Miscellaneous Comment Thread Part 1

Since I have had the awful tendency to dominate discussions, I am opening this thread as a place to put my responses to conversations in other threads which might have gone on too long.  Case in point – a thread in Sohum Parlance.  Others are welcome to bring the conversation here too, of course.

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Miscellaneous Comment Thread Part 1

  1. To HOJ from SP regarding free speech and the word ‘evil’. Also HOJ – thanks for the McD’s shout out. Right?

    Comment Link: http://kunsoo1024.wordpress.com/2013/08/14/all-things-reconsidered-tomorrow-night-4/#comment-76785

    That is exactly it HOJ. There is a very important distinction there. I revere free speech. Because I do, I understand how important speech is. I respect the language immensely and want to use it as precisely as possible. Everyone has the right to say what they wish. If MCSD = evil, what word do we use for the act of bringing a bomb to a public space, as one example. How do we describe the act or the willingness to use chemical-based weapons of mass murder on one’s own people (not pretending to know who did this – just have seen the evidence that someone did).

    Words have meaning. ‘Evil’ is an important word with a resonant meaning to many people (you get this because you mentioned ‘sin’). I think you said you are not religious, nor am I. ‘Evil’ has a very specific meaning to religious people of all cloths. I understand that meaning only superficially. However, since our public discourse involves people of all religious persuasions, ‘evil’ should be use very precisely so it’s meaning is not diminished, not to mention other humans such as those on the MCSD are not misunderstood to be demonic. If they happen to be, I’m not sure as I’m not religious, but I think it is not on us to judge.

    Say what you want, you have that right.

    So do I. That is one of the reasons I’m Proud … you know.

    That’s all I’m saying. Peace.

  2. I’m too engaged today – here is another from an off topic thread in this week’s Matthew in the Middle over at Lost Coast Outpost. I started objecting to a poster’s name because it contained the word” *****man” where the stars can be replaced by a word for a the world’s most populous country. Turn’s out if was a reference to a pretty funny, if not completely politically correct, scene from The Big Lebowski. Here is my response…

    The law I mention refers to the Chinese Exclusion Act that Wikipedia’s Eureka pages says was not repealed until 1959.

    “I happen to agree with Walter, now that I have the frame of reference that we do have to draw a line in the sand.

    The nomenclature *****man has chosen is offensive to not only the children who have just walked into the movie, but adults who haven’t seen the movie at all.

    Seriously, the fact that we had that law on the books (a as late as 1959) is one of the dark aspects of our history that I think we should discuss instead of sweep under rugs. (pun not intended, but I’ll keep it)

    I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but our beloved county is not extremely progressive on matters of race, religion, ethnicity, etc. Hank et. al. know this because I was personally aware of at least two comments that did get removed very recently. I can only guess how many they have to remove on a regular basis, and how many more would be posted if people thought they could get away with it.

    It may be that this guy loves this movie and choose a risque name. Or it may be that this guy has borderline views on race and/or ethnicity and found one way past the censors. I don’t know.

    Here’s my point. The name “*****man” is exactly the issue. People don’t have the frame of reference just like Walter said. It shouldn’t be expected they do.

    On drawing lines in sand and proper nomenclature I totally agree with Walter.”

    Here is the clip if you haven’t seen it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wu598ENenk

  3. Here’s one I posted on Fred’s blog today. He’s had a few posts on Syria. I regret the “bomb the **** out of that place” comment. Maybe I should have used Assad’s forces instead.

    Fred, I’m glad you are paying attention to Syria. I tend to find myself agreeing with McCain, and the Tories in the UK on this one – not my party. I think we should be using force. I also think it should first be approved by Congress per the Constitution. I also think the force should be air only and limited. I also think we should carefully pay attention to and encourage the democratic process after regime change if/when it happens. But it should happen, and not just because of the chemicals. Because 90K are dead and untold millions are now refugees. Assad is a monster. Period. He has to go. Let’s get the evidence, get Congress and the UN behind us and bomb the **** out of that place. Bias note. My father comes from Turkey which is a Sunni Muslim country. Assad is a Alawhite which is aligned with the Shiites. Which is why he gets support from Hezbollah and Iran. Having told you my bias, I really don’t think that informs my opinion other than to be very concerned about the people as people. Not pawns, not statistics. Thanks again for bringing this issue to the Northcoast blogosphere.

