Reason Roundup

Is Giving to Biden or Trump Grounds for Getting Fired? New Poll Finds a Disturbing Number of People Who Think It Should Be

Plus: Self-censorship is on the rise, court issues restraining order for feds in Portland, and more...

|

Poll finds self-censorship on the rise across political groups. A disturbingly high percentage of people polled earlier this month think private political donations should be grounds for getting fired. The number was especially high among respondents under age 30, with 44 percent of the youngest group saying business leaders who donate to Donald Trump should be fired and 27 percent saying the same for execs who give to Joe Biden. Meanwhile, 62 percent of all respondents said they're reluctant to share their political views for fear of offending others—up four points from when the same question was posed in 2017.

Those are a few of the findings in a new national poll conducted by the Cato Institute and YouGov.

When it comes to free expression, the "fears cross partisan lines," writes Cato Director of Polling Emily Ekins. "Majorities of Democrats (52%), independents (59%) and Republicans (77%) all agree they have political opinions they are afraid to share."

There are some differences of degree. A majority (58 percent) of people who categorized themselves as "very" liberal told pollsters they felt they could express themselves freely, while only 48 percent of "moderate" liberals said the same.

"Political expression is an issue that divides the Democratic coalition between centrist Democrats and their left flank," suggests Ekins.

The percentage of respondents who felt they could speak freely was even lower among those who labeled themselves "moderate" (36 percent), "conservative" (23 percent), or "very conservative" (23 percent).

Of course, the poll doesn't tell us how much people's perceptions on this front are true to life and how much they reflect distorted evaluations. Maybe staunch liberals feel they can speak more freely because cultural currents do indeed allow it; maybe they just don't realize when their free expression is offending or alienating people. Maybe it's a little of both, plus a lot of other reasons.

On the conservative side, the strong feeling of having to self-censor is likely somewhat rooted in a media and political culture that thrives on peddling its own marginalization. But there's also statistical evidence that self-identification with conservatism and the Republican Party are on the decline, and no doubt that conservative ideas are sidelined in many elite institutions.

It's also hard to guess what people actually mean about their politics when they describe themselves as stronger or less-strong "liberals" or "conservatives" in an era where these meanings are mutable and often bizarre.

Ekins notes that even strong liberals are less confident in their ability to speak freely in 2020 then they were in 2017: "the share who feel pressured to self-​censor rose 12 points from 30% in 2017 to 42% in 2020." At the same time,

The share of moderates who self-censor increased 7 points from 57% to 64%, and the share of conservatives rose 70% to 77%, also a 7-point increase. Strong conservatives are the only group with little change. They are about as likely now (77%) to say they hold back their views as in 2017 (76%).

Self-​censorship is widespread across demographic groups as well. Nearly two-thirds of Latino Americans (65%) and White Americans (64%) and nearly half of African Americans (49%) have political views they are afraid to share. Majorities of men (65%) and women (59%), people with incomes over $100,000 (60%) and people with incomes less than $20,000 (58%), people under 35 (55%) and over 65 (66%), religious (71%) and non-​religious (56%) all agree that the political climate prevents them from expressing their true beliefs.

Not all self-censorship is bad, of course. There are times and places for restraint. So it's hard to know quite how to interpret the results above.

Alas, another part of the study is much more unambiguously depressing: A large number of people think whether someone is employable ought to be tied to their personal politics.

"Nearly a quarter (22%) of Americans would support firing a business executive who personally donates to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden's campaign," notes Ekins. "Even more, 31% support firing a business executive who donates to Donald Trump's re-​election campaign." And:

Support rises among political subgroups. Support increases to 50% of strong liberals who support firing executives who personally donate to Trump. And more than a third (36%) of strong conservatives support firing an executive for donating to Biden's presidential campaign.

Young Americans are also more likely than older Americans to support punishing people at work for personal donations to Trump. Forty-four percent (44%) of Americans under 30 support firing executives if they donate to Trump. This share declines to 22% among those over 55 years old—a 20-​point difference. An age gap also exists for Biden donors, but is less pronounced. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of Americans under 30 support firing executives who donate to Biden compared to 20% of those over 55—a 7-​point difference.

Respondents also expressed fear that their own political opinions or donations would cost them a job or a career opportunity. "Younger people are also more concerned than older people, irrespective of political viewpoint," notes Ekins.

Examining all Americans under 65, 37% of those under 30 are worried their political opinions could harm their career trajectories, compared to 30% of 30–54 year-​olds and 24% of 55–64 year-olds. But the age gap is more striking taking into account political views.

A slim majority (51%) of Republicans under 30 fear their views could harm their career prospects compared to 39% of 30–44 year-olds, 34% of 45–54 year-olds, and 28% of 55–64 year-old Republicans.

Democrats reflect a similar but less pronounced pattern. A third (33%) of Democrats under 30 worry they have views that could harm their current and future jobs, compared to 27% of 30–54 year-​olds, and 19% of 55–64 year-​old Democrats.

You can find the full survey—conducted July 1–6, 2020, with a national sample of 2,000 American adults—here. The sections on political donations and self-censorship are here. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.36 percentage points.


QUICK HITS

• A couple of (positive) Portland updates:

• Twitter is exploring subscription options.

• The Malaysian government is backtracking on making people who post videos to their personal social-media accounts get a license.

• A new documentary goes inside Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Advertisement

NEXT: Laws Protecting Private Employees' Speech and Political Activity Against Employer Retaliation: Cross-Cutting Questions

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Poll finds self-censorship on the rise across political groups.

    Methinks one political group, not so much.

    1. Hello.

      86% of Americans support mask wearing. Imagine living in a world where 9 out of every 10 people wear a mask. More creepily disturbing? The evidence DOES NOT support doing it.

      The balance of the 14% are apparently recalcitrant.

      Try and tell me it’s not a dark age. Ga’head. I’m waiting.

      /lowers head. Sticks arm out motions hand gesture inviting all comers.

      1. That’s a new word I’ve noticed creep up by the way. Sullum used it.

        What’s interesting to me is America was fricken born because of the recalcitrant.

        1. >>born because of the recalcitrant

          word. always fight the power.

          1. My last month’s on-line earning was $17930 simply by doing a straightforward job on-line. best home primarily based on-line job to earn additional greenbacks monthly simply by doing work for optimum two to three hrs daily.uyt. I actually have joined this job concerning three months past and in my 1st month I actually have created $12k+ simply with none special on-line expertise. everyone on this earth will get this job nowadays and begin creating money on-line by simply follow details on this web site……… HERE══════►►►Money90

      2. I dont support wearing a “mask”.

        In fact, I have never worn a mask since this all started. I travel and conduct business without doing anything like wearing a mask or what these Blue state say.

        Like polls numbers for Biden, the poll numbers for supporters of masks are one big lie.

        1. I don’t either and it’s mandated here.

          The body of evidence doesn’t support it.

          1. Not only do the death rates not support doing anything different than we do for Flu/Colds, 99% of people are not wearing a medical mask that does anything to limit virus particles.

            Wearing a N95 mask for more than a day completely negates its design.

            I have an M50 (CBRN) mask. Even that requires cleaning and changing of the filters depending on your use.

            In Georgia its illegal to wear masks outside Halloween because of the KKK, started by Democrats. Of course that mask law is unconstitutional, just like any state law requiring masks.

            1. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work on my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home.NVc Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and Follow instructions on this page…

              ►══════► Online Income Websites

      3. “The evidence DOES NOT support doing it.”

        I wonder when they will realize that this was essentially the Satanic Panic of this decade.

        1. Perhaps masks that look like clown makeup would turn the tide.

        2. That would require self reflection on the part of the media. History, especially recent history, tells us that’s about as likely as someone under 30 dying of COVID-19.

      4. It is weird that they started with a story about people afraid to posit their views publicly… and then post about a poll showing nearly everyone loves masks.

