Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On October 22 2024 21:09 MJG wrote: There isn't a silver bullet for fixing social media, but making it so that social media companies are legally responsible for the content that's publicly posted on their platforms would be a good start.
For example, here in the UK it's possible for people to be prosecuted for inciting racial hatred using platforms like Twitter. Imagine if Twitter themselves were also held responsible each time this happened? They are amplifying these voices by giving them an audience, and they're profiting from doing that, so they should be punished every time someone is convicted of posting illegal content.
Of course, this will never happen because these companies are too big and too rich, but it would be a good first step.
I disagree with this. This is like holding city major accountable for something, someone said on the street of this city. I also think that ability to moderate is part of the power those companies have. I would rather have them not being able to moderate any content without specific court order (specific as not "delete any post with "faiuihreuah" in it, but rather "delete all the posts and account of x y"), this would curtail their power more than anything else. As it is now its like having private security company instead of police (to keep comparision to the city going). I also think social media should be strictly 18+ at the very least.
I don't think that's a good comparison.
If someone wants to spout hate speech on the street then the city mayor doesn't profit from that; the city mayor doesn't actively promote the hate speech to other people; the city mayor doesn't amplify the reach of that hate speech by broadcasting it in other cities or counties or countries; and so on and so forth.
The difference is that a city doesn't make money off of what is said on their streets. Social media algorithms are designed to increase engagement over everything and the easiest way to do that is to encourage hate and division. With shareholder capitalism, these companies aren't just incentivized to spread as much racial hated as they are allowed you but legally have to spread as much racial hatred and division as possible.
I agree having different standards for sites that cater to children and non children but like Joe Rogan this isn't a case of bad actors its a case of being legally mandated to be bad actors that make the world a worse place. The same reason why you don't allow people to shout bomb in an airport or fire in a crowded area you can't allow a company to become legally mandated to incite hate crimes.
This is even worse in a world with state run, or at least state influenced corperations that have an interest in increasing division and discord in another country for their own nations benefit. The idea that you should trust capitalism with making society better is just wild.
On October 22 2024 07:48 Uldridge wrote: The existential threat is there, no matter who wins though. Trump is just a symptom. He's the voice channeling all the conspiratorial, schizo, out of touch, disenfranchised people. How do you turn the tide? At the same time: why are these people like this? HOW did this happen? It's time for some really serious root cause analysis, because just brushing it off as "tsk, just impressionable, gullible, stupid, insane people" isn't going to cut it for the third election in a row. There are people thinking the hurricane was manmade to steal lithium. I don't understand reality any more.
We need something better than "they're too far gone". I'm actually starting to feel quite anxious for you guys, no matter the outcome. Let's just hope everything stays more or less calm at the turn of the year.
I want to talk about this seriously, without being pulled into the Dogmeat discussion.
I think a core reason for this is that these people have noticed they they are getting the short end of the stick. It is a fact that a lot of things only get better for those at the very top, and get worse for everyone else.
Money and resources accumulate more on more onto ever fewer multibillionaires. Housing is getting more expensive for normal people, you have to work more for less (real) money, things that our parents generation took for granted seem utterly unreachable for us. (Affording a house and a family on a single normal income, for example). Stuff gets more expensive while pay stagnates. Natural disasters happen more often.
So there are some real grievances that lead to people being unhappy in general.
Then there is social media. Social media is broken and it breaks people. Social media is designed to make people angry and unhappy, as long as that keeps them hooked to the platform. Anger is a very good driver for this. This is both something that just happens on social media, and also something that gets increased through enemy action. Russia has long been fighting a hybrid war against the west, and using social media and other avenues to sow discontent has been a very, very successful endeavor for Putin.
If we want to make stuff better, the top three issues are:
Wealth inequality Climate Change Social Media
Fixing them is not easy, and not even something that you can get majorities to actually think is necessary. Yet if we don't manage to do that, things will only get worse on the societal front.
The rich getting richer is a feature of capitalism that people are okay with, as long as they feel that they also get some share of that pie. That is no longer the case. We need to solve this.
And i have no idea how to tackle social media. It is a drug that destroys us. It is basically heroin. We need to devolop some societal inoculation against the bad effects from it, in the same way that we eventually managed to develop societal resistance to mass alcoholism.