    Topic: Syria

  4. Another long and righteous comment today on Sohum. I do not use ‘righteous’ complementarily here. Nor long.

    http://kunsoo1024.wordpress.com/2013/08/14/all-things-reconsidered-tomorrow-night-4/#comment-76834

    It’s not about the case JW, it is about ALEC’s insane Stand Your Ground law and related craziness in Florida law. The case is a symptom of that law. Contrary to media reports it did effect the case in the instructions given to the jury. I have no love for the verdict of the OJ case either. That is a case of money trumping justice IMHO. (Too young to have lived through the other’s and I am not a crime guy so I haven’t studied up on them.)

    But JW I do stand with you against HOJ’s disregard for our men and women sacrificing in uniform. But that is just a natural symptom if you fundamentally don’t believe in the @system@ (IMHO). That’s where the crazy libertarians run into trouble. It’s why they need organizations like Oathkeepers which is another name for breaking your chain of command. As a soldier you do have a right and a responsibility under the UCMJ to break the chain if the order is unlawful, but I think an organized club is borderline treasonous. Not that I really concern myself with this. It isn’t my expertise or concern to be honest, but I just think that it is a very fine and dangerous line they are walking.

    Mitch – I agree with you. I’m guilty too, of a great deal of hypocrisy, etc. However, one pattern I’m noticing is this streak of independence or libertarianism (see above) or whatever. It is rampant in HumCo – partially due to weed and people wanting to be free of religious-right fueled drug laws, and now from people like me now worried about code enforcement and regulation based on environmental and planning concerns. So there is that. There is also that we are beyond the green curtain. That affects us culturally and the idea of freedom and independence has a resonant currency here. (and btw I am decidedly NOT against freedom and independence – just against the concepts as empty, meaningless slogans that are used to motivate and persuade people for otherwise hidden agendas benefiting the few)

    Finally, this is my tin-foilly opinion, I believe there has been a market-driven anti-government kick in this country that has it’s roots in anti-FDR hatred. It has flourished and now taints almost all political discussion (local and national). It heart has moved from the Rush Limbaugh right to the crazy-right Ayn Rand, Ron Paul, Alex Jones Libertarianism. It is so far right that it begins to circle around and I agree with a bunch of it as it overlaps with Democracy Now stuff. Foreign policy, anti-authoritarianism, anti-surveillance, pro-whistle blower, etc. I think where I agree with Alex et. al. is a concern about power. Where we disagree is where that power actually lies.

    I so agree that individuals must reach their own conclusions. (and I realize that I may have been too focused on one or two individuals over the summer on this – so sorry if I was!) It is the patterns of those conclusions that bother me. I am addressing a pattern that I see that I don’t think is getting any attention. That’s why I’m here. I think that book is fascinating and after the GPU BS is over I’d like to do a book club on it. I just read the solutions chapter saw some promise and interesting ideas, but I’m afraid the message of the book fits neatly into my concern about this tendency we have to fracture ourselves instead of working with what we have. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel – just fix ours. I think EK’s post back in June on sectarianism goes to this.*

    I WOULD like to say that I totally disagree with his take on DailyKos though. I think the liberal pockets of the internet (Kos, Silver (liberal in the sense that he measures reality and shares it), Democracy Now) and the tiny liberal presence in broadcast media – MSNBC and Thom Hartmann ARE making a difference. I think they are adding reason to policy that gives me hope for the future. They are kinda my guides (along with Heraldo and YOU! and EK and Janelle and Jane and Cooke!, etc etc) to what I would like to do here.

    http://kunsoo1024.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/sectarianism-2/

    Also. My name is Jon. I am a blogaholic. I AM sorry! I am weaning myself away though I swear it.

  5. I would like to add to the above, that the “anti-government kick” forces me to promote government which is a very tricky argument to make.

    I’d also like to add that all-in-all I believe we are working with a pretty great wheel. It needs a great deal of work, but the more I read our history, the more I appreciate the wheel we have.