      5. Alex Berenson
        @AlexBerenson
        And there’s Dr. Anthony Fauci showing us all he knows exactly how well masks work! Thanks for the lesson, doc.

        Fauci was caught on cameras at the game with his mask pulled down in the stands.

        1. After that opening pitch, he realized that COVID was not the worst thing that could happen to him.

          1. It was the most on mark he has ever been though.

      6. I support mask wearing but not mandates to wear them. There are still people out there who support mass shutdowns because “the science” supports them. Mask shutdowns. Which would you rather have?

        1. The science never supported masks in relation to these types of diseases until the CDC changed course in April of this year. They’ve studied mask use for decades and have shown almost no correlation to infection and mask usage.

          What changed? People created models that showed masks worked. Real world data has yet to demonstrate it.

      7. i love that mask wearing is now considered socially acceptable. Total surveillance state has been mitigated somewhat.

        1. A big problem with trying to be a Trump follower and apologist is that he will undermine all your defenses of his behavior.

          1. You can see a professional about that TDS of yours if it is bothering you.

            1. It seems to be bothering you. And you might want to ask yourself why you (presuming you are a libertarian, since you are on a libertarian website) would have a problem with a fellow libertarian criticizing the buffoon at the seat of government power.

              1. Robert did not mention Trump.

                You, on the other hand, did.

                1. Two things.

                  One, Trump IS the name of the guy I was criticizing, so I used his name.

                  Two, the T in TDS stands for Trump, so Robert DID mention Trump.

                  Come to think of it, what the heck is your point? What would be wrong with me mentioning Trump? Is it like taking the Lord’s name in vane or something?

    2. Getting paid every month easily more than $15k just by doing simple job online. Last month i have exactly received $16839 from this online job just by giving this 2 hrs a day online. Now everybody on this earth can get this job and start earning more cash online just by follow instructions here……..for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lotCopy Here………>>  Click for full details 

    3. Start earning today from $600 to $754 easily by working online from home. Last month i have generated and received $19663 from this job by giving this only maximum 2 hours a day of my life. Easiest job in the world and earning from this job are just awesome. Everybody can now get this job and start earning cash online right now by just follow instructions click on this link and vist tabs( Home, Media, Tech ) for more details thanks……Click for full Details

    4. ●▬▬▬▬PART TIME JOBS▬▬▬▬▬●

      I am making $165 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now. I experience masses freedom now that i’m my non-public boss. that is what I do…… ↓↓↓↓COPY THIS SITE↓↓↓↓

      HERE►Click for full Details

    5. ●▬▬▬▬PART TIME JOBS▬▬▬▬▬●

      I am making $165 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now. I experience masses freedom now that i’m my non-public boss. that is what I do……
      ↓↓↓↓COPY THIS SITE↓↓↓↓

      HERE► Only Click Here For Full Details

  2. A majority (58 percent) of people who categorized themselves as “very” liberal told pollsters they felt they could express themselves freely…

    And do, loudly and often.

    1. Yeah, we needed a survey to tell us who’s running the show for the moment.

      1. The President and the Senate are Republican. It is amazing how conservatives can maintain a persecution complex even though they are in power.

        1. What’ s more amazing is a person so ignorant that they think running two parts of government = in charge.

          1. Ooh, zing!

            Yeah, I guess that’s why nobody makes that much of a big deal over Presidential elections.

    2. They’re evangelicals. To not do it loudly and often is against their religion.

    3. Yeah, a more interesting poll would ask people how motivated they feel to preach their politics.

      Nothing like born-again religion (complete with acceptance of original sin, rejection of satan, and submission to the holy authority) to motivate the masses. The human brain is one fucked-up bit of evolutionary design.

    4. But it’s still both sides, I’m sure.

  3. A federal court just issued a restraining order on the federal agents in Portland, Oregon.

    Antifa can enforce it.

    1. Just gather up all the documents and computers, leave the buildings, and lock the door. Explain that the President is reluctantly bowing to the political will of the mayor and governor and that he hopes that they know what they are doing. What will probably happen next will be a gift to the Republican party, quite visual and demonstrative.

    2. The TRO restricts federal officers from interfering with the press or ‘legal observers.’ It doesn’t stop the officers from arresting either of those sets, should the officers see either of them commit crimes.

      It sounds worse than its practical effect.

      1. Yeah, it essentially tells them not to do something they weren’t doing previously.

    3. Pull everything out, salt it with claymores, and then throw the switch when the anarcho-communists flood in to celebrate their “victory.”

      1. I think the federal government should observe, document, and live-stream exactly what happens in cities like Detroit and Portland, so that voters can make an informed decision on whether that’s what they want for their own towns.

        1. And then also make sure to track every single person and get them. Later, of course.

    4. I thought the only thing the judge declared was that they couldn’t disperse or arrest journalists… something they already weren’t doing or allowed to do. Of course, the problem is that Antifa likes to disguise themselves as press some times, and if you’re press with a phone out, you look a lot like all the other loons with phones out who are rioting. Soooo YGWYFD

      1. Someone who’s a journalist will have actual credentials to show. Some random dickhead wearing “PRESS” on their shirt and filming everything with their iPhone isn’t going to qualify.

        1. And yet, the dickhead with an iPhone is probably better journalism even if inadvertently.

  4. We said we would deploy the full firepower of the ACLU in this fight to save our democracy — and we meant it.

    A little early for the victory lap. Or maybe a little late.

    1. They are saving fascism, not democracy.

    2. Mission accomplished?

    3. The ACLU has firepower? Have they started defending the 2A again and I missed it?

      1. They’re using that “language of violence” that causes mass shootings: “firepower.”

        These are truly dark times when the ACLU calls for murder.

    4. ACLU – protecting the civil liberties of those they agree with.

  5. JOhns Hopkins Sick Map

    Over 40 million Americans have been tested for KungFlu with only 4M confirmed infected and far less actively infected. Only 144,000 deaths “while infected” in the USA.

    Trump is correct. The Wuhanvirus hysteria will subside once he is reelected.

    1. If there is still wuhan flu hysteria in November, he will not be reelected. Which is why that is all the media will talk about until then.

      1. Trump is more popular than ever and the Kungflu hysteria has been weaponized against him for months.

        It’s not working.

        Lefties will have to get out to vote or they will certainly lose elections around the USA. Lefties are the biggest population of chicken shits who are terrified to leave home.

        Republicans are not allowing everyone to vote via the mail in Red states, so every Republican voter who can will be out to vote against Democrats.

        1. Trump is more popular than ever

          Haha, dude, no.

          Trump is not popular. It’s just the people opposing him are acting like shrieking, nihilistic shitstains.

          1. This. If Trump wins he should thank the Resistance for trashing cities and helping him secure the suburban vote.

        2. I won’t vote for Trump but I prefer him over Biden. But you cannot look at the polls and think that Trump wins if the COVID situation remains.

          Trump won based on people thinking Trade with China and Immigration were the country’s biggest issues. If in November, people think COVID and Race are the most important subjects he will lose.

          I know, I know, secret Trump voters. But dude, the disparity is like 18 points on some of these issues. I don’t see secret trump voters overcoming that.

          1. Good thing Covid has nothing to do with China.

          2. I do, for a few reasons. 1. At this point, race has been replaced with race riots, and the riots help Trump. The democrats are openly supporting this and actively destroying people’s jobs, that is not a winning message for Biden. 2. The press had a purge last month of anyone remotely interested in pretending to be fair or balanced. You can see it in the daily news, they are actively lying and don’t care enough to hide it. Why wouldn’t they do the same about the polls? Especially when, as the article above states, we have even more reason now than in 2016 to not talk about our opinions? No one’s gonna admit to liberal scum they’re a trump supporter, that’s how you get doxed and lose your job.

