Quite frankly I think tucker Carlson did a great job giving me the interview I wanted to have. Fair and balanced, you decide. The real issue is whether we are going to allow Trump to limit our freedoms.

Here’s the back story. I have had the domain flagburning.org for 20 years and every time they try to restrict burning the flag they find my web site and I get interviewed. So I’ve done this before.


  1. bobbo, if you don't KNOW AGW is going to kill your grand kiddies, you've got more basic science to learn says:

    It was not fair and balanced…Tucker did not accept your position of not advocating flag burning except for very rare circumstances to protest actions of the Gubment. Then…right at the end, he very pointedly tried to make you a protester and part of the problem.

    I think he knows, but plays the far right crowd to not appreciate the difference between veterans dying for the freedoms the flag represents rather than the flag itself.

    In every real sense…flag worship is an effort in mind control to stop dissent or criticism of the gubment: “just wave a flag at them.”

    otoh…Tucker did less a bad job than most at Faux would have done.

    Can you report back if your website gets a bump in traffic?….I hope so.

    • Hmeyers says:

      Flag burning as a “serious issue” is a distraction.
      But who knows, maybe it is a harmless distraction.
      It might be a better distraction than half the trash the news runs as “serious issues” these days — like which bathroom to use, etc.

    • Tim says:

      So I agree with the concept that flag burning is protected free speech. Burning an effigy of Trump in effigy should also be protected speech, and this is where the Liberals will fail.

      This cuts both ways. Burning an effigy of Mohammad, or Obama or the Mexican flag has to be protected speech as well. Anything else is just hypocritical.

      Under that concept, there is no such thing as hate speech.

      • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

        Can’t you discuss any issue without lurching into idiotic partisanship?

        buring in effigy IS protected speech. So tell us: how can liberal “fail.”

        You are nonsense.

        • Tim says:

          For the love of Allah….find an online dictionary and use it, spellcheck as well.

          A person cannot be nonsense, only his idea or writings can.

          “buring in effigy ” is nonsense.

          “burning an effigy” is not nonsense.

          No need to buy a dictionary, just use an online dictionary.

          Words do matter…..and you’re welcome.

          • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

            Well done. I admire the effort. I could go line by line, but for those who have a dictionary:

            in effigy: concerns a general action regarding a specific person

            an effigy: concerns a specific image of a person.

            Close perhaps…but two different ideas.

            Reject Allah…. use Science.

      • ± says:

        Correct. There is no such thing as hate speech just as there is no such thing as a hate crime. There are things said that some people don’t like and there are actions taken which are crimes. “Hate speech” and “hate crime” are concepts invented by liberals to facilitate controlling peoples lives.

        • spsffan says:


        • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

          Hate speech is a crime…spelled out by statute.

          The “core” of free speech is ideas. A call to violence is “action” and not protected under free speech constitutional protections.

          You don’t want to be one of those guys raking his tin cup against the jail cell bars saying “You can’t do this to me!”… do you??

          Side issue? Crime = crime.

          Hate = Hate

          Combine the two, and you got Hate Crimes. A simple arithmetic.

          Second purchase: a calculator.

          • ± says:

            The only thing perfectly obvious about your response (and many of your posts) is that some how, and in some way, in your mind you think you are responding in some relevant way, when in fact only the inner bobbo could possibly have the slightest clue of what you are going on about.

            The above is the kindest possible interpretation. The more likely possibility is that you are just a troll since this interpretation is more consistent with most of your posts.

            [no idiotic and/or meaningless prose here]

          • BTBF says:

            Tucker whines how Government is stealing freedom yet supports Government limiting a basic freedom? Dumb Tucker.

          • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

            “hate crime” : a crime motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence.

            How to tell a zealot, or someone who stopped learning some time back: one who denies words defined in law and any dictionary of common usage.

            “I reject your reality…. and substitute my own.” by Mythbusters.

          • jpfitz says:

            Hey bobbo, go pick some cotton u watermelon pit spitting lazy darkie: Is this hate speach? You know I have no hate for You. I’m confused, But is the insult a hate speech crime. The laws be a changing fast.

    • Despairing Groan says:

      Yes, it was fair and balanced.

      …but not as fair and balanced as you are. LOL 🙄

      You crack me up!

