Huck Mucus 
Member since Mar 12, 2013

Custom Lists

  • Zip.



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “The Real Fight Against Fake News: The Top 10 underreported stories of 2017-18

Hi Katy Lynn Davis:

If that was your point, then it's not that it flew over my head. Rather, it's that you failed to make it.

Let me dumb it down for you: Instead of drawing a distinction between Fox and CNN, or calling out the media for picking and choosing which stories to run, you decided to run your key board about Farrakhan in the context of quote you pulled denying the existence of Black Identity Extremists. This was a clear failure on your part to distinguish between black identity extremists and a non-existent "Black Identity Extremists" which is what the article was about.

But hey, thanks for clarifying what it was you meant to say. You may want to change the subject from what the article was about, but you failed to do so.

You're welcome. :-)

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Huck Mucus on 11/08/2018 at 2:53 PM

Re: “The Real Fight Against Fake News: The Top 10 underreported stories of 2017-18

Mr. K:

I think you are making the same mistake that Katy Lynn Davis made.

You say: "There are indeed "White Identity Extremists" out there" and then you immediately define them as "racists who adhere to a theology called "Christian Identity" which is, . . .".

I think it would be more accurate, and in accord with the point of the article, to say: "There is a theology called 'Christian Identity' whose members believe . . .. They are white identity extremists."

If indeed there is a movement out there called "White Identity Extremists" (by the federal government or through self-identification), then I'd like to see a reference. Maybe there is, but let's see it (not the Urban Dictionary, please).

If we are going to just engage in making up our own shit, then Katy Lynn Davis was correct, for I can easily find examples of black identity extremists out there. These are self-identified groups who's beliefs are extreme and based on black identity. So now I can call them "Black Identity Extremists" and then you and I can argue endlessly about why someone should or should not be deemed a member.

But, as the article opines, there is no Black Identity Extremists except the one some wag in the F.B.I. pulled out of his/her ass. I think "White Identity Extremists" is the same, but I will stand corrected when shown.

2 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Huck Mucus on 11/08/2018 at 6:21 AM

Re: “The Real Fight Against Fake News: The Top 10 underreported stories of 2017-18

Hi Katy Lynn Davis:

I think you missed the point and mistakenly (I hope) took the capitalized moniker "Black Identity Extremists" out of context. Contrary to your implication, the article did not argue, or even imply there are no black extremists out there. Please go back and re-read the piece, only this time, use your analytic reading skills to discern what the article actually said.

Compare "Unite the Right", "Black Lives Matter", etc. as monikers/movements, with extremist positions. The idea that U.S. agencies are, sua sponte, starting to create labels which lack Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulation, or judicial definitions, and sans public notice and an opportunity to be heard, is troubling indeed. This is especially a concern when these terms can wrangle folks based upon subjective "feelings" of individual law enforcement personnel.

Sure, talking heads and other stupid people on the boob tube and the internet are allowed to toss around terms like "Radical Islam" and "Terrorism" and "I know it when I see it" without parsing any hairs or drawing any distinctions, but we expect better from government. After all, even government was forced define "terrorist", "terrorism", "hate crime" etc. before cranking up the propaganda machine and getting the Reds all hot and bothered. Sure, they did a crappy job of it, but at least the terms are and have been subject to judicial review.

In short, the article was about the F.B.I. creating a term out of thin air to help them do what? There are black extremists our there, yes, but there is no "Black Identity Extremists" out there and the term is not needed to wrangle black extremists who commit crimes. There is ISIS, Al Queda, etc. and there are even radical Islamists, but if there is a "Radical Islam" I have not seen the definition of who it includes or excludes. There are white identity extremists out there but there is no "White Identity Extremists" out there (at least to my knowledge). What the hell is that? Who is included? Who is excluded?

No need to gin up undefined, generalized fear about a color (black, white, whatever) or a term (extreme, un-American, etc.) when crime can be used to define individuals and groups which commit them, self-identified or not.

It's a distinction with a relevant difference and that is what, I think, the article was saying.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Huck Mucus on 11/07/2018 at 5:04 PM

Re: “Reader: We must speak out against violence in all of its forms

"We must speak out against violence in all of its forms, . . . ."

Speaking is fine but, as you note, words matter. You might want to make sure your words don't ham-string the kind of violence that made a member of the Jewish community feel safe from the violence and hatred that African-American people endured; that same kind of violence that freed the African-American people to back your hand when the assholes came to town.

Speak all you want, but don't forfeit the right of others to kill pieces of shit that need killing. It just encourages them and you don't want to encourage violence, do you?

Walk as softly as you want, speak as peacefully as you want, condemn violence all you want, but never forget what is done about that which should never be forgotten.

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Huck Mucus on 11/05/2018 at 7:11 AM

Re: “Reader: Why would expose ourselves to dangerous fracking chemicals?

If I thought for one minute that 112 would effectively ban fracking in Colorado, then I would support it. Unfortunately, I think it will just protect people and push fracking out onto public lands where people don't live. I'd rather people wallow in their own filth than put it out on otherwise good land.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Huck Mucus on 11/02/2018 at 9:14 AM

Re: “Reader: Investment in our children is overdue. Vote Yes on 73.

" . . . as a local public school teacher for the past 11 years . . ."

Thank you for your service.

I voted Yes on 73. Sure, there are no guarantees the money will be spent wisely, but that is always the case in an under-educated society that lies to itself about how much it cares about children and their future. And it never stopped us from throwing money at lesser projects, like ourselves.

If some of the money gets through to where it's supposed to go, let's see if we can't turn out something more than good little consumers and producers. Yea!

4 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Huck Mucus on 11/01/2018 at 5:56 AM

Re: “Terrorist Rhetoric

Some words matter to some people more than other words to other people. There is an independent, objective way of influencing which words matter more than others, and by how much. That way is at least 2,500 years old, and involves teaching people how to think.

The current discussion in our country about words and their meaning has a lot of finger-pointing, appeals for civility and restraint, and even censorship. What is missing is any discussion about education in the liberal arts of critical and analytical thinking, reason, logic, etc.

If people were taught how to think, then fake news and propaganda would be, at their worst, a point of humor or ridicule, and at their best, a hard stone upon which the truth might whet it's edge.

The fact that fake news and propaganda matter is an indictment of our educational system. There are people who don't want people to know how to think. Those are people who want other people influenced by a dependent, subjective understanding of which words matter, and how much. In other words, they want to influence what people think, as opposed to teaching people how to think.

STEM is great, but of no moral/ethical avail without a solid foundation in, and a context of liberal arts. If you want to know why an emphasis on the latter will wain in any nation or state at any given time, then following the money is only a start: Follow instead, the power. Any power that doesn't trust the people to think is not a power of the people.

Invest in education, and when little Sally and Billy come home from school at night and roll your socks at the dinner table in some argument that you can't keep up with in a wise, educational, calm, dignified and Socratic manner, you will know your tax dollars have been well spent. Know that when it comes to all your clap-trap about making a better world for your children, you have actually walked the walk. Know that you might have some larnin' to do yer own damn self.

Instead of whining about how your kids have been brain-washed by a bunch of liberal teachers, try matching wits with them in a sport of brains, just as you would exercise their bodies in athletics, tossing the ball around in the front yard. After all, your maturity and life experience and wisdom in "the real world" should have you knowing how to teach your kids how to think, right?

6 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Huck Mucus on 10/31/2018 at 6:23 AM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

All content © Copyright 2018, The Colorado Springs Independent

Website powered by Foundation