The Goat Pen

A

innocentbystander wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2024 6:06 pm Everyone in the theater stood, clapped, and cried, at the end of Reagan this afternoon.

What happened, everybody stood and clapped and then the lights came on and they saw you were there?

DooKSucks wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2024 9:49 pm

innocentbystander wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2024 6:06 pm Everyone in the theater stood, clapped, and cried, at the end of Reagan this afternoon.

You and three other retards related to you doesn’t count

Theater was sold out

Which is what you did a long time ago...

(shrugs)

You know hedge, I welcome debate. I welcome debate, arguments, and questions. I welcome them because I am smart enough to realize that I don't know everything. Problem is, far too many people in our society think like you. They fear debate. They fear conversation and questions from people who disagree with them because they don't want to try and explain why they think the way they do. They don't want to defend their thoughts or beliefs. Instead, they want everyone ELSE to take those same thoughts and beliefs on faith without questioning. And if someone can rationally think differently, someone who is charismatic enough to shift public opinion, if that someone gets a soap box or a platform for their voice, the fearful opposition works very diligently NOT to argue with them but to cancel them. Remove them. Delete them. Fire them. Take away their platform instead of trying to explain to them why they are wrong.

I thought the Reagan movie was excellent. It was. I strongly recommend you watching it. At some point, I'm going to watch that Epstein Island movie Blink Twice even though I don't expect it to even come close to what really happened on the island. But I am going to give it a try and hope it isn't a cheeseball the way so many movies are. YMMV.

The big problem with Reagan was he was basically a libertarian. Which is the worst and dumbest political worldview possible because you want less government, but don't bother to think about who will step into that power vacuum, or in this case, who will put their boots on our throats even harder.

every man goes to law school with the hopes that one day he gets to hear an assault with a chicken case.

bonus points for adding multiple syllables to the word "hard"

Tree wrote: ↑Mon Sep 02, 2024 7:53 pm The big problem with Reagan was he was basically a libertarian. Which is the worst and dumbest political worldview possible because you want less government, but don't bother to think about who will step into that power vacuum, or in this case, who will put their boots on our throats even harder.

there are a lot of things to like about Libertarianism, but I broke away because they live with too many absolutes with their ideology.

but the problem with any political party today is they have absolutes that draw division. Reagan's idea of smaller government was less regulation, but that is only a small part of libertarianism - Reagan was hardcore anti-communist to the extent he'd spend recklessly on military, he was anti-drug and laid the ground work for some very harsh mandatory sentencing laws, and he ushered in the era of evangelical republicans.

Perhaps Reagans biggest mistake as president was vetoing the fairness doctrine in reporting, making way for Fox News and MSNBC while also ruining CNN which used to just report the news in a repeating cycle until a plane crashed or someone important died. Afterwards the FCC decided it was a free speech issue, knowing they'd never have the support of Reagan who was one of the most popular presidents ever. Every American trusted Bernard Shaw to deliver accurate news in 1981. Once competition entered into it, it stopped being about delivering news and became about delivering opinion.

If the fairness doctrine had been in place today, it could have been extended to the Internet for social media sites that linked to news—it very likely would have prevented the rampant divisiveness and extremism that is a cancer to this country today.

eCat wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2024 6:44 am

Tree wrote: ↑Mon Sep 02, 2024 7:53 pm The big problem with Reagan was he was basically a libertarian. Which is the worst and dumbest political worldview possible because you want less government, but don't bother to think about who will step into that power vacuum, or in this case, who will put their boots on our throats even harder.

there are a lot of things to like about Libertarianism, but I broke away because they live with too many absolutes with their ideology.

Ann Coulter did a wonderful job showing why libertarianism is ridiculous.

Ann Coulter wrote:You guys aren't stoners. You are NERDS!

As Libertarians, we say the government shouldn't be involved in marriage AT ALL. (everyone cheers)

Ann Coulter wrote:If the government isn't involved in marriage, who issues alimony decrees? Who decides the division of assets? How about inheritance taxes?[ So can a man marry a 10 year old girl since government is no longer involved?

Totally quiet. Libertarians never thought about marriage law that way. That is because they don't think. They just want to be cool.

Libertarianism is bullshit. All they are, are a bunch of nerds who can't think and are too pussy to call out liberals as fools.

eCat wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2024 6:44 ambut the problem with any political party today is they have absolutes that draw division. Reagan's idea of smaller government was less regulation, but that is only a small part of libertarianism - Reagan was hardcore anti-communist to the extent he'd spend recklessly on military, he was anti-drug and laid the ground work for some very harsh mandatory sentencing laws, and he ushered in the era of evangelical republicans.

Perhaps Reagans biggest mistake as president was vetoing the fairness doctrine in reporting, making way for Fox News and MSNBC while also ruining CNN which used to just report the news in a repeating cycle until a plane crashed or someone important died. Afterwards the FCC decided it was a free speech issue, knowing they'd never have the support of Reagan who was one of the most popular presidents ever. Every American trusted Bernard Shaw to deliver accurate news in 1981. Once competition entered into it, it stopped being about delivering news and became about delivering opinion.

If the fairness doctrine had been in place today, it could have been extended to the Internet for social media sites that linked to news—it very likely would have prevented the rampant divisiveness and extremism that is a cancer to this country today.

Reagan bankrupted both the Soviet Union AND the USA. He borrowed and spent too much. Now we are fucked.

Fairness Doctrine had to go. There was nothing fair about it. Why should an AM radio station be compelled to report on the news in any way that the government demands? As Rush Limbaugh said, with the Fairness Doctrine all AM radio had was talk shows about how to bake cakes and other pointless bullshit that no one wanted to listen to. Fairness Doctrine and Imus in the Morning NEVER goes national and Don Imus never says anything even remotely interesting. Fairness Doctrine and there is no Howard Stern show. Its that simple.

using Rush Limbaugh as the reference for losing the fairness doctrine is problematic to begin with

Regulation is good b/c otherwise we have the oligarchs making whatever business rules they want, which is a bleak future, especially in the realm of commercial banking. I like anarchism because it's a more intelligent version of libertarianism. Instead of just blindly nerfing government, you're looking at all power structures and eradicating the ones that aren't needed. Ofc this would tend to hurt the billionaires and megacorporations, so nobody talks about it. But it would also check things like the CIA and Pentagon that are causing all sorts of problems for US citizens as well as other countries all over the world.

Yeah, you get right on that, tree. Maybe your skateboarder punk friends will help you eradicate that CIA and the Pentagon while you're at it...

Wouldn't be possible. Too many feckless liberals who just vote blue every 4 years no matter what.

DirecTV can suck a dick, and so can Disney.

people all over twitter saying they are canceling

I got a letter announcing price increases for all of their packages across the board on the same day they cut off all the ESPN and Disney channels.

Get Hulu

Youtube TV

YouTube TV will likely be the next option.

Can’t make the move until I get fiber installed, which is scheduled for the 19th…

I’ve had DirecTV since they were called USSB…over 25 years ago…