    • Likes2LOL says:

      I’m sorry, but I could never take Tucker Carlson seriously after he STOPPED wearing the bow tie in response to Jon Stewart’s criticism (starts around 6:35):
      Jon Stewart on Crossfire – YouTube

      Sen. Paul Simon always wore the bow tie, Larry King’s schtick is his suspenderes (even on RT), Flavor Flav’s got a big clock, but I can’t trust a man with no sartorial compass! 😉

  2. David Jung says:

    Is this what Fox is like? A cross look, and repeating the same argument regardless of what you said. The only thing that kept running thru my head is what, should we ban the Westboro Baptists, or the KKK, etc. Oh wait, this is the president that wants to ban Mexicans and Muslims. Marc you rocked it with sanity. Thanks.

  3. Duh Ta De Dah Dah Duh Doe Doe says:

    Could this interview be more OBVIOUS?!

    Tucker Carlson was looking for RATINGS!!! Translation: MONEY!!!! Tucker Carlson would argue about the color of the sky if it got him and his network better RATINGS!!! (And more money.)

    Admit it. Tucker Carlson is more of a CLOWN that Donald Trump is.

    Watch it again. This whole “interview” is just two deaf guys trying to have an argument about DIFFERENT THINGS!!!!!!!!

  4. Ah_Yea says:

    On a serious note with a serious question.

    How did you get on Fox News? It certainly must be more than having a website.

    • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

      It might be because Marc has had the website for 20 years?… and evidently that longevity has him on Faux Rolodex.

      I actually visited the site and its more fringe than Marc’s performance with Tucker. Of note…I didn’t see any link to a list of subjects, articles, prior postings that I think most such sites would have made over the years? Bandwidth???

      By fringe I mean things like right at the top: “Not My President” and in the middle: “And I think him and his Soviet born Communist raised wife have no business in the Whitehouse.”

      Flaky comments on a serious subject… but who you gonna find late in the afternoon to “represent” the flag burners?

      Free Speech. What you gonna do?

    • Marc Perkel says:

      I have flagburning.org – every time they try to ban flag burnung some media calls me.

  5. Mr Diesel - Trump Won the Election, Suck It Crybabies says:

    A few things:

    1. Congratulations Marc for getting interviewed
    2. I like to see scum sucking vermin burn the flag. Why? Because when the flag is desecrated or no longer a fitting symbol it must be retired and the most common way is by burning. So, when the scum sucking vermin burn it I’m okay because of the fact the the worthless pieces of shit touched it in the first place.
    3. My last point is that no where in the US Constitution does it say flag burning is protected speech. Why? Because it is not speech. Freedom of expression (given to us by a few. very few people) was added by SCOTUS. Another ruling that sucks but until it gets over turned (never) I’ll abide by it but don’t say it is protected by the constitution because it isn’t.

    The are lots of things that are not protected by the first amendment, just add flag burning to the list.

    • Hmeyers says:

      Sometimes you need to think outside the box.

      Fires put CO2 in the atmosphere.
      CO2 causes global warming.
      They start forest fires in California.
      Someone might accidentally set themselves on fire, increasing health care costs.

      Ban flag burning to save the environment!

      If someone burns the flag, contributing to global warming, the appropriate punishment is sequestering the carbon emitter into a facility for 30 days where their lack of access to energy wasting activities reduces their carbon footprint for a while to make up for their crime against the environment.

    • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

      So very droll, I assume you troll?

      “3. My last point is that no where in the US Constitution does it say flag burning is protected speech. Why? Because it is not speech.” /// You say you will abide by the Supremes…. but you would do yourself a favor by actually understanding the WISDOM of their holding in this instance.

      Not just speech… but you are raising “the flag” to a religious symbol and a national religion is also prevented by the First Amendment===>amendments passed to ASSURE our gubment does not trample on individual rights.

      Why are you so in favor of trampling on individual rights? The constitution does not say we can write what we wish to on a public web based forum. By your logic.

      Your logic, emotions, and druthers===>suck. Its only your alternate reasonable coping mechanism that sees some light.

      Ha, ha. …… I just cracked myself up.

      • Mr Diesel - Trump Won the Election, Suck It Crybabies says:

        Go yell “gun” at a presidential speech rally.
        Go yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater.

        Not every thing is protected and for good reason.