  6. Over staying my welcome on SP today. Here is a responce I’d like to post to HOJ

    Henchmen – soldiers are trained to follow orders. If we didn’t have soldiers, well that is another argument I would kinda like to have. But you’re beef on that is the right – not me. As long as we decide as a society to have a strong standing military – if you don’t like the soldiers are doing whether in training or target for their activity or whatever- your beef is with the Commander in Chief. Which circles me back to the system again. Rinse. Repeat.

  7. http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2013/aug/28/matthew-middle-what-happened-republicans/#comment-1021449849

    Here is another comment from a few days ago where I comment on a Mathew In the Middle column in the LoCO. Is it OK to say the following about one’s own comments? (A. Probably not!) It’s a personal favorite of mine that I think is important. It’s where I call out Matthew Owen using his own words. Which is pretty easy to do if he allows you, which he won’t anymore which is a shame.

    Unfortunately, it received zero attention which bums me out, but at least it’s out there. And now it’s here too for anyone who finds their way to this thread.

    OK, I lied. I’m back, but only because as I reread the article I had to respond to a couple of falsehoods and a couple of low blows.

    First, BP. A quick Google check gives many sites that way the name change occurred in 2000, not 2010. Swing and a miss.

    That Frank Luntz interview was not in early 2012, but 2011. Strike two.

    Also, Palin not smarter than a 5th grader? I hate to defend Palin, but that is a little off.

    Marcus Bachmann as gay? I’ve seen comedy shows imply this, and liberal’s would love to call him out on this because of the hypocrisy given his reparative therapy past, but that still is crossing a line. IMHO.

    Matthew, in your own words from your email to me, “I respect your zeal. If I can make a recommendation… direct your energy towards a political campaign.”

    Yes, exactly.

    Also, this – “Believe it or not, I’m trying to stay under the radar”. No Matthew, I don’t believe it, nor should you. Have you read your opinion pieces? And did you notice that they were on the internets, where people can read them?

    The truth is Matthew, as you point out, the Republican Party has gone off the rails. One’s chances to win with and (R) next to their name in California is an uphill battle. One that you would rather not attempt. So what to do? Join the Democrats. Why not? I’m still wondering though, if not to win, why? Why not stay in your former party and pull it back. If it isn’t to get the (D) and win, then, again, why? Can you answer that in your next opinion piece instead of making stuff up,calling out other’s as 5th graders or gay, or secret Muslims (even in some bizarre fantasy of yours)? It would be nice.

    OK, now I’m finally done. I swear it. Oh yeah, one more thing… because Matthew wrote this too … “If you can’t use your real name then your comments are worthless.” … Hi internets (again) my name is Jon Yalcinkaya. But Matthew already knew that. Now I’m done.

  8. Kym Kemp over at LoCO got my goat today (actually twice – only one I’ll reprint here) when she wrote this … “Tell that to someone with their face plastered on LoCO.”

    http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2013/sep/1/why-do-humboldt-growers-get-such-bad-press/#comment-1025776364

    Here is my reply.

    (apologies for the antagonism that follows. You hit a nerve x 2 today)

    Kym , on a completely different subject, the admission in that first sentence saddens me.

    I am not a criminal apologist, but the FOX COPSification of our local media – TS for as long as I can remember and those super popular LoCO mug shot threads are modern day public shamings*. It’s “if it bleeds it leads” at it’s worst and now I know you know it.

    I’m for criminals getting caught and doing their time. I don’t think we need to glorify ourselves by highlighting the idiocy and/or immorality and/or whatever else of others. I’m also for a quiet place in the media where we don’t have to be frightened everyday. I live in downtown Eureka and have been for 3 years. I hear the sirens, I know what you print is true. I interact with the homeless every day. Still so far I have lived a Mayberry life here. *knocks wood*

    I accept this is a part of LoCO’s business model. I don’t have to like it. I don’t really accept it is a part of the TS though. It bothers me to no end to see that repeated mug shot of whatever random (alleged usually at the point the mug shots are up) criminal above the fold day after day after day.

    TS (and LoCO somehow?) have a daily COPS section in addition to the Sports section or something, but don’t define our county by crime by “plastering” the faces on the front page everyday to sell copy. Crime exists, and I’m sure well above the per-capita norm. But don’t let it define us. Report it quietly and rationally and let’s work on the non-COPS methods of fixing the obviously structural societal problems we have.

