On - Who is a sell-out? When VP Kamala Harris goes into DEI mode, I suspect that she is performing as “sell-out”. But to know for certain, I would have to ask her and she would have to respond honestly.
I'd argue there's no virtue in the decision to have kids (or not have them). But, having kids tends to foster the development of several virtues: A sense of responsibility towards others, less focus on one's self, and a sense of a long-term commitment to society and the future.
Nothing quite focuses you on the future as the thought that your kids are going to have to live there.
Well said. My only regret in life is not having children because I never married and didn't want to raise them alone. Although I doted over my niece and nephews who are all adults now, I have no idea who will look after me in my elderly years. The realization of this alone is enough to have a child even if one must go it alone. A good topic for John to write about, too.
Would John and Glenn consider the Republicans of 1876 to have sold out? When the presidential election of that year was contested, they ultimately reached a deal in which their candidate, Rutherford B Hayes, would become President, but he would remove all federal troops from the south.
My god man. John is insufferable. The show opens with Glenn mentioning some post op issues and John pivots to explaining what is wrong with how Wikipedia did his CV.
Then Glenn brings up JD Vance and John begins to explain how Vance's book is like his book and he's got feelz because Vance isn't a goodwhite.
Could be worse I guess. The runner up would be who, T'Nahesi Coates.
I'm sorry, John, but someone needed to tell you that you're defending your ego too much, from what I've heard. And I could be wrong.
Clarence Page, from the same hometown as Vance, has gone through a similar path as John in his columns. A few years ago he was promoting Vance out as one of the good ones with a lot of potential, although often not agreeing with him. Then it became "Which Vance are we going to get?". Then just disappointment in the sad rhetoric of the latest version.
Anyone else find it rich that John claims to have a better understanding of what's going on in Springfield Ohio than JD Vance, who is the Senator that is representing these people?
Might as well say that the representative from Alaska doesn't know what she's talking about, there aren't actually that many bears up there.
I don't think John is claiming to have a better idea of what is going on in Springfield than Vance. His claim is that Vance was lying when he talked and posted about the pet eating rumors which he knew were unsubstantiated rumors and likely untrue.
And John is right to be critical of that. Here are the best two pieces I've ready about why:
I always thought of the term "sellout" in terms of a musician who traded authentic, weird expression for a more palatable mainstream sound in exchange for big bags of money - I wonder if it originates in 60s pop culture? Who was the first sellout?
I'll answer my own question 😂 According to some quick research, the first instances of the term showed up in jazz culture and grew in the larger pop culture phenomenon.
How appropriate that a show biz term is now applicable to so many different types of professions - all the world is in fact a stage.
I think that calling someone a sell out, or a racist, or a fascist is simply an indication that the speaker does not have a good argument against the target's policy positions. It is pure nonsense.
However, it appears also that ganging up on the target is a form of mimetic desire. I have concluded that Trump Derangement Syndrome is the result of mimetic desire. Glenn or John is called sellout, and immediately others want to be like the speaker and gang up on them.
As a Christian I don't look to the Country's political leadership for my moral compass. I understand that we are all flawed and sinners. My yardstick for picking who to vote for is solely based on what a candidate will do to 1) Protect my family and 2) Improve our economy so that my family can prosper.
I am a SF public health “witch” who was fired into retirement for exposing DEI fraud. I am horrified that the White House is OK with children being groomed into pediatric-Trans, which I am trying to ban. I predict a parent zombie apocalypse in the future resulting from parents driven crazy with grief.
Every comment about another person with whom John disagrees politically (usually more famous and successful than he) seems to be an evidence-free assumption about the contents of that person's heart.
Clarence Thomas is gossiping about the evils of the Left when he shares a private humorous moment with his wife; JD Vance is a racist and dishonest sell-out, not a conduit for the corroborated complaints of his own constituents or a successful author and tech entrepreneur.
Donald Trump is a gorilla who John wishes would be removed from the public stage by gunfire.
John, how can you, when your own motives for saying what you believe have been impugned and maligned by others, have so little grace for your fellow men?
Such a pleasure on my day off to sit with my cup of coffee in the morning and watch The Glenn Show with Glenn and John. As always, I ended the episode feeling good about the world. Also, I second John and Glenn's plug of Everett's book James. It's a great read. And Racecraft by Barbara and Karen Fields is a must for anyone, who wants to understand the corruptible nature of "race" as a concept. In fact, I recommend reading Barbara Fields's essay "Ideology and Race in American History" from Region, Race, and Reconstruction as a precursor to the book. Thanks, gentlemen!
The "Sell Out" label in black culture has been going on for more than a century. It's an old feud that belongs in the hills and mountains somewhere. But unfortunately, it transcends the entire culture. From grade school to serious adult platforms of politics, business, entertainment, academia, and journalism. And the perception of black culture pays a price. It's hard to take it seriously when grown people are calling each other names for having a difference of opinion. So sad.