        I never said anything about elevating the flag up to a religious symbol.

        Wisdom from SCOTUS is when they read the constitution and actually rule according to what it says and not they feel it says. It says speech. It also doesn’t say a lot of things that your wide SCOTUS says it does.

        Can’t wait until a few more of them retire or kick off so we can get constitutional justices in there.

        • bobbo, the constitution standing alone is a doorstop. Right or Wrong..without the Supremes constantly singing we would have reverted to an Elected Dictator years ago says:

          How deep is your stupid hole?

          • ± says:

            bobbo, once again, being incapable of expressing what he is unhappy about resorts to name calling. 🙄

          • IM78 says:

            Again, pure BS coming from bobbo.

          • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

            Well, well, well.

            Again…. demonstrating an attention span shorter than a tweet.

            bobbo: criticized for either responding with 4 page machine generated responses … or having no response and resorting to name calling.

            of note: if you go just one post up in the same thread… you have my reasons in detail. My following characterization of Diesels dull witted response then could only be redundant, so I went with a dash of humor. No name calling at all.

            Use a dictionary.

  6. Hmeyers says:

    Marc missed an opportunity to become famous. He could have said he also supported flying the confederate flag as an act of free speech.

    /Marc gets kicked out California. Tucker Carlson’s show get cancelled. Fox issues an apology. John Dvorak says “I don’t even know that guy! He setup a private email server for me to keep my emails off the corporate email server.” Marc gets added to TV blacklists, gets put on “no fly list”.

    • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

      ““I don’t even know that guy!” /// Ha, ha…. quite clever.

  7. NewFormatSux says:

    Marc, did Tucker pronounce your last name correctly, PerKell?

  8. NewFormatSux says:

    Good job Marc. I’m pretty sure Tucker agrees with you but had his script in his mind from the outset. Was there any interviewing done prior to the show by staff?

    Really thought there’d be some fireworks when he brought up NSA, clearly not much homework done.

    However overall your appearance was a failure. You failed to slay the Hildebeest and instead just played capture the flag. I hope you at lest mentioned it to producers so they would have you on again.

  9. Al Schmidt says:

    Everyone misses the point. Trump knows as well as anyone that Flag burning is protected speech. He was Trolling. Not only to get the mainstream media’s panties in a wad, but to start some flag burning, which happened right on schedule this morning in front of Trump Tower. As Tucker said everyone knows that it is protected speech, but almost everyone thinks it is despicable. Which is what he said when he introduced you. You now are the face of a despicable act, which is perfectly legal, but still despicable. The mob burning the flag in front of the Trump Tower are also the face of a despicable act and more importantly the face of his opposition. People don’t think of them (and you) as standing up for our freedoms, they see them as preforming disgusting and degrading the symbol of our country and the men who fought for it. Trump’s opposition has been played. This guy did not become a Billionaire by being unaware of how to play the public. Hillary out spent him 10 to 1 and yet he still one.
    Expect more. Look at the forest, not the trees.

    • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

      Everyone but you huh? Very Trumpian.

      • Hmeyers says:

        Trump is an extremely intelligent communicator. It’s pretty scary.

        He is trolling. He knows its free speech.

        Has 3 effects:
        1) Some of his supporters say “Hell yeah! It’s about time”.
        2) More important — some of the zero self-control leftys get red-in-the-face and make fools of themselves. (Main objective, make detractors look like morons — makes you look better).
        3) Controls the news cycle. Nature abhors a vaccuum. That vaccum could be filled with anti-Trump stuff, so instead he fills void with nonsense.

        Now .. Obama trolled too.

        “You don’t like a particular policy or a particular president, then argue for your position,” Obama said. “Go out there and win an election.”

        I agreed with Obama when he said it. And I also agree that extreme lefties should instead of complaining, learn from what happened and listen to the people and focus on the issues better.

        Because their candidate this year did neither of those, and did neither of those very brazenly.

        I would expect Trump to continue saying things of small significance that cause extreme lefties to get rabid, because if they do enough they look terrible.

        • NewFormatSux says:

          This is how W got reelected, giving a medal to George Tenet when he should have been fired. Making liberals go crazy was all he had. Plus the Dems nominated a Frenchman.

          • Hmeyers says:

            I’m not with you, brother.