    I know your practice of plastering faces and starting each day with the BOOKED section on LoCO isn’t going to change. That type of reporting is too easy and too good for business at the same time. Doesn’t mean I have to like it or dialog it encourages in readers.

    (Also, given much of the LoCO readership, IMHO these mugshot threads serve as a rationalization to many growers, that, “hey – see – I’m better than that guy!”)

    *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_humiliation

  9. Poor Kym , here is another reply of mine to her today.

    Note: This comment was flagged. It may disappear on LoCO. We’ll see.

    http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2013/sep/1/why-do-humboldt-growers-get-such-bad-press/#comment-1025838224

    “Yah, of course, we get the majority of our funds from growers.”

    EPIC maybe? KMUD?

    What about commercial? LoCO?

    What about political candidates and political alliances?

    The problem is Kym, it is still not ok with the majority of society once you lose the environmentalists. I used to be pro legalization and would have been on here cheering you on until this summer when I learned about the direct influence the weed has had through KMUD on our General Plan Update.

    The Bohn/Fennell alliance is impossible to understand unless you understand who Bonnie Blackberry, Charley Custer, Tom Grover, Lee Ulansey and whoever else are. It’s amazing really.

    Then you get the silence or self-negotiating stance of EPIC’s Gary Graham Hughes. AHHHH! (Note: Kudos to Scott Greacen. He has been strong and relatively environmentally consistent this summer IMHO.)

    Here’s the thing. That Bohn/Fennell alliance is not well understood. If Bohn’s supporters knew what was going on, they would kinda freak out IMHO – at least those who aren’t directly profiting from the GPU GP re-write, lax enforcement, and reduced county regulation.

    The bad press and one sided reporting you are complaining about today is partially because it is important for advocates to keep quiet. (Again, IMHO)

    Keep quiet or else people will see that this weed train ride we are on is on a downhill slope and we as a society are losing control. Nobody knows where this is headed or what legalization is going to look like. Will it benefit our rivers? I’m starting to believe it probably won’t.

    Good for you for publicizing and promoting the weed trade, but your lonesome voice is probably at least partially due to the fact many growers are rightfully shy about the publicity.

    Bonnie Blackberry and Charley Custer included. Where are they during the public GPU meetings? Bonnie is there, but not connecting the weed trade to her positions like she does on her KMUD radio show. That would not go over well in the Courthouse.

  10. Really interesting thread today by Kym and she is active in the comments, so I am as well. I think her honesty and attempt at having a conversation are invaluable. I hope she doesn’t hate me.

    http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2013/sep/1/why-do-humboldt-growers-get-such-bad-press/#comment-1025887015

    Kym, I agree with you here. I want them to talk (the growers and dependent businesses), but it isn’t ridicule that concerns them. It is a business decision. Talking may mean less influence.

    Right now the road to legalization/decriminalization is based on very tenuous coalitions. At least locally. You and I are both pro open-honest conversation. I know I must sound like I am partially insane and/or have an axe to grind, but I swear to you there is a political movement that is extremely powerful and extremely surreptitious. It has to be hidden, because of the Federal prohibition for one, but also because the civil liberties crowd has an unholy alliance with the conservative wing of the right.

    I think this fault line was revealed during Gary Graham Hughes’ trip to the Fortuna Chamber of Commerce. I would so love an audio of that meeting.

    I could write another 3 paragraphs connecting the dots again, but I have in other replies to you. I would love to know if you think like I’m sure many do that I am crazy/bitter or if you understand the point I am trying to make.

    I’m not familiar with Matt Cohen. I’ll look him up. We all agree on the damaging growers. I am interested in the discussion about the sustainable grows. How much are they making, how sustainable are they, how much in taxes are they paying, etc. etc. That is the conversation I want to have. Right now all I have is anecdotal information that your friends are being sustainable.

    Let’s get a good, fair, robust reporting/taxation/enforcement/planning/envi. research regiment going so we have stats to argue about. This is our county’s growth industry. I am as concerned if not more about this growth industry as I would be with any other. I don’t want to kill it, I want to know what is going on so we can plan our future together. We ARE all connected.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s