Politics

[MR2 Fan]

did he say what the mistake was though?

[FaultyMario]

It was "very, very big".

[FaultyMario]

I mean, I do not want to post the clip, but at the same time I do. The thing with Trump is that he is completely inept at public service, he can do politics fairly competitively, but he just sucks at being a representative of the people... until you realize that a lot of people hear his incoherent ramblings and they think that he is doing a great service for their community.

:smh:

I'm still blaming Newscorp for the destruction of public discourse.

[Yw-slayer]

3888

[neanderthal]

I mean, I do not want to post the clip, but at the same time I do. The thing with Trump is that he is completely inept at public service, he can do politics fairly competitively, but he just sucks at being a representative of the people... until you realize that a lot of people hear his incoherent ramblings and they think that he is doing a great service for their community.

:smh:

I'm still blaming Newscorp for the destruction of public discourse.

Reagan, doing away with the fairness doctrine. 1980s.

[neanderthal]

3888

101%

[Tom Servo]

Sounds like Jackson will be appointed to the supreme court.

This makes me happy. Hawley's and Greene's rounds of throwing red meat to the Q idiots seem to have failed this time.

[MR2 Fan]

I wonder if there hasn't been a push for the Ginny Thomas stuff while this nomination wasn't finished, then MAYBE it will be brought up again.

Anyway my new analogy of Democrats vs Republicans currently, if they were landlords of your house:

Democrats would say nice things to you and like having you as a tenant, but the faucet leaks, the foundation is cracked, but they keep telling you that rent costs and infrastructure will get better...eventually if you just trust them enough.

Republicans would constantly try to burn your house down and blame you for it because you're not one of them (rich, white, male, conservative, christian, blah blah)

[Rare White Ape]

Not to mention trying to evict you to live in a poor area so that they can bulldoze the place and build an expensive mansion.

[neanderthal]

The supreme court just ruled 5- 4 siding with red states against the clean water act.

I'm old enough to remember when we tried explaining that the supreme court was at stake in 2016, but something about a ladies emails was more important.

[neanderthal]

The supreme court just ruled 5- 4 siding with red states against the clean water act.

I'm old enough to remember when we tried explaining that the supreme court was at stake in 2016, but something about a ladies emails was more important.

And we still don't know what was in her emails.

[Rare White Ape]

So how does America ensure that its water is safe to drink?

Does the free market decide or something?

[neanderthal]

So how does America ensure that its water is safe to drink?

Does the free market decide or something?

Pretty much.

Look at Flint Michigan. They knew the pipes were lead and they still pumped water through them because replacing the pipes would be expensive. It mostly the darkies that were affected too, so there is that factor.

[Rare White Ape]

Parts of the USA spent half of 2020 protesting police violence and spreading the wider message that Black Lives Matter.

'Polite' society said that it wasn't the way to get the message across.

Has anything changed? Has the so-called 'polite' part of society taken ANY FUCKING NOTICE?

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/police-wont-charged-death-amir-locke-black-man-killed-no-knock-warrant-rcna23233
Police still shooting black people dead.

Also, thanks to defunding police movement and mask mandates, we now have more and more mob robberies.

Polite or not, I don't think things are changing for the better.

To me, it felt like BLM was more energized by Trump's white supremacy leaning. Once Trump is gone, although things really haven't changed much, we also don't seem much BLM protests anymore. Floyd jumpstarted it, but I really don't understand why it sorta just went away. What has changed?

America definitely has a racism problem, but I really think it has a greater wealth distribution problem. Poor young Obama and Old rich Obama will obviously be treated differently in America. Sure, age and race make a difference, but just saying money probably plays a much bigger role in how you're being treated in America.

Whether it's water pipes, roads, bridges, schools... people who are poor will have less and less access and be left further and further behind. It's obvious conservatives ain't gonna fix that and I'm not sure we can count on liberals to fix it either. Bernie Sanders remains my last hope... but the guy is old and probably ready to kick the bucket at any time...

[JoshInKC]

Also, thanks to defunding police movement [...] we now have more and more mob robberies.
No.
If you're going to say something like that, I want to see a source.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Not even Biden is for defunding the police. So I guess I can’t say that we’ve actually defunded the police. However, that sentiment is still there. A lot of police have also defunded themselves by quitting due to low morale and convicted criminals’ quick releases. What’s the point of enforcing laws and the next minute you see criminals released back in the public?

Something is wrong with our criminal Justice system and it’s not just racism. Or perhaps we’re just not equipped to deal with minor crimes? Growing homeless encampments around LA and Seattle is caused not just by lack of affordable housing.

Also, of course I am for masks during a pandemic, but it just makes robberies much easier to carry out.

America is just not helping those who need help and we’re leaving them further and further behind. These poor people committing petty crimes are not all black people of course. Last data I checked show homeless encampments are made up of 49% white 40% black.

https://endhomelessness.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/3rd-Demo-Brief-Race.pdf

They are mostly drug addicts and since they don't hold jobs, how do you think they get the money to buy drugs? Sure, some of their income probably came from good nature folks giving money to them, but most of the time, crimes were committed.

Anyway, I do hope our infrastructure bill will fix the pipes, roads and bridges 1st of course. Police funding really isn't the main issue, we just need to have proper reform so that the system can somehow take better care of the people regardless of their race and wealth?

Point is I don't see any improvements. I'm seeing things getting worse, whether it's LA or Seattle. Do you see any improvements? Am I missing something?

[neanderthal]

Am I missing something?

Yes; the link between defunding police and mob robberies. As asked for here


No.
If you're going to say something like that, I want to see a source.

Feel free to cite your source and link your source.

[neanderthal]

Supposed to be apoliticial but it's 2022; congratulations to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Doesn't change the political makeup of the court, still 6- 3. But it is the first time that white men are not the majority of the court. I hope the next appointee is Native American.

[Tom Servo]

No.
If you're going to say something like that, I want to see a source.

Yep. Our police chief and police union like to claim that crime is up due to defunding of the police. The LAPD hasn't been defunded, and crime is overall down. They're also going after our DA who they claim is too soft on crime, but the actual number of prosecutions is basically unchanged from his predecessor (who loved to let cops off the hook).

[JoshInKC]

Growing homeless encampments around LA and Seattle is caused not just by lack of affordable housing. Source?

America is just not helping those who need help and we’re leaving them further and further behind. True.

They are mostly drug addicts and since they don't hold jobs, how do you think they get the money to buy drugs? Sure, some of their income probably came from good nature folks giving money to them, but most of the time, crimes were committed.Def. gonna need to see a source on this one too, bro.

These poor people committing petty crimes are not all black people of course. Last data I checked show homeless encampments are made up of 49% white 40% black.

https://endhomelessness.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/3rd-Demo-Brief-Race.pdfGood job citing a source for a piece of data. What I would love is for you to consider looking for facts like those to support more of your opinions. I think one of the major "miscommunication" things you have on this forum is stringing one unsupported opinion after another and then drawing tons of conclusions from things that might not exist in the reality we all share. So maybe consider doing a quick search to see if your major assertions are supported by external sources before you hit 'post'.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Regarding homelessness, I found this data source to prove me wrong that not ALL homeless people are drug addicts.

https://www.uwkc.org/news/are-all-homeless-people-drug-addicts/

Only about 21%. 25% of them self reported that the #1 reason that they’re homeless is because they can’t afford a home.

That piece also made a distinction between drug addicts and folks who have opioid issues…

Anyway, I’m not in the ‘trenches’ and have not surveyed these encampments myself and probably brained washed by documentaries such as Seattle is Dying.

Still, I think it’s probably safe for me to say that majority of our homeless population is mentally impaired one way or another? They need more than just a roof over their heads?

Assuming only a small minority of that 20% would actually commit crimes to feed their addiction, the revolving door of our current criminal Justice system just isn’t working.

CA’s previous 3 strikes and you’re out law was way too harsh and now we’re way to lax.

We don’t even provided sufficient mental healthcare for regular citizens, naturally we’re not about to provide enough care for the homeless population.

Anyway, don’t really mean to pick on just homeless folks, in my current neighborhood in WA, we constantly hear about petty thefts and robberies on social media. From stolen bikes to trailers or 7/11 to bank robberies. Thank God I have not actually seen any of such crimes personally, but it’s still kinda scary. For sure these crimes were not all committed by homeless people, but surely they’re committed by poor folks looking for some quick cash either to feed their addictions or to just survive.

With housing, gas, food prices continue to soar, I suppose there will be more and more Aladdins, stealing what they can’t afford.

Perhaps we just need to create something that’s like prison but not quite prison. So that we can shelter and feed and give them mental healthcare to those who need such things. Maybe such place exist already? Probably called church? ;) however most small churches probably can’t afford to do that as well…

As it is, regardless whether if Billi has data or not, it’s kinda hard to convince me that we have homelessness and crime under control.

[Tom Servo]

The thing is, to me it seems like you keep thinking that public policy should be defined based on how you feel, not what the data says.

If one in four homeless people can't afford a home, that's a pretty massive fraction. There's a bit of confirmation bias when people think they understand the causes of homelessness. You tend to notice the homeless people who are having mental breakdowns or are drug addicts, you don't notice the tons of them that aren't. People who sleep in their cars at Walmart parking lots, that kind of thing. That's why it's important to collect data and figure out what you're dealing with.

Another problem is the proliferation of social media and sites like Citizen and Nextdoor. It used to be that if you were a victim of a crime, unless it was a particularly horrible one, basically you and your neighborhood friends heard about it. Now people can broadcast it to the entire neighborhood. It's more visibility into what's been there. Don't get me wrong, there are problems with the police not bothering to report crimes they don't think are worth bothering with, but it's the best way we have right now of actually measuring if things are improving or getting worse. It's kinda like if you got a black light to see if there was gross stuff on the hotel sheets. Sure, now you know there is and that's upsetting, but that doesn't mean that a) it wasn't there before and b) it wasn't even worse before you knew. The visibility of local crime via social media doesn't actually tell you anything, especially when it comes to where the amount of it lies in relation to historical trends.

But I think the biggest stat that I can give is this: We have the most incarcerated people per capita of any country in the world, and yet that hasn't solved the issue of homelessness and crime. Maybe the "tough on crime" kneejerk reaction isn't as effective as we might hope?

[Crazed_Insanity]

I’m not a computer nor Vulcan so naturally I’m not data driven. :p

I hope you understand that I’m not proposing we get tougher on criminals, we just need to intervene more effectively to help. It’s not like LA and Seattle aren’t spending huge load of money. It’s just frustrating, and I’m sure for our local politicians as well, that so much money was spent with so little to show for.

[Tom Servo]

I'm also neither of those, but when data's available I tend to find it to be a better gauge of whether what I'm doing is working to solve a problem. A couple of examples off the top of my head - if you were trying to save money on gas, would you prefer to just eyeball the gauge and go by gut feeling or would you rather write down how many miles you drove between fillups and how much you filled up each time to get a better idea of your mileage? (I realize this is a little silly, most cars will just tell you on the dash, but bear with me). Or in car racing - a lot of people think a lurid drifty slide looks fast, is that a better gauge than laptime of speed?

The thing is, overall crime is down. Gun violence is up, which is something we need to work on, but is likely unrelated to the homeless population. Homelessness is at an all time high, but is it because of drug addiction, or is it because investors are buying up all the housing stock and doing short-term rentals, driving housing and rental prices through the roof? We don't know if we don't have data, everything else is just Shotgun Debugging (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun_debugging)

[Tom Servo]

I just came up with a better analogy. Everything around me tells me that I am great at what I do. My new job offered me $10K more than I asked for. My current job is losing their shit that I'm leaving. I still have doubts about my abilities.

Perception is stupid. I am stupid for listening to it. Listen to the data.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I’m not against data, I’m also not against our own intuitions as well. Ideally the 2 should line up in agreement. If not, then some investigations may be in order.

Data can be manipulated. Our perceptions can be clouded. However I still like to have both to come to agreement by having accurate data and unclouded perceptions.

It doesn’t help me feel better with data pointing to lower crime overall but gun violence going up. I have data points of what LA and Seattle were like before… Wall st buying up homes is definitely problematic, but do you truly believe if we get investors to stop buying and builders to build more homes cheaply, these encampments would then naturally go away? I’m sure that’d help a lot of average folks out, but pretty sure encampments will remain.

Look, I don’t even know how nor do I have the means to debug our problems, shot gun or not.

I’m can only hope our tax dollars being thrown to tackle such problems didn’t end up enriching some other assholes instead.

[Rare White Ape]

Tom I've got an analogy for you. Picture yourself having a conversation and you're talking about CONTEXT and NUANCE with a housecat.

The cat brushes itself against your lower leg and then barfs in the corner.

[Tom Servo]

Lulz

[FaultyMario]

Picture yourself...

... on a boat on a river...

[Yw-slayer]

Dude. Am I the only one who noticed that Swervo was talking about saving gas?

[JSGeneral]

Dude. Am I the only one who noticed that Swervo was talking about saving gas?

There are some others here that I only read a little bit at a time, but for Swervo's posts... I fully consume each one.

[Cam]

That gag that keeps on gagging.

[Tom Servo]

I'm feeling seen.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Why are you feeling? Data is telling you that! :p

[sandydandy]

So glad Judge Jackson finally got confirmed after that circus of a hearing that seemed like it was going to last forever.

The "what is a woman" gotcha was pathetic and desperate.

[Tom Servo]

Even moreso that then Hawley got asked by an interviewer to define a woman, said something about being able to have children, and then ended up hemming and hawing a lot when asked if a woman who's had a hysterectomy or lost their ovaries to cancer was a woman.

As popehat put it, can you imagine being so fucking dumb that you'd make a big performative dance out of a supposed gotcha question and not even have a prepared answer yourself?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Anyway, that was one small step back for white men, but one giant leap for SCOTUS kind.

However to be frank, I don’t really care about their race nor gender, I just hope these justices will be able to interpret laws justly.

[Tom Servo]

That's awfully presumptuous to call it a step back for white men. This white man doesn't feel that way.

[Rare White Ape]

... on a boat on a river...

SHIA LABEOUF


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da57xY2VMAA5GRc.jpg

[Crazed_Insanity]

That's awfully presumptuous to call it a step back for white men. This white man doesn't feel that way.

1st time ever white male lost their majority in the Supreme Court. How would you describe that step for white men?

Overall it’s definitely a step forward, but if you look at just the data… :p

[Tom Servo]

It's like you're a machine built by an advanced race to just say the worst possible things.

[MR2 Fan]

:lol:

[Crazed_Insanity]

I’m a feely machine though. Nothing like Spock or Data.

[KillerB]

It's like you're a machine built by an advanced race to just say the worst possible things.

Clearly not that advanced - he could be saying the worst possible things that are at least coherent. I've not read his posts in years, and tried to get through one the other day and gave up after three sentences. They read to me like something just more sensible than word salad; it has the structure of English but his statements bring to mind the old saying attributed to Wolfgang Pauli - "That is not only not right, it's not even wrong!" Though this other statement of Pauli's might be more appropriate in this case: "What you said was so confused that one could not tell whether it was nonsense or not."