            I was so sick of what was happening in Iraq in 2004 …

            And very pissed off Howard Dean wasn’t the Democratic nominee … John Kerry is a piece of shit.

            Believe it or not, that year I was wishing Hillary had run.

            Considering how much I hate Hillary at this point in time, yes — things changed.

            Primarily, her effort to talk up outsourcing when she visited India a few years after the 2004 election.

            That made my blood boil, I live in Ohio. We have been totally and absolutely wrecked by NAFTA.

            It has destroyed most of our formerly great state. I live in Columbus, somewhat immune but outsourcing tech jobs has hurt us very badly where NAFTA didn’t.

            I hate George W. Bush, I hate Hillary, I hate the Republican elite, I hate the Democrats.

            Wanna see how people in Ohio feel?

            Watch this … I promise you will enjoy it only because of this year …


          • NewFormatSux says:

            W should have fired Tenet, but giving him the medal had the effect of making liberals go crazy and got him reelected.

          • Mr Diesel - Trump Won the Election, Suck It Crybabies says:


            Yep, that sums up how Ohioans feel alright.

            A big fuck you to Dems&Reps alike.

        • NewFormatSux says:

          Next he should say that people should be banned from committing suicide…

          And can he manage to have hot women only at the next SlutWalk?

        • aslightlycrankygeek says:

          Obama trolled very well indeed. He handled the birth certificate issue with extreme prejudice, giving the skeptics enough to cast serious doubt but ultimately hang themselves.

          I don’t know if Trump learned this from the birther experience or if he was always a master troll, but I must say he has Obama beat hands down. In addition to the three points you mentioned, it also got people unaware of the issue to realize that Hillary co-sponsered a bill in 2005 that would have sent flag-burners to jail for up to a year.

          All the people up in arms about a Trump troll tweet think it is totally fine that Hillary actually sponsored a bill to make it illegal and punishable by substantial jail time. “But she is so progressive so it is OK for her.” “But that was a long time ago.” “Oh, like the same year that Trump said some dirty words on a hot mic that took away no ones freedom and sent no one to jail?”

      • Al Schmidt says:

        Alas this was not my original idea.
        I just thought it was good enough to pass on. Perhaps you should open your mind and see what the other side says.

        • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

          Well thanks Al—but can you state just what exactly would be seen with eyes wide open?

          That if it bleeds (or is on fire) it leads?

          That flag burning is a distraction from any other issue that is more important…. like the deficit supercharging Banksters that Trump is filling his gubment with?

          THAT kind of eye opening….or do you mean the narcotic induced snooze fest of ……….. FIRE!!!!!!!!!!


          It used to be informative AND you could wrap fish bones in it. Today: neither provided.

          • NewFormatSux says:

            ‘deficit supercharging’
            Obama sent debt from 8 trillion to 20 trillion.

          • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

            In fairness, that is mostly the result of BushtheRetards Republican tactic of cutting taxes for the AlreadyTooRich, boosting military spending, then blaming the Democrats for the deficit when they are voted out of office.

            Whats insane?===> it works.

            too many voters…….mesmerized just like you. No attention span past a bumper sticker. Pukes are good at bumper stickers.

          • MikeN says:

            More spending by Obama is Bush’s fault?

  10. Melissa Lammey says:

    Tucker made a fool of himself. I didn’t see this on air, I found it because I found Marc Perkel while I was looking into some things online. This man is a genius outside the Academy. Period.

    • Marc Perkel says:

      Thank you for being wise enough to recognize that. 🙂

      • Melissa Lammey says:

        I find it quite charming that you engage with others at the level of religion and politics. You must know that you are in fact in conversation with the ages. I will continue reading your work. Please expect an email from me at some point. I am wondering about your thoughts on things like pantheism and the millennium prize problems in mathematics…I just haven’t read enough to formulate my questions. 🙂

        • ± says:

          Holy Crap! An intelligent trollbot!! First in my experience. Kudos to your coder, Mellisa.

          • Melissa Lammey says:

            I am my coder 🙂 (Turing solution)

          • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

            Yep… no hooman female would check for a response within the hour.

            ………..oops. Thats 3 hours…. just before going to bed?

            …….so, is a troll bot better than no troll at all? It is afterall the thought that counts, coded or not?

