Bob Huggins could be in big trouble

[60's Guy]

Please provide some examples of people who have been cancelled.

Victims. couple off the top of my head in addition....
Macalester Founder
Hamline Professor
Stanford Student
Statues Removed
It's everywhere and rampant

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Please provide some examples of people who have been cancelled.

These types of posts are annoying. You clearly have an opinion on what would make something "cancelled" and what would not. Why go through this effeminate song and dance of making someone provide you examples that you already knew just to critique those examples? It doesn't come across as clever, it comes off bitchy.

Just come out and make your point.

 

[Gophers1992]

These types of posts are annoying. You clearly have an opinion on what would make something "cancelled" and what would not. Why go through this effeminate song and dance of making someone provide you examples that you already knew just to critique those examples? It doesn't come across as clever, it comes off bitchy.

Just come out and make your point.

I have made my point all over this thread. Cancel culture is a made up concept for people who want to complain about being held accountable for their actions. It’s similar to lazy employees who claim they are “quiet quitting” or “acting their wage”.

Apparently my point is invalid because a newspaper believe it exists, and they certainly aren’t motivated to divide people with this type of BS. Mpls Gopher disagrees because of said newspaper telling him to.

 

[Gophers1992]

Victims. couple off the top of my head in addition....
Macalester Founder
Hamline Professor
Stanford Student
Statues Removed
It's everywhere and rampant

The very first name on your first link is Mike Lindell. He has not been “cancelled”, there are just fewer people who want to work with him since he has outed himself as a lunatic.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

I have made my point all over this thread. Cancel culture is a made up concept for people who want to complain about being held accountable for their actions. It’s similar to lazy employees who claim they are “quiet quitting” or “acting their wage”.

Apparently my point is invalid because a newspaper believe it exists, and they certainly aren’t motivated to divide people with this type of BS. Mpls Gopher disagrees because of said newspaper telling him to.

That's fine, make that point, don't pretend to not know what examples people are talking about. When you ask for examples of things you already know, it's like the HS girl who says "nothing" with a pouty face when you ask "what's wrong?".

You believe people losing their jobs or being moved off of various platforms for their beliefs is not being "cancelled" and other people do. That's the argument. Not this pretend charade where you ask for examples - you know the f'n examples, you just disagree with them.

It's a semantic argument about what a term means - cancelled vs. being held accountable for their actions (which usually neatly fit into the same opinions you share). Please also don't get hung up on the terms like "cancelled", that's also extremely effeminate. You know exactly what people mean by it and you're okay with that kind of editorializing. I'm not even arguing against your opinion, but I'm not going to sit here and say "list one controversial thing Alex Jones ever said" and then say "well, define "controversial" or "he didn't say that, a guest on his show said that". That's pussyfooting around the issue.

We all know the examples.
We all know the fall out on these things.
The question is if we agree with what happened and if we do, where is the line? If we don't, where would we potentially draw a line?

That's the argument. Let's not pretend like we are just hearing about these things for the first time.

 

[Gopher Teeth]

Capitalism is what we have.

Private capital owns the media and demands profit, which in turn demands ratings/clicks/views.

There is no other way, short of a completely publicly financed news service that simply reports facts and interviews.

If you are proposing government funded news then I would say you are crazy; there is plenty of historical and current proof that that model is a disaster. I don't disagree that the current media is terrible, but at least there are different views presented, that would not be the case in a government funded (thus controlled) model.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Capitalism is what we have.

Private capital owns the media and demands profit, which in turn demands ratings/clicks/views.

There is no other way, short of a completely publicly financed news service that simply reports facts and interviews.

No, we have crony capitalism. We have a system where powerful entities are able to buy off politicians through lobbying.

Enforcement would be incredibly easy, treat the social media platforms like you do every other entity that editorializes. That would change the system dramatically but no one (on either side) has any interest because of the amount of money being dumped into DC.

It's why you will never see a change across most of the huge issues. It's why we stat in wars 20 years too long. That's not capitalism. It's the mirage of capitalism where corporations are controlling the government and pretending it's just the invisible hand of the market.

You wanna shut up all of these phony populist types from Bernie and AOC to the vast majority of "small government" conservatives, bring up campaign finance reform with actual teeth.

 

[Gophers_4life]

If you are proposing government funded news then I would say you are crazy; there is plenty of historical and current proof that that model is a disaster. I don't disagree that the current media is terrible, but at least there are different views presented, that would not be the case in a government funded (thus controlled) model.

I'm not proposing that such a service would be the only media allowed. Just another option. Like C-SPAN or something along those lines. Not saying it's likely to happen, either. Doubt it

 

[MonikerSchmoniker45]

Some really nice discussion here.

Back to Bob Huggins, he could have said Catholics are the most awesome people ever created, and I still wouldn't piss on him if he were on fire. He's just a douchebag IMHO, diarrhea of the mouth or not. I didn't like him going all the way back to Cincinnati days. I find his face punchable.

Gotta like the millions he's raised for cancer research, no?

 

[Spaulding!No!]

Donald Turmp