• Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:47 AM
    I was referring to your claim that black culture has fallen since slavery. To the contrary, the blues and jazz that came later (especially jazz) are in no way a decline of black culture; they are huge advances. You might as well say that the Renaissance wasn't an improvement because people were already painting, sculpting, and writing. Moreover, how many blacks could read or write during slavery? Will you dismiss all of the literature created by blacks after emancipation as if they added nothing to black culture?
    25 replies | 478 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:35 AM
    Making June 19 a holiday displays a woeful ignorance of history, or at least a willingness to ignore it. Slavery didn't end until the 13th Amerndment was ratified on December 6, 1865, since the Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves only in the states that were in rebellion against the Union.
    25 replies | 478 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:29 AM
    Two of the crowning artistic achievements of black culture came much later -- the blues and jazz. Sure, they had roots in pre-emancipation times, but they were perfected leter on. Without them, there's no rock and roll.
    25 replies | 478 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-17-2021, 04:23 PM
    Including two of Trump's three appointees.
    17 replies | 446 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-17-2021, 04:19 PM
    Is it too much to ask a reporter to actually read the judge's decision? Apparently so. It is the hospital, not the judge, that is telling the workers to get vaccinated or get fired. The judge simply ruled on the plaintiff's claims that if they were fired for refusing to get vaccinated, the hospital's action would amount to unlawful termination under Texas law. But Texas law only protects employees from being terminated for refusing to commit an act carrying criminal penalties to the worker, and receiving a COVID vaccine isn't an illegal act. The plaintiffs argued in the alternative that forcing them to be vaccinated violated public policy, but the judge pointed out that (a) Texas law doesn't recognize such an exception to at-will employment, and (b) even if it did, under relevant Supreme Court precedent compulsory vaccination doesn't violate due process. Plaintiff's additional argument that the hospital's vaccination requirement violated federal law and the Nuremberg Code failed because (a) the federal law the Plaintiffs relied on and the Nuremberg Code apply only to the government, not to a private employer; and (b) comparing the hospital's vaccination requirement to the medical-experiment atrocities committed by the Nazis that the Nuremberg Code addressed is, in the court's words, "reprehensible". Even Ron Paul didn't buy that comparison. https://int.********/data/documenttools/houston-methodist-court-ruling/3468984fc566cea5/full.pdf
    2 replies | 160 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-16-2021, 08:57 AM
    + rep
    52 replies | 958 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-15-2021, 12:49 PM
    Not ironic at all, you clueless imbecile.
    4 replies | 213 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-15-2021, 10:14 AM
    It should be, but too many Trump lemmings are deaf, dumb, and blind to the obvious. They would apparently prefer that one individual have supreme power over their lives, and they don't seem to care that the cult of personality they willingly belong to is straight out of the playbook of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Of course, the obvious point (which is far too difficult for Trump lemmings to grasp) is that the comparison is not to the policies of Hitler, et al.; it is to the fanatical devotion to one person that ignores the teaching that power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
    52 replies | 958 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-15-2021, 09:46 AM
    Wouldn't be a bit surprised, since such a plan would violate the Constitution (not that Trump gives a flip about the Constitution).
    52 replies | 958 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-15-2021, 07:25 AM
    On Flag Day in 1943, in the middle of World War II when patriotic feelings were at a high, the Supreme Court overturned a West Virginla law requiring public school students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of each school day, thereby elevating the liberty that the flag supposedly stands for over the notion that the government can coerce people to venerate it as a symbol. In perhaps the most libertarian opinion in the Court's history, Justice Robert Jackson wrote:
    4 replies | 213 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-11-2021, 07:27 AM
    Might not be a bad idea, at least in Washington State, D.C., and New York.
    22 replies | 810 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-02-2021, 03:42 PM
    Now they can do Leroy Van Dyke's "The Auctioneer".
    2 replies | 150 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-01-2021, 09:08 AM
    Unlike Flynn, the signers of the DOI didn't try to walk back from it and denied they ever signed it. Not all patriots are scoundrels. The Samuel Johnson saying simply means that some scoundrels will try to justify their actions on the basis of patriotism. This phoniness is kinda like someone who posts a call for a military coup on a freedom-centered site. As I said before, it seems Flynn desperately want to be James Mattoon Scott.
    16 replies | 704 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-01-2021, 07:09 AM
    "Patriot Roundup"? Just goes to show that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, although "scoundrel" is too mild a word for folks like Flynn, Gohmert, and Powell.
    16 replies | 704 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    05-24-2021, 06:44 AM
    The Del McCoury Band at the Ryman.
    9 replies | 258 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    05-21-2021, 09:39 AM
    If you bought a home in a city chances are pretty good that the property is subject to zoming laws so that, for example, you can't open certain businesses in your residential neighborhood. I don't know if you consider that as endorsement, but it's certainly a voluntary submission to that restriction even if you think the government shouldn't have the authority to enact such a law. And when the author of the OP urges customers to violate the terms the business owner insists on via a sign, he seems to be assuming that the owner is doing so solely because he's being coerced by the government. What if he isn't? What if he doesn't want to risk having his customers infected and would insist on masks even if the government didn't require it? Why should the customer's wishes override the owner's wishes? Consider a slightly different situation: a customer in a bar, clearly drunk, demands a couple more drinks before he drives himself home. The bartender refuses, fearing that the guy might kill someone (including himself). Does the customer have the right to get fall-down, stinking blotto just because the government has enacted a dram shop law that imposes liability on the bar if the drunk causes damage to persons or property as a result of the bar serving him?
    31 replies | 781 view(s)
No More Results
About Sonny Tufts

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):


We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
Erwin N. Griswold

Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 08:49 AM
Join Date






  • 10:57 AM - Hidden


No results to display...
Page 1 of 61 1231151 ... LastLast












Page 1 of 61 1231151 ... LastLast