Anyhow, other than picking on Billi, which I admit is not very nice, but the last several years have seen a rise in people not just being ignorant, but willfully ignorant. In other words, it's not that they haven't had an opportunity to get the facts, they've been presented with the facts and choose not to believe them. This shit predated Trump - he's a symptom* of something larger I'd been worried about for most of the last decade, people becoming unable to even agree on basic facts. I've seen the idiocy from some of my hippie friends out here who buy into conspiracy theories and some of them who had children wouldn't vaccinate them, despite Andrew Wakefield (he lost his license and I refuse to call him a doctor) being totally discredited as he falsified information in a study paid for by a pharmaceutical company that had developed an MMR vaccine that didn't contain thimerosal, a compound that contains the element mercury, which there were concerns in the 1990s about whether it would break down in the body in a way that would lead to mercury poisoning, which led to its use being phased out. It later turned out that the way it broke down to ethyl mercury caused it to not cause the toxicity they predicted. However, this pharmaceutical company paid Wakefield to falsify data to make it look like the compound caused autism, to drive demand for their formulation that didn't contain thimerosal. The study was later retracted but the damage was done. Now tons of folks on the right have gotten on the anti-vaxxer train because "muh freedums," or whatever the assholes manipulating these ignorant folks tell them is a reason to not get vaccinated.

But I was seeing a large increase in folks I knew on the right who also were falling into this refusal to agree on basic facts; ironically this has led, IMO, to people on the far right and far left believing in the same conspiracies; I'm not surprised by racists on the right believing that the Jews run the world; I was surprised when I started to hear things like that from people on the left. It's the "horseshoe" theory of extreme politics going so far out there that they meet back up on the crazy side.

*I honestly can't remember whether I commented on the Politics thread since rise of Trumpism and the Republicans going full-on anti-facts, but I think you all know enough about me that there is not a thing on Earth that could have gotten me to vote for that nincompoop. Set aside his disgusting statements and his abhorrent positions - he was just so clearly not qualified to be president, and those whole four years combined with the absolute nightmare of January 6th made me lose a lot of my faith in my fellow Americans to respect the process and the institutions and the Constitution that has helped keep this county together and working when so many other countries founded on similar ideals have not been able to say the same.

It's become winning at all costs to the Republicans, and unfortunately now I see far too many people on both ends of the political spectrum who clearly no longer see the opposing side as fellow Americans, or even humans. I think the right got us to this point, but when I read screeds online from leftists who talk about putting people wealthier than them "up against the wall when the revolution comes," I get very concerned. The irony is that the truly wealthy in the US - not the 1% but the 0.1% - will have the ability to get a "golden passport" by investing in certain EU countries that grant them to people who bring a certain amount of money into their country, and have assets that are mobile. Meanwhile, those of us in the upper middle class, "professional class," or "petit bourgeoisie", whose main sources of wealth are our homes and 401k retirement plans, won't have that option. Frankly, my wife and I have been investigating how little we would need to spend to get a second passport - it appears buying a house in Malta is the cheapest option. If we are able to retire, we'll sell our house in California and buy a small home somewhere with an inexpensive golden passport in the EU and, if the US is still hanging together by then, maybe buy some kind of condo or apartment in a walkable American city. But I am not optimistic about the future of our country at this point. :(

Okay, that's enough of a political post for another few years. :lol:

PS - I truly believe if Hillary Clinton hadn't made that "basket of deplorables" remark, she'd have won that election. Hell, *I* was insulted - even though my politics by 2016 wouldn't put me in that group, I also felt she was looking down her nose at people where I'm from, and as soon as she said that, I turned to my wife and said, "She's going to lose. I guarantee you she at least cost herself Pennsylvania, and probably some other Rust Belt states. I don't even live there anymore, and I'm not politically who she's talking about, but that remark makes me want to punch her in the face. I guarantee you none of my family back home will vote for her now. They may still not vote for Trump, but they'll stay home."

PPS - Reality continues to approach Mike Judge's Idiocracy - I'm left unable to fathom how many willfully ignorant and just plain dumb people manage to function on a day-to-day basis. I'm glad I don't have kids so I basically only have to worry about how things will go for the next 35-40 years. Other than a few friends who are younger and may outlive me, I avoid a lot of anxiety over the future because no one I really care about will have to live in that time. I feel bad for all of you with kids - and, of course, for your kids.

[neanderthal]

Clearly not that advanced - he could be saying the worst possible things that are at least coherent. I've not read his posts in years, and tried to get through one the other day and gave up after three sentences. They read to me like something just more sensible than word salad; it has the structure of English but his statements bring to mind the old saying attributed to Wolfgang Pauli - "That is not only not right, it's not even wrong!" Though this other statement of Pauli's might be more appropriate in this case: "What you said was so confused that one could not tell whether it was nonsense or not."

Anyhow, other than picking on Billi, which I admit is not very nice, but the last several years have seen a rise in people not just being ignorant, but willfully ignorant. In other words, it's not that they haven't had an opportunity to get the facts, they've been presented with the facts and choose not to believe them. This shit predated Trump - he's a symptom* of something larger I'd been worried about for most of the last decade, people becoming unable to even agree on basic facts. I've seen the idiocy from some of my hippie friends out here who buy into conspiracy theories and some of them who had children wouldn't vaccinate them, despite Andrew Wakefield (he lost his license and I refuse to call him a doctor) being totally discredited as he falsified information in a study paid for by a pharmaceutical company that had developed an MMR vaccine that didn't contain thimerosal, a compound that contains the element mercury, which there were concerns in the 1990s about whether it would break down in the body in a way that would lead to mercury poisoning, which led to its use being phased out. It later turned out that the way it broke down to ethyl mercury caused it to not cause the toxicity they predicted. However, this pharmaceutical company paid Wakefield to falsify data to make it look like the compound caused autism, to drive demand for their formulation that didn't contain thimerosal. The study was later retracted but the damage was done. Now tons of folks on the right have gotten on the anti-vaxxer train because "muh freedums," or whatever the assholes manipulating these ignorant folks tell them is a reason to not get vaccinated.

But I was seeing a large increase in folks I knew on the right who also were falling into this refusal to agree on basic facts; ironically this has led, IMO, to people on the far right and far left believing in the same conspiracies; I'm not surprised by racists on the right believing that the Jews run the world; I was surprised when I started to hear things like that from people on the left. It's the "horseshoe" theory of extreme politics going so far out there that they meet back up on the crazy side.

*I honestly can't remember whether I commented on the Politics thread since rise of Trumpism and the Republicans going full-on anti-facts, but I think you all know enough about me that there is not a thing on Earth that could have gotten me to vote for that nincompoop. Set aside his disgusting statements and his abhorrent positions - he was just so clearly not qualified to be president, and those whole four years combined with the absolute nightmare of January 6th made me lose a lot of my faith in my fellow Americans to respect the process and the institutions and the Constitution that has helped keep this county together and working when so many other countries founded on similar ideals have not been able to say the same.

It's become winning at all costs to the Republicans, and unfortunately now I see far too many people on both ends of the political spectrum who clearly no longer see the opposing side as fellow Americans, or even humans. I think the right got us to this point, but when I read screeds online from leftists who talk about putting people wealthier than them "up against the wall when the revolution comes," I get very concerned. The irony is that the truly wealthy in the US - not the 1% but the 0.1% - will have the ability to get a "golden passport" by investing in certain EU countries that grant them to people who bring a certain amount of money into their country, and have assets that are mobile. Meanwhile, those of us in the upper middle class, "professional class," or "petit bourgeoisie", whose main sources of wealth are our homes and 401k retirement plans, won't have that option. Frankly, my wife and I have been investigating how little we would need to spend to get a second passport - it appears buying a house in Malta is the cheapest option. If we are able to retire, we'll sell our house in California and buy a small home somewhere with an inexpensive golden passport in the EU and, if the US is still hanging together by then, maybe buy some kind of condo or apartment in a walkable American city. But I am not optimistic about the future of our country at this point. :(

Okay, that's enough of a political post for another few years. :lol:

PS - I truly believe if Hillary Clinton hadn't made that "basket of deplorables" remark, she'd have won that election. Hell, *I* was insulted - even though my politics by 2016 wouldn't put me in that group, I also felt she was looking down her nose at people where I'm from, and as soon as she said that, I turned to my wife and said, "She's going to lose. I guarantee you she at least cost herself Pennsylvania, and probably some other Rust Belt states. I don't even live there anymore, and I'm not politically who she's talking about, but that remark makes me want to punch her in the face. I guarantee you none of my family back home will vote for her now. They may still not vote for Trump, but they'll stay home."

PPS - Reality continues to approach Mike Judge's Idiocracy - I'm left unable to fathom how many willfully ignorant and just plain dumb people manage to function on a day-to-day basis. I'm glad I don't have kids so I basically only have to worry about how things will go for the next 35-40 years. Other than a few friends who are younger and may outlive me, I avoid a lot of anxiety over the future because no one I really care about will have to live in that time. I feel bad for all of you with kids - and, of course, for your kids.


“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” Clinton said. “The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”

Source. (https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript/)

Context is important. Sure, she said it and it cost her, but peoples/ their failing to listen to more than the soundbite falls squarely in line with your thoughts about the wilfully ignorant.
That Trump l i t e r a l l y said people could drink bleach and then ... there wasn't an exodus of actual thinking people from the party, spoke volumes. :eek: I CANNOT with any Trump voter/ supporter. Cannot.

[Yw-slayer]

Idiocracy was a great movie. It should be required watching for every teenager.

[MR2 Fan]

So Trump decides apparently that he won't run in 2024 due to health issues....BUT he just had a rally tonight. Amazing how he keeps having rallies for....something (I know what it's for...raising money) but just...how idiotic his supporters must be to just keep showing up to these events expecting...what? JFK Jr. to show up? imbeciles

[Tom Servo]

So Trump decides apparently that he won't run in 2024 due to health issues

CITATION DESPERATELY NEEDED!!1!!eleven!!

[Kchrpm]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10696249/Trump-75-admits-health-stop-running-president-2024.html

[Tom Servo]

Oof, feels like false hope.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I think he’s just dropping hints and teases. Nothing firm yet. We need something firmer like lock him up!

Anyway, although KB won’t read my posts but I still feel the need to respond, not really from a personal level, I am thick skinned enough to not be offended by what he said. I think it’s perfectly understandable why he sees me that way.

However, speaking for dumbasses, hey, if I’m born with low IQ, what can I do? This isn’t a symptom of anything but something naturally occurring! A truly diverse society will end up having smart and dumb people. Best we can do to remedy this is by having better schools. Are we investing in our education system?

Now, speaking for those willfully ignorant, well, one man’s gospel truth/scientific data maybe another man’s bullshit. This particular symptom is the lack of trust for organized religions/organized political institutions. People don’t really have issues with the real Jesus Christ or actual science. It’s the lack of trust for these man made institutions.

If you think Hillary was wrong to look down upon people who she disagree with, then we ought to not do the same.

This is a free country. I personally would not look down on people who disagree with me politically or religiously because we really cannot be absolutely certain about anything. (I do look down on Putin and Xi because I honestly can’t look up to assholes!)

Anyway, I have my reasons why I’m not happy with this world, but I’m still hopeful of our collective future because I believe there is a good God. Besides that, we also have lots of people doing good in this world.

[Yw-slayer]

It's the Daily Mail. Ignore.

[MR2 Fan]

Apparently this was in an interview he did, so basically all he's doing is setting up an excuse if he doesn't run

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FP1f0_KXoAg29Yj?format=png&name=medium

[Rare White Ape]

lots of words that I actually read

I am glad you have made a reappearance here. That was a good post.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Apparently this was in an interview he did, so basically all he's doing is setting up an excuse if he doesn't run

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FP1f0_KXoAg29Yj?format=png&name=medium

I’m skeptical he really concerned about his health. He is probably leaving his exit possible for some other reasons…, whatever that reason may be, it’s better than him fully committed to run again.

Anyway, I suspect his ambiguity is simply to avoid campaign finance laws, like you said, he enjoys making/raising money for himself above all else.

[KillerB]

Source. (https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript/)

Context is important. Sure, she said it and it cost her, but peoples/ their failing to listen to more than the soundbite falls squarely in line with your thoughts about the wilfully ignorant.
That Trump l i t e r a l l y said people could drink bleach and then ... there wasn't an exodus of actual thinking people from the party, spoke volumes. :eek: I CANNOT with any Trump voter/ supporter. Cannot.

Oh, I know the soundbite was taken out of context. But with her considerable experience in politics, she knew or should have known that the media will take something like that out of the context of the longer statement. The way it played on TV - and not just Fox News - made it sound a lot worse and more broadly applied than it did in the context of the statement. When I read the whole thing a few days later, I was less bothered, but most people didn't bother. Context may matter in a conversation, but I really don't think it matters in modern politics, and this is *definitely* a both sides issue, because basically all TV and clickbait media does it. That's why I stick mostly to longform articles in publications like The Atlantic[/] when I can.

[I]HOWEVER calling half of your opponents a "basket of deplorables" doesn't really help peel off some of the other half. In fact, adding the "you name it" at the end made it still pretty rough in context, because it makes someone wonder what other things might get them a "deplorable" label. It was such a self-own because she didn't need to say anything like that to her own supporters. It just frustrates me because that election was SO close. FWIW, I held my nose and voted for her anyway, because I value having someone in at the desk that can do the job that I'm not fond of than someone who has spent his life failing upward. It also helps that I didn't much agree with Trump's positions, either, such as they even existed before he took office. And let's face it, Clinton was basically a neoliberal anyway.

Oh, and word to the Republicans - I will *never* forget that your so-called tax cut in 2017 actually *raised* our taxes by several thousand dollars a year. If you want to know why Orange County, CA turned blue for the first time ever in the 2018 midterms, that was, IMO, the deciding factor here. While I couldn't abide the racism, incompetence, and just general lunacy in the Trump administration, I have a feeling a lot of OC folks would have held their noses and kept voting Republican. But that tax bill was seen here by many as a complete and utter betrayal.

The only good thing in that bill was finally indexing the AMT to inflation.

[KillerB]

Idiocracy was a great movie. It should be required watching for every teenager..

I'll second that. Then make them watch it again (and Office Space) their first year in the workplace.

[KillerB]

I am glad you have made a reappearance here. That was a good post.

Thank you - it's nice to hear that you're happy I've started posting here again. I don't have the time or the stamina to get into big debates anymore, but I'll probably drop a long post like that from time to time. I've had a lot of time to ponder and digest politics over the last several years, and my positions have continued to evolve generally leftward on economics, and still pretty socially libertarian. That said, while my family is certainly more than comfortable, I remain steadfastly against folks like my wife and I having to contribute any more in taxes until they find a constitutional way to make the TRULY wealthy (like the folks who have hundreds of millions or billions of dollars) pay their fare share.

*I say constitutional because the neosocialst/progressive part of the left needs to drop the wealth tax idea. It would be extremely hard to prevent legal avoidance (people with this kind of money can afford tax professionals to set up all the trusts and offshore corporations to enable this), and drive "global citizens" to renounce US citizenship to avoid taxation. But most importantly, it's likely not constitutional, based on Article I, Section 2, which requires that direct taxes be apportioned among the states by population. Yes I know the American Bar Association and others argue it's constitutional, but I guarantee if it got to the Supreme Court as it is currently composed, it will be struck down. The original income tax levied in the United States during the Civil War was struck down as unconstitutional for the same reason. We have income taxes now because they amended the Constitution specifically allow them. I would argue you would need an amendment for a wealth tax as well, and for the time being that is clearly not going to happen.

"Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best." - Otto von Bismarck

[KillerB]

Okay, I'll toss a little bomb out here and see what people think:

The United States - and perhaps some of the rest of the world, too - would be better off if Mitt Romney won the US Presidential election in 2012.

- Romney would be an incumbent in 2016. Barring something happening to Romney or some very strange turn of events, there's no real competition for the Republican nomination in 2016.
- The House and perhaps the Senate still go Democratic, because the party in power tends to lose seats in the midterm election of a president's first term.
- The years 2017-2020 would not have been wasted on the foreign policy front by pissing off our allies and focusing on the wrong geopolitical threats, and the constant general buffoonery on Twitter.
- A tax reform bill, if any, doesn't proceed to piss off traditionally Republican voters in coastal states, because Romney knows where his bread is buttered.
- A white supremacist movement isn't emboldened by seeing someone who says just the absolute worst things proceed to win an election. It doesn't mean they're not racist, but people don't feel empowered to speak or act on those thoughts.
- There is no one fomenting an insurrection and attempted coup, because there's not a malignant delusional narcissist and his enablers placing power above all else, even the Constitution.
- Who knows whether Romney would have been able to affect the path Russia has taken, but it's worth noting that he identified Russia as our greatest geopolitical threat. He was roundly mocked at the time. Maybe it was a case of a stopped clock being right twice a day, but... anything would have been better than what we got instead, right?
- The Democrats still win the presidency in 2020, because that's usually the rhythm of things in the United States. Bonus for those on the progressive left - without the pressure of needing to do ANYTHING to get Trump out of office, perhaps there's room for a more progressive candidate - because it's no longer the very fate of our democracy that's at stake, it's not the end of the world if a progressive loses to some milquetoast, non-radicalized Republican.

I've convinced an awful lot of leftist friends with this one. :)

[mk]

War's are many times sort of a tipping point thingies.
So cumulative history below those points are also needed.

Russia/Soviets have been losing ground for quite some time and naive Western Europe have been pick-nicking.
Merkel was a gate keeper with money, the opposite USA couldn't have done it, their money though.

Ukraine made their war but its enabler was the Holocaust.
Without the Holocaust western allies would finally have continued to Moscow, with Germany.
Even if not, if nationalism in Germany was allowed the thing had been very different anyway.

So when Russian leaders started thinking their people are going to oppose them in near future the case was pretty much closed.
And without much stronger Ukraine the situation is the same.
Would free thinker Germans have made that change, who knows.

[FaultyMario]

I think Romney would have been better than the neoliberals, actually.

But I think you are mistaken on the "foreign threat" bit. The U.S. is the military, economic and cultural hegemon, it has no real threats; Russia is not Europe's threat, it's the other way around, Russia has been a primary exporter to Europe. In fact, you guys are the threat, the US/Israel & US/Saudi partnerships control the Mediterranean interface, and on the other side of the world you've got China surrounded with the biggest naval structure the world ever saw! and, even if the Chinese "investment diplomacy" could be harmful to some of the military/industrial interests of Yankee companies, it stops being so if you guys realize that the cold-war approach has stopped functioning, in everything from security to commerce.

Which would be my biggest criticism of Trump's policies, they are fifty years too old.

[Rare White Ape]

@KillerB regarding the tax thing:

I think we all agree that the ultra-rich need to pay their fair share, and that low-to-middle income earners would probably have less of an issue with taxes if they felt that their tax dollars were being spent more responsibly.

Try getting everyone to agree on what constitutes responsible spending though… welcome to politics.

But the kicker is we are seeing the long-term effects of the Reagan era with unequal tax policies so entrenched into the economy that these destructive measures literally cannot be rolled back lest it result in the political suicide of whoever has the guts to try and fix them. I think in general the USA is under taxed at all levels of the economy and is unable to afford what it needs, and as a result nobody feels like they’re benefiting. Reversing that course will be incredibly unpopular. Raising the minimum wage would be a good start because people who earn more will pay more tax without even having to fiddle with tax rates.

One could simplistically say “why don’t we cut military spending and put extra into schools and roads and public healthcare” but that’s a minefield too. Look at where that money is spent: hundreds of thousands of jobs across the USA, plus the scale of the military is one of those things that can’t ever be rolled back.

I think the whole world would be in a better place if ultra-conservative fiscal policies from the 70s and 80s never saw the light of day. As a comparison Australia avoided that and has had a steady economy all the way into the 2010s, but ultra-conservative policies that were introduced in the late-90s are coming home to roost now; real wages have gone backwards over the last decade, our property market is one of the most protected in the world so house prices have skyrocketed by 24% in the last year, 4 out of every 5 buyers are existing homeowners, and interest rates are about to take a big leap. Guess what that means for people trying to buy their first home? And the first germ of a thought from our conservative government (should they win the election in May) is to allow people to buy a house on a 5% deposit. One could call that a ‘sub-prime’ mortgage… Something real bad is going to happen to our economy if this isn’t fixed really quickly.

[FaultyMario]

Hah! this is us:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPnlQBwXwAYWirl.jpg

Behaviors of deflated house prices vs true wage earnings, starting at 100 for 2005.

[MR2 Fan]

http://images7.memedroid.com/images/UPLOADED655/590f22cbc8d7b.jpeg

[neanderthal]

Okay, I'll toss a little bomb out here and see what people think:

The United States - and perhaps some of the rest of the world, too - would be better off if Mitt Romney won the US Presidential election in 2012.

- Romney would be an incumbent in 2016. Barring something happening to Romney or some very strange turn of events, there's no real competition for the Republican nomination in 2016.
- The House and perhaps the Senate still go Democratic, because the party in power tends to lose seats in the midterm election of a president's first term.
- The years 2017-2020 would not have been wasted on the foreign policy front by pissing off our allies and focusing on the wrong geopolitical threats, and the constant general buffoonery on Twitter.
- A tax reform bill, if any, doesn't proceed to piss off traditionally Republican voters in coastal states, because Romney knows where his bread is buttered.
- A white supremacist movement isn't emboldened by seeing someone who says just the absolute worst things proceed to win an election. It doesn't mean they're not racist, but people don't feel empowered to speak or act on those thoughts.
- There is no one fomenting an insurrection and attempted coup, because there's not a malignant delusional narcissist and his enablers placing power above all else, even the Constitution.
- Who knows whether Romney would have been able to affect the path Russia has taken, but it's worth noting that he identified Russia as our greatest geopolitical threat. He was roundly mocked at the time. Maybe it was a case of a stopped clock being right twice a day, but... anything would have been better than what we got instead, right?
- The Democrats still win the presidency in 2020, because that's usually the rhythm of things in the United States. Bonus for those on the progressive left - without the pressure of needing to do ANYTHING to get Trump out of office, perhaps there's room for a more progressive candidate - because it's no longer the very fate of our democracy that's at stake, it's not the end of the world if a progressive loses to some milquetoast, non-radicalized Republican.

I've convinced an awful lot of leftist friends with this one. :)

You have a lot of faith in the Republicans. Or maybe i'm just jaded over the last few years.

It's probable that it happens the way you've written it, but the party seems to have been on the path to where they are now (authoritarianism) a long time ago. Trump just accelerated it.

2012 would have been right after that recession. I think if GOP had won the house, senate, and presidency then, that they would have enacted their supply side economics and we'd be in a much worse economic pile than we are now.
If Mittens had won the WH but the senate and congress went to Democrats, who knows. Some kind of detente where the economy just stumbled along and things didn't really improve but maybe didn't get worse either.

As it is right now the only Republican i have any semblance of trust in is Kinzinger.

[neanderthal]

@KillerB regarding the tax thing:

I think we all agree that the ultra-rich need to pay their fair share, and that low-to-middle income earners would probably have less of an issue with taxes if they felt that their tax dollars were being spent more responsibly.

Try getting everyone to agree on what constitutes responsible spending though… welcome to politics.

But the kicker is we are seeing the long-term effects of the Reagan era with unequal tax policies so entrenched into the economy that these destructive measures literally cannot be rolled back lest it result in the political suicide of whoever has the guts to try and fix them. I think in general the USA is under taxed at all levels of the economy and is unable to afford what it needs, and as a result nobody feels like they’re benefiting. Reversing that course will be incredibly unpopular. Raising the minimum wage would be a good start because people who earn more will pay more tax without even having to fiddle with tax rates.

One could simplistically say “why don’t we cut military spending and put extra into schools and roads and public healthcare” but that’s a minefield too. Look at where that money is spent: hundreds of thousands of jobs across the USA, plus the scale of the military is one of those things that can’t ever be rolled back.

I think the whole world would be in a better place if ultra-conservative fiscal policies from the 70s and 80s never saw the light of day. As a comparison Australia avoided that and has had a steady economy all the way into the 2010s, but ultra-conservative policies that were introduced in the late-90s are coming home to roost now; real wages have gone backwards over the last decade, our property market is one of the most protected in the world so house prices have skyrocketed by 24% in the last year, 4 out of every 5 buyers are existing homeowners, and interest rates are about to take a big leap. Guess what that means for people trying to buy their first home? And the first germ of a thought from our conservative government (should they win the election in May) is to allow people to buy a house on a 5% deposit. One could call that a ‘sub-prime’ mortgage… Something real bad is going to happen to our economy if this isn’t fixed really quickly.

Indeed.

While the economy is a ginormous complicated thing, I honestly think we here (except billi) would actually have a decent shot of fixing that shit better than politicians. The trick is have a large middle class with disposable income. Our middle class is being squeezed hard from both sides to where even buying a house is a challenge now in most metro areas.

Then again, I suppose we need to really redefine what middle class is. If you make less than $100000 a year, i'd call that working class rather than middle class. Less than $50k i'd call that working poor.
But $50k/ annum goes a long way in rural Alabama vs coastal anywhere.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Indeed.

While the economy is a ginormous complicated thing, I honestly think we here (except billi) would actually have a decent shot of fixing that shit better than politicians. The trick is have a large middle class with disposable income. Our middle class is being squeezed hard from both sides to where even buying a house is a challenge now in most metro areas.



I can only ‘feel’ something is not right, but I’m definitely not smart enough to know how to properly fix this economy/tax codes even if I have the power to do so.

Bernie Sanders just felt the most right to me. I’d definitely vote for anyone here, including Neanderthal, for president if I could.

I just don’t trust Hillary nor Mitt because those guys are just way too ‘established’ for my taste. Biden at least still had his working class roots…

This is supposedly a nation of the people, by the people and for the people. Not the establishment.

Of course Trump was way worse than those established candidates. No question about that. He clearly took advantage of the frustrated IQ challenged Americans.

However, he is just a symptom of peoples frustration over the establishments’ abuses over the decades.

So excuse me for not voting Hillary nor Mitt. :p

As long as we don’t fix the strangle hold of the establishment on our government, there will be more Trumps coming our way. I pray that we won’t have another Trump-like candidate who’s a bit more competent and more charismatic… once American voters fall for that guy, then it’ll be game over for all of us.

Thank God Trump wasn’t that competent.

[FaultyMario]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FHFjQ3HXEAIRaXW.jpg

I'd watch it.

[MR2 Fan]

Yeah, something like this

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FOLloswWQAEddTe?format=jpg&name=large

[Crazed_Insanity]

http://images7.memedroid.com/images/UPLOADED655/590f22cbc8d7b.jpeg

I just realized that pen is not only position on the right, but actually on the FAR RIGHT, much like Trump! She loves Putin too and will likely get France out of NATO! This Ukraine war has tamped down even Trump's admiration of Putin, how are the French still okay with somebody pro-Putin? Anyway, I guess it's France's turn to make itself great again? Hope not. Sigh...

[Dicknose]

Australia now has a date for its Federal election. May 21.

While I think most of our election system is very good, for the Federal the date is set by the Prime Minister. So we had to wait for the PM to "call" the election.

And while you technically only vote for your local representative, not the PM, these do come down to the leaders. And unfortunately this one is between two unremarkable men.

[Rare White Ape]

I don’t care about the personalities of the candidates. I just want Labor to form government.

[Dicknose]

I don’t care about the personalities of the candidates. I just want Labor to form government.
Scomo seems hopeless, completely lacking in empathy and honesty.
I just feel Labor could have picked a better leader, but they went with bland as a cautious option.

[Rare White Ape]

Yeah, I saw some talking head last week (it might have even been friendlyjordies) saying he ran the perfect opposition and gave the media nothing, absolutely nothing to chew on.

But it is different once it's election time. The uncooperative media is already on the warpath picking out the most minor issues and constructing the typical Murdoch hackjobs. I fucken can't wait for that cunt to die. Sorry to change subject here in such a rush but Rupert Murdoch needs to die shirtless and penniless and alone with no friends and no one to say goodbye with my rancid cum caking his eyes shut and I hope his bath towel hits the toilet bowl every time he dries himself off after he showers for the rest of his life.

*breathe*

Anyway, yes, so, I am voting Labor again.

[2ndMoparMan]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/13/politics/mark-meadows-removed-voter-rolls-north-carolina/index.html

get fucked.

[Yw-slayer]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/13/politics/mark-meadows-removed-voter-rolls-north-carolina/index.html

get fucked.

According to Billi and his Brainwashed Bros, this could NEVER happen in a Liberal democracy!! Oh no, never!!!

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://www.axios.com/rnc-vote-withdraw-president-debate-55487e0f-1a72-4242-8f5b-5cea225f9ea0.html

Wow. Republicans have voted to cancel the presidential debates. :erm:

I take that as a sign that Trump is probably running come 2024. Even if Trump is locked up, they'll probably have somebody trump-like...

[FaultyMario]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FQROHAfX0AETFQn.jpg

Volunshow and tell.

[Tom Servo]

Nothing screams "performative victimhood" like saying that people asking you to explain how you plan to fix things is biased against you.

[neanderthal]

Thoughts? (no billi. i am not interested in your incoherent mumblings.)

Is/ do the recent actions of Putin put him up there with the worst of the worst; Hitler, Stalin, PolPot?

If so, where does George Bush feature in that lineup.

[neanderthal]

Thoughts? (no billi. i am not interested in your incoherent mumblings.)

Is/ do the recent actions of Putin put him up there with the worst of the worst; Hitler, Stalin, PolPot?

If so, where does George Bush feature in that lineup.

My thoughts.

Yes. Duh.
But also; No, It's too soon to tell.

GB; somewhere in line in front of Putin.

In which case, where does that put President Obama. Somewhere in that line too. I'm just not sure where.

[Rare White Ape]

I don't think Putin's actions have been anywhere near as bad as those you mentioned.

It may sound like I am defending him here (I am not) but: it's not exactly a surprise that he has ordered Russia to attack Ukraine. There was plenty of warning and his demands were very clear. There is no hint of genocide or dictator-ish actions. His target is essentially the institution of NATO and Ukraine just happens to be the battleground.

Right now is has been made abundantly clear and obvious that Russia is essentially powerless to do the sort of bullying in the region that everyone was fearing; the Russian military has been a total embarrassment, backed up by a complete failure in intelligence and military leadership. If Russia can't take a relatively smol country like Ukraine then how do you expect it to take over all of Europe, or even defend its own turf?

