Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

On the one hand, I think it is true that if it is really the best paper, it should be given the best grade/award.  On the other, a paper with a premise or thesis like that would have to be really outstanding, especially because it seems to go against the weight of scholarship.  It can't be "it has interesting, provocative ideas."

The other circumstances, a FedSoc Trump appointee perfesser and a repressive state like Florida, just take it to 11.

The professor should defend the grading rubric, absolutely.

Amusingly, Damsky's assertion or conclusion is the premise of CRT.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 4
Posted
2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

What if, and I’m just spitballing here, the framers, guys that lived almost 300 years ago ya know….got some things wrong. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 4
Posted
17 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I work in the travel industry. International travel completely cratered. 

Big drop in tourists across the country already. The rest of this year is projected to be significantly down as well. Going to start seeing a bunch of restaurant closures as well as really cheap hotel deals even during what should be normal peak seasons. The rest of the world that can vote with their wallet as a way to give the middle finger to TFG is doing just that.

Posted
On 6/19/2025 at 7:50 AM, troph said:

I threw up in my mouth a little bit. 
 

 

 

On 6/19/2025 at 10:14 AM, Vegas64 said:

Christian extremists is a new one.

Christian extremists is a ‘knew one.’

FIFY

Authoritarians always coop religion and put themselves at the center. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

On the one hand, I think it is true that if it is really the best paper, it should be given the best grade/award.  On the other, a paper with a premise or thesis like that would have to be really outstanding, especially because it seems to go against the weight of scholarship.  It can't be "it has interesting, provocative ideas."

The other circumstances, a FedSoc Trump appointee perfesser and a repressive state like Florida, just take it to 11.

The professor should defend the grading rubric, absolutely.

Amusingly, Damsky's assertion or conclusion is the premise of CRT.

So you’re saying he’s not wrong he’s just and asshole?

  • Haha 1
Posted

If (when) the defecation really hits the ventilation, these Lt Cols will pay floor sweepers from their corporate HQs to serve in their places a la 1861.

Motherfuckers conjured up by Motherfuckers. Next the Orange One will appear on the White House balcony in a full Plaza Doorman uniform getup, as the Commander-In-Chief.  I’m figna vommick!

Posted
17 hours ago, Hank_Hill said:

Context?


It was in response to someone in LA posting the hotel locations on social media where these bounty hunters are staying. The radical right wingers are saying posting their hotel locations is against federal law.

Posted
38 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

So you’re saying he’s not wrong he’s just and asshole?

I think it is theoretically possible to have a top paper that contains disgusting ideas. And that it perhaps should be awarded for its research or writing quality. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Surly Bevo said:

What if, and I’m just spitballing here, the framers, guys that lived almost 300 years ago ya know….got some things wrong. 

Also, the idea that the "Framers", which I guess means the 55 delegates to the constitutional convention who were in a little bit of a hurry to get this shit over with and get out of the hot Philadelphia summer being cooped up in Independence Hall with the windows closed to keep the debates from getting out, not to mention the other influential people that were not there such as Thomas Jefferson, all had one monolithic viewpoint that happens to fit what you want to say has always seemed to me to be a little bit of a stretch

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
5 minutes ago, Grande Mart said:

Also, the idea that the "Framers", which I guess means the 55 delegates to the constitutional convention who were in a little bit of a hurry to get this shit over with and get out of the hot Philadelphia summer being cooped up in Independence Hall with the windows closed to keep the debates from getting out, not to mention the other influential people that were not there such as Thomas Jefferson, all had one monolithic viewpoint that happens to fit what you want to say has always seemed to me to be a little bit of a stretch

Man, imagine what you would get if you locked 55 Surly posters in a hot room all summer long.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 4
Posted
35 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I think it is theoretically possible to have a top paper that contains disgusting ideas. And that it perhaps should be awarded for its research or writing quality. 

I categorically disagree if you are talking about a paper written in an academic setting whose basic premise and or conclusions are morally reprehensible 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
11 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I categorically disagree if you are talking about a paper written in an academic setting whose basic premise and or conclusions are morally reprehensible 

What if they are 100% accurate? 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
41 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

What if they are 100% accurate? 

Well, since morality cannot be measured objectively, they could not be considered 100% “accurate“

Posted
8 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Well, since morality cannot be measured objectively, they could not be considered 100% “accurate“

I'm loathe to get into this, but one characteristic of western academic environments (see for instance the concept of tenure) is the freedom to hold dissenting and unpopular opinions.

