Skip to Content

Support MinnPost

Jon Erik Kingstad

Afton, MN
Commenter for
4 years 15 weeks

Recent Comments

Posted on 04/19/14 at 10:53 am in response to Lane Kenworthy on why we’re headed toward social democracy

Conservatives don't care about deficits. If they did they would be screaming to cut the bloated defense and national security budgets. The only thing people like Paul Ryan and other darlings of the right want is to cut spending that helps the most vulnerable people in society: children the elderly, the homeless and the poor. After the right has been more or less in charge of all three branches of the government for over thirty years, you'll never convince me that the right really cares about...

"90,000 members, only about 200 are between the ages of 18-34 —"

Whoa! Let's go "Rewire"!

Posted on 04/11/14 at 08:10 pm in response to Language use and misuse: 'Evolving' is one thing ...

Thanks, Mr. Souder for the clarification on some of these misuses of the language. Or malapropisms.

I've run into the problem of "begs the question" as few times. But I quite agree that it robs the meaning of it's English language translation of the Latin term for the logical fallacy 'petitio principii" as translated from Aristotle. Maybe we need a new term that more forcefully conveys the idea of circular reasoning.

I thought the term "Hobson's choice" came from the 1950's...

From his comment about the "banality of evil", it sounds like M.r El-Hai isn't aware that Hannah Arendt was specifically speaking not of von Ribbentrop or Streicher. She was speaking of Adolph Eichman whom she personally observed during his trial in Jerusalem in the early 1960's. Her book concluded just what it sounds Dr. Kelley concluded about Goering: that he was a normal average human being and by simply following orders to commit the most despicable and heinous crimes against humanity,...

Posted on 04/09/14 at 07:54 am in response to Should the Supreme Court decide what’s good or bad for democracy?

Should the U.S. Supreme Court decide what's good and bad for democracy? That question was answered in Marbury v. Madison and is now an integral part of the Constitution itself. So the question should be what standard ought the Supreme Court use to decide what is good and bad for democracy?

Chuck Holtman nails it when he identifies the constitutional doctrines and issues involved. I completely agree that Buckley v. Valeo and its progeny up to McCutcheon are right up there with Dred...

Posted on 04/09/14 at 09:20 pm in response to Should the Supreme Court decide what’s good or bad for democracy?

I don't think I said or implied that the Court had such a role. But the Constitution is document that bears interpretation. I has been interpreted to reflect "democratic values" and so I say it should be in the future. I think it's possible to identify those decisions or trends in judicial interpretation which are un- or anti-democratic. For example, Buckley v. Valeo down to McCutcheon. And certainly including Bush v.Gore in that mix as well.

Posted on 04/07/14 at 08:35 am in response to Watch out — those sugared-cereal boxes are watching you

That is the title of Vance Packard's 1957 book on this subject which I believe also appraised advertising and marketing practices to get the American public to buy things they don't need. As Thorstein Veblen pointed out, advertising and marketing add nothing to the value and are aimed at disinforming consumers, not informing them. In other words, total waste.

Posted on 03/31/14 at 08:19 pm in response to CIA's role in the arrest of Nelson Mandela

next to "terrorist" and you'll come up with tons of reasons to put anyone behind bars. With drones and "extraordinary rendition" you don't even have to have any facts or evidence, a trial or anything. Just the accusation and presto, "your name here" is now public enemy number one.

I'm puzzled by the Bloomberg remark quoted in the article. Does the reviewer mean that Smith offers no critique of the "consumerist society" or that he has not offered a critique of a consumerist society that is spiraled out of control? Or does the reviewer mean to suggest that a consumerist society is OK as long as it's not "spiraled out of control"?

Anyway, it sounds like Smith has offered a critique but probably not a critique that the Bloomberg reviewer wanted to hear or could...

That's easy: The title of Professor Bill Black's book "The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One" says it all. Banking is a lawful but not legitimate enterprise in this country. Remember the "golden rule": who owns the gold makes the rules. When you say so many banks, are you thinking of all the buildings that are branches of US Bank, TCF, JP Morgan, etc. These are chains, something which used to be illegal in this country too.

Nobody "forces" anyone to take out high priced debt by...