          3. No, Trump won because enough people think the president of the US should prioritize the country he’s fucking president of

  6. DOJ OIG launching investigation into use of force allegations involving DOJ law enforcement personnel in Portland…

    Federal law enforcement agents don’t have a chance so long as OIG don’t have to actually interact with any Portlanders.

    1. Launching an investigation is the new proof of guilt.

  7. Declassified Documents Show FBI Used ‘Defensive’ Briefing In 2016 To Spy On Donald Trump

    Democrats know that Trump has enough bureaucrats and allies to indict them when Trump wins reelection. Even trying to nuke the economy wont stop the reelection. Democrats are freaking out.

    1. The release of all these formerly assified documents show what a shit show the whole russia investigation was.

      1. “Formerly assified”? Nope, they’re still assified. De-assification would imply people went to jail.

  8. Twitter is exploring subscription options.

    I CAN’T BELIEVE THIS WEBSITE IS FREE.

    1. Considering we’re the ones writing the only coherent content here, “Reason” should pay *us*.

    2. it’s almost as if they kicked a huge chunk of users off of their site or something. Let it burn.

  9. Smithsonian Blows Off Senator’s Demand For Explanation Of Taxpayer-Funded Racist Curriculum

    Like NPR, the Smithsonian should have 100% of their funding cut. Let Lefties pay for their propaganda wing operations.

    1. Everything but the Air and Space museum.

      USA!

  10. Political expression is an issue that divides the Democratic coalition between centrist Democrats and their left flank…

    Guess which faction is winning.

    1. Define winning.

  11. More bad economic news.

    Charles Koch current net worth: $53.0 billion

    Still stagnating around $50 billion, barely in the worldwide top 20, and down $9 billion this year.

    It’s not Mr. Koch’s fault his business — apparently unlike Amazon.com — requires a constant influx of labor, particularly from Mexico. Hopefully our benefactor can withstand the next half year until President Biden opens the borders.

    #50BillionIsntEnough

  12. Cancel culture comes for The Wall Street Journal

    “Wall Street Journal editorial staffers sent a letter to the paper’s new publisher Monday, demanding a clearer distinction between digital news and opinion content.

    Over 280 employees signed the letter addressed to new Publisher Almar Latour, according to the Journal, which reported on the letter itself. They objected to a lack of clearer separation between Paul Gigot’s opinion section and the news section, overseen by Editor in Chief Matt Murray, who was also copied on the letter.

    —-Yahoo

    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/280-wall-street-journal-journalists-192816284.html

    The piece that made them so upset appears to be “The Myth of Systemic Racism”, linked below.

    But it’s behind a paywall, Ken!

    Learn how to use the f’n Wayback Machine already.

    1. They do have a point. It is becoming increasingly difficult to tell the difference between news and opinion in all media outlets.

      1. If you can’t tell an opinion pieces from a news articles, then the problem isn’t that the opinion pieces are opinionated. The problem is that there’s too much opinion in the news articles.

        Oh, and please see my elaboration below. The issue doesn’t appear to have anything to do with there not being any facts in the opinion piece in question. The issue appears to be that the facts themselves are “problematic”.

        1. Exactly Ken. The MSM are propagandists but there is still some fact in the story they are basing the lies on.

          The trick is to pick those facts out among the lies.

          unreason prints an article about “protesters” in Portland. We get some insight into what the enemy antifa are doing and know that they are NOT protesters but violent Socialists and Anarchists trying to burn down the USA, so the 4th Reich can rise from the ashes.

    2. Here’s a quote:

      “African-Americans were about a quarter of those killed by cops last year (235), a ratio that has remained stable since 2015. That share of black victims is less than what the black crime rate would predict, since police shootings are a function of how often officers encounter armed and violent suspects. In 2018, the latest year for which such data have been published, African-Americans made up 53% of known homicide offenders in the U.S. and commit about 60% of robberies, though they are 13% of the population.

      . . . .

      In 2018 there were 7,407 black homicide victims. Assuming a comparable number of victims last year, those nine unarmed black victims of police shootings represent 0.1% of all African-Americans killed in 2019. By contrast, a police officer is 18½ times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.

      —-“The Myth of Systemic Racism”

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-systemic-police-racism-11591119883

      Reading the piece, it doesn’t appear that there is much to take issue with in terms of the statistics. The editorial staff on the news side appear to be upset with the conclusions and the title. They don’t want people to think they were working for an organization that would print such things with titles like that.

      How did the opinion side of their operation respond?

      They published an opinion piece, “A Note to Readers”, with a subheading of “These pages won’t wilt under cancel-culture pressure”. They aren’t changing a goddamn thing.

      1. P.S. I do not believe The Wall Street Journal was ever a free news website. They’ve been charging for subscriptions since the day they went online. I suspect this insulates them from the concerns of advertisers. Looking at the front page of the website, I don’t see any advertising other than “Mansion Global”, which is about luxury real estate and exotic homes that are currently for sale–that may be sponsored by Sotheby’s or some other real estate company.

        No doubt, they have advertising, especially from various brokerages, banks, IT companies, etc, but they’re less subject to the concerns of advertisers than someone who depends on consumer products companies for almost all of their revenue.

        If you want to see the raunchy stuff, you have to pay to watch it on HBO. Advertising supported media outlets are far more subject to the pressures of advertisers. If you want to read news worth reading, you probably need to pay for it. Otherwise, you’re watching politically correct sitcoms, singing competitions, and network news.

        1. NYT has a bunch of free articles. I never pay any of these Lefty rags any money. If they block some article with a paywall, I move on to something else.

          1. Most of the sites have 5 free articles before pay wall. Just browse anonymous and the counter never goes up.

            1. The other thing you can do is if you use Startpage as your search engine (which everyone should try) and Brave as my browser, beside every search result, there’s an “Anonymous View”, which is basically embedded Tor. You can see things without your IP address being read that you couldn’t see otherwise if you right click Anonymous View and open it in a new tab.

              1. Thanks. I’ll try that. Brave has worked wonderfully so far. 10/10, would surf again.

        2. Another big lie about certain media is that they are being read or viewed widely.

          CNN and/or FOX is run on nearly every tv at airports. That does not mean that anyone is watching the tvs.

          I get a NYT, USA Today, or WSJ depending on which hotel I stay at. I throw them in the trash without ever reading them.

          The Lefty Propaganda model in America is failing.

          1. The issue with cable news is that you pay for it with your monthly subscription whether you actually watch it or not.

            I used to love streaming with Sling back when they only offered you CNN and MSNBC if you chose to pay for it. I use Philo now which doesn’t have any of that.

            The networks’ news divisions get away with the same thing through cable because cable companies are required to carry local stations regardless of whether they want to. The networks have bought up the local stations in lucrative markets to capture those fees from cable, too–and their broadcast license is such that they’re supposed to be making it available for free as a condition of the local station not having to pay for their spectrum.

            Streaming is coming for both cable and broadcast news.

            I bought a Tablo device, plugged an antenna into my wifi router, and I get all the local stations for free. ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, CNN, MSNBC . . . none of them get a penny from me. Defund the news!

            I used to pay Direct TV to stream NFL Sunday Ticket on my Roku, but now that my favorite team has been kicked out of the NFL, I won’t be paying them a dime anymore.

            1. To be fair, kicking the Detroit Lions out of the NFL has been a long time coming.

              1. Haha! Being a Michigander, I’m not slightly offended. The Lion’s chance of winning a super bowl are the same even if they are NOT kicked out of the league…

        3. Yeah newspapers best ad model were the help wanted/classified sections. Real boneheaded move allowing other companies to spring up and take that business online without putting up a fight.

        4. I think they used to do the 5 or 10 or whatever free articles a month, but quickly stopped when it became apparent that method was trivially easy to defeat and get unlimited “free samples”

      2. In 2018 there were 7,407 black homicide victims. Assuming a comparable number of victims last year, those nine unarmed black victims of police shootings represent 0.1% of all African-Americans killed in 2019. By contrast, a police officer is 18½ times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.