So for the underlined parts, is the important objective to work on communicating that Democrats are trying much harder than Republicans to address wealth inequality and climate change? Because Democrats are at least proposing ideas, but then they're being blocked by Republicans. If Republican voters sincerely think wealth inequality and climate change are legitimate issues, but still vote for Republicans who oppose the interests of the middle class / non-millionaires, then there's a miscommunication problem going on.
I don't think that republican voters think that wealth inequality is a problem. I do however think that wealth inequality is a main reason for many of the things that make republicans angry. But i don't think they view things like that.
A main point of the republican party is to prevent that attribution from ever occuring by distracting their voters in lots of different ways. Rich people don't like people thinking about wealth inequality, and they have figured out a lot of tools to prevent that from happening.
I mean they’re not a monolith, not everyone fits the mould.
I’d say it’s pretty consistent that Republicans like free market capitalism in the abstract, but don’t like it in practice if it doesn’t give the results they want
It creates this very inconsistent, dare I say cognitive dissonance and rank inconsistency. State intervention bad unless some industry I value, the whole ‘culture war’ is effectively a railing against entertainment industries doing capitalism and trying to appeal to different markets. I mean I doubt I have to list many examples, you all likely know what I’m talking about
The left aren’t immune to the aforementioned, but generally aren’t on socio-economic problems. For pretty obvious reasons various levels of critique or outright rejection of free market capitalism, in a very capitalist world remain pretty damn consistent.
Conservatives yearn for this competitive meritocracy, but without the downsides of a competitive meritocracy. Which I think is just a fundamentally ridiculous expectation.
Obviously generalising, and I do think conservatives aren’t without some legitimate critiques in other domains. And as I say, aren’t a monolith
A state run corporation is not what you would normally call a unique aspect of capitalism, and if they can't be trusted not to fuck up other countries then the suggestion that they deserve control over speech in their own countries is at the least suspect and at the most counter not only to economic principles, but also to the basic ideas of the Enlightenment that hopefully continue to underpin our societies.
"Economic interests" is an interesting invocation. Remember, having economic interests is not a bad thing per se. You have them. In Twitter's case, their economic interests possibly took a huge hit, because their value as a private company is nothing near their value as a publicly traded meme stock that didn't earn a profit in 15 years. So whatever Elon has done at X must be an incredibly selfless and laudable thing, going against their own economic interests like that. But we generally do strive to prosecute companies for wrongdoing - they can't do whatever they want.
For example RTX (Raytheon) just got hit with a billion dollars in fines for corruption. Imagine how much business at usual corruption is still under the hood of the MIC. From the revolving door of government employees and lobbyists giving themselves juicy noncompetitive contracts to deliver bad shit late and over its already inflated budget. The Department Of Government Efficiency should clean this up this pattern.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
I don't know what the media machine is, but I would argue that since it would be considered inappropriate any other time in history for a man to show up to teach kids with Size Z prosthetic tits, and now we have a school board that was willing to defend it then they are the ones that are ideologically captured by some kind of machine.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
I don't know what the media machine is, but I would argue that since it would be considered inappropriate any other time in history for a man to show up to teach kids with Size Z prosthetic tits, and now we have a school board that was willing to defend it then they are the ones that are ideologically captured by some kind of machine.
My guess about "the media machine" is that you just finished making a huge deal out of the media drawing logical inferences about what Trump said about Harris and the radical left, claiming that what you wish they would do instead is to just quote Trump's exact words verbatim... but now you just made up a bunch of nonsense about what DogMeat totally didn't say, in an attempt to rescue his hateful rhetoric. You completely changed his actual post by qualifying it with "because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits". Don't pay any mind to DogMeat and his nonsense. He'll probably just continue to get warned and then eventually get banned for his shitposting. + Show Spoiler +
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
I don't know what the media machine is, but I would argue that since it would be considered inappropriate any other time in history for a man to show up to teach kids with Size Z prosthetic tits, and now we have a school board that was willing to defend it then they are the ones that are ideologically captured by some kind of machine.