          • NewFormatSux says:

            You would fail a Turing test on both sides, and the ideological Turing test- you should be able to argue the other side’s positions so well that a third party couldn’t tell the difference- and you fail at the captcha blogs put up to keep bots out.

        • Melissa Lammey says:

          I don’t really know about trolls. I’m just a philosophy professor. I have heard about these bots though and it makes me wonder if the Turing test should be flipped on its head. 🤔

          • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

            Actually, I apologize. since I don’t use it, simple to assume you checked the box to be notified if there were any responses?

            You don’t “sound like” a professor of any sort….too jejune.

            I wouldn’t interfere any more with Marc’s raging imaginary hook-up but I’m interested by what you mean by flipping the Turing Test on its head. i can make my own guesses… but its your statement.

            Amuse us.

          • jpfitz says:

            Please scope the user Pedro, some are not sure whether the user is human.
            Turin test, very interesting study.

            Kidding about our friend Pedro.

          • Melissa Lammey says:

            Well, if I hit the wrong reply button that’s my bad.

            I don’t really know how to reply except to say I’m unclear about the purpose of your claims. That puts me in a state of uncertainty that is frankly quite hurtful. I was excited to come here and interact with people and learn something from a different perspective. But even as I’m explaining this I am wondering if I am just giving you an opportunity to….idk, get pleasure from putting me in an awkward and hurtful position? I don’t know people who treat other people like that.

            I am not a mean spirited person and it’s hard to interpret you charitably. So I’m at a loss here. And yes, you have made me cry. There you go! 🌹

            Did I do something to offend you? Is it pleasing in some way to hurt a person’s feelings? I have been excited for two days to have come across Marc’s pages. His use of reason and language is so precise that he illustrates a different way of processing data that perhaps collapse problems at the root of metaphysics. He appears to be grounded in perceiving the rational structure in the world around us. People who can do that can see solutions in long standing problems in the academy once they are in conversation with the academy. I didn’t come here as a professor. I came here as a philosopher because my own views collapse dualisms in what is misrepresented in language as ‘subjective’ and ‘objective’ that resolves the mind/body problem and enters the data of experience into the academy for analysis – not simply the data from experience. It seems he perceives meaning in the world and I perceive meaning perspective. I wouldn’t have finished college at all if I had not been called to it. We didn’t have a lot of money and I lived in MS. No, no one has ever thought I sounded like a professor. Lil’ lady is better? I guessed Marc also would have a hard time in entering because the structure of reason is inherent to his very perspections and if a person thinks their job is to debate him instead of interpret him, they will miss it. I am able to interpret the structure of reason in the writing on his pages but I was hoping to be able to interact. Why would I want to come here again? Do you not see the the function of your language?

            Anyway. An analysis of meaning from perspective to be submitted to the academy – that’s a framework to solve the modern problems of epistemology.

            This wasn’t a response to whatever you were asking me, but you gave me a foot in the door to respond given your claims. It didn’t feel good, but being intellectually honest sometimes doesn’t. I had language for communicating with you but I typed this up to put words to what I struggled to communicate to Marc because my language reflects meaning specific to the context and nothing else. I don’t know what he has read in the history of philosophy so that he resolves the Chinese room argument or appears to have completed the ontological proof and comes close to what I could interpret through reason and possibly illustrate a functional analysis of reality that avoids the subjective/objective distinction as well as the problem of other minds – I mean I am hopeful about something and I get stepped on. Well, that’s just a way of being that I wouldn’t choose for someone else. I don’t sound like a professor. Ok, well, I don’t know what that’s about because your words mean you not only have auditory perception while you’re reading, but you also are judging those perceptions against some standard I am not familiar with. I only know you have seen my name that I posted in good spirit and that I replied to you before with a good spirit. I’m going to copy and paste this then be gone. I’ll proofread later,

          • ± says:

            Postmodernism bullshit generator.


          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential anti-theist and Social Justice Kibbitzer says:

            Good call p/m. A real challenge for programmers like Marc.

            So…Melissa… what does turning the Turing Test on its head mean?

          • ± says:

            [to bobbo]

            I called it after its second post (the first post is inconclusive). You’ve been dancing with someones code. The coder(s) must be laughing their asses off. The thing is outted, what’s the point of continuing?