Glenn's discussion of Clarence Thomas taking millions from his wealthy conservative patrons was incomplete and one-sided.
It is absolutely true that, relative to the importance of their work, Supreme Court justices are paid a pittance. But so what? Each and every one of them, including Thomas, knew what the salary was and what the work was when they signed on. And each and every one of them is free to leave. If Thomas, or any other justice, is no longer willing to do the work for the amount that they are paid, and would rather get out and cash in on their status, they are all free to do so.
There is strong evidence to support the proposition that Thomas himself knew what he was doing was inappropriate - namely, he chose to break the law requiring disclosure of gifts. Why do that if it is all above board?
The vast majority of the millions of dollars in gifts Thomas has collected come from wealthy individuals who are like minded and are invovled enough with the conservative legal movement to be funding efforts to get certain cases before the court. There isn't a direct enough association to require recual under the court's current standards, but the billionaires funding Thomas are the same billionaires funding conservative legal organizations that are bringing tests cases to the court.
I think about 95% of the people who defend Thomas for taking so much money would not extend the same defense to any of the liberal justices if it turned out that they had accepted even a ten th of the $4 million we know Clarence Thomas got. (My guess is that Glenn would fall in the 5% who would be OK with it.) Justice Jackson got some flak from conservatives for accepting - and disclosing - 4 tickets to a Beyconce concert valued at under $4,000.
Anyway, if Thomas or any other justice would prefer to cash in rather than live on a salary that, though very low relative to what they do, still dwarfs mine, they can resign.
Your accusations and innuendos about one of SCOTUS's greatest justices, Clarence Thomas, is in my opinion defamation and worthy of punative damages. On the other hand, by your comments you are not worth the effort. No wonder the US is in decline.
Different cultures eat different animals - if the lunatic leftist on this thread has ever left his bubble he would know this - Ive seen and heard many 911 calls , from Springfield concerned about their pets , we are shocked that Haitians would eat a cat?? John and his typical tds - he and the other lefty on here really need to seek help ! ASAP
Now we get ads!!
On - Who is a sell-out? When VP Kamala Harris goes into DEI mode, I suspect that she is performing as “sell-out”. But to know for certain, I would have to ask her and she would have to respond honestly.
I'd argue there's no virtue in the decision to have kids (or not have them). But, having kids tends to foster the development of several virtues: A sense of responsibility towards others, less focus on one's self, and a sense of a long-term commitment to society and the future.
Nothing quite focuses you on the future as the thought that your kids are going to have to live there.
Well said. My only regret in life is not having children because I never married and didn't want to raise them alone. Although I doted over my niece and nephews who are all adults now, I have no idea who will look after me in my elderly years. The realization of this alone is enough to have a child even if one must go it alone. A good topic for John to write about, too.
Glenn’s story about his late wife and description of their two sons and the book club was a touching moment. 🙂
Would John and Glenn consider the Republicans of 1876 to have sold out? When the presidential election of that year was contested, they ultimately reached a deal in which their candidate, Rutherford B Hayes, would become President, but he would remove all federal troops from the south.
My god man. John is insufferable. The show opens with Glenn mentioning some post op issues and John pivots to explaining what is wrong with how Wikipedia did his CV.
Then Glenn brings up JD Vance and John begins to explain how Vance's book is like his book and he's got feelz because Vance isn't a goodwhite.
Could be worse I guess. The runner up would be who, T'Nahesi Coates.
I'm sorry, John, but someone needed to tell you that you're defending your ego too much, from what I've heard. And I could be wrong.
Clarence Page, from the same hometown as Vance, has gone through a similar path as John in his columns. A few years ago he was promoting Vance out as one of the good ones with a lot of potential, although often not agreeing with him. Then it became "Which Vance are we going to get?". Then just disappointment in the sad rhetoric of the latest version.
Anyone else find it rich that John claims to have a better understanding of what's going on in Springfield Ohio than JD Vance, who is the Senator that is representing these people?
Might as well say that the representative from Alaska doesn't know what she's talking about, there aren't actually that many bears up there.
I don't think John is claiming to have a better idea of what is going on in Springfield than Vance. His claim is that Vance was lying when he talked and posted about the pet eating rumors which he knew were unsubstantiated rumors and likely untrue.
And John is right to be critical of that. Here are the best two pieces I've ready about why:
https://damonlinker.substack.com/p/something-much-darker
https://www.slowboring.com/p/the-tired-dance-of-the-demagogue
What concrete actions has Vance taken to represent the people of Springfield that have actually helped?
I always thought of the term "sellout" in terms of a musician who traded authentic, weird expression for a more palatable mainstream sound in exchange for big bags of money - I wonder if it originates in 60s pop culture? Who was the first sellout?