        No matter how correct these statistics may be – and I have no reason to doubt them at the moment – it’s still offensive to conflate acts of random violence by random people, with acts of violence perpetrated by agents of the state against anyone, particularly those of a minority group. They are qualitatively different from each other, and the presence of the former does not mitigate the horror of the latter. Agents of the state ought to be held to a higher standard than your average gangbanger. To many people, trying to make a tenuous connection between police brutality and random acts of violence is a bad-faith debate tactic. So I can understand why people get upset over that. I don’t think that means that anyone should be canceled per se, just that those types of arguments should not be employed in a good faith discussion of police brutality particularly against marginalized groups.

        1. Thanks for sharing your feelings.

          The facts either support the hypothesis of systemic racism in our police departments or they don’t–regardless of how you feel about them.

          If you’re not smart enough to take issue with the facts and make a counterargument, don’t expect the rest of the world to retreat into the land of make believe where it’s your feelings that are what’s really important.

          People who take the facts that undermine their arguments into consideration and formulate counterarguments anyway are the solution to the world’s problems. People who tell us about their feelings when they’re confronted by facts and logic are part of the problem with this world.

          1. The facts either support the hypothesis of systemic racism in our police departments or they don’t–regardless of how you feel about them.

            Okay, then, so what is the point of bringing up this “fact” in the context of a discussion about systemic racism in our police departments?

            In 2018 there were 7,407 black homicide victims. Assuming a comparable number of victims last year, those nine unarmed black victims of police shootings represent 0.1% of all African-Americans killed in 2019.

            One might justifiably call this tactic to be a dishonest attempt to deflect from the real issue. What would you call it?

            1. The truth about how much black lives actually matter to the people screeching “black lives matter”

              “One might justifiably call this tactic ”

              Nope. Nothing justified anout what you’re doing at all.

              1. Whatever, Tulpa

                1. Awww little bitch Jeffy is upset because he’s getting mocked for being a bitch.

            2. “fact”

              Why the scare quotes cunt? It’s a fact, full stop.

              If black culture is demonstrably violent ( and facts bear this out) then the narrative of “Black Lives Matter” folds instantly.

              1. Why else do leftists shriek like banshees when the facts of the violence of black culture are pointed out?

            3. One might justifiably call this tactic to be a dishonest attempt to deflect from the real issue. What would you call it?

              I would call it honesty. I can see why you’re so upset by it.

          2. Bravo

            Oh, and most of those killed by police richly deserved it

        2. You talk about bad faith arguments and then ignore the whole part of statistics of cop deaths.

          How strange….

          You think those acts are random but they stem from interactions with the police. The same interactions that can lead to the death of an unarmed person. Cops arent perfect. They are in a risky job that will lead to mistakes. But your assumption appears to be all cops are perfect so any death if an unarmed person is intentional and willful.

          1. Not only that but he ignores the increased risk of harm to the officers by the black suspects that the data points out. This in itself could be part of the cause of, well both statistics there, if the statistic is blown out of overall proportion like Jeff does and demands be the only metric used.

        3. “it’s still offensive”

          Fuck your feelings bitch.

          1. Like your feelings of pleasure that you derive from your persistent trolling here, Tulpa?

            1. Nice of you to admit you are trolling and get pleasure from it bitch.

        4. What Jeff here reveals is that black lives don’t matter, only black victims of cops/whites do

          1. “Whatever Nardz” – Jeff, realizing he’s wrong and you got him

          2. Black lives do matter, all of them, whether they are the victims of random crime or they are the victims of police violence. But it is a cheap and dishonest debate trick to take two separate problems and conflate them together into one in order to deflect away from the one you don’t want to deal with.

            Murders by some gangbanger in Chicago do not justify the murder of George Floyd at the hands of the police.

            1. “two separate problems”

              They aren’t separate fucktard.

              “Murders by some gangbanger in Chicago do not justify”

              No one said otherwise fucktard.

              1. Yeah they are separate. Random crime by random people do not equate to official acts of violence conducted by agents of the state. Unless you think that your typical police officer is no different than your typical gangbanger?

                And if we’re going to discuss about problems involving systemic racism in official institutions, what does random crime committed by non-state actors have to do with anything?

                “Murders by some gangbanger in Chicago do not justify”

                No one said otherwise fucktard.

                Then why bring it up in a discussion of systemic racism in police departments?

                1. “Yeah they are separate”

                  No fucktard they aren’t.

                  “Random crime by random people”

                  The people aren’t random fucktard

                  1. What a witty retort. What a devastating critique. How can I ever recover.

                    1. You could start by not being a fucktard, fucktard.

                    2. Because your “YES HUH YES IT IS SPERRRRRG!!!” is the height of rhetoric lollollol

                  2. >The people aren’t random fucktard

                    Not sure how Jeff can’t understand that

                    1. I am referring to the 7,407 black homicide victims that are referred to in the statistic that I quoted. What connection do these victims have, if any, to official police violence against anyone?

                    2. Why are you pretending that your question hasn’t been answered repeatedly.

                    3. “official police violence”

                      LOL.

                  3. ““Yeah they are separate”

                    No fucktard they aren’t.”

                    Um yeah they are. Though they may be related. So instead of shitting up these threads with “Duck Season/Rabbit Season” dialogue, lets discuss that.

                    The article has a point: It is possible that there is a problem with gangs, that are largely Black, committing violence against other Blacks. In terms of raw numbers of Blacks harmed, it is probably one of the biggest impacts to Black Americans.

                    Jeff also has a point: It is also possible that Police Departments have institutional racism that leads to a disproportionate number of Blacks being killed. It is also a fact that both armed and unarmed blacks killed by police are over-represented for their population.

                    Here is the point that Jeff misses. The reason the former point is important is that it shows that there *might* be a reason for the deaths that is not “Systematic Racism”. When police are not around, we see that Blacks account for a an amount of crime that over-represents their population. So it is not hard to see that Blacks will therefore be over-represented in Interactions with the police.

                    So, Jeff, those who have studied the likelihood of a person being killed in an interaction with the cops have NOT found a racial bias. In fact they have found that on a per interaction basis, whites are slightly more likely to be killed by a cop. But because Blacks represent so many more interactions, the absolute number of deaths is higher.

                    It is noteworthy that the same studies looking at deaths also found a racial bias AGAINST BLACKS for interactions NOT resulting in death. That is, Police still seem to ticket, arrest and cite blacks more often in interactions, and these racial biases *seem* to exist even if you account for the more times police interact with blacks.

                    Jeff, I am on the fence about whether or not the police are systematically racist. But I do say that the powers that be on the Left or Right have no reason to fix it. It is now a wedge issue. By making this about race, and pushing the White Fragility pseudo-intellectual bullshit, the leftists lost people like me to support their cause. I refuse to say that I am racist and that it is my job to combat racism at all times. And I am insulted by that “If he floats he’s a witch” nonsense. *shrug*

                    1. “Um yeah they are. Though they may be related.”

                      So in your firtt two sentences you claim they are separate then openly admit they aren’t.

                      Are you fucking retarded?

                      “So instead of shitting up these threads with “Duck Season/Rabbit Season” dialogue, lets discuss that.”

                      No thanks, Jeff is enough retard that I don’t need yours too.

                    2. It is also possible that Police Departments have institutional racism that leads to a disproportionate number of Blacks being killed.

                      It’s possible, but only if you normalize the data against population percentages and not criminal interaction percentages.

                      I thought we were talking about not having a dishonest argument.

                    3. Overt is the idiot who vehemently insisted that the National Guard didn’t enforce de-segregation of southern schools.

                      Not only is he stupid he’s poorly informed as well.