Out of all those people, Henry Kissinger would be one to top the list of worst American warmongers.

[Tom Servo]

I dunno, the indiscriminate killings of people, especially just wholesale slaughtering of men and raping of women, puts this beyond "this is a strategic thing 'cuz NATO" for me.

I think the NATO thing is a red herring. He's long said that he thinks the breaking up of the soviet union was a mistake and that he wants to rebuild it. I don't think he's hit the level of Stalin or Hitler yet, but I also think he's capable of it. The NATO thing strikes me as George W. claiming that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, not that the US wanted to go for war for oil and with the side benefit of hopefully getting rid of the guy who wanted to assassinate his dad.

EDIT: I should say, I think he's mentally and personally capable of ordering atrocities on that scale. I don't think he's a good enough leader as evidenced by the particularly shit military he seems to have to actually get people to carry it out for him.

[Crazed_Insanity]

My thoughts.

Yes. Duh.
But also; No, It's too soon to tell.

GB; somewhere in line in front of Putin.

In which case, where does that put President Obama. Somewhere in that line too. I'm just not sure where.

Yeah, I’ll give you my thoughts anyways after Putin dies or repent of his sins. :p

[neanderthal]

I don't think Putin's actions have been anywhere near as bad as those you mentioned.

It may sound like I am defending him here (I am not) but: it's not exactly a surprise that he has ordered Russia to attack Ukraine. There was plenty of warning and his demands were very clear. There is no hint of genocide or dictator-ish actions. His target is essentially the institution of NATO and Ukraine just happens to be the battleground.

Right now is has been made abundantly clear and obvious that Russia is essentially powerless to do the sort of bullying in the region that everyone was fearing; the Russian military has been a total embarrassment, backed up by a complete failure in intelligence and military leadership. If Russia can't take a relatively smol country like Ukraine then how do you expect it to take over all of Europe, or even defend its own turf?

Out of all those people, Henry Kissinger would be one to top the list of worst American warmongers.


I dunno, the indiscriminate killings of people, especially just wholesale slaughtering of men and raping of women, puts this beyond "this is a strategic thing 'cuz NATO" for me.

I think the NATO thing is a red herring. He's long said that he thinks the breaking up of the soviet union was a mistake and that he wants to rebuild it. I don't think he's hit the level of Stalin or Hitler yet, but I also think he's capable of it. The NATO thing strikes me as George W. claiming that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, not that the US wanted to go for war for oil and with the side benefit of hopefully getting rid of the guy who wanted to assassinate his dad.

EDIT: I should say, I think he's mentally and personally capable of ordering atrocities on that scale. I don't think he's a good enough leader as evidenced by the particularly shit military he seems to have to actually get people to carry it out for him.

I've talked bout Justins YouTube channel (Beau of the Fifth column) several times here. He's got a couple of insightful videos about how Russia has managed to stumble so badly in Ukraine.
Part of the military bumbling has been due to corruption; generals pocketing money that was supposed to maintain fleet vehicles, etc. Another mis-step was a special agency that he created to sow discord in Ukraine. They were supposed to be undermining the government, sowing discontent, fometing rebellion. Instead, it appears money that was supposed to be given to sowers of misinformation, and other informants, was being pocketed, and the intel was being created. And sent back to Russia. Which would explain why Putin thought Russian military would be received as liberators, and they were received as exactly the opposite.


It's really quite illuminating when you put all the pieces together.

[neanderthal]

My thoughts.

Yes. Duh.
But also; No, It's too soon to tell.

GB; somewhere in line in front of Putin.

In which case, where does that put President Obama. Somewhere in that line too. I'm just not sure where.

And, giving this further thought, when you think about how the CIA has managed to undermine so many countries sovereignty, economies, currencies, political establishments, etc, then youhave to start asking yourself where does each and every single USian president stand on that list.
Then you think about Frances ecnonomic policies towards its former colonies that didn't want to use the Franc.

And fucking Leopold that right fucking cunt of a Belgian king.

[Tom Servo]

I've talked bout Justins YouTube channel (Beau of the Fifth column) several times here. He's got a couple of insightful videos about how Russia has managed to stumble so badly in Ukraine.
Part of the military bumbling has been due to corruption; generals pocketing money that was supposed to maintain fleet vehicles, etc. Another mis-step was a special agency that he created to sow discord in Ukraine. They were supposed to be undermining the government, sowing discontent, fometing rebellion. Instead, it appears money that was supposed to be given to sowers of misinformation, and other informants, was being pocketed, and the intel was being created. And sent back to Russia. Which would explain why Putin thought Russian military would be received as liberators, and they were received as exactly the opposite.


It's really quite illuminating when you put all the pieces together.

Oh yeah, some of the stories coming out of what basically sounds like what you'd expect when you surround yourself with a bunch of oligarchs buddies who are pretty much only out for themselves are just wild. Like how they've been communicating over unencrypted radio because the guy who got the contract to handle all their communications systems basically said he was going to supply them with this great gear, got the money, and then bought the cheapest shit he could find and that's what he delivered. Just a bunch of people with no scruples enriching themselves and leaving the things they're being paid to handle to rot.

For a formerly communist country, they're fucking great at capitalism.

[Rare White Ape]

All of the rubles none of the scruples :lol:

[FaultyMario]

For a formerly communist country, they're fucking great at capitalism.

That's what Ernesto Guevara said 60 years ago and one of the reasons why he is one of our lay saints!!

[Yw-slayer]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/

"WHY THE PAST 10 YEARS OF AMERICAN LIFE HAVE BEEN UNIQUELY Stupid" by Jonathan Haidt in The Atlantic.

[Crazed_Insanity]

That's actually a nice read. Agree with lots of what the author said.

However, just like the original tower of babel, pride is probably the main reason why our world split up again. I don't think this is just an american phenomenon given that nationalist trumpian close the border leaders rose up all over the world in democratic nations. 1st time around God was the one splitting people up and this time around it's the tech gods we all so worshipped splitting us up in the name of profits... Authoritarian regimes are all pretty safe because they all have stronger borders to begin with and they already have better control over their stupid people using tech. ;)

Part of growing pain I think. Hope we all can grow out of it and be able to grow up. However, if our government continues to sleep with these rich profit driven corporations, things will probably only get worse.

[MR2 Fan]

There's more to the division....billionaires with a lot of power over media, including russian influence and lack of oversight of the big tech companies.

I also have been noticing a trend with news stations and newspapers in the U.S....MOST are pushing more conservative now, either due to being bought out by conservative companies or my guess is that since older people skew conservative and they are the ones still checking traditional media most often that they're being catered to more often. They're not covering a lot of big bombshell stories from what I'm hearing if it goes against the GOP or helps Biden

[Crazed_Insanity]

Not sure if I've ever seen young people buying newspaper... I have not purchased newspaper for ages as well... so it makes sense for them to cater to older more conservative audience I suppose.

However, I'm not really sure if there's really such a shift to the right for these media companies..., I'm sure we can probably also find conservatives complaining media shifting too much to the left? I think we as readers need to try to learn to put aside our own biases as well.

Whatever the case might be, news orgs really all need to made to be more non-profit. If they need to chase money, naturally journalistic integrity will suffer.

Anyway, what I found encouraging from a recent study showing that it is possible to change FOX viewer's minds if you pay them to watch CNN for a while! Wonder if the reserve could be true as well? Probably not. :D

[MR2 Fan]

I would be interested to know what people under, say 25 years old, primarily get their news these days.

[George]

From their smart-phones.

While driving.

[Crazed_Insanity]

:lol: Probably true.

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://twitter.com/MalloryMcMorrow/status/1516453738403143681?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5 Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1516453738403143681%7Ctwgr% 5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.yahoo.com%2Fnews%2Fmichi gan-state-senator-hits-back-at-gop-colleague-accusing-her-of-grooming-kids-135900555.html

I did not know who she is last night. Now, I kinda wish she can run for the WH ASAP. I think she's the kind of democrat who can beat the republicans. Will be paying more attention to her. If she truly is who she said she is, she will rise to the top!

[Cam]

I would be interested to know what people under, say 25 years old, primarily get their news these days.

I suspect they do not care about current events.

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://www.npr.org/2022/04/22/1094316591/disney-world-desantis-florida-counties-taxes

I'm finding the clash between the giant blue woke company(Disney) and the crazy red state(Florida) extremely fascinating.

Seems like whatever happens, it's probably going to be lose-lose for both sides. Maybe it's time for Mickey and friends to arm themselves and fight to keep their own country inside Florida? ;)

[MR2 Fan]

It's extremely annoying. DeSantis is really authoritarian, possibly worse than Trump at this point.

Regarding Disney's special status, it is something I'm quite familiar with because it was set up for something that technically was never built...the original EPCOT city plan which was EXTREMELY different than the theme park built in 1982.

If you've never heard about or knew much about it, it was a fascinating, arguably still modern idea regarding making cities more livable by proper planning, especially in regards to transportation. Unfortunately Walt passed away just before it was going to be introduced to the public. "The Florida Project" film he made for it didn't debut to audiences until after his death. The Disney company tried several ways to try and fulfill his dreams, but without his guidance and vision (and let's face it, promotion ability), it never happened.

Would it have actually worked? I don't know, but it would have completely changed a lot of things IMO

[FaultyMario]

Can somebody explain why in the past few days MTG was so scared reluctant to appear in court today?

IIRC she appeared as a witness called by the prosecution in the Jan 6 crimes investigation, right?

is it because of the spin her answers are going to get in political ads?

I thought she was already a walking corpse, ever since her handlers pulled her out of a dumpster from the Dalton Waltmart.

[MR2 Fan]

probably because she most likely set the bombs found during Jan 6th and she's afraid it might be brought up?

https://twitter.com/FBI/status/1479165992513191943

[FaultyMario]

she did?

OMG, what an idiot! that's what aides' aides are for!

[Tom Servo]

If I understand correctly, this is a state-level thing where people in her district are challenging her right to be on the ballot for re-election. So she's basically testifying to try to keep her political career alive.

Here's a bit of an explainer - a group are saying that the 14th amendment says that you can't run for federal office if you were part of an insurrection, and now she's trying to say that she wasn't involved. https://www.npr.org/2022/04/22/1094273441/marjorie-taylor-greene-is-in-court-as-part-of-a-legal-challenge-to-her-candidacy

[FaultyMario]

Even as a witness and not indicted?

[Crazed_Insanity]

While I wish her to go away, but I also don’t think we need to find ways to get her off ballot like that.

If there’s an insurrection, prove it, and then fry that biggest fish 1st. If you cannot stop Trump, what good will it do to stop her or other ‘insurrectionists’?

Dems need to beat her fair and square thru elections. This type of tactics undermines democratic process just as Trump undermined it.

[Crazed_Insanity]

It's extremely annoying. DeSantis is really authoritarian, possibly worse than Trump at this point.

Regarding Disney's special status, it is something I'm quite familiar with because it was set up for something that technically was never built...the original EPCOT city plan which was EXTREMELY different than the theme park built in 1982.

If you've never heard about or knew much about it, it was a fascinating, arguably still modern idea regarding making cities more livable by proper planning, especially in regards to transportation. Unfortunately Walt passed away just before it was going to be introduced to the public. "The Florida Project" film he made for it didn't debut to audiences until after his death. The Disney company tried several ways to try and fulfill his dreams, but without his guidance and vision (and let's face it, promotion ability), it never happened.

Would it have actually worked? I don't know, but it would have completely changed a lot of things IMO

Really had no idea! Wow!

Wish Walt Disney could’ve lived long enough so that we could get a glimpse of what Tomorrowland really looks like.

[Tom Servo]

If there’s an insurrection, prove it

Umm....were you watching just over a year ago?

EDIT: I think I get your point. On the other hand, a) this isn't a federal suit, and b) it can often be really handy to go after the smaller fish to get them to turn on the bigger fish.

As an allegory - considering your concern about crime, do you think that the police shouldn't go after someone who knocks off a liquor store if they're not going to convict the head of the gang that person might belong to?

[Tom Servo]

Even as a witness and not indicted?

I honestly do not want to give a ton of time thinking about MTG, but my guess is that she's testifying in her own defense in a civil trial, not a criminal one, so indictments don't exist.

[FaultyMario]

I honestly do not want to give a ton of time thinking about MTG.

Fair enough.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Umm....were you watching just over a year ago?

EDIT: I think I get your point. On the other hand, a) this isn't a federal suit, and b) it can often be really handy to go after the smaller fish to get them to turn on the bigger fish.

As an allegory - considering your concern about crime, do you think that the police shouldn't go after someone who knocks off a liquor store if they're not going to convict the head of the gang that person might belong to?

We’ve had a long history of catching just the little fishes while ignoring the big fish.

Financial crisis of 2008, what big fish did we fry? What of substance did we fix to avoid future fiascos?

Jeff Epstein was probably the biggest dead fish we caught but it still didn’t help us catch any really big fishes.

If there’s really a ring leader that’s causing the latest violent crimes, we definitely also need to spend more police resources on catching the big fish 1st!

Now, dems are not really the police. If you’re gonna go thru the legal maneuvers to get your opponents, then you better make sure you can nail the guy! (Rather than impeach twice and giving him the opportunity to gloat about it and the door is still open for him to run again?!?!?)

Best way to beat your opponent in a democracy is to beat him by a landslide!

Same with MTG, even if you succeed in removing her from the ballot, you still can’t win the hearts of people that way.

That’d only generate more fuel for the next MTG candidates to burn even brighter.

Fix this country and these antiestablishment candidates should disappear naturally.

[Rare White Ape]

While all this is going down, just comfort yourself with the fact that the good people of America voted for her and put her in a political office.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I’d say it’s the bad actors screwing up on top which caused the good people frustrated enough to be duped by voting for candidates such as Trump and MTG.

If you really want to blame the ‘good people’, then we might as well just end democracy.

No way Trump could run on MAGA if america is doing pretty good to begin with. Likewise, Bernie Sanders would never be famous. AOC would still be bartending.

[MR2 Fan]

the macaroon beat the pen, sounds good

[FaultyMario]

Just because it doesn't sound horrible, it doesn't mean it doesn't sound bad.

[Rikadyn]

Just because it doesn't sound horrible, it doesn't mean it doesn't sound bad.

And sure as hell does not make it good.

[Rare White Ape]

What IS good is that the far right nut job party didn’t win.

[Tom Servo]

And by a pretty significant margin. From what I gather, Slovenia has also ditched their far-right autocrat.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I think people are beginning to realize that going far right didn’t really help make anything great again. Their collective admirer Putin starting a stupid ass war probably didn’t help their cause much too!

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/

"WHY THE PAST 10 YEARS OF AMERICAN LIFE HAVE BEEN UNIQUELY Stupid" by Jonathan Haidt in The Atlantic.

More theory for our stupidity… social media!
https://youtu.be/iiZw2lUIHhg

[Yw-slayer]

Just because it doesn't sound horrible, it doesn't mean it doesn't sound bad.

Yes. That "Special forces hoodie and stubble" cosplay waa hilarious, and hilariously bad.

[Crazed_Insanity]

oh my...

