I was somehow delighted and heartbroken when the moderator stepped in to clarify that killing babies is illegal in every state. Delighted because it was needed. Heartbroken to realize how surprising it felt to see it happen. For nearly a decade we've had nothing but "Trump says he can cure cancer with copper pennies and breath mints. Some Democrats disagree" kind of reporting. Seeing an actual journalist follow up with a fact in real time shouldn't feel as life affirming as it did last night. I do hope we see more.
Although I don’t belong to a political party and am not a Biden or Harris fan, and I wish aliens would abduct Trump, I found your assessment of last night's debate to be delightful. I’m a retired lawyer turned writer, who once clerked for a US District Judge that presided over every federal prosecution in his court’s jurisdiction. You are dead on, Harris did very well for herself and baiting Trump, who did not answer one of the debate moderator’s questions during the 45 minutes I watched, then I watched a Netflix movie, because I simply could not take any more of Trump. At one time, I ran numerous times for public office, and thankfully never was elected. I participated in many candidate forums and media interviews. I was delighted to see the two moderators do what needed to be done.
Kevin, I've been watching debates since the sixties and have begun to wonder what they even are anymore, since the term seems to evolve like our slang. The slugfests we've had to endure over the past several cycles, with ten people on stage and a couple of camera-mugging "moderators" trying to egg on candidates with deep questions such as "so what do have to say about what he said about you said on twitter this morning?" And we remember what happened to Candy Crowley when she fact-checked Mitt Romney in 2012--she was blasted for it. So I was pleased to watch last night, it was a pretty good balance between the two candidates. Trump will always be Trump, and Harris played her part beautifully. Good fact checking, only when his lies were beyond ignoring. Killing babies after birth!
I know reporters are reticent, but those lies -- after-birth abortions, dangerous immigrants -- are ones that they understand can easily get people killed, and it's vital to call them out. Hope others follow their lead!
I wonder if historians will note the "free speech wars" going on now. They seems consequential but also insane. I just googled "free speech in the 1800s" and Thomas Tedford wrote that state and local laws against "sedition" were directed against abolitionists, union organizers and other people deemed threatening to the social order. In addition, state and federal laws criminalized speed deemed as either blasphemy or obscenity."
Free speech, for the last century, has been about allowing ideas that threatened the social order, including blasphemy and obscenity.
Now free speech is about allowing lies. My rational mind believes this is a blip. Remember that funny time conservatives were trying to make social media sites not delete their AI created Taylor Swift endorsements? Crazy times.
But it also feels like maybe liberals are close to doing that thing where we actually ban toxic ideas. It starts by outlawing physical threats. Then laws to prevent January 6 style events (Brazil). Then the German style banning Nazi propaganda (which they might overturn).
It is hard to see how it will work out with free speech, lies and AI generated content. And what a "free speech purist" would even want. Should "Climate change isn't real" get a person arrested? How about a special check mark on twitter? What if they sign up for it?
I was somehow delighted and heartbroken when the moderator stepped in to clarify that killing babies is illegal in every state. Delighted because it was needed. Heartbroken to realize how surprising it felt to see it happen. For nearly a decade we've had nothing but "Trump says he can cure cancer with copper pennies and breath mints. Some Democrats disagree" kind of reporting. Seeing an actual journalist follow up with a fact in real time shouldn't feel as life affirming as it did last night. I do hope we see more.
Same! I was stunned and then immediately saddened that it stunned me.
Although I don’t belong to a political party and am not a Biden or Harris fan, and I wish aliens would abduct Trump, I found your assessment of last night's debate to be delightful. I’m a retired lawyer turned writer, who once clerked for a US District Judge that presided over every federal prosecution in his court’s jurisdiction. You are dead on, Harris did very well for herself and baiting Trump, who did not answer one of the debate moderator’s questions during the 45 minutes I watched, then I watched a Netflix movie, because I simply could not take any more of Trump. At one time, I ran numerous times for public office, and thankfully never was elected. I participated in many candidate forums and media interviews. I was delighted to see the two moderators do what needed to be done.
Kevin, I've been watching debates since the sixties and have begun to wonder what they even are anymore, since the term seems to evolve like our slang. The slugfests we've had to endure over the past several cycles, with ten people on stage and a couple of camera-mugging "moderators" trying to egg on candidates with deep questions such as "so what do have to say about what he said about you said on twitter this morning?" And we remember what happened to Candy Crowley when she fact-checked Mitt Romney in 2012--she was blasted for it. So I was pleased to watch last night, it was a pretty good balance between the two candidates. Trump will always be Trump, and Harris played her part beautifully. Good fact checking, only when his lies were beyond ignoring. Killing babies after birth!
I know reporters are reticent, but those lies -- after-birth abortions, dangerous immigrants -- are ones that they understand can easily get people killed, and it's vital to call them out. Hope others follow their lead!
The woke vs the unawoke: Harris-Trump debate
I am hoping reporters and publishers will decide that piling on Trump’s terrible performance is good for business.
Fingers crossed.
I wonder if historians will note the "free speech wars" going on now. They seems consequential but also insane. I just googled "free speech in the 1800s" and Thomas Tedford wrote that state and local laws against "sedition" were directed against abolitionists, union organizers and other people deemed threatening to the social order. In addition, state and federal laws criminalized speed deemed as either blasphemy or obscenity."
Free speech, for the last century, has been about allowing ideas that threatened the social order, including blasphemy and obscenity.
Now free speech is about allowing lies. My rational mind believes this is a blip. Remember that funny time conservatives were trying to make social media sites not delete their AI created Taylor Swift endorsements? Crazy times.
But it also feels like maybe liberals are close to doing that thing where we actually ban toxic ideas. It starts by outlawing physical threats. Then laws to prevent January 6 style events (Brazil). Then the German style banning Nazi propaganda (which they might overturn).
It is hard to see how it will work out with free speech, lies and AI generated content. And what a "free speech purist" would even want. Should "Climate change isn't real" get a person arrested? How about a special check mark on twitter? What if they sign up for it?