  11. aslightlycrankygeek says:


    I have been reading this blog for years and had no idea that was you. Although I disagree with much of what you post and find it as almost as annoying bobbo, the smug condescending hermit with too much time on his hands, silly hooman, I must congratulate you on an excellent interview. I have enjoyed Tucker’s show so far but I must say you were able to argue your point more effectively than his other guests this far. (Or at least the ones he disagrees with.) Good job on staying calm and sticking to your points. There was definitely some talking past each other, and the guy before you would make anyone look good, but nonetheless, bravo!

    • NewFormatSux says:

      Agreed. From reading this blog, I’m surprised Marc didn’t come across as a juvenile.

      • Mr Diesel - Trump Won the Election, Suck It Crybabies says:

        At least Marc didn’t try to run over Tucker with a Tesla.

        • jpfitz says:

          And Marc was stylish, thank goodness he didn’t wear his tie-die shirt.

          Good job staying on message, using the law on your side, including saying the burning was dispicabile, But an important right of the people.

          My flag no problem, now some Campus won’t fly the flag because some yo-yo destroys property not his/hers.

          I have been perplexed, maybe DJT’s falg distraction is just that.

        • NewFormatSux says:

          For Marc, that’s called ‘driving’.

    • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

      What more effectively argued point do you still disagree with?

      • aslightlycrankygeek says:

        After not posting on here for an eternity, it almost brings a tear to my eye that I have successfully summoned bobbo.

        I didn’t say I disagreed with what he said in the interview. I said I disagreed with much of the opinions he posts on here. Although if I had to critique his argument, I would say he goes to far and overstates his case. It is hard to argue that it is a good thing to burn the flag because it is just too generic of an expression.

        Yes, the government exists to serve us and we should hold all politicians accountable, but what is burning the flag actually stating? Neither of those things. It is about the most inefficient and inaccurate method of conveying a specific grievance with a politician, or government in general, that one could imagine. A sign with two words on it would carry more information. But if you are the type of person who is happy with communicating in vague grunts and burps that are sure to deeply offend some, make some people sad, incite some to riot, and others to just scratch their heads in confusion, then by all means, burning the flag is your method of communication.

        • NewFormatSux says:

          ” it almost brings a tear to my eye that I have successfully summoned bobbo.”

          Happens to everyone, but not how you meant.

          • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

            Well, just for myself….. its better than a swift kick to the groin.

        • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

          Cranky–if everything Marc said in the video has not already been said on this blog….then Marc has come pretty close. So, your distinction is without merit.

          You say burning the flag is not a good thing…which is exactly what Marc said. His position is that it should not be made illegal to do so.

          A generic expression not specific enough in meaning…. for you? But it speaks loudly, directly, and emphatically to the strength of the emotion behind the concern…often something that mere words, especially two words only, cannot convey.

          Ha, ha……….you obviously haven’t watched many protests. Most signs/sayings/speeches are devoid of any specific meaning…. one dog whistle of emotion after another one.

          Grunting and burping is more what you have done here, just like Tucker … you ignore what was actually said for your talking points.

          not subtle at all…and you took paragraphs.

          BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. ((my favorite grunt… ymmv))

  12. Bidobi says:

    Really thought there’d be some fireworks when he brought up NSA, clearly not much homework don

  13. Phydeau says:

    Al Schmidt, good point on Trump tweets. It’s so easy to troll people, saying one outrageous thing after another until outrage fatigue sets in. People opposed to Trump would do well to keep this in mind. He’s an expert. 🙄

    • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

      How does outrage fatigue set in BEFORE the candidate is rejected for being outrageous?

      “By definition” outrage fatigue is seen as ….. not accurate ((thus sayeth the temporarily reformed and humiliated bobbo)). “Something else” is going on….. Ha, ha…. kinda like “outrage philia” is what is actually going on.

      Politics. Getting people to believe and act upon the very opposite of truth…. like voting againsts one’s own interests.

      Know what I mean?

  14. MikeN says:

    Trump has gotten himself reelected, and he isn’t even in office yet.

    Who wants to be associated with people like this?

    • bobbo, words have meaning, for the love of God, please buy and use a dictionary says:

      Which people? The obnoxious asshole wearing the tee shirt or the obnoxious assholes challenging him to defend his obnoxious tee shirt?