                    4. Jeff also has a point: It is also possible that Police Departments have institutional racism that leads to a disproportionate number of Blacks being killed. It is also a fact that both armed and unarmed blacks killed by police are over-represented for their population.

                      No, he doesn’t. Why did both he and you neglect to reference the relevant passage in the original post by Ken:

                      “African-Americans were about a quarter of those killed by cops last year (235), a ratio that has remained stable since 2015. That share of black victims is less than what the black crime rate would predict, since police shootings are a function of how often officers encounter armed and violent suspects. In 2018, the latest year for which such data have been published, African-Americans made up 53% of known homicide offenders in the U.S. and commit about 60% of robberies, though they are 13% of the population.

                      It’s a poor “systemically racist” system which actually doesn’t kill the supposed population at even proportionate rates.

                    5. > But because Blacks represent so many more interactions, the absolute number of deaths is higher.

                      No? The absolute number of deaths of black people by police is 1/4th that of white people.

                2. Then why bring it up in a discussion of systemic racism in police departments?

                  I love that you ask a question that exposes your ignorance for everyone to see.

                  “The rates at which people violently interact with police have nothing to do with the interactions said people have with the police” chemjeff just now lololol

                  Jesus Christ you’re fucking stupid.

                3. Again, Jeff conflates the issue by equating killing of unarmed people as official acts. He doesn’t believe cops ever make mistakes. Violence is completely random, which leads to armed cops who themselves at are higher population risks. Then when a cop makes a mistake, it isn’t random, but official state orders.

                  Should cops make a mistake? No. Will they? Yes. What’s the allowable percentage? If it is 0% then you want no cops ever. The fact is that cops are encountering violent acts often. They will have mistakes at certain points. They should be held accountable. Generally civilly, in egregious abuse criminally.

            2. But it is a cheap and dishonest debate trick to take two separate problems and conflate them together into one in order to deflect away from the one you don’t want to deal with.

              So you’re saying it’s dishonest of you to take the problem of individual bad acts and conflate that into systemic racism?

              Ok. You got one right finally. Kudos.

        5. The stats tell us that 25% of people killed by cops are black, which math tells us is about double the percentage we would expect if cops shot people “fairly”.

          But the stats, and logic, tell us that people of all shapes and colors are much more likely to be shot depending on the situation, with much highly probability of death during or following armed crime.

          Finally, the stats tell us that blacks, especially young black men, are over-achievers at committing armed crime. So math and logic both explain and predict their over-achievement at getting killed by cops.

          So, what would you like people to do to make the outcomes more to your liking? Encourage more white people to commit armed crimes? Require cops to tolerate more crime from blacks than whites? Or, heaven forbid, require black people to commit fewer armed crimes?

          1. How about, take a broader look at the problem of crime and police violence?

            You are right in one sense, there tends to be more reported crime in minority neighborhoods than in whiter neighborhoods. Why is that? Could it be simply because the police are patrolling minority neighborhoods more frequently, and are therefore discovering more crime there as opposed to elsewhere? If that’s not the answer, could it be due to factors that are present in minority neighborhoods that are not as present elsewhere? Could it be poverty? Lack of wealth? Lack of good educational opportunities? Lack of good job/career opportunities? What leads to these results? And, most importantly, what can be done to resolve or at least ameliorate these issues in a minimally coercive manner as possible?

            1. We get it, you think blacks have no agency.

              God you’re such a gross stupid racist.

            2. Jeff, I’m going to ask you honestly, because you seem like you don’t know.

              Do you know what correlates with crime statistics more than race? Poverty. Do you know what correlates closely with poverty? Single parent households. Do you know which culture has a prevalence of single parent households?

              So if you think somehow society is forcing blacks into single parent households… then prove it.

              Until then stop thinking everything is about skin color. Because that makes you the actual racist.

              Instead of doing any research into the numbers and looking for causes, you stopped at race. That makes you the racist.

              You have many black intellectuals and scholars who have all identified the same root cause of the problem in their community, and it starts at the family center. The very family center BLM now advocates against. Ironic isn’t it.

              1. So if you think somehow society is forcing blacks into single parent households… then prove it.

                Oh, but it is. The problem is it’s the policies of his progressive travelers that created and perpetuate this problem. This is the point where some idiot wokatarian will scream “muh DRUG WARZ!” The welfare state that Jeffy is soooo convinced will cure all of our problems real soon now has pissed away over $22TT and actually created the exact problems it was meant to solve.

                It isn’t hard for an actual libertarian to understand how and why that happens. But it’s hard for the Pigeon.

                QED on that.

                1. +100

                  The Atlantic once posted a piece of BadThink that interviewed black individuals that had children together but were separated.

                  They made more money as a dysfunctional unit through work, welfare, and WIC than they did as a functional family.

                  He was living with a girlfriend and her kids and she had their kids living with her mom.

                  So welfare that outpaces honest work and reinforces negative behavior – check.

                  Then you have minimum wage laws that keep unskilled workers from gaining work experience, that overwhelmingly harms those in poverty because they rely on more members of the family to lift them out of poverty.

                  Then you have an education system that turns a blind eye to the financial struggles that impoverished families have, shoveling highly stressed students into one path only that eats up 6-10 years of productive working years, where 4-6 of them are accumulating student loan debt.

                  Drop the welfare for dysfunctional families. Bring back the benefits for stable, married families. Drop minimum wage laws (or lower them to a fraction of living wage). Reform or drop compulsory education for teens. Bring back vocational tracks in high school education so students can enter skilled work upon high school graduation.

                  Help build a stable base so that the next generation can achieve more and their kids can achieve even more. It’s a long game that leads to long term better results for their communities – as opposed to short-term, feel good acts that perpetuate and worsen the situation.

            3. Amazing. You hit every single talking point. You can’t even apply Occam’s Razor. Nope, the assumption must be anything other than the simplest explanation.

              “Good faith” my ass.

          2. But no, people it seems would rather spend time blaming the victims and trying to discredit BLM than by trying to discuss any of these much harder issues.

            1. “than by trying to discuss any of these much harder issues.”

              You just spent 2 hours bitching like a child at anyone who brought up the much harder issues you fucking moron.

              1. He didn’t even bring up any issues. He simply said something different happened between races, therefore racism. It isn’t even facial analysis of the core issues he is trying to address.

        6. Ignoring the data never helps to find the best solution to a problem.
          Police brutality against minorities is highlighted in the news, so many people wrongly conclude that police racism is the root cause. The real root causes are police brutality against everyone, and police unions protecting the few bad cops from being fired soon enough, in part because public employee unions are allowed to contribute to political campaigns and hold sway over local office holders who should be holding the police accountable to that higher standard.

      3. And that’s the difference between reporting and…advocacy? evangelizing? propaganda?

        Those with ideological brain damage must have a hard time separating facts and opinion. And post-modernists (and just plain poorly-educated college graduates) deny any objective truth.

      4. STAY HOME AND STARTING WORK AT HOME EASILY… MORE AND MORE EARNING DAILY BY JUST FOLLOW THESE STEPS, I am a student and i work daily this site and earn money..Go this site home media tech tab for more details thanks you.CLICK HERE══════►► USA TODAY  

    3. LEARN TO LINK TO THE WAYBACK MACHINE YOU MONSTER.

      1. Jiminey Cricket, use a search engine!

        “Wayback Machine”.

        1. What? No link to this so called “search engine”?

    4. And for once, the accused told the aggrieved to fuck off (sorry…still paywalled).

  13. China Closing Its Houston Consulate Is A Sign We’re In A New Cold War

    The MSM and unreason are barely covering this topic. I wonder why?

    Watch unreason advocate that China pushing American consulate personnel out of China does NOT help Trump’s strategy against letting China roll over the USA.

    Everyone knows that embassies are used as staging grounds for espionage. Having less staging grounds for Commie spying in the USA is good for America. Giving tyrants less money and buying their crap is good for America.

    MAGA!