Before Elon opens up the Texas Institute of Technology & Science(TITS), he'll probably have the power to rename Twitter to Titter soon?

Donald Trump will now finally be able to show us his rambling Tits in the middle of the night once again? Elon has got to be the most S3XY EV making nerd/billianaire ever! Even his rocket company is rated X!

Hope he knows what he's doing and won't end up making America even dumber with his new social media company.

Of all the billionaires out there, Elon is definitely the one I trust the most. Fingers crossed that he'll really help shape a better future for us.

[George]

^ Really? I don't study the man but he seems pretty sleazy to me, just from seeing headlines and reading the occasional article about him over the years.

The first name that popped into my mind as a trustworthy billionaire was Warren Buffett, but I don't claim to know a great deal about him either.

And I thought Ross Perot qualified when he first started running for president the first time, before he quit the race and then got back in and all the Reform Party stuff the second time around. I was easily impressed by his plain and direct speech, 1984 Oldsmobile (in 1992), and seven-dollar haircuts.

[Rikadyn]

No billionaire is trustworthy.

[MR2 Fan]

Elon is wishy-washy, part of being neurodivergent and being insanely rich for over 2 decades (he owned...and crashed...a McLaren F1 in the 90's)

I think it's bad because even though nothing has happened yet, a lot of my twitter friends are already abandoning ship and it's unclear where everyone will go to. Counter Social seems ok, but their registrations have crashed due to too many people trying to use it.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I know lots of folks here hate Elon... Warren Buffet seems like a nice old man and I'd rate him my #2 most trusted favorite billionaire because he lives in such a modest lifestyle for a billionaire.

Extreme wealth tend to effect people badly in ways just like the Ring could turn an average middle earther into Gollum. Only extreme few could handle it an not let wealth get into their heads.

Main reason why Mr. Buffet isn't my #1 is because he doesn't really build anything or contribute to our society in meaningful ways. I guess he has some passive influence and able to passively build his personal wealth. He has certainly done way better than me. However, Elon is way next level.

Elon can sound like a jerk at times, but at least he has a clear vision of what he wants. Whether it's EVs or going to Mars or getting a social media company. Billionaires such as Bezos or Gates seemed to have lost their ways.

Look at it this way, I think how their ex-wives think about them would probably give us better clues as to what kind of human beings they are? I do not think Mrs. Gates or Mrs. Bezos think fondly of their ex-husbands. However, I saw in a TED talk that Mrs. Musk seems to still be an admirer of Elon. Elon the workaholic is a failed husband, but to have an ex to still think highly of you says something.

Anyway, Warran Buffet definitely isn't a bad guy by any means, but I wish he'd use his wealth to better transform the world as Elon has done.

Back to topic, I'm not really a twitter user so I don't really care, but I do agree we need to have freer speech. Just to be clear, I also do not like Trump, but I think it's BS to suspend him on Twitter.

The West cannot criticize Putin and Xi for suppressing speech and then be able to justify suppressing Trump and conspiracy theories in their own countries. How hypocritical can we get?

If your citizens are truly that dumb and insist on following somebody off a cliff, suppressing information probably won't help your citizens become smarter. Are we a free society or not?

[Rare White Ape]

Elon Musk (aka Benevolent Technology Jesus to a particular subset of morans) could have used $21 billion of his personal wealth to feed, house, and rehabilitate a quarter million homeless people, or redirected funds into improving working conditions for his long suffering employees at Tesla, or… since he is such a supposed genius, found some other way to materially benefit greater society that could have lasted 1000 years.

But no, instead he’s going to piss it up a wall on a grand vanity project with the promise of absolute free speech (Americans already have that, remember?) even though other platforms have attempted to spring up in the wake of the redneck uprising last January, but this time it will make a difference… somehow?

Just wait and see. If the discourse on Twitter is already a frigging cesspool, a place where famous authors are able to write abusive comments disparaging transgender people, while other authors get harassed for including LGBT characters in science fiction novels and end up losing their jobs, how can “freeze peach!”-ifing it even further possibly be of any benefit to humanity? I feel that the bedrock of democracy is at very real risk if these sort of changes to the terms of service are implemented.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Elon did mysteriously donate $6 billion last year... possibly to feed the hungry because that # came close to what UN asked for in a tweet, but I'm not sure if anyone could confirm that. So let's just assume he did not feed the hungry.

Time will tell his true motive and what he could accomplish.

Nobody thought his EV and rocket companies would get anywhere either. Not only the Russians were laughing at him, even his friends urged him to not waste his own money!

Good thing that he didn't listen to them.

I think most here only hate him because Elon isn’t aligned with you politically and due to his loud mouth.

Political bias aside, Think about it, exactly what has he done that’s so horrible to the world? Although this is a political thread, but being politically correct isn’t the only way to live.

[FaultyMario]

But no, instead he’s going to piss it up a wall on a grand vanity project with the promise of absolute free speech (Americans already have that, remember?) even though other platforms have attempted to spring up in the wake of the redneck uprising last January, but this time it will make a difference… somehow?

This purchase is about money.

The big question has been why a relatively "small" digital social network is so influential in culture, politics and other aspects of society. Some people have guessed that it is related to twitter's instantaneous nature, the way that some of its networks are embedded within other networks and to some of their trade secrets, notably their almighty algorithm.

Also, some of Musk's newer business tap into predicting the behavior of users/consumers and I think that twitter's users exhibit some of the most predictable amongst social media users.

Most analysts I've read/heard think that the investment tries to covers those two bases, have a bigger influence on all sorts of audiences to gain leverage on public issues and to acquire valuable predictive analysis tools.

[Rikadyn]

Back to topic, I'm not really a twitter user so I don't really care, but I do agree we need to have freer speech. Just to be clear, I also do not like Trump, but I think it's BS to suspend him on Twitter.

The West cannot criticize Putin and Xi for suppressing speech and then be able to justify suppressing Trump and conspiracy theories in their own countries. How hypocritical can we get?

If your citizens are truly that dumb and insist on following somebody off a cliff, suppressing information probably won't help your citizens become smarter. Are we a free society or not?

By this same standard this very site couldn't have any moderation or bans of anyone for anything.

The west isn't banning or suppressing anything. Private companies are. You are simply too fucking willfully fucking ignorant to get that through your God damn thick skull and stick in your tiny fucking lizard brain.

It is only a free speech violation if the government interferes and suppresses speech. If a platform wants to fucking kick you off because you are fucking a hate-mongering shitbag and they'd rather not be associated with you then they can. Especially if you continously break their fucking rules.

You schmuck.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Facebook would even work with the Chinese government to ban my wife’s anti-Chinese posts. Do you really believe social media companies are that private and would never coordinate shit with govt?

It’s definitely okay to moderate or ban people when there’s a clear violation of rules; however, you can’t just make up rules banning people for lab leak theories for example. That’s the same as Vatican banning Galileo for saying earth revolves around the sun.

When there’s no evidence either way, you can’t just shut the side that you don’t like down. That’s what Putin and Xi would do.

[Rare White Ape]

Even gubernatorial rules regarding free speech have their limits.

Ask yourself if material related to underage sex with minors is free speech, or material related to inciting violence is free speech.

Free speech explicitly protects people in the United States who want to criticise the government. That’s it.

Chinese people are generally unable to criticise their government because the government says it’s unacceptable.

For things like the blocking of YouTube and Facebook or material related to the Tiananmen Square massacre, that’s not blocking free speech; that’s censorship.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Fine. Why do we need that much censorship?

Yes, private companies can do whatever they want. Censor or not censor, it’s up to the boss. Why are people so upset over it one way or another?

It’s not just the radical right who wants to be censor free, Bernie sanders for sure hates trump and even he disagrees with censoring a POTUS!

If he did something wrong/ illegal, let’s try to bring him to justice rather than censoring him. Do we really want to create a Fox version of social media?

I really hope Elon isn’t starting one. Hope the true reasons are the ones listed by Mario.

Idea of free speech isn’t all about whining about governments. Free exchange of ideas whether stupid or not, left or right should be encouraged! People can censor incoming info themselves such as use of ignore features. We all have different preferences, so we also have the right to block anything we don’t want to hear. However, I really don’t think we need a media company controlling the flow of information for us. Whatever algorithm to use should be at the user end, not hidden and controlled by some corporation.

[Rikadyn]

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

Jean-Paul Sartre

[Rare White Ape]

Sartre might have had deep intellect, but the rest of us have the ignore list :cool:

[Rikadyn]

Sartre might have had deep intellect, but the rest of us have the ignore list :cool:

See I hate ignore because it still says when they post...

[Crazed_Insanity]

Good and bad speeches/deeds happen all the time.

Yes, ideally if we could suppress all those bad things would be nice, but the problem is, who gets to determine what is good and what is bad when everyone can’t seem to agree on their moral values? In a world of moral relativism, even Christians probably cannot agree what Jesus would do! So how can we determine what is good and what is bad? Is lab leak theory really that bad? Yes, it’s so bad that scientists shouldn’t even go there!

Speaking of antisemites, so if a Palestinian tweets something bad about Israel, it’s an automatic ban? Because if you say anything bad about Jews and ready to throw a rock at them, you must be an antisemite and a terrorist?

Until we figure out an AI capable of figuring out absolute morality so that it knows perfectly what’s good and what’s bad, I’ll always be for free speech (or no censorship) and figure things out for myself.

Finally, we need to be able to beat down bad ideas or bad people on merit, rather than thru censorship. Have better candidates capable of beating MTG on Election Day rather than censoring her name on the ballot. Active suppression of fire is not better than actually putting out that fire. Of course if censoring will actually put out a fire for good, then I can be for that in special cases. It’s just that I’d prefer to fight fire by having free speech or by not ignoring anybody. Problems are never resolved by suppressing and ignoring them.

BTW, it's interesting to see conservatives happy about this deal... and dems and wall street very unhappy about it. Personally, I couldn't care less what any of them think of the deal. At least Twitter's original founder approves and trusts Elon to take back of Twitter from Wall St. Then again, based on how Jack Dorsy donated money to Andrew and Tulsi during 2020 election, you guys can probably rest assured that he's also an idiot like me so you guys can ignore what he thinks too I guess. As for me, I still have no intention to sign up and get a new Titter account. ;)

[sandydandy]

I couldn’t care less about Twitter, or who owns it. I barely use the platform. Only occasionally read tweets. :|

[Crazed_Insanity]

Forget about Elon Musk for now, I've been pondering about freedom of speech recently... why are the conservatives promoting it now? Shouldn't 'free' speech go with liberals because 'liberals' should be more free, right? Are the Conservatives harping on it now only because liberals are in charge at the moment? Once conservatives takes over control, they'll probably have no problems censoring speech themselves? Shutting up somebody like Edward Snowden is probably something both parties are in favor of, right? Ironically Snowden has to escape to Russia... Wonder how he's doing over there now. Heard he's involved in some sort of newer more private crypto currency. Makes me wonder that perhaps Putin could also be financing his war with crypto currency to bypass sanctions?

Anyway, I suppose another reason conservatives are more for free speech is due to political correctness. PC has good intentions and wishes to help train people to have better manners, but I have to say it has become a bit totalitarian. If you wish to adopt PC talk yourself, that's cool, but should that be shoved down everyone's throats? Don't think so.

Moral of the story is that an far right extremists like Trump admires Putin. Similarly, far left extremists like Justin Trudeau admires Xi.

Hope American voters will at least stay smart enough to stay in the middle and stay free...

[FaultyMario]

Didn't Musk back his twitter bid against Tesla stock? Isn't Tesla down like 19% since the bid was announced?

[Tom Servo]

The conservatives who harp on about freedom of speech the most are only good at harping on about it. They're the same ones trying to pass laws banning certain books or "don't say gay" laws. Or retaliating against Disney's free speech exercise.

One thing those conservatives are really good at is grabbing onto a phrase or name and just pounding on it until they "own" it. Like "patriot", "we the people", etc.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, figured. Florida GOP becoming anti-business and wanting to tax disney more also made no sense… this shows that they don’t actually believe in any of the ideologies… they’re all just a bunch of RINOs and DINOs. :D Once they attain power, they’ll do whatever to keep it.


Didn't Musk back his twitter bid against Tesla stock? Isn't Tesla down like 19% since the bid was announced?

I don’t think Musk revealed exactly how he’ll finance it, so people were speculating he’s gonna sell his Tesla stocks. Anyway, Tesla short sellers will find whatever reason to short Tesla stocks. Hope it’ll go down some more so I can buy more! ;)

[Yw-slayer]

One thing those conservatives are really good at is grabbing onto a phrase or name and just pounding on it until they "own" it. Like "patriot", "we the people", etc.

Yes, good at propaganda.

[Tom Servo]

Madison Cawthorn is suddenly getting all sorts of bad publicity. In addition to his multiple citations for driving with a suspended license and expired registration, he's gotten popped for the second time with a loaded firearm in his carry-on. Then there was the pictures of him in lingerie drinking wine and now his male associate with his hands on his junk.

Guess we know what happens when you try to ruin everyone's cocaine orgy fun.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I always thought Madison is a girl name because I’m just not aware of any guy Madisons until this guy came along… anyway, so I guess he’s just being true to his name!

[MR2 Fan]

AFAIK Madison was a very southern name for confederate types

[Tom Servo]

To go back a little bit to the free speech thing, I saw a good exchange on Twitter about this. Nate Silver was posting about how free speech is an incredibly popular thing on either side of the political spectrum, but it was pointed out how the "idea" of free speech, or maybe just the phrase itself, is popular. Compare the popularity of "free speech" to the popularity of "the right for people to desecrate the flag." When it comes down to it, when it speech people don't like, they become a lot less likely to support it.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Tweeting ideologies are much easier for social Justice warriors, but when the issue actually comes closer and closer to you personally, most of us would become NIMBY hypocrites.

I think people with strong integrity really attract me. Take Sanders and Musk for example. Those 2 have probably opposing ideologies, but I seriously admire them both because, like them or hate them, I know those 2 would do what they say they’ll do. (And plenty of folks wanting to destroy them because people find them offensive and threatening.)

Unlike most politicians or Fortune 500 CEOs… these folks only say things people want to hear. Our society has progressed to a point that we can’t say anything offensive anymore.

Anyway, I think the story of emperor’s new cloth highlights the importance of free speech. The emperor himself may be a wonderful ruler, but if people can’t speak freely, the entire nation can be duped by bad actors…

[Tom Servo]

I'm sorry, what? Charlie Kirk, Ben Shapiro, Tucker Carlson, et al all tweet ideologies all day long. On the other hand, people outspoken on tolerance issues tend to get hounded with death threats. Where do you get this idea that tweeting ideologies is easier for "social justice warriors" (which, btw, is like using "woke" as a pejorative - we immediately know you're full of it).

I honestly haven't paid enough attention to Sanders, but Musk 100% will NOT do what he says he'll do. I don't see a hyperloop here. Tesla ditched their discussion forums in 2021 and replaced them with ones where only Tesla employees could start topics. He retaliates against anyone who criticizes him and then champions free speech.

For the Fortune 500 CEOs you cite, do you think Disney's CEO has progressed to a point where they can't say anything offensive? What about all the people who find Disney's stance against Florida law offensive? Is something only offensive in your eyes if one side finds it offensive?