      Free speech……. does include the right NOT to speak, I know….. you can’t find THOSE WORDS in the constitution…so just call me an “activist” like Judge Scalia.

      Expressing obnoxious ideas in public carries with in the danger of confrontation. So much healthier to do it anonymously on a forum? Ha, ha.

      Does remind me of “wearing” my military hair cut at a ski resort bar in Vermont: “How can you drop bombs on all those innocent women and children?” //// “You just line up the cross hairs…..” Almost the exact same line came out in some movie I saw….or maybe it was a joke…. or maybe I’m remembering the movie? …. It was definitely Vermont though…. unless it was New Hampshire. Too much ice on the ski slopes is what I definitely remember.

      • Melissa Lammey says:

        I couldn’t find the reply button to your comment above. I just read it more carefully and I’m not sure why you are bullying me. I came here with hopes and I came back to answer about the Turing test to see that you were mocking me? What is wrong with you? Yeah, you made me cry….have a good laugh. Maybe call me some names and insult my intellect. Or hey, tell me I’m worthless and I should go kill myself…is that the behavior you think is funny? You’re bullying a woman who has replied nicely to you? I don’t even know what to do with that. I do t want to come back here so you got your wish 🌹

  15. Melissa Lammey says:

    Marc, is this claim true or false?

    Obsrvation of necessary truth is sufficient for knowledge.

  16. Melissa Lammey says:

    Hi again!

    I did and didn’t mean to be so short in my last post.😎

    I realized that your pages often demonstrate self evident truths through language that represents states of affairs that appear self-evident.

    I have seen some comments claiming you are “stating the obvious”…Stating your claim so that its truth is obvious…are they missing it? That’s the goal. I know that reason is in the structure of language and we don’t always use language effectively. 😣

    I am failing at structuring my language to express meaning.
    It is as if I have nothing to report for analysis.

    I am not satisfied with that..I am compelled to spit something out.

    A foundation in reason should not be necessary to demonstrate truth…(is rationalism false?)
    Would you agree?

    Is a cat better defined by the characteristics that all and only cats have – or is a better definition to point at a nearby cat?

    Is meaning in language or in the world? Is this an empty question?

    I hope you don’t mind my asking….

    I’m a trained analytic philosopher. I sometimes work on language revision to avoid vague expression of meaning. The goal is to satisfy knowledge by avoiding metaphysical traps.

  17. Proud Flag burner says:

    My first flag retirement ceremony was a flag that had been flying over the state capitol the day that a highway patrolmen had been killed on the job. The cubmaster of our scout pack at the time managed to request that particular flag when it was decommissioned (he was also CHP and had worked with the guy), and it was one of the most moving ceremonies I have ever witnessed.

    Since then I have participated in flag burning ceremonies on 9/11, Veteran’s day, or even just regular scout camps to show the scouts how a flag should be honored.

    Flag burning ceremonies are not just about hate speech, but a way to honor our traditions and to remember what that flag stands for.

  18. Cgp says:

    Areal tragedy for fox to replace a nice lady with this nasty creep. I cannot see his nasty over the top (even for fox ) biased hit jobbery is good for ratings. He is a turn off.

  19. Cgpnz says:

    Who is this Perkel person? Did he buy the sole blogging rights off of buzz kill? Buzz kill would not allow flag burners here, or even those who condoned it.

    The person that balances a right to offend for the sake of protest against the ultimate respect due to those that gave their lives for what it represents, has lost it, never had it, and should be severely banished.

  20. Cgpnz says:

    Any burning of the American flag, and any of the allies flags is counter to any cause that is put up for such attention seeking.
    The revulsion of the sacred defiled completely obscures any cause.

    • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

      Cg: Scalia the most conservative thinking member of SCOTUS (to distinguish him from Thomas) thought flag burning was protected speech.

      The majority of Americans think flag burning is protected speech.

      Flag Burning “IS” protected speech. To be used sparingly as it is so symbollic and important.

      …………… Yes
      ……………………………………. YOU!

      Like most rightwingnutjobs: trying to wrap yourself in the American Flag to silence dissent. if you had any brains…. you’d be dangerous. Instead: its only your numbers, by voting, that mean a thing.


Bad Behavior has blocked 7401 access attempts in the last 7 days.