  14. “Nearly a quarter (22%) of Americans would support firing a business executive who personally donates to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s campaign,” notes Ekins. “Even more, 31% support firing a business executive who donates to Donald Trump’s re-​election campaign.”

    99% of Americans would support laughing at anyone personally supporting Jo Jorgensen… until they realize that JoJo supporters are HANDING THE ELECTION TO TRUMP. OR BIDEN.

  15. Respondents also expressed fear that their own political opinions or donations would cost them a job or a career opportunity.

    Too bad they don’t act like it.

  16. Joe Biden Makes Racist Comments While Accusing Trump Of Being Racist

    “People don’t make a distinction, as you well know, from a South Korean and someone from Beijing” he said while gesturing to members of the town hall. “They make no distinction. It’s Asian.”

    Biden also said that Donald Trump is the first racist president ever elected and that he is intentionally “spreading racism.”

    “I’ll have them niggers voting Democratic for two hundred years. “ Except for Democrat LBJ…

    …and Democrat Carter
    …and Democrat Bill Clinton
    …and Democrat Obama

    1. …and Democrat Andrew Jackson
      …and Democrat Woodrow Wilson
      …and Democrat FDR

      1. dammit, didn’t see your comment. You beat me 2 outta 3

    2. And Buchanan, the guy who helped the South arm up to fight Lincoln…
      Woodrow Wilson…
      Franklin Roosevelt…

    3. Sorry, where’s the “racist comment”?

      It is a very non-controversial statement that the general public considers “Asian” people to all be the same? Referring to the racism of others is not making racist comments onesself?

      Unless one lives in a place with large and distinct communities of different types of Asians, almost no non-Asian American is aware of signifiers of Asian country of origin.

      Also, fuck the Federalist. Clickbait, partisan garbage in general.

      1. He didn’t say that. And if he did, he didn’t mean it. And if he did, it’s not a big deal.

        Your tears for the next 4 years are going to be even more delicious.

        1. Lol? Why am I going to be crying? Because I… support Joe Biden?

          Hint : not supporting baselessly calling someone’s comments ‘racist’ is not supporting them politically.

          Fuck Joe Biden. Fuck Team Blue.

          That said, I notice your reply doesn’t clarify how his statements were racist?

        2. In case you need more proof that I don’t love Joe Biden…

          … his comments to Charlemagne the God about how if you don’t vote for him, you’re not really black?

          Racist comments.

          The thing he said about Asians? No.

          1. I see what you’re saying, but at the same time:
            Biden is saying “most people think all Asians are the same”
            Where does he get this impression?
            It’s fair to assume that he thinks most people think of all Asians as the same because… he thinks of all Asians as the same.
            He is assuming his perception is common perception

  17. Glenn Greenwald continues to be my least favorite writer.

    Democrats: Trump is a fascist, racist madman & unprecedented threat to democracy. Democrats: Every 6 months or so, we’re going to authorize massive amounts of military spending and surveillance powers for Trump to use (and even prevent him from withdrawing the troops he wants).

    In fact there’s no contradiction in Democratic messaging. We need an enormous defense budget precisely because of Drumpf — so that when President Biden takes over he’ll have the military might necessary to confront Russia.

    #LibertariansForGettingToughWithRussia

  18. Maybe staunch liberals feel they can speak more freely because cultural currents do indeed allow it; maybe they just don’t realize when their free expression is offending or alienating people.

    When you’re absolutely, one hundred percent right about everything, there just can’t be that many racist troglodytes out there who could possibly find what you’re saying offensive.

  19. Young Americans are also more likely than older Americans to support punishing people at work for personal donations to Trump. Forty-four percent (44%) of Americans under 30 support firing executives if they donate to Trump.

    In unrelated news, pollsters find that almost no one they asked is voting for Trump in November.

    1. In other other news, some number of young people demand open voting records.

  20. Niskanen Center Executive Claims Property Destruction ‘Obviously’ Isn’t Violence

    In addition to defending property violence, Wilkinson used his position to encourage Democrats to not accept unfavorable election results on the very same day. The New York Times opinion writer retweeted suggestions that Democrats and their allies should “be prepared to capture and hold public spaces if results look weird” in the upcoming election.

    I am telling you people. There will be a Civil War 2.0 when Trump gets reelected. Technically America is in a Civil War but its mainly limited to regional and urban violence and UNPEACEFUL ASSEMBLY. Lefties will try to spill violence outside the cities and Blue states and that will kick off the bloodletting by the Silent Majority. If Lefties refuse to play by the rules, then the rules are off and Lefties get no protections from the US Constitution either.

    1. Democracy is really just a civil war on low simmer.

      1. you count fists so you don’t have to count bodies, and go with the majority side

    2. “…Be prepared to capture and hold public spaces…”

      By which means, Wilkinson? Has he fully considered all of the implications of that course of action? Does he think that the people he is in opposition to, won’t have anything to say about it?

      1. remember kids, when it kicks off know where your local DNC offices are at. They’ll have records of registered democrats and donations.

        1. The one in my town is next to a tattoo parlor

    3. I thought Trump was the one that wouldn’t accept election results, but it seems like there’s always these other people whose heads have been roaring with explosions for, oh, about 4 years now about elections, and they don’t like Trump at all.

    4. Gee, the Niskanen Center staffed by Reason cronies and paid by Koch? How odd.

  21. White House: President Donald J. Trump Is Working to Give Students and Parents Flexibility and Schools the Support They Need to Reopen This Fall

    “If schools do not reopen, funding should follow students so parents can send their child to the private, charter, religious, or home school of their choice.”

    1. Good idea, but will come too late for parents to make any actual arrangements.

      1. Great idea actually, but you’re right. I for one would love to see all the teachers (who, at least the ones I’ve seen, have fully been supportive of lockdowns and dismissive of people who aren’t able to work or afford food/homes) figure out what to do without being paid to just sit around and shame people who can’t expect a check in the mail for doing nothing.

  22. “We said we would deploy the full firepower of the ACLU in this fight to save our democracy — and we meant it.” – ACLU”

    An incendiary choice of words. Do we strengthen our democracy by burning their offices?

  23. “…When it comes to free expression, the “fears cross partisan lines,” writes Cato Director of Polling Emily Ekins…”
    […]
    “…with 44 percent of the youngest group saying business leaders who donate to Donald Trump should be fired and 27 percent saying the same for execs who give to Joe Biden…”

    That traffic seems to be largely one-way there.

    1. Purity is a bitch.

  24. Mitch McConnell is a pussy.

    We’ve known this for at least ten years (since TARP), but it’s become especially clear now that he’s revealing the Republican stimulus plan–and there’s no sign of President Trump’s suspension of Trump’s payroll taxes anywhere in sight.

    Lefty news outlets all over the country are calling him out for obstructing coronavirus relief for millions of frightened and unemployed Americans, but he’s already capitulated to the Democrats in almost every way that matters.

    This should be seen as a preview of what we should expect if and when Biden takes the White House, which is to say that even if the Republican maintain control of the Senate, Mitch McConnell will simply capitulate to the Democrats’ demands on The Green New Deal and Medicare for All anyway.

    Think of it this way: If Mitch McConnell is capitulating to the Democrats now, when he has a Republican president in the White House that can back him up against Pelosi, then why would he stand up to the Democrats in the House when he’s in a weaker position with Biden in the White House?

    With Mitch McConnell as the Majority Leader in the Senate and Joe Biden in the White House, the Senate might as well be in the hands of the Democrats. If we want divided government in the is country, we better vote for Donald Trump. Mitch McConnell has the backbone of a flatworm.

    1. Mitch McConnell is a pussy.

      Ken, I disagree – a lot. What you see as capitulation, I see as a necessary compromise in the face of objective reality. Look, I love the idea of a limited payroll tax holiday. But there is just not sufficient support to get 60 votes, which is what will be required in this instance. Politics comes down to the art of the possible. It is nothing short of miraculous that not one, not two, but three gigantic pieces of pandemic legislation were passed with majorities, considering the deep divisions we have right now.