My guess about "the media machine" is that you just finished making a huge deal out of the media drawing logical inferences about what Trump said about Harris and the radical left, claiming that what you wish they would do instead is to just quote Trump's exact words verbatim... but now you just made up a bunch of nonsense about what DogMeat totally didn't say, in an attempt to rescue his hateful rhetoric. You completely changed his actual post by qualifying it with "because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits". Don't pay any mind to DogMeat and his nonsense. He'll probably just continue to get warned and then eventually get banned for his shitposting. + Show Spoiler +
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
To be clear, your ideology dictates that you accept that teacher as a woman simply for saying he is a woman. The wig and prosthetic breasts aren't even a necessary component of my post.
If you look closely he didn't put quotation marks around what dogmeat the ancient poker player said. The reason is not because he's strawmanning or whitewashing or false quoting. He's engaged in something called conversation, which entails more than simply robotically verbatim repeating what the other person said, finding a word to equivocate on, or demanding a source for the sky being blue. He may have been, for example, contributing his own thoughts on the matter. If anything, BlackJack's part that he emphasized and agreed with is a tiny and far less controversial subset of dogmeat's more general claim.
Lastly, we can look at the intent (good faith) behind the interaction. Is BlackJack acting hostile or abrasive towards dogmeat or does he have an ulterior reason to misquote him? No. Is he using the quote as a strawman, or to build a slippery slope, with the goal of calling dogmeat a fascist Hitler? No. Bad intentions? None. As stated above, if anything he's made the claim far more limited, far less controversial, and far easier to identify common ground on. Then BlackJack seems to be in no danger of compromising his journalistic standards for the moment, and as much as we may like this thread I think it would be kidding BlackJack's influence to suggest his reach compares with CNN and MSNBC even in their current state. And you are equally unlikely to impugn any actual such media outlet's standards to begin with so the tu quoque move on BlackJack looks ultimately fruitless in any case.
On October 23 2024 01:49 oBlade wrote: How about when they break the law?
"Economic interests" is an interesting invocation. Remember, having economic interests is not a bad thing per se. You have them. In Twitter's case, their economic interests possibly took a huge hit, because their value as a private company is nothing near their value as a publicly traded meme stock that didn't earn a profit in 15 years. So whatever Elon has done at X must be an incredibly selfless and laudable thing, going against their own economic interests like that. But we generally do strive to prosecute companies for wrongdoing - they can't do whatever they want.
For example RTX (Raytheon) just got hit with a billion dollars in fines for corruption. Imagine how much business at usual corruption is still under the hood of the MIC. From the revolving door of government employees and lobbyists giving themselves juicy noncompetitive contracts to deliver bad shit late and over its already inflated budget. The Department Of Government Efficiency should clean this up this pattern.
So when they break the law. But you oppose new laws to regulate them and want to cut down on the agencies that regulate them (I think your word were gut the FDA, but it was definitely something like it). So with no new laws keeping up with technological progress and no agencies to investigate and enforce the existing laws, that sounds like very empty rhetoric.
On October 23 2024 01:49 oBlade wrote: How about when they break the law? + Show Spoiler +
"Economic interests" is an interesting invocation. Remember, having economic interests is not a bad thing per se. You have them. In Twitter's case, their economic interests possibly took a huge hit, because their value as a private company is nothing near their value as a publicly traded meme stock that didn't earn a profit in 15 years. So whatever Elon has done at X must be an incredibly selfless and laudable thing, going against their own economic interests like that. But we generally do strive to prosecute companies for wrongdoing - they can't do whatever they want.
For example RTX (Raytheon) just got hit with a billion dollars in fines for corruption. Imagine how much business at usual corruption is still under the hood of the MIC. From the revolving door of government employees and lobbyists giving themselves juicy noncompetitive contracts to deliver bad shit late and over its already inflated budget. The Department Of Government Efficiency should clean this up this pattern.
The law is an ever changing thing. Social media wasn't around forever and we now live in a situation where everyone can say whatever they want all to time to everyone else. I think this can be harmful. Corruption is least of my worries at the moment. I think mis- and disinformation is one of the most pressing issues we need to tackle now because it's tearing apart social fabric. Or, maybe more aptly, it's allowing everyone to show their true colors. I don't know if that necessarily a good thing. It's something where I'm not sure we already know if everyone should be able to show their true colors all the time. But it is also platforming instances that take advantages of this possibilities to drive ideologies, to scam, to polarize etc. I don't like polarization. I like to believe I can live side by side someone I don't agree with on how to organize education for example, not to know that this person thinks the education system is a left oriented cult to brainwash our children into becoming the opposite sex so that they'll keep the plastic surgery business running.
