, or your sex life in a forum where you you're clearly paying for me to speak.
Any further sexual harassment of this nature will be dealt with ENTIRELY SERIOUSLY.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
thegreekdog wrote:I think the dude's wrong about burning the flag. It's classic politically symbolic speech to burn the American flag.
I agree. I spent my time in the military so that people could burn the flag, despite that I personally detest that particular act.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
saxitoxin wrote: Symmetry, I like your spunk and drive. Aside from the Valued Mods, you're one of the few intellectually competent people here who has die kugeln to stand up to my sometimes abusive tirades. I find all these sycophants so boorish.
This wasn't how it was like in the old days when I was runnin' and gunnin' on CC, scrappin' around and getting into all sorts of shenanigans and tomfoolery. These days the only way I can get a ban is if I give it to myself, not unlike my sex life in the last 40 years or so.
Thanks, Sym! - STX
Any further suggestions that you are familiar with my spunk and drive will be dealt with by the moderators. You don't have the right bring up tomfoolery, shenanigans, or your sex life in a forum where you you're clearly paying for me to speak.
Any further sexual harassment of this nature will be dealt with ENTIRELY SERIOUSLY.
EXCUSE ME, I WAS ATTEMPTING TO COMPLIMENT YOU
Back in the '60's ol' Saxi saw his share of spunk, there was plenty to go around back in Berlin in those days. It's great to see kids like Sym who are practically overflowing with spunk. Saxi is too old to these days to have much spunk himself, though sometimes if I get really worked up I've been known to unload on Player57832.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
saxitoxin wrote:WHEN DID THEGREEKDOG BECOME A VALUED MOD?
Thegreekdog became a valued mod when I, the non spokesperson of the axis of evil, nominated him and used coercion and behind the scenes deals to bring CC closer to the masses.
Or maybe he got in on his own credentials. I dunno.
This post was made by jefjef who should be on your ignore list.
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
Symmetry wrote:Look, I can take a bit of homophobia on and off the main threads, but you clearly crossed the line here, and I guess I have to complain.