      In terms of standing up to a POTUS of the opposite party, I merely cite the Merrick Garland saga. I think Senator McConnell showed his mettle. And prevailed, I might add.

      Now the Judicial confirmation train appears to be getting back on track. I can see an additional 40+ article 3 judges, and at least a half-dozen article 1 judges by the end of the year. Confirmation votes are already scheduled, with two dozen more on the executive calendar by months end.

      No, when the history books are written, I think they will specifically note this Kentucky politician as one of the most influential majority leaders in the last half-century.

      1. This is the opening negotiation.

        You don’t walk into a negotiation capitulating.

        There are only two demands that mattered:

        1) No money for the states.

        2) Payroll tax cut to encourage employment.

        You capitulate on one coming out of the gate, why?

        If you ever need to sell your house, here’s a hint: Ask for more than you’re willing to settle for. Chances are the buyer will offer less than they’re willing to pay, too.

        1. Ken, you also don’t go into a negotiation with a guaranteed to lose negotiating position, either. The support for the payroll tax holiday is simply not there. Your ire is more properly directed toward Senators whose constituents would support a payroll tax, and the Senator chooses not to (for whatever reason).

          If you think the support is there…make your case. I am listening.

      2. “In terms of standing up to a POTUS of the opposite party, I merely cite the Merrick Garland saga. I think Senator McConnell showed his mettle. And prevailed, I might add.”

        That’s a sideshow compared to TARP and bailing out states with pension crises.

        And, yeah, isn’t it funny how McConnell was willing to go along with the Tea Party radicals–when he was scared to death they were coming after his seat like they did with all the other fake Republicans who voted for TARP.

        The only reason McConnell survived the tea party in Kentucky was because Rand Paul horse-traded with him. Rand Paul needed McConnell’s help in changing the law in Kentucky so that Rand Paul could run for president without giving up his seat in the Senate, and Rand Paul protected McConnell from the Tea Party in the Kentucky primaries in exchange.

        When McConnell was afraid the Tea Party was coming for him, that was one thing. What’s that line from that Flannery O’Connor story?

        “She would have been a good woman,” The Misfit said, “if it had been somebody there to shoot her every minute of her life.”

        That’s Mitch McConnell.

        1. Ken, while I agree with you that TARP was bad, I think you’re forgetting one basic fact, here. Who was the Majority Leader in 2008-09 when the TARPs (plural) were passed? Newsflash: Harry Reid.

          Now, if you want to pillory Senator McConnell for saying ‘TARP worked’; feel free.

          Your original proposition was just wrong. He is not a pussy. He is just a politician. And a skillful one. 🙂

    2. I’m far less concerned about that than I am dumping another $105BB into the hands of teachers who won’t even show up to work, let alone do any work.

      1. Anything going to states with outrageous pension liabilities is a mistake. Those states need to start with the layoffs already. Bailouts aren’t the solution to overspending. Cutting spending and pension benefits is the solution to overspending.

        1. That is what a business would do. But if you lay off teachers, you are “literally” murdering innocent children. /sarc

    1. For those who don’t want to click that garbage website, the attempted MURDER is via setting a giant federal courthouse on fire after somehow preventing any avenue of escape from a giant federal courthouse. Which makes it attempted MURDER.

      ????????????

      1. Oh, right. Reason.com doesn’t Unicode, so you can’t see my eyeroll emoji.

        1. It’s OK, we understood your unwavering support of Marxist violence without your zoomer shit.

  25. People are more likely to contract COVID-19 at home, study finds
    https://news.yahoo.com/people-more-likely-contract-covid-122611396.html

    SEOUL (Reuters) – South Korean epidemiologists have found that people were more likely to contract the new coronavirus from members of their own households than from contacts outside the home.

    A study published in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on July 16 looked in detail at 5,706 “index patients” who had tested positive for the coronavirus and more than 59,000 people who came into contact with them.

    The findings showed that less than 2% of patients’ non-household contacts had caught the virus, while nearly 12% of patients’ household contacts had contracted the disease.

    1. This is a really stupid premise? Of course people are more likely to contract a virus from people who they spend large amounts of time indoors with, unmasked? Especially in South Korea where everyone is masked in public?

      How does the first member of the household get it? Spontaneous infection? Divine infection? Or do they quite obviously get it in public and bring it home?

      1. Unpossible. If they are all wearing masks, nobody can get sick.

  26. ‘Racist AF’: NY Times announces series on ‘what’s wrong with our public education system’ (Spoiler: It’s ‘Nice White Parents’)
    https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2020/07/23/racist-af-ny-times-announces-series-on-whats-wrong-with-our-public-education-system-spoiler-its-nice-white-parents/

    1. the real answer is : It’s a public education system

  27. Did the Chinese Consulate in Houston Clandestinely Work to Stoke Racial Tensions in U.S.?

    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/07/23/chinese-consulate-in-houston-may-have-helped-stoke-racial-tensions-in-u-s-n673348

    “Also, there are stories that this consulate had links with protest groups in the United States providing financial and logistical support. That’s unconfirmed,” he added. “But, what is confirmed is that the Chinese Foreign Ministry and the Communist Party’s global ties have been engaged in a malicious disinformation campaign, deliberately stoking racial tensions in the U.S.

    “And, U.S. Customs has seized items coming from China this year that would be very handy for protesters,” Chang noted.

    1. >>Clandestinely Work to Stoke Racial Tensions in U.S.?

      that was a Homeland

      1. It’s been soviet/communist SOP since at least the 50s

    1. I hope you’re not trying to tie that hag’s private com system to someone doing business on a private account.

    2. chem, the rules are the rules. If Secretary Ross used his personal email for official government business, then he must turn over documents responsive to the FOIA request. One measure, one standard; and everyone, regardless of political persuasion follows it.

      1. Jeff thinks we are against it for some reason lol. Doesnt realize we actually want the consistency of FOIA discovery.

        1. Wouldn’t be chemtard without his false equivalencies.

      2. Sounds fine with me.

        I am sure, though, that when some scandalous detail is found in Ross’s private emails, that the usual suspects around here will scream about how unfair it all is and we will be treated to another round of WHATABOUTHILLARY.

        1. Your assumptions are idiotic.

          Hilarious of you accusing posters of some imagined future argument when you make the argument now. You didnt give 2 shits about Hillarys server. You’re the actual hypocrite here. Lol.

          1. “But i know what you’ll say in advance!!! ” chemjeff, wasting his prognostication abilities

        2. Yeah, what about that felon Hillary?
          Lefty scumbags are forever hoping to excuse her private com system, and as a pathetic piece of lefty shit, you too have failed.

          1. And right on cue, WHATABOUTHILLARY

            1. Weird that bringing her up would upset a libertarian so much..?

            2. This coming from the guy who equated Kavanaugh to Pizzagate.

              Sit this one out, sport.

        3. “I am sure,”

          Yeah you do a lot if this kind of getting shit wrong.

        4. chem…this is actually pretty easy. If Secretary Ross did something that clearly and demonstrably broke the law, then he resigns (or gets fired), and deals with the legalities. This is not hard.

        5. I, for one, will immediately jump to the defense of a judge I have never heard of before, for no other reason than my partisan political views and with no regard for my own hypocrisy?

          Ok….

        6. You do realize he needs to turn over only what’s responsive to the FOIA request and not every communication with every person on the planet right? JFC you’re a moron looking for any perceived gotcha and only catching yourself.

          Hillary’s problem was ALL of her communication was on a private server and she chose to be unresponsive and then destroy evidence before it could be reviewed to be sure it wasn’t responsive. If there are no gaps here then there is only a minor issue.