Personally, I think it should be pretty easy to shoot all kinds of holes in such a paper, but I certainly haven't read it.  It it doesn't stand up to logical scrutiny, then the reprehensible nature of the conclusions is secondary.

Posted (edited)

Haven't read the paper, but I agree with the overall intent (as expressed in titles, etc). Hell, I'd be hard pressed to agree with a paper that says the original intent was NOT for white men only.

Edited by Slacks
Clarification
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Slacks said:

Haven't read the paper, but I agree with the overall intent (as expressed in titles, etc). Hell, I'd be hard pressed to agree with a paper that says the original intent was NOT for white men only.

 

3 minutes ago, Slacks said:

Haven't read the paper, but I agree with the overall intent (as expressed in titles, etc). Hell, I'd be hard pressed to agree with a paper that says the original intent was NOT for white men only.

Of course, I haven’t read the paper either. From what I read, it doesn’t sound like he is drawing the conclusion that original intent was for white men only. That’s pretty much a given. My understanding is that he was using that as the premise to argue that our current and future policies should necessarily be structured to follow that original intent. In my opinion that is morally reprehensible, and regardless of the internal consistency of the paper would not be worthy of any type of award, although they might even earn an A for it. Of course, all the other papers could’ve been absolute dog shit.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

 

Of course, I haven’t read the paper either. From what I read, it doesn’t sound like he is drawing the conclusion that original intent was for white men only. That’s pretty much a given. My understanding is that he was using that as the premise to argue that our current and future policies should necessarily be structured to follow that original intent. In my opinion that is morally reprehensible, and regardless of the internal consistency of the paper would not be worthy of any type of award, although they might even earn an A for it. Of course, all the other papers could’ve been absolute dog shit.

I'll play devil's advocate...

Original Intent gets thrown around a lot by so-called strict constitutionalists. For those who claim this angle, one can argue that all policies should follow original intent.

Of course the counter to that is that original intent cannot apply, as the Constitution has been amended, thus amending intent.

But I'm not a ConLaw scholar, so what do I know?

Posted
On 6/20/2025 at 10:18 AM, immamac said:

There are significantly more stupid people than you think. 

Even if they aren't all stupid, there's a lot more uninformed people out there.  Guy in the office next to mine is really sharp, doesn't have strong political beliefs either way - I dare say politically agnostic.  When I mentioned some of the vile shit Hot Wheels and crew are doing in this state he had no idea about any of it.  I told him you need to become a more informed voter, my dude.

Posted

What are people even arguing about? 

Quote

In his capstone paper for the class, Mr. Damsky argued that the framers had intended for the phrase “We the People,” in the Constitution’s preamble, to refer exclusively to white people. From there, he argued for the removal of voting rights protections for nonwhites, and for the issuance of shoot-to-kill orders against “criminal infiltrators at the border.”

Turning over the country to “a nonwhite majority,” Mr. Damsky wrote, would constitute a “terrible crime.” White people, he warned, “cannot be expected to meekly swallow this demographic assault on their sovereignty.”

 

  • Rage+1 4
Posted
17 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

I honestly expect the House to create some kind of prize named "Nobel" and award it to him.  

 

 

maga billionaires will form a committee and hand out 'patriotic' awards 

the first will goto trump and look like a MoH 

Posted
1 hour ago, Pancho said:

Anyone else notice the whole “Q” shit just stopped?

That cult just abandoned that shit 

 

too busy eating trump burgers 

Posted
5 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

Big drop in tourists across the country already. The rest of this year is projected to be significantly down as well. Going to start seeing a bunch of restaurant closures as well as really cheap hotel deals even during what should be normal peak seasons. The rest of the world that can vote with their wallet as a way to give the middle finger to TFG is doing just that.

A relative of mine in the restaurant industry (assistant manager with a Brennans group) just got laid off due to people starting to tighten their belts and not visit fine dining.  Plus, summer always is usual doldrums time.   His owner just decided he could not carry them until things got better. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Grande Mart said:

Man, imagine what you would get if you locked 55 Surly posters in a hot room all summer long.

Interesting responses, but I’m all in on athlete’s foot with a sprinkle of parvo.

  • Haha 1


×
×
  • Create New...