I'm very disorganized in my thoughts right now regarding these topics because I'm trying to figure it all out, so sorry if it's not coming out all clean or formatted or even correct vocabulary or grammar. The USA, at the momemt, is basically a proof of concept for how we should go about free speech/information and it might be close to having run its course.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
I don't know what the media machine is, but I would argue that since it would be considered inappropriate any other time in history for a man to show up to teach kids with Size Z prosthetic tits, and now we have a school board that was willing to defend it then they are the ones that are ideologically captured by some kind of machine.
My guess about "the media machine" is that you just finished making a huge deal out of the media drawing logical inferences about what Trump said about Harris and the radical left, claiming that what you wish they would do instead is to just quote Trump's exact words verbatim... but now you just made up a bunch of nonsense about what DogMeat totally didn't say, in an attempt to rescue his hateful rhetoric. You completely changed his actual post by qualifying it with "because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits". Don't pay any mind to DogMeat and his nonsense. He'll probably just continue to get warned and then eventually get banned for his shitposting. + Show Spoiler +
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
To be clear, your ideology dictates that you accept that teacher as a woman simply for saying he is a woman. The wig and prosthetic breasts aren't even a necessary component of my post.
And why is that an issue? Who does this person hurt by saying she's a woman?
On October 23 2024 01:49 oBlade wrote: How about when they break the law?
"Economic interests" is an interesting invocation. Remember, having economic interests is not a bad thing per se. You have them. In Twitter's case, their economic interests possibly took a huge hit, because their value as a private company is nothing near their value as a publicly traded meme stock that didn't earn a profit in 15 years. So whatever Elon has done at X must be an incredibly selfless and laudable thing, going against their own economic interests like that. But we generally do strive to prosecute companies for wrongdoing - they can't do whatever they want.
For example RTX (Raytheon) just got hit with a billion dollars in fines for corruption. Imagine how much business at usual corruption is still under the hood of the MIC. From the revolving door of government employees and lobbyists giving themselves juicy noncompetitive contracts to deliver bad shit late and over its already inflated budget. The Department Of Government Efficiency should clean this up this pattern.
So when they break the law. But you oppose new laws to regulate them and want to cut down on the agencies that regulate them (I think your word were gut the FDA, but it was definitely something like it). So with no new laws keeping up with technological progress and no agencies to investigate and enforce the existing laws, that sounds like very empty rhetoric.
I didn't say gut the FDA but I accept that's not the only thing you took away from that conversation on purpose, it was someone else's fault not yours.
If you have pharmaceutical executives running the FDA, military industrial complex guys running the Department of Defense, and bankers running the SEC and Commerce and the Fed, then I posit that this isn't regulation, it's corruption, and needs to be broken up at the government level where the problem is. Not building more dysfunctional corrupt government on top of the old dysfunctional corrupt government. You brought it up but this is the same FDA that let half a million Americans die from opioids. Keep the skepticism goggles you have for corporations on when you look at the government too. Don't just defer to them as the schoolteacher authority that handles all the bully corporations.
In terms of speech, yes, I don't support a single new law to regulate the speech of Americans. My logical reason is I hate censorship, because it's controlled by humans, and it assumes that humans are smarter than humans, which precludes the free exchange of ideas. My legal reason is the First Amendment, which says "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press." My personal reason is the people who want the power to regulate speech are communists and the CIA.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
I don't know what the media machine is, but I would argue that since it would be considered inappropriate any other time in history for a man to show up to teach kids with Size Z prosthetic tits, and now we have a school board that was willing to defend it then they are the ones that are ideologically captured by some kind of machine.
My guess about "the media machine" is that you just finished making a huge deal out of the media drawing logical inferences about what Trump said about Harris and the radical left, claiming that what you wish they would do instead is to just quote Trump's exact words verbatim... but now you just made up a bunch of nonsense about what DogMeat totally didn't say, in an attempt to rescue his hateful rhetoric. You completely changed his actual post by qualifying it with "because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits". Don't pay any mind to DogMeat and his nonsense. He'll probably just continue to get warned and then eventually get banned for his shitposting. + Show Spoiler +
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
To be clear, your ideology dictates that you accept that teacher as a woman simply for saying she is a woman. The wig and prosthetic breasts aren't even a necessary component of my post.