        7. Did Hillary turn over ALL of her emails?

          No?

          Then how would it be remotely consistent?

    3. chemjeff radical individualist
      July.24.2020 at 11:11 am
      But it is a cheap and dishonest debate trick to take two separate problems and conflate them together into one in order to deflect away from the one you don’t want to deal with.

  28. The only people who will pay for Twitter are journos and media types, but what would they get for their money?

    Also supposedly the whole point of deplatforming and censoring was so they wouldn’t lose ad revenue. Looks like it didn’t work, so how about they try a little different approach?

  29. I have to say, the apparent willingness of Americans to punish each other for political speech is one of the most odious, and frightening developments I have ever seen in my life. We are going down a very, very dangerous path. IMO, the issue really isn’t political donations and political speech.

    The issue is the freedom to choose how one thinks.

    1. Well yes and no.

      Part of it is overhyped, because after all it has long been considered taboo to discuss either politics or religion in ‘mixed company’, long before the modern era of polarization.

      But another part is because in the age of social media, it’s a lot harder to keep one’s personal identities separate from each other.

      In the past, before social media, a person could have a successful career in some field, and have an identity in that industry, and then after hours, could attend a Klan meeting or CPUSA meeting or bowling league meeting and have a different identity among that circle of individuals. Those identities could be kept separate from each other with only a little bit of work, so your boss never had to find out you were a secret racist or communist or bowler. But nowadays it’s a lot harder to keep it all separate, so one’s identities have to be congruent with each other. So your boss can more easily find out if an employee is a secret racist or communist or bowler, and exercise his/her own rights of association accordingly.

      I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong for a person to want to lead multiple lives that don’t intersect with each other, and I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong for an employer to choose to fire employees for whatever reason he/she wishes, including for activity outside of the workplace. I do think there is a tension here that isn’t going to go away anytime soon, and the answer is probably going to come in the form of stronger workplace protections, that explicitly protects employees from being fired for certain activities. I don’t know what I think about that yet, it will probably be a shitshow, but I think that is where things are headed.

      1. chem….no offense, but you have not addressed what I said in your response. You’re not wrong, per se, but the post was not responsive.

        1. cytotoxic works very hard to spew copious numbers of words in defense of Marxism at every possible opportunity while somehow still saying absolutely nothing. It’s his gift.

    2. “I have to say, the apparent willingness of Americans to punish each other for political speech is one of the most odious, ”

      I agree. We’re losing the ability to agree to disagree.

      1. I disagree. Were losing the ability to disagree to agree.

      2. It really is quite amazing (and frightening). We have let politics become way too important (and personal). The ‘live and let live’ ethos I was reared with has been virtually extinguished.

        It is not just politics and political speech, either. There is also a pronounced bias against religious belief and practice.

      3. Are we?
        Or is the left psychotic and totalitarian?
        I don’t mind people disagreeing with me, I mind their attempts to impose their disagreement on me.
        If leftists would just leave everyone else the fuck alone, then we can all live with disagreement.
        But leftists can’t and won’t leave anyone alone

  30. Of course young people support limits on public behavior. They are the product of totalitarian parenting and education, with years of play dates and ideological safe spaces to guide their support of statism and animosity towards disagreeable thinking.

  31. I had a coworker once who went on and on how much he hated republicans and conservatives and guns and religion. He overstepped the company’s policy finally and got fired for it. Pissed off some higher up I guess. So yes companies can fire you for it.

  32. if you’re not giving enough to gain influence you’re wasting money anyway. fired, maybe. punched in the face for stupid, yes.

  33. “Hey doc we have a great idea we’re gonna have you throw out the first pitch on Opening Night. It’ll be great you’ll show America it’s okay for MLB to give it a go.”

    “Okay, but I have no idea how to throw a ball.”

    “Everyone says that. You’ll be great!”

    1. Christ, you weren’t kidding. I’m surprised he was able to hit the ground with it.

  34. Money isn’t speech, and even if it was speech, it’s all the rage to get people fired for the wrong things they say. Why not fire people for supporting the wrong candidates?

    Coming soon: you’re fired for voting wrong.

    1. Coming soon: you’re fired for voting wrong.

      That’s not new, that is an old trick. In the 19th century, some employers would bus their workers to the polling place and literally hand them the ballot that they were to cast in the election.

      1. Sort of like SEIU does now with the illiterate non-eligible Mexicans in their ranks while you jerk your micropenis to it and dribble your cum down your ballsack?

        1. Yep, unions have done that every single election

      1. expensive speech. generally no return.

  35. Did you know there’s a “deep detox” you can do first thing in the morning to burn more fat? And the good news is It only takes 13-seconds! Here it is—>>Click For Full Detail Here.

    1. “Deep detox”? I thought we stopped doing phrasing.

      Anyway, I “deep detox”ed this morning and it took way longer than 13 seconds. Perhaps you should work on some breathing exercises.

  36. I have earned $ 18394 last month by W0rking Online from home. I am a full time college student and just doing this Job in my part time for maximum 2 hrs a day using my laptop. This Job is just awesome and regular earning from this easy home Job is much times better than other regular 9 to 5 office Jobs. I suggest you all to join this right now and start earning easily by just follow details on the given WebSite……..
    here……. ⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢ ReadMore.

  37. Peacefully burning hate with peace. And love. And peace.

  38. A disturbingly high percentage of people polled earlier this month think private political donations should be grounds for getting fired.

    Oh, right on! And if you *don’t* donate you should also be fired.

    WTF is wrong with people? 8-(

  39. Meanwhile the secret stormtroopers violently ignore a peaceful protester with their hate.

    When will the world stand up to such tyranny? Why, Allah, why?!

  40. Media partisans held accountable for libel.

    Reason hardest hit.

  41. A disturbingly high percentage of people polled earlier this month think private political donations should be grounds for getting fired.

    Hey, aren’t you the cunt who doxxed a guy and tried to get him fired for making a joke on Twitter? You sure are!

  42. Ds under 30 support firing 85% more than Rs under 30, but you’re going to be a shill and pretend that both parties are equally bad. This is why nobody likes big L Libertarians.

    1. My bad, 63% more. Still that’s a big lie.

    2. Oh look! A drawers-dirtying looter squealing for another 0.00000007% bootlicking this or that faction of the coercive Kleptocracy! How adorably kyewt! –libertariantranslator

  43. Supporting politicians is bad behavior. That’s why there has always been a secret ballot.

  44. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work n my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home. Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and follow instructions on this page……click for jobs its a limited offER.

  45. Making every month from home by working online more than $180000k just in part time. I have made $197530000 in my last month from this easy home based job.Everybody can now get this job and start earning money online by follow instructions on this website.Go to this site home media tech tab for more details thanks you…………USA Dollars.Com  

  46. Hi evry one……..Making money online more than $15k just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info on this page. … Click For Full Detail.

  47. Hello.

    86% of Americans support mask wearing. Imagine living in a world where 9 out of every 10 people wear a mask. More creepily disturbing? The evidence DOES NOT support doing it.

    The balance of the 14% are apparently recalcitrant.

    Try and tell me it’s not a dark age. Ga’head. I’m waiting.

    /lowers head. Sticks arm out motions hand gesture inviting all comers.
    chack out

  48. I’m disappointed to see ENB helping gelded communist and fascists hide behind meaningless cutout labels. But I am looking forward to Joe Mandatory Minimums Biden ducking the debates so that Jo Jorgensen and Boss Trump can debate each other before actual American registered voters.

  49. My last month paycheck was for 11000 … All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hourHERE? learn More

  50. Murder of black Trump supporter Bernell Trammell spurs call for federal investigation. If you disagree with the mob they are coming for you. Be afraid. Be very afraid. In November Americans have a choice to make. Mobs or jobs. Choose wisely.

  51. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use these.Make 5000 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website……………………<Click For Full Details.

Please to post comments