I also like this idea you can't speak freely. Who, exactly, is being denied freedom of speech? Keeping in mind that, as has been explained ad nauseum, private companies are exercising their own freedom of speech by moderating content on their websites.

BTW, if you want to see what more hands-off content moderation looks like, I can point you at a number of websites. I won't post their URLs here, but I'm happy to DM them to you.

Finally, to get back to what you were responding to, I think you ultimately agree with the people disagreeing with Nate Silver. "We're all into free speech until it's speech we don't like, and then we want to get rid of it."

[Crazed_Insanity]

Anyway, I was just saying in a bipartisan way that everyone can be hypocritical.

Todays sermon, I heard a young pastor preaching about people nowadays all tend to be against various issues and rarely you’d hear people actually for anything anymore.

Prolifers essentially are people against abortions. They’re not really for life, otherwise theyd also be for masks and for vaccines and for affordable healthcare. Likewise prochoice folks are essential people against government interventions. If they’re truly prochoice, they’d respect peoples choice to do not wear masks or reject vaccines.

Jesus is for life and for choice. Bernie is for narrowing the gap between rich and poor. Elon is for going to Mars! (I really don’t think Elon will go down in history as the guy who created the hyper loop!)

Anyway, I like the idea to be able to speak freely. Elon’s brand will probably take a severe hit, at least for me, if he were to start banning Twitter users that he doesn’t like. Better speech is better defense against bad speech, not censorship. I really don’t consider censorship as a form a free speech being practiced by private companies. Of course you are free to believe whatever you want to believe.

[Tom Servo]

Elon does what he says! "Well, what about hyperloop?" Well, he does what he says sometimes and that's good enough!

Seriously though, "censorship" (read: moderation) is something that private companies do, and often fosters freedom of speech. Let me give you this hypothetical:

You post something here that another user doesn't like. That user then publicizes that through posts in every thread including information about you, your family, where you live, and where you work. You start getting death threats at home, and your boss gets calls demanding your firing.

Is that fostering free speech? Or is that chilling your free speech, and handing over the platform to the least scrupulous?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Not sure if hyperloop is completely dead. Is that really super important? If Musk failed that, that means he lacks integrity? Or are you just arguing with Billi for the sake of arguing?

Anyway, regarding free speech, I wouldn’t include publishing other peoples private info without permission as part of free speech. I also don’t believe most free speech lovers would have problems with platforms censoring such info.

Just as we can have free speech criticizing the president but threatening the president with death threats probably won’t be covered under free speech.

[Tom Servo]

I'm arguing the hyperloop because you claimed that Musk does what he says he'll do. Only, that's a prime example of him not doing it. There are others, that's just the one that came to mind.

Now, here's the fun part. You are *immediately* putting curbs on free speech. There's nothing in the constitution prohibiting publishing people's information, especially in the first amendment. You then argue that most "free speech lovers" wouldn't be against curbing that speech.

You've already admitted that you have limitations to free speech that you'd be in favor of. Where do you go from here?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Dude, do you really believe in what you’re saying?

Look Cybertruck isn’t out on the market yet, SpaceX hasn’t been on Mars yet… so this conclusively proves that Elon is a liar and he obviously doesn’t do what he said he would do?

Also, does free speech really mean anything goes? Freedom in free societies really meant anything goes kind of anarchy? Do you really think that’s what I want?

Anyway, lets go from here I guess: I honestly think it’d be more fun to have likes of Elon or Bernie moderating Twitter rather than allowing Wall Street types or DNC or Fauci or Hillary or even Obama to moderate Twitter. (See what happened to Covid origins or to Edward Snowden) Of course I wouldn’t want Trump or Fox or any republicans moderating Twitter as well. I would trust somebody like Jordan Peterson, who you think is on the conservative side, but then again he believes he’s a liberal!

So anyway, as you can see, I tend to not trust in any groups, but only individuals who have proven themselves over time. Now, I won’t always agree with those individuals 100% of time but I’d trust them because they’re one of the few folks left in the world who actual stand FOR something and won’t cave under whatever pressure. I’m pretty sure Bernie and Elon and Peterson won’t all agree with each other politically, but pretty sure they won’t compel or censor people’s speech with their moderation rules. Pretty sure free speech on Twitter doesn’t mean we make Twitter rule less. Land of the free doesn’t mean we make a lawless land.

We absolutely need free speech in order to come up with the right set of laws for a free society. We don’t need wall st or whatever elite coming up with whatever rules in their secret closed board meetings.

[Tom Servo]

Uhh, yes. Why wouldn't I? That's just one example, and in the meantime, he's conned a bunch of money out of various cities (including Los Angeles) with what appear to be entirely empty promises on this. I don't say it to call him a liar, I say it to reset normal expectations from a person that for some reason people seem to think is some sort of business god. He's not, and nothing about him so far indicate he'd be good at running a social media company. It was you who said that you know he'll "do what he says he'll do," and I'm saying "not necessarily, he says a lot of things."

As far as the free speech thing goes, he's literally said that his plan is to align speech on Twitter with what's allowed by law. That means almost everything goes. There are purposely very few restrictions on speech under US law.

Twitter's content rules have been tweaked and worked on for over a decade now to try to balance people being allow to say what they want while also protecting other users and trying to keep it from just crumbling under a few loud, angry users. They're not perfect by any means, but basically every social network tends to start on the side of "anything goes", and then content moderation rules get built up over time when it turns out that that's not sustainable. Musk wants to roll that all back and just pretend the last ten years didn't happen.

But none of this has anything to do with the point I was trying to make, which is that a lot of people claim to be in favor of free speech but when you ask them about speech they don't like, the number of people actually in favor of it tends to shift pretty dramatically. I feel like you're showing that, you say free speech a lot, but then couch it with "well, except this speech, obviously" kinds of statements.

Also, what's up with the repeated mentions of Wall St. elite setting the rules? Where'd that come from?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Also, what's up with the repeated mentions of Wall St. elite setting the rules? Where'd that come from?

Who do you think has the greatest control over our social media platforms, our politicians, our elections, central bank, SEC, EPA, CDC, FAA, etc? Hint, probably not Russians nor the Chinese.

[Tom Servo]

I think the employees at the company who runs the social media platform have the greatest control over it. I don't think there's a shadowy cabal of Wall St. types having secret meetings deciding who gets to post and who doesn't.

[Crazed_Insanity]

You think US democracy is firmly controlled by the average American voters? Legislations passed in congress reflect the will of average Americans? Shouldn’t the shadowy figure be pretty clear?

Let’s just use the latest pandemic example. Big pharma is the wall st type. Fauci, FDA, CDC had been super faithful to science the whole time? While I am thankful that we’ve developed vaccines that worked, but why FDA had been ‘censoring’ vaccines from other nations? Why is it we cannot talk about lab leak theory when we have no evidence proving either way? Don’t get me wrong, I am grateful that america is a nation that’s been pretty free compared to others, but we are still short of our ideals when it comes to free speech or even the democratic process itself!

Anyway, the fact that Wall Street execs are not happy with Elon’s purchase of Twitter was enough to make me happy. ;) Seriously, I couldn’t care less about Twitter itself. I also couldn’t care less if Trump is on Twitter or not. We just need to come up with candidates capable of beating Trump or whoever else like Trump. Censoring them doesn’t work. Find the evidences to convict or find better candidates to kick their asses!

Left’s censoring tactic is pretty much the same as the right ‘censoring’ minorities’ voting rights. It’s all about controlling a group of folks that they don’t like.

Like them or not, they’re all Americans. I want this nation to be a nation of its people, not just rich people.

[Tom Servo]

I said I don't think that there's a shadowy cabal of Wall St. execs that control Twitter's content moderation policies. Don't forget, not only do I know people at the major social media companies, but I used to work for one too.

Also, this is all getting real dangerously close to talking about the (((globalists))).

[Crazed_Insanity]

Pretty sure this shadowy figure is not micromanaging social media sites themselves. However, if they wish to control certain narratives behind the scene, it should be easy for them.

It’s difficult to believe those Q conspiracies but existence of Jeff Epstein makes controlling these rich execs very easy, right? Do what I say or I’ll expose you!

Just saying people like Bernie or Elon probably won’t be subject to such control.

Anyway, if we have true free speech, whatever topic should not end up dangerous or life threatening. That’s the whole point of free speech.

[Tom Servo]

Who decides what's dangerous or life threatening? Some people might consider speech driving people to take Ivermectin instead of getting vaccinated to be dangerous and life threatening. Nonetheless, that's protected speech under the first amendment.

The thing is, for some reason you're arguing with me while totally agreeing with what I wrote. You're saying you want "free speech with limits," which is not true free speech. It's pretty much what everyone wants from their social media platforms. We have that here, people get banned from here for speech that's totally legal. There's a big divide between "free speech" as it's defined in the first amendment and what speech corporations will want to allow on their websites.

Lemme ask you this, though - let's say there _is_ this cabal of Wall St. execs that exercise control over Twitter's content moderation. Wall St. execs aren't exactly famously liberal. Why would they push the levers in the direction you seem to think they have?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Which direction do you think that I think that they have? Can you be more specific?

Can we also define what is free speech?

I think we have different definitions.

Let me jus ask you this, how do you think lobbyists representing wall st are doing to our government? Do you think they work exclusively with republicans? Whatever direction they’re lobbying for, chances are it’s in a direction contrary to the average Americans. That’s my point. I don’t have any specific conspiracy theories for you. Sorry.
If you really need to hear a theory, my personal theory is that US and China are both responsible for causing Covid 19. However, we just can’t talk about that and we likely won’t be able to get to the bottom of it. CCP will thwart all investigations and US will brand you a racist for even thinking about that possibility.

[Tom Servo]

Left’s censoring tactic

That'd be the direction I think you're talking about.

As for the rest of that, what does that have to do, at all, with how "free speech" polls vs. how things poll when you specifically talk about speech people don't like?

I think I get your point, I just have absolutely no clue why you're trying so hard to make it when it's not what anyone else was talking about.

[Rikadyn]

Do I have to post the Sartre quote again...

[Rare White Ape]

please do i don't feel like scrolling all the way back to find it

[Rare White Ape]

"I exist, that is all, and I find it nauseating."

[Rare White Ape]

"In order to make himself thoroughly undesirable, he will speak."

[MR2 Fan]

I had a thought over the weekend, wanted your thoughts on this:

TRUE/FALSE: A country can do whatever it wants to its own citizens and other nations which COULD intervene and do something mostly will not, UNLESS that country also happens to invade another country, then other countries come to that country's rescue, even if atrocities are happening at the same rate against their own citizens already.

(Of course this could also be related to how much information about those are getting reported outside of their own country). How long would Nazi Germany have stayed in power if they hadn't started attacking most of Europe and stuck with Poland or a couple of other countries in the area?

[Crazed_Insanity]

That is a hypothetical question which is impossible to answer.

In this day and age with social media, it’d be difficult for UN to do absolutely nothing if a government were to commit genocide to one of its own people…

Also it’s clear US military response won’t be based on any ethical rationale, it all depends n that nations military might. We have demonstrated that we can invade without that country’s invading another. We can do one thing with Iraq but quite another with Russia.

England was like Ukraine now and Hitler was Putin. My guess is US would remain on the sideline if Japan never attacked Pearl Harbor.




That'd be the direction I think you're talking about.

As for the rest of that, what does that have to do, at all, with how "free speech" polls vs. how things poll when you specifically talk about speech people don't like?

I think I get your point, I just have absolutely no clue why you're trying so hard to make it when it's not what anyone else was talking about.

Because you sounded like you have no clue what I’m talking about. Glad you got my point. Then I think we can just agree to agree.

[Tom Servo]

So, uhh...this seems not ideal.

Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows (https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473)

[Rare White Ape]

Well this is perfectly fine as long as backyard abortion providers sterilise their coat hangers between procedures.

[Jason]

I'm beyond livid. But also incredibly concerned what this decision will lead to. If SCOTUS is now willing to *take away rights*, and overturn "super precedent", there really is no law, protection, regulation, etc that is safe. The most vulnerable Americans have all been dealt a very serious blow tonight.

[FaultyMario]

Abortion down here is not legalized, but it was decriminalized last year. On their ruling, the president of our constitutional court gave his opinion that "The reasons that lead a woman to abort, the conditions of secrecy and insalubrity some are forced into, the consequences for their physical and mental health produce unimaginable human suffering, especially for women who live in economic and social marginalization. It is a crime that, in practice, punishes poverty."

[Crazed_Insanity]

For something to be so 'wrong', all 9 justices really should be able to come to an agreement. If there are dissenting justice(s), maybe the issue just isn't that black and white.

It is so unbelievable that our supreme court would rule against life saving vaccines mandate in the name of choice and at the same time deny women's choice in the name of saving lives. Which one do you want? Make up your mind!

Anyway, at least states can still decide for themselves? Red states can save babies, reject vaccines and masks while blue states can still let women to choose but people won't get to choose to not wear masks and take up vaccines.

This is not set in stone yet... somebody just leaked this info and gave us a sneak preview. We don't really know which way this is going to fall yet, right?

[FaultyMario]

babies

:rolleyes:

[Rare White Ape]

Imagine if it was illegal to save your own life if giving birth to a child was going to kill you.

Imagine if the law said that you will be forced to carry a stillborn child to term and give birth to it even though you know that it is already dead.

It's not just about red or blue states.

[neanderthal]

So, uhh...this seems not ideal.

Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows (https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473)

Me, 2016: The Supreme Court is at stake.

billi, et al: But her emails ...

[neanderthal]

As we speak the student loans crowd is raising a raucous while the democratic base is imploring them to not suppress the vote.

What's worse is when I see posts from Jamaal Bowman, AOC, Liz Warren etc decrying Bidens failure to act on student loans (before you even say it, Biden never promised to cancel student loans. Go back and look at what he actually said, not what the headlines said!) meanwhile they are in a position where they can write a law that could he could sign and the comments beneath their posts are filled with 2 responses. The "progressives" are all "yes, he sucks" and the base are screaming "then write a bill."


Remind me again, how exactly does the government work?

The "work" of the progressives going into the mid terms is going to undermine Democratic control of one of the chambers, then watch everything get rolled back. Abortion was just the shot across the bow to test the waters.

Voting matters!!!! How you vote matters. Who you vote for matters. Withholding your vote, and threatening to withhold your vote, suppresses actual voting. Actual voting determines real outcomes. Real outcomes affect the most marginalised first. This is why black Americans overwhelmingly vote Democrat.

[dodint]

Friendly reminder that RBG could have prevented all of this by stepping down at the appropriate time. Her legacy will be her narcissism undoing a lifetime of effort on women's issues.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I think it's pointless to blame RBG and Trump and Billi at this stage...

Silver lining is that it hasn't happened yet... and the leak should energize the democrats during the midterm. Fingers crossed.

[Tom Servo]

That seems overly simplified when a) I assume that, like most of us, she did not think that Trump was going to be president, and b) you have McConnell making up rules to prevent presidents from nominating judges in their last year of their term. So, basically, she would have had to know in 2014 that Trump would be president.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, she could retire on the day Obama was inaugurated and Mitch and the Republicans could probably still drag on the nomination process til another republican wins the WH 8 or how ever many years later! :p

BTW, majority of americans do not want abortion rights over turned. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/03/most-americans-say-supreme-court-should-uphold-roe-post-abc-poll-finds/

Our supreme court seems to have lost its way and got into a stupid political mode. Kinda depressing. However, like I said, perhaps the silverlining is that a more energized liberal base will help dems to not lose too many seats during the upcoming midterm. That's probably the best we can hope for.