Fixed that for you.
Again, what's the problem here, exactly? Does your world fall apart if people don't have the genitalia you expect them to have? Do you inspect people and have them strip to verify they have the correct ones? How do you have this authority, and who gave it to you? What do you do if they have the wrong genitalia? If someone does have the wrong genitalia, but you don't find out, or they manage to escape your investigation, what happens? How do you respond to someone who changes their name? How do you respond to someone who refers to their significant other as a partner, regardless of whether they're putting the correct genitalia together?
I'm genuinely curious as to how this is supposed to work according to you.
I definitely agree there are a lot of conflicts of interest everywhere. We don't just need to cut the system out from under us necessarily, but restrics the ways in which these CoIs can happen in the first place. However, I'm all for tabula rasa. Who's going to rebuild it though? People with good intentions?
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
I don't know what the media machine is, but I would argue that since it would be considered inappropriate any other time in history for a man to show up to teach kids with Size Z prosthetic tits, and now we have a school board that was willing to defend it then they are the ones that are ideologically captured by some kind of machine.
My guess about "the media machine" is that you just finished making a huge deal out of the media drawing logical inferences about what Trump said about Harris and the radical left, claiming that what you wish they would do instead is to just quote Trump's exact words verbatim... but now you just made up a bunch of nonsense about what DogMeat totally didn't say, in an attempt to rescue his hateful rhetoric. You completely changed his actual post by qualifying it with "because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits". Don't pay any mind to DogMeat and his nonsense. He'll probably just continue to get warned and then eventually get banned for his shitposting. + Show Spoiler +
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
To be clear, your ideology dictates that you accept that teacher as a woman simply for saying she is a woman. The wig and prosthetic breasts aren't even a necessary component of my post.
Fixed that for you.
Again, what's the problem here, exactly? Does your world fall apart if people don't have the genitalia you expect them to have? Do you inspect people and have them strip to verify they have the correct ones? How do you have this authority, and who gave it to you? What do you do if they have the wrong genitalia? If someone does have the wrong genitalia, but you don't find out, or they manage to escape your investigation, what happens? How do you respond to someone who changes their name? How do you respond to someone who refers to their significant other as a partner, regardless of whether they're putting the correct genitalia together?
I'm genuinely curious as to how this is supposed to work according to you.
You must be unfamiliar with this story because it was revealed later that he was indeed trolling. You've rushed to his defense by editing my post to change "he" to "she" but ironically all you did was misgender him.
Edit: to answer your question, "the problem" here is we have a troll that's permitted to wear giant prosthetic breasts with rock hard nipples that made students uncomfortable and distracted. All of this defended by a school board more keen on appearing tolerant than ensuring their children are educated.
On October 23 2024 01:49 oBlade wrote: How about when they break the law? + Show Spoiler +
"Economic interests" is an interesting invocation. Remember, having economic interests is not a bad thing per se. You have them. In Twitter's case, their economic interests possibly took a huge hit, because their value as a private company is nothing near their value as a publicly traded meme stock that didn't earn a profit in 15 years. So whatever Elon has done at X must be an incredibly selfless and laudable thing, going against their own economic interests like that. But we generally do strive to prosecute companies for wrongdoing - they can't do whatever they want.
For example RTX (Raytheon) just got hit with a billion dollars in fines for corruption. Imagine how much business at usual corruption is still under the hood of the MIC. From the revolving door of government employees and lobbyists giving themselves juicy noncompetitive contracts to deliver bad shit late and over its already inflated budget. The Department Of Government Efficiency should clean this up this pattern.
The law is an ever changing thing. Social media wasn't around forever and we now live in a situation where everyone can say whatever they want all to time to everyone else. I think this can be harmful. Corruption is least of my worries at the moment. I think mis- and disinformation is one of the most pressing issues we need to tackle now because it's tearing apart social fabric. Or, maybe more aptly, it's allowing everyone to show their true colors. I don't know if that necessarily a good thing. It's something where I'm not sure we already know if everyone should be able to show their true colors all the time. But it is also platforming instances that take advantages of this possibilities to drive ideologies, to scam, to polarize etc. I don't like polarization. I like to believe I can live side by side someone I don't agree with on how to organize education for example, not to know that this person thinks the education system is a left oriented cult to brainwash our children into becoming the opposite sex so that they'll keep the plastic surgery business running.