I'll answer my own question 😂 According to some quick research, the first instances of the term showed up in jazz culture and grew in the larger pop culture phenomenon.
How appropriate that a show biz term is now applicable to so many different types of professions - all the world is in fact a stage.
I think that calling someone a sell out, or a racist, or a fascist is simply an indication that the speaker does not have a good argument against the target's policy positions. It is pure nonsense.
However, it appears also that ganging up on the target is a form of mimetic desire. I have concluded that Trump Derangement Syndrome is the result of mimetic desire. Glenn or John is called sellout, and immediately others want to be like the speaker and gang up on them.
There is such a thing as selling out, even if the accusation is made too readily.
As a Christian I don't look to the Country's political leadership for my moral compass. I understand that we are all flawed and sinners. My yardstick for picking who to vote for is solely based on what a candidate will do to 1) Protect my family and 2) Improve our economy so that my family can prosper.
I am a SF public health “witch” who was fired into retirement for exposing DEI fraud. I am horrified that the White House is OK with children being groomed into pediatric-Trans, which I am trying to ban. I predict a parent zombie apocalypse in the future resulting from parents driven crazy with grief.
Every comment about another person with whom John disagrees politically (usually more famous and successful than he) seems to be an evidence-free assumption about the contents of that person's heart.
Clarence Thomas is gossiping about the evils of the Left when he shares a private humorous moment with his wife; JD Vance is a racist and dishonest sell-out, not a conduit for the corroborated complaints of his own constituents or a successful author and tech entrepreneur.
Donald Trump is a gorilla who John wishes would be removed from the public stage by gunfire.
John, how can you, when your own motives for saying what you believe have been impugned and maligned by others, have so little grace for your fellow men?
Such a pleasure on my day off to sit with my cup of coffee in the morning and watch The Glenn Show with Glenn and John. As always, I ended the episode feeling good about the world. Also, I second John and Glenn's plug of Everett's book James. It's a great read. And Racecraft by Barbara and Karen Fields is a must for anyone, who wants to understand the corruptible nature of "race" as a concept. In fact, I recommend reading Barbara Fields's essay "Ideology and Race in American History" from Region, Race, and Reconstruction as a precursor to the book. Thanks, gentlemen!
The "Sell Out" label in black culture has been going on for more than a century. It's an old feud that belongs in the hills and mountains somewhere. But unfortunately, it transcends the entire culture. From grade school to serious adult platforms of politics, business, entertainment, academia, and journalism. And the perception of black culture pays a price. It's hard to take it seriously when grown people are calling each other names for having a difference of opinion. So sad.
Glenn's discussion of Clarence Thomas taking millions from his wealthy conservative patrons was incomplete and one-sided.
It is absolutely true that, relative to the importance of their work, Supreme Court justices are paid a pittance. But so what? Each and every one of them, including Thomas, knew what the salary was and what the work was when they signed on. And each and every one of them is free to leave. If Thomas, or any other justice, is no longer willing to do the work for the amount that they are paid, and would rather get out and cash in on their status, they are all free to do so.
There is strong evidence to support the proposition that Thomas himself knew what he was doing was inappropriate - namely, he chose to break the law requiring disclosure of gifts. Why do that if it is all above board?
The vast majority of the millions of dollars in gifts Thomas has collected come from wealthy individuals who are like minded and are invovled enough with the conservative legal movement to be funding efforts to get certain cases before the court. There isn't a direct enough association to require recual under the court's current standards, but the billionaires funding Thomas are the same billionaires funding conservative legal organizations that are bringing tests cases to the court.
I think about 95% of the people who defend Thomas for taking so much money would not extend the same defense to any of the liberal justices if it turned out that they had accepted even a ten th of the $4 million we know Clarence Thomas got. (My guess is that Glenn would fall in the 5% who would be OK with it.) Justice Jackson got some flak from conservatives for accepting - and disclosing - 4 tickets to a Beyconce concert valued at under $4,000.
Anyway, if Thomas or any other justice would prefer to cash in rather than live on a salary that, though very low relative to what they do, still dwarfs mine, they can resign.
Your accusations and innuendos about one of SCOTUS's greatest justices, Clarence Thomas, is in my opinion defamation and worthy of punative damages. On the other hand, by your comments you are not worth the effort. No wonder the US is in decline.
A true fact cannot be defamatory. Neither can an opinion. That’s why you make a vague accusation rather than a specific one.
Different cultures eat different animals - if the lunatic leftist on this thread has ever left his bubble he would know this - Ive seen and heard many 911 calls , from Springfield concerned about their pets , we are shocked that Haitians would eat a cat?? John and his typical tds - he and the other lefty on here really need to seek help ! ASAP