[Rikadyn]

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

Jean-Paul Sartre

For those who asked

[Rikadyn]

Friendly reminder that RBG could have prevented all of this by stepping down at the appropriate time. Her legacy will be her narcissism undoing a lifetime of effort on women's issues.

Agreed

If the emperor of Japan can see age is taking its toll and abdicate the throne...

[FaultyMario]

Agreed

Failure by design, me thinks.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FR3rwbiXEAEi5Fg.png

[neanderthal]

Anyone notice the RepubliQans are talking about the leak itself, and not the great victory they have been working towards for decades?

They've only ever been trying to stoke the fires of outrage in a small minority of people, firing up that base. They do the same thing too with guns, taxes, big government, freedom of speech (meanwhile they are the ones banning books,) "forced healthcare (like that's a negative?!?!?!) and every single wedge issue they harp on and parrot.

[Rare White Ape]

Maybe Elon Musk's Twitter will be a safe place that allow us to talk about Roe vs Wade and fix the problems ❤❤❤

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://youtu.be/5Nr65lc1ys8

[Tom Servo]

The other part is, I've heard a lot of performative outrage about the leak, but I haven't heard anybody explain why it's so damaging. Like, what about secrecy there is beneficial to the country?

[Crazed_Insanity]

I thought Trevor Noah explained that pretty well! :p

Anyway, every one of those conservative justices made statements saying that they agreed with precedence set by RvW during their confirmation hearings and now they think RvW is wrong.

If they lied in their confirmation hearings(job interviews), they're not liable for anything at all? Pretty sure normal folks like us would get fired if we were caught lying during our job interviews.

But then again, maybe somebody just leaked a 'fantasy' of conservative justices? Kinda like our dark fantasies? We never would broadcast such dark fantasies publically and we likely won't ever carry out those fantasies, but now that it's leaked, embarrassment has turned to rage? ;)

Anyway, really hope this is just a nightmare and we'll wake up and have the justices make the statement that they were just kidding. If Supreme court seriously goes thru with this, I think we can probably expect insurrections of another kind. This time, with majority of Americans supporting it.

[FaultyMario]

o0o

[dodint]

That seems overly simplified when a) I assume that, like most of us, she did not think that Trump was going to be president, and b) you have McConnell making up rules to prevent presidents from nominating judges in their last year of their term. So, basically, she would have had to know in 2014 that Trump would be president.

In her lifetime no party has retained the presidency for a third straight term, aside from Roosevelt.
She had colon cancer in 1999.
Pancreatic cancer in 2009, early in Obama's presidency.
Pancreatic cancer has a very bleak outlook.
She died on the bench in 2020 and was replaced by religious nutball Amy Coney Barrett.


RGB is absolutely an important part of this monumental step backward.

[neanderthal]

In her lifetime no party has retained the presidency for a third straight term, aside from Roosevelt.
She had colon cancer in 1999.
Pancreatic cancer in 2009, early in Obama's presidency.
Pancreatic cancer has a very bleak outlook.
She died on the bench in 2020 and was replaced by religious nutball Amy Coney Barrett.


RGB is absolutely an important part of this monumental step backward.

No. The I disagree.

Not with the verity, nothing you have said is incorrect, but with the heart/ spirit of the matter; she had a lifetime appointment- therefore she, and really only she, could decide when to retire.
If she felt her work was unfinished I can't blame her for staying on the bench.

If anything it affirms that she was apolitical, despite her liberal bent.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, had to agree with Neanderthal on this one.

Even if she had the worst possible motive, which was to holding on to 'power' in the most selfish way... I would agree Billi probably deserved more blame than her serving out her 'full' term.

Of course you're not wrong either. If I were a supreme court justice diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, I would most likely choose to retire while a president who's more aligned with my political views is in office.

Bottomline is that the 'choice' is her's to make. I also get to choose how I vote too. When it comes to people's choices, as long as it's not illegal and not hurting anybody, then people should get to choose on their own without anybody judging them.

Of course when it comes to abortions, we're assuming embryos won't feel pain. At least for sure they won't remember pain.

[Tom Servo]

In her lifetime no party has retained the presidency for a third straight term, aside from Roosevelt.
She had colon cancer in 1999.
Pancreatic cancer in 2009, early in Obama's presidency.
Pancreatic cancer has a very bleak outlook.
She died on the bench in 2020 and was replaced by religious nutball Amy Coney Barrett.


RGB is absolutely an important part of this monumental step backward.

I still think it's more than a little backwards to blame her for McConnell making up rules to prevent Merrick Garland from getting a hearing and Kennedy suddenly retiring to give Kavanaugh his spot. So while you might argue that she was narcistic, even if you 100% put the blame on her, that's still only 1/3 of the equation.

[George]

...I've heard a lot of performative outrage about the leak, but I haven't heard anybody explain why it's so damaging. Like, what about secrecy there is beneficial to the country?

The simplest answer is probably the correct one, but I saw an article somewhere online yesterday (I'd cite the source but don't remember) suggesting "they" - whether that's the SCOTUS or the RNC or Homeland Security or maybe the Freemasons - let this leak out to test the waters.

Riots and cities burning? Uh, maybe we shouldn't do this.

Relative calm? Do it!

I doubt it was planned that way but it was interesting to consider, at least until I clicked on some other news link that was probably equally depressing. They all are these days.

[Tom Servo]

A lot of 'em are, but hey, we just broke ground on the first wildlife overpass over the 101 out here! That should be huge for the mountain lion population - they've been pretty much trapped in the Malibu area for decades now after being fenced in by the 405 and 101, and inbreeding has been a real big problem. So hey, some good news!

[George]

:up:

[sandydandy]

I'm having a little fun on Facebook sticking it to far-right deplorables, who don't even realize they're deplorables.

Last year Trudeau won another election, and the Conservative party was in shambles and they kicked out their leader Erin O'Toole, because he was a useless piece of garbage. Now a race is underway for Conservative party leadership. The front runner is Pierre Poilievre, (I can never spell his last name, always have to look it up), with others throwing their hats into the ring.

The guy I'm supporting is a fella named Patrick Brown, who is the current mayor of the city I live in, (Brampton), and has done an adequate job so far. Why I really like him is because he's not a far-right deplorable...he represents what Conservatives once were in this country, which was fiscally responsible yet socially and culturally tolerant. Basically just right of center.

Today's new Conservative is a piece of shit, thanks to the Trump Effect that has crossed over the border and poisoned people's minds. The party and its followers have leaned very heavily to the right and they think that's normal. It's not. A lot of moderate Conservative voters have rejected this new direction and have voted, (begrudgingly), for Trudeau and the Liberals in the last couple of elections. I am one of them. Liberals have gravitated more to the left, so we're left with hyper-partisanship in the Canadian political landscape.

Patrick Brown is appealing to those of us, (mostly visible minorities), who refuse to vote Conservative while it remains in this state. He's trying to bring the moderate Conservative voter back to the party. While Poilievre is taking the route of his predecessors, (who lost to Trudeau), and doubling down on their antics, appealing solely to the angry white man who resides in the far-right. Brown is currently far behind in the leadership race, but there's plenty of time for him to make gains. The final vote is in September. The comment sections of all of his Facebook posts are littered with far-right maggots and their idiotic commentary, and that’s where I participate to counter them. The sad thing is these idiots don't realize that Poilievre is not as strong as they think he is. While he might win the Conservative leadership race, he absolutely will lose to Trudeau in the next election. Why? Because he has nothing in his campaign that appeals to moderate Conservatives, (who are the difference makers), as he's only targeting the far-right as his base.

If he's the leader, I will vote for Justin again. Full stop.

If Patrick Brown wins the leadership, then I suspect he'll be able to bring Trudeau down, because even those far-right dickheads who hate him now will have no choice but to vote for him over Trudeau, because they hate Justin even more.

That's the play, and I think it's a smart one.

[Rare White Ape]

That's a solid strategy. I agree with it for the most part but I'd still love to see Trudeau win.

One thing that doesn't happen here in Australia is the rusted-on conservative voter switching to the progressive party if they feel the right is too far right. I'd say that you are blessed with that effect in Canada. This leads me to guess that you don't have much influence from Murdoch-owned media over there, who do their worst to maintain the status quo of right wing control in politics.

[Tom Servo]

There is a bit of that here. Despite what Trump would have you believe, I know of at least a couple Trump voters who voted for him in 2016 because they deeply distrusted Clinton and thought "how bad could he be?" My uncle, for instance, is a longtime conservative voter who deeply regretted that decision and voted for Biden in 2020.

[Rare White Ape]

It’s clearly Opposite Day in the local Murdoch press.

https://scontent.fool1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/280053329_523789272518994_7079157748186465550_n.jp g?stp=cp0_dst-jpg_e15_fr_q65&_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8024bb&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_ohc=SXRHY9-Y82QAX_pCMwN&tn=kgwbHf2foSZCgvr2&_nc_ht=scontent.fool1-1.fna&oh=00_AT_XiuXD-wXgwZRSkDD53OO92HreBQIgScowDDI3f0Z1Dg&oe=6278A1C5

[Yw-slayer]

The other part is, I've heard a lot of performative outrage about the leak, but I haven't heard anybody explain why it's so damaging. Like, what about secrecy there is beneficial to the country?

I would be concerned if confidential drafts are leaked.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I have to admit I have no clue how supreme court works.

For example, what prompted them to all of a sudden to think a 50 yr old precedent is wrong and needs to be changed? Were the 'secret' drafts meant only for the justices themselves to talk about this amongst themselves and not really intended for public consumption?

But then again, with lifetime appointments, they're not suppose to care what the public thinks.

Yeah, if you signed an NDA or have security clearance or whatever similar things, you are suppose to keep your mouth shut.

However, if your company/government is about to do something evil in your mind, should we continue to keep our mouths shut?

I can totally understand why Snowden and this leaker did what they did.

As for supreme court, I really don't see the need for any secrecy. It's lady justice who was suppose to be blindfolded to deliver impartial justice for all of us..., not the other way around... attempting to blindfold the public.

[Tom Servo]

I would be concerned if confidential drafts are leaked.

I guess my question is: why do they need to be confidential?

[neanderthal]

I have to admit I have no clue ...

Shoulda just stopped there.

We know. You prove it daily.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Why do you feel necessary to point out the obvious? :p

Do you know why Supreme Court needs to draft things in secrecy?

[Jason]

I guess my question is: why do they need to be confidential?

The explanation I've heard is that SCOTUS ideally is not supposed to be swayed by public opinion/response. I understand it in theory, I guess, as all they're "supposed" to be doing is interpreting the Constitution basically, but in reality it's BS and they're just as political as anyone else.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Not sure if it's reasonable to force justices to have no political opinions of their own.

However, if they deliberately lied during their confirmation hearings, something ought to be done about that. I would not want justices lying like politicians. What good is a judge if he/she has no integrity.

[Yw-slayer]

I guess my question is: why do they need to be confidential?

Because they're drafts, and draft judgments at that.

[Tom Servo]

So Jason's answer made a certain kind of sense. I don't necessarily agree with it, but at least there was a reason.

YW - I'm not sure what "'cuz" was supposed to convey, but I publicize my draft RFCs all the time. There might be some parlance I'm not privy to, but from a layman's perspective, that was a pretty spectacular non-answer.

[sandydandy]

The explanation I've heard is that SCOTUS ideally is not supposed to be swayed by public opinion/response. I understand it in theory, I guess, as all they're "supposed" to be doing is interpreting the Constitution basically, but in reality it's BS and they're just as political as anyone else. This is why Biden should’ve packed the Supreme Court with two more Democrats. He should’ve done it on day one of his presidency.

Play the game the way it’s being played by your opponents.

[Yw-slayer]

People may not have fully made up their minds or fully thought through the ramifications of certain arguments or points. They may have been mistaken about things that they want to correct. They may want to add to or rephrase the reasoning. They may want to review their decisions after further discussion with colleagues. There is every reason drafts should be kept confidential. I don't see anything controversial about ensuring that they should be.

[Tom Servo]

And that was an *actual* answer. It's one I disagree with, I think transparency in these types of things is a good thing, but at least it wasn't "because it is what it is", so thank you for that.

[Rare White Ape]

Well I think the suggestion earlier was that it got 'leaked' to test the waters because they knew it would be bad news. That way they can gauge the reaction and if needed turn around and say it was just a draft all along haha.

But hey knowing how determined the fundies can be for wrecking shit in the name of the eight pound six ounce newborn baby jesus, I just KNOW they are going to go ahead with it.

[Rikadyn]

3898

[FaultyMario]

Who? Crazy religious bigot wrote that? GTFO!

[Crazed_Insanity]

Both birth rate and abortion rate are going down over the past 50 years. This is not the way to satisfy ‘market demand’. If there’s really such a market demand for babies, raise the prices and then perhaps domestic moms will choose to carry the babies to full term and sell them to you? Plus, what happened to free market? Why should governments intervene like this?

[Dicknose]

One thing that doesn't happen here in Australia is the rusted-on conservative voter switching to the progressive party if they feel the right is too far right. I'd say that you are blessed with that effect in Canada.
We have had very conservative seats lost to moderate rightish independents eg Zali beating the former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.
This election this trend may spread.

These seats are very conservative by percentage but generally quite moderate politically. They wouldn't go left but can fall to a moderate independent.

The problem for the parties is that individual candidates need to toe the party line, so its hard being more moderate that your party.

[Dicknose]

I was wondering why Supreme court issue was a surprise, since there should have been a case that raised this issue. Ah - its a Mississippi case about the ban of abortions after 15 weeks.
The whole State v Federal rights is a big issue. You get problems like this when the Federal govt can't pass a law allowing abortions and it becomes a state issue.
Sorry but the US system is very messed up and complicated. Australia gets similar issues with multi level govt - we have had it suggested to remove state govt, but that's easier for us with just a handful of states.

[Rare White Ape]

We have had very conservative seats lost to moderate rightish independents eg Zali beating the former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.
This election this trend may spread.

These seats are very conservative by percentage but generally quite moderate politically. They wouldn't go left but can fall to a moderate independent.

The problem for the parties is that individual candidates need to toe the party line, so its hard being more moderate that your party.

I am watching and waiting with excitement to see how the teal independent movement goes. They might well be the wrecking ball that causes the Liberal Party to die in a fire, especially in Frydenberg’s seat :lol:

For those unaware, the ‘teal’ independents are those who are economically conservative but want action on climate change, whilst the Liberal Party is also economically conservative but very much want to continue the current fossil fuels-based economy. So that’s blue politics (our right wing is blue) mixed with green politics, hence the teal moniker.

I’m not sure who’s organised it, but there’s funding to the tune of $200-ish million bucks being provided to them for electioneering so they’ve all banded under a loosely unified group while still not being an official party.

If they end up holding balance of power, the likelihood is that they’ll allow the Liberals to form minority government but block any energy policies that aren’t made with the environment in mind.