I'm very disorganized in my thoughts right now regarding these topics because I'm trying to figure it all out, so sorry if it's not coming out all clean or formatted or even correct vocabulary or grammar. The USA, at the momemt, is basically a proof of concept for how we should go about free speech/information and it might be close to having run its course.
Also, "When they break the law" is such a low-level analysis of the situation. The question is not if corporations should be allowed to break the law. It is what the law should say about what they can or cannot do.
The law is no god-given eternal thing. It is made by people. Ideally to the benefit of all. And that warrants discussion. Saying people or corporations should just follow the law adds no value to any discussion.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
I don't know what the media machine is, but I would argue that since it would be considered inappropriate any other time in history for a man to show up to teach kids with Size Z prosthetic tits, and now we have a school board that was willing to defend it then they are the ones that are ideologically captured by some kind of machine.
My guess about "the media machine" is that you just finished making a huge deal out of the media drawing logical inferences about what Trump said about Harris and the radical left, claiming that what you wish they would do instead is to just quote Trump's exact words verbatim... but now you just made up a bunch of nonsense about what DogMeat totally didn't say, in an attempt to rescue his hateful rhetoric. You completely changed his actual post by qualifying it with "because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits". Don't pay any mind to DogMeat and his nonsense. He'll probably just continue to get warned and then eventually get banned for his shitposting. + Show Spoiler +
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
To be clear, your ideology dictates that you accept that teacher as a woman simply for saying she is a woman. The wig and prosthetic breasts aren't even a necessary component of my post.
Fixed that for you.
Again, what's the problem here, exactly? Does your world fall apart if people don't have the genitalia you expect them to have? Do you inspect people and have them strip to verify they have the correct ones? How do you have this authority, and who gave it to you? What do you do if they have the wrong genitalia? If someone does have the wrong genitalia, but you don't find out, or they manage to escape your investigation, what happens? How do you respond to someone who changes their name? How do you respond to someone who refers to their significant other as a partner, regardless of whether they're putting the correct genitalia together?
I'm genuinely curious as to how this is supposed to work according to you.
You must be unfamiliar with this story because it was revealed later that he was indeed trolling. You've rushed to his defense by editing my post to change "he" to "she" but ironically all you did was misgender him.
Edit: to answer your question, "the problem" here is we have a troll that's permitted to wear giant prosthetic breasts with rock hard nipples that made students uncomfortable and distracted. All of this defended by a school board more keen on appearing tolerant than ensuring their children are educated.
I would be unfamiliar with that story. I suspect part of the reason is that I don't consume the same kind of media that you do. The rest of the reason I'm not familiar with your story is because you didn't cite anything for me to become familiar with. If your intent was to hold it close to your (presumably flat) chest so you could gotcha "the woke left" on the internet, it's cute, but I'm already bored. If you honestly wanted me to be aware of the context that was apparently central to your post, it's not my job to cite your sources for you. That's your problem, not mine.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
I don't know what the media machine is, but I would argue that since it would be considered inappropriate any other time in history for a man to show up to teach kids with Size Z prosthetic tits, and now we have a school board that was willing to defend it then they are the ones that are ideologically captured by some kind of machine.
My guess about "the media machine" is that you just finished making a huge deal out of the media drawing logical inferences about what Trump said about Harris and the radical left, claiming that what you wish they would do instead is to just quote Trump's exact words verbatim... but now you just made up a bunch of nonsense about what DogMeat totally didn't say, in an attempt to rescue his hateful rhetoric. You completely changed his actual post by qualifying it with "because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits". Don't pay any mind to DogMeat and his nonsense. He'll probably just continue to get warned and then eventually get banned for his shitposting. + Show Spoiler +
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
To be clear, your ideology dictates that you accept that teacher as a woman simply for saying he is a woman. The wig and prosthetic breasts aren't even a necessary component of my post.
To be clear, your assertion about my ideology doesn't justify your hypocrisy. You're trying to change the subject.
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/AZGiXda.jpeg)
