tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post2033630348390671996..comments2023-04-03T05:20:01.318-04:00Comments on Young, Hip and Conservative: a skeptical blog: Vegan potlucks and free speechMichaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00427964335321253510noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post-89119588872784248162012-03-11T10:55:50.158-04:002012-03-11T10:55:50.158-04:00The topic of outrage authenticity doesn't inte...The topic of outrage authenticity doesn't interest me much, but I wanted to note that free speech is not dependent on having a daily 3 hour national megaphone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post-18934555654650682812012-03-11T04:19:03.222-04:002012-03-11T04:19:03.222-04:00I'll go back and listen again, but I don't...I'll go back and listen again, but I don't recall that being what he said. All of the sudden we are back to trying to derive deep meaning from the usage of a single word, a single time.<br /><br />You had me going for a while, that whole needing "evidence" thing when making a claim. I'm sure I've heard you use the word slut before, should people come to the same conclusion about you?<br /><br />And I'm not seeing where he has said the right are any kind of better. What he said was the right will never be as effective at politically motivated outrage as the left is. That doesn't have anything to do with one party being "better", as in better behaved, it's just simply a statement regarding effectiveness.<br /><br />By all means, continue being outraged.Natehttp://congressshallmakenolaw.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post-4195654906741618872012-03-10T12:58:07.998-05:002012-03-10T12:58:07.998-05:00You should read the clause in question where you c...You should read the clause in question where you claimed the right is notably better than the left. The evidence says otherwise - especially when the left has legitimate reasons to be angry, such as when a popular radio host says women should not have a certain amount of sex.Michael Hawkinshttp://forthesakeofscience.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post-47082870330687936652012-03-10T09:42:13.356-05:002012-03-10T09:42:13.356-05:00You should read the paragraph in question. I said ...You should read the paragraph in question. I said plain as day that both sides have plenty of experience, and then you angrily agreed with me.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00427964335321253510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post-15033484889709519812012-03-10T02:12:08.667-05:002012-03-10T02:12:08.667-05:00I honestly think you're trying to delude yours...I honestly think you're trying to delude yourself recently. First, the Komen issue was one where a conservative person was put in charge and things suddenly changed. And did they change consistently? No, because other groups under investigation - the reason Komen pretended they were pulling funding - were still receiving funding. Second, you mention Planned Parenthood in the paragraph immediately preceding the one where you act like conservatives don't muster a whole shitload of fake outrage. In fact, if we go back a few more paragraphs, we see that whole Muslim show incident. Or, hey, let's look at, I don't know, contraceptives? Or ground-zero Mosques? Or artist/rapper Common? Or President Obama not saying "God" in a speech? Or everything Santorum has said? Or Obama hugging a Harvard professor? Or Obama having a "bombastic" minister? Or the First Lady pushing for fitness? Or Obama saying we aren't a Christian nation? If I was more willing to watch FOX Noise, I could more easily go on for another few thousand words.<br /><br />Stop pretending like the right is filled with any degree of rationality. You're on the side of religious zealots who agree with blind patriotism and things that sound manly.Michael Hawkinshttp://forthesakeofscience.comnoreply@blogger.com