[Yw-slayer]

lol man, hilarious, people actually still like the Republicans? lololollllllllllllllllllllll

[Rare White Ape]

Hot off the “things that are so old that they aren’t news anymore” desk:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/oan-finally-admits-no-widespread-voter-fraud-by-georgia-election-workers-after-settling-defamation-lawsuit?ref=scroll

[neanderthal]

Senate bill to protect women's health fails: yes, 49. No, 51.

All Republican+ Manchin vote best

Progressives "deMocr4ts don't d0 anYth!ng ..."

Um. Maybe go vote for the purple who voted to protect women's health versus the people trying to take away women's rights. Also wanting to boycott and encouraging others to boycott voting LITERALLY doesn't do anything to help.

[FaultyMario]

How can the pharmaceutical industry finance anti-Roe legislators?

It puts its business in jeopardy.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Senate bill to protect women's health fails: yes, 49. No, 51.

All Republican+ Manchin vote best

Progressives "deMocr4ts don't d0 anYth!ng ..."

Um. Maybe go vote for the purple who voted to protect women's health versus the people trying to take away women's rights. Also wanting to boycott and encouraging others to boycott voting LITERALLY doesn't do anything to help.

Anyway, democrats don’t do anything because they have members like Manchin. It’s really mind boggling why Manchin is a democrat.

Our last hope is probably Chief Justice swaying one of the conservative Justices to switch sides…

[FaultyMario]

Is the murder of Shireen Abu Akleh getting any coverage in MSM?

I think she also held American citizenship.

[Tom Servo]

It is. I've seen a ton of stories about it today.

[Jason]

lol man, hilarious, people actually still like the Republicans? lololollllllllllllllllllllll

Republicans lead in the generic ballot

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

Also, Trump has a higher favorability rating than Biden has approval rating.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/

Democrats are *incredibly* unpopular right now, because of inflation, gas prices, etc and made up wedge issues like "CRT"

Combine that with the fact that Republicans have an advantage due to how our systems are set up (link below), there's not a whole lot of hope for the Democratic party in the near future, imo.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/advantage-gop/

[Crazed_Insanity]

Republican's advantage comes down to their ability to strike emotional chords with their base better. They are also more united. Democrats are generally more boring, unless some charismatic young dude comes along like Kennedy, Clinton, Obama... otherwise party is just too often playing the boring lesser of the 2 evil card. Just not very inspiring. Democrats are also not very united. (See Joe Manchin)

I think large corporations is still the biggest threat to our democracy. Regardless which party is in charge, our government, supposedly of the people, just isn't representing the will of the people very well. The disconnect will only cause further voter apathy... so we'll end up with only passionate extremists involved in the election process making our nation more polarizing...

One consolation after Trump is that at least we've demonstrated that it's not that easy for insurrectionists to overthrow our government... yet!

Anyway, hopefully dems will have more young charismatic folks who cannot be bought by corporate money in the pipeline. Otherwise, we'll just have to wait for GOP to mess up in order to win again.

[neanderthal]

Republicans lead in the generic ballot

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

Also, Trump has a higher favorability rating than Biden has approval rating.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/

Democrats are *incredibly* unpopular right now, because of inflation, gas prices, etc and made up wedge issues like "CRT"

Combine that with the fact that Republicans have an advantage due to how our systems are set up (link below), there's not a whole lot of hope for the Democratic party in the near future, imo.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/advantage-gop/

I quoted you but I was responding to you and to billi. Don't feel dirty by association. It wasn't intended.

------

In other words, Republicans/ right wing nutjobs win the pithy catch phrase battle. I know we here understand that politics is not described by a catchy three word slogan. Well, maybe billi doesn't understand that.

Lock her up.
Build the wall.
Let's go Brandon. aka F#ck Joe Biden.
No new taxes.
Ban CRT.
But her emails.
God. Guns. Babies
Freedom isn't free.
Come and take it. (referring to guns.)

Etc etc etc.

There's decades of slogans over the years. They come up with new ones every year and parrot them continually and their followers the sheep lap it up all the time. They buy the merch. Wear the t shirts and caps. They repeat the slogans. Slap the bumper stickers on their cars. They trumpet their ignorance every place they can. All in the name of "own the libs."[/b]

That's why they glommed onto "defund the police" so easily. Terrible sloganeering by whoever started it, no matter how accurate it was meant to be. I firmly believe police need to be defunded and social services funded in equal measure. Same with military and education.

Ever try to have a discussion about how cutting taxes works in the real world with one of the zealots? They're brainwashed sheep.

There is one entity that is actively trying to harm the country. One. The Republican party. They occasionally actually do something good (pension protection act or whatever it was) but for the most part GQP politicians are working for the monied elites that Bernie keeps talking about.

But no "progressives" wanna talk about that. They'd rather act to harm the democrats and suppress the votes.

[neanderthal]

We in the black community have a saying; not all skin folk is kin folk. Just coz people are allied with you, don't mean they got your back. Even if they're every single category of whatever you are.

I'm as progressive as they come, but you couldn't align me with "progressives" without the stongest magnetic forces. I really don't know what they're about. Except themselves.

[Yw-slayer]

Thanks mainly to the media, emotional voting, and the interests of those in power, votes in certain places are indeed won and lost by way of pithy catchphrases.

[Rare White Ape]

But no "progressives" wanna talk about that. They'd rather act to harm the democrats and suppress the votes.

I'm seeing this phenomenon here with The Greens. I'm also quite progressive and would prefer Greens policies over Labor policies (Greens are obviously left, and Labor are centre-left with the best chance of sending the RWNJ Liberal Party into the bin and forming government in a week when the federal election happens).

Indeed, I have been a Greens voter for a long time and usually preference them over Labor, but I have seen the light. The Greens, on multiple occasions, have sided with the Liberals and sought to bury good government policies purely because they didn't think they went far enough. They literally let perfect become the enemy of good, with no thought put toward allowing actual electable policies through into legislation.

Now The Greens' current tack is to enter the battle for marginal seats in order to grow their current foothold of just one seat in parliament to ten at this election. Of the nine seats in contest, four are held by the Liberal Party, while the other five are Labor-held seats. Yes: they want to take away Labor's chance of gaining those four seats, as well as take another five from Labor, thus diluting the ability of Labor to win this election.

It's looking increasingly likely that Labor will be able to win enough seats to form government outright, but there is also the chance of a hung parliament where a number of Greens and 'teal' independents MPs could form the balance of power, in which case it will go to Labor based on climate policy, so that's not the end of the world. But if the effect is that The Greens cause Labor to lose the election.... then I don't think I'll ever be able to forgive them.

It is at this point where I shall cast your minds back to the last election in 2019, where it was also looking like an easy Labor victory. But the former leader of The Greens went to North Queensland and basically told towns full of coal miners that they are stupid for working in fossil fuels with the end result that it galvanised them via fear mongering about their jobs that they should vote Liberal. And they did and North Queensland swing the election back around to deliver us another three years of the absolute horror show that is neoliberal right wing dogshit.

So the catch cry of 'blue no matter who' is actually correct. Remember that it took 40 years for the Overton Window to slide this far to the right, with the help of a tax-dodging media and decades of fear about 'mooslims' and Asian immigrants. It will take just as long for a real progressive movement to drag it back again, for the Democrat Party to solidify its base and gradually move left again, leaving the right-wing elements off to the side to go back to being core Republicans, and for the further-right elements of the Republican party to fall off and once again be considered fringe idiots.

Got to play the long game, fix the most pressing issues now and start building the utopia that we all want.

[Crazed_Insanity]

But no "progressives" wanna talk about that. They'd rather act to harm the democrats and suppress the votes.

Really? Bernie never wanna talk about that? Bernie would rather harm democrats and suppress votes? So Bernie is actually Manchin?

[Jason]

I quoted you but I was responding to you and to billi. Don't feel dirty by association. It wasn't intended.

------

In other words, Republicans/ right wing nutjobs win the pithy catch phrase battle. I know we here understand that politics is not described by a catchy three word slogan. Well, maybe billi doesn't understand that.

Lock her up.
Build the wall.
Let's go Brandon. aka F#ck Joe Biden.
No new taxes.
Ban CRT.
But her emails.
God. Guns. Babies
Freedom isn't free.
Come and take it. (referring to guns.)

Etc etc etc.

There's decades of slogans over the years. They come up with new ones every year and parrot them continually and their followers the sheep lap it up all the time. They buy the merch. Wear the t shirts and caps. They repeat the slogans. Slap the bumper stickers on their cars. They trumpet their ignorance every place they can. All in the name of "own the libs."[/b]

That's why they glommed onto "defund the police" so easily. Terrible sloganeering by whoever started it, no matter how accurate it was meant to be. I firmly believe police need to be defunded and social services funded in equal measure. Same with military and education.

Ever try to have a discussion about how cutting taxes works in the real world with one of the zealots? They're brainwashed sheep.

There is one entity that is actively trying to harm the country. One. The Republican party. They occasionally actually do something good (pension protection act or whatever it was) but for the most part GQP politicians are working for the monied elites that Bernie keeps talking about.

But no "progressives" wanna talk about that. They'd rather act to harm the democrats and suppress the votes.

I consider myself progressive, but pragmatic, it has been frustrating being on the “side” of policy makers, working against folks who simply either want to make themselves wealthy, hurt people they don’t like, or “blow it all up”. Those slogans are way easier to push than nuanced policy details, and I have absolutely no solution for it. It sucks.

[Tom Servo]

For me, a lot of it is this feeling that the GOP are more than willing to break rules or make up rules to get whatever they want, and then liberals stick by the rules and say "look at how good we are!" even though nothing gets done. The annoying part is, I also know that the GOP is better at ginning up the outrage machine, so the second the democratic party starts trying to bend or break the rules, they will lose their fucking minds over it and it'll still end up hurting us.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Dems can be good at operating the outrage machines as well, but their cheap talks tend to end up hurting themselves… take this talk about ‘greedflation’ for example:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/12/democratic-conspiracy-theory-on-inflation-makes-things-worse/

Dems needs more actions/solutions that can help them get re-elected! Blaming the GOP, greedy corporations, deplorable voters like Billi won’t help!

[Rare White Ape]

Dems needs more actions/solutions that can help them get re-elected!

They've got them, but the meeedja tells people otherwise.

[Tom Servo]

Dems can be good at operating the outrage machines as well

They can be, but they've got nothing on the right when it comes to just being the overarching strategy. There are multiple cable news networks that spend 24/7 ginning up that outrage. The election was stolen, covid is a hoax, whites are being replaced, child sex trafficking is rampant and the democrats are the ones doing it, etc etc etc.

[Crazed_Insanity]

They've got them, but the meeedja tells people otherwise.
Take the recent failure for senate to codify abortion rights. Not sure why it needs to wait 50 years, but anyway, we still couldn’t get it done today with a senate majority. I guess we can blame Bernie and Billi for that because if such deplorable people don’t exist, they’d not be able to harm the dem party so much.

Yeah, I was being sarcastic, but just saying that dems like Neanderthal really should learn to harness energy from Bernie rather than constantly seeing him as the enemy.

[Crazed_Insanity]

They can be, but they've got nothing on the right when it comes to just being the overarching strategy. There are multiple cable news networks that spend 24/7 ginning up that outrage. The election was stolen, covid is a hoax, whites are being replaced, child sex trafficking is rampant and the democrats are the ones doing it, etc etc etc.

Anyway, point is these rage machines won’t save you if you don’t do a good job. Trump lost because he fucked up!

Biden really inherited a mess, but if Brandon doesn’t make things go better, and if we failed to lock him up, we just might make America trumpian again!!!

[Jason]

Take the recent failure for senate to codify abortion rights. Not sure why it needs to wait 50 years, but anyway, we still couldn’t get it done today with a senate majority. I guess we can blame Bernie and Billi for that because if such deplorable people don’t exist, they’d not be able to harm the dem party so much.

Yeah, I was being sarcastic, but just saying that dems like Neanderthal really should learn to harness energy from Bernie rather than constantly seeing him as the enemy.

The filibuster exists, and having 60 votes in the Senate, a majority in the House, and a Dem POTUS at the same time is a very tall order. Think it's only happened once for like a year or two since Roe v Wade was decided.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Agree that it's a tall order. However, the reality is that we don't even need filibuster or supermajority to be in the way of getting the job done. We have Bernie Manchin derailing us every step of the way! :p

Dems need to be more unified and be more representative of the average folks. Not just the lobbyists and various 'minorities'. We need a majority to win votes!

Isn't it mind boggling that we had a billionaire republican running to represent the average americans? Shouldn't that be democrat's job?!?!? I just think democrats have lost its way. Obama has been the classic example. He started out running against Hillary(and the establishment) just like Bernie, but he ended his 8 years as if he is Hillary. It's just unfortunate that Bernie Sanders is a white old male and not very charismatic...

I'm also beginning to doubt Biden... I wonder if he knew about the upcoming conflict with Russia... that's why he was able to pull out of Afghanistan? The home I bought early 2021 south of Seattle was owned by some high ranking army guy who got promoted/transferred to some UN/NATO gig in Poland. Maybe it's all coincidence, but considering how accurate the intelligence Biden had about Russia before the war...

Anyway, forever wars need to stop and government needs to focus more on the well being of its people. Anti-establishment sentiments didn't come about for no reason.

[Tom Servo]

Anyway, point is these rage machines won’t save you if you don’t do a good job. Trump lost because he fucked up!

Disagree. There are plenty of Republican senators still thriving off things like ginning up "death panels" in the face of a public healthcare option. They literally got people to vote against their own best interests by scaring them with outrage, ignoring that there are death panels right now made up of corporate executives that you don't even have the opportunity to vote out if you don't like their decisions.

Trump's one example where he didn't manage to hang onto the office (I won't say he hasn't managed to hang onto power, he still has a terrifying amount of sway over the party), but there are tons of examples of people still happily serving in public office who haven't done shit other than get people outraged about the "others."

[Crazed_Insanity]

Well, in predominantly red or blue states, it’s much easier to hang on to power while doing nothing. Voters likely won’t switch party no matter what.

In purple districts or for POTUS, if you do a poor job, voters will usually blame you by voting the other party. Rage machines will likely work as a challenger when those in power did a poor job. However, I kinda doubt one can maintain power by getting your constituents mad all the time. :p

Btw, besides minimizing lobbying influences, we also need to gerrymander every district in America to the color purple so that politicians can no longer cater just to one side…

[George]

Thanks mainly to the media, emotional voting, and the interests of those in power, votes in certain places are indeed won and lost by way of pithy catchphrases.

Votes and wars. Most of you guys know about this already, I'm sure: Wikipedia: "Remember the Maine! To hell with Spain!" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War#USS_Maine_dispatch_to _Havana_and_loss)

[Tom Servo]

Is the murder of Shireen Abu Akleh getting any coverage in MSM?

I think she also held American citizenship.

It's getting a *whole* lot of attention now that there's video of the Israeli police kicking the shit out of the pallbearers carrying her coffin.

[FaultyMario]

It's getting a *whole* lot of attention now that there's video of the Israeli police kicking the shit out of the pallbearers carrying her coffin.

That shit was medieval.

Edit: I had not seen the coffin itself, she was a christian.