The (Uncensorable) Three Whisky Happy Hour: Still Loitering at the Courthouse

On A5. Utterly useless discussion.
I and most likely even John, would come to the table in good faith, the leftists will not. An example is how both sides, especially the left, uses "rules" in committee hearings. Oh this person cant say this, this has to be struck, or censured or whatever. Before the convention even starts, there will be terms and it will be slanted to protect progressivism, protect the federal reserve, and protect the status quo.
Here is that procedural nonsense in action against MGT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLt21qv4NqI
Never mind the substances of MGT's grandstanding, this is what the A5 convention will most likely look like. An utter clown show.

And now for my segment - Jabs at John:
John's squeamishness about a revolution is most likely rooted in the fear of "legal issues" relating to potential war crimes committed under the Bush administration. That is, if the side that values natural rights were to win. Best to hedge your bet with the current State that, while hostile, is happy to overlook those "legal issues".
My unwanted advice is for him to repent and go through a @Lucretia struggle session where the outcome is to just parrot whatever she says :)

Lucretia is right about Ketanji. I read her dissent. Holy cow! My students could have written better, more accurate, arguments. So could the first 400 names in the Boston phone book.

I think John has a point about the founders wanting to test their intellectual ideas being a, if not the, motivating factor behind the revolution. Yes, they had legit grievances, but compared to many parts of the world, then and now, it was not that bad.

I hope Steve is wrong, but fear he is right, about slave ships in the harbor in '26. Unless John is right about Harvard case being the highpoint (lowpoint?) of race-obsessed wokeism. I fear it is with us for a long time, though, because the young people are so indoctrinated, and they will be the teachers, politicians, judges of tomorrow. Who, exactly, will influence enough people to turn it around?

Lastly, (in my best Lucretia scolding voice), "Where's the ID on the exit music, Steve?!"

WilliamWarford (View Comment):

I think John has a point about the founders wanting to test their intellectual ideas being a, if not the, motivating factor behind the revolution. Yes, they had legit grievances, but compared to many parts of the world, then and now, it was not that bad.

John says things are worse now than back then. If things are worse now, then things were better then when we kicked the Brithish out. Continuing the logic, it would seem then that John knows what is bad/wrong and what is good/right. BUT he also got very uncomfortable when it seemed like another revolution might be necessary.
1) In what circumstances would John advocate for a revolution? What is the line?
2) Seems like John would be more of a William Franklin than Ben.

WilliamWarford (View Comment):

Lucretia is right about Ketanji. I read her dissent. Holy cow! My students could have written better, more accurate, arguments. So could the first 400 names in the Boston phone book.

I think John has a point about the founders wanting to test their intellectual ideas being a, if not the, motivating factor behind the revolution. Yes, they had legit grievances, but compared to many parts of the world, then and now, it was not that bad.

I hope Steve is wrong, but fear he is right, about slave ships in the harbor in ’26. Unless John is right about Harvard case being the highpoint (lowpoint?) of race-obsessed wokeism. I fear it is with us for a long time, though, because the young people are so indoctrinated, and they will be the teachers, politicians, judges of tomorrow. Who, exactly, will influence enough people to turn it around?

Lastly, (in my best Lucretia scolding voice), “Where’s the ID on the exit music, Steve?!”

Sorry! The exit tune, "Censorship" (pretty topical, no?), is by some British crooner who goes by Eleanor Rigby, back in 1994.

Noell Colin the gadfly (View Comment):

On A5. Utterly useless discussion. I and most likely even John, would come to the table in good faith, the leftists will not. An example is how both sides, especially the left, uses “rules” in committee hearings. Oh this person cant say this, this has to be struck, or censured or whatever. Before the convention even starts, there will be terms and it will be slanted to protect progressivism, protect the federal reserve, and protect the status quo. Here is that procedural nonsense in action against MGT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLt21qv4NqI Never mind the substances of MGT’s grandstanding, this is what the A5 convention will most likely look like. An utter clown show.

And now for my segment – Jabs at John: John’s squeamishness about a revolution is most likely rooted in the fear of “legal issues” relating to potential war crimes committed under the Bush administration. That is, if the side that values natural rights were to win. Best to hedge your bet with the current State that, while hostile, is happy to overlook those “legal issues”. My unwanted advice is for him to repent and go through a @ lucretia struggle session where the outcome is to just parrot whatever she says :)

What few listeners seem to realize—with good reason; they've never seen John in the classroom with mostly liberal law students—is that provocations about "wasn't the American Revolution a mistake?" are meant to stimulate discussion and make the defenders extend themselves. I can assure you he doesn't for a moment actually think that.