Reason Roundup

Trust in Media and Elected Officials Near Record Lows in Gallup Poll

Plus: Google and YouTube will demonetize climate change denial content, Dems disagree over spending priorities, and more...

|

American confidence in media is at nearly the lowest level since the early 1970s. A new Gallup poll finds just 36 percent of survey respondents say they trust the press to report the news fully, fairly, and accurately (down from 40 percent who said the same last year).

This marks the second-lowest level of trust in media since Gallup started measuring trust in U.S. institutions in 1972. The record low came in 2016, when just 32 percent of people said they had either "a great deal" of trust in media or "a fair amount" of trust.

In 2021, 7 percent of those polled said they have a great deal of trust, and 29 percent a fair amount. Meanwhile, 29 percent have "not very much" trust in media and 34 percent "none at all."

This is down significantly from the early 1970s (when 68–72 percent of people trusted mass media) and from the late 1990s. In 1997, 53 percent of people had a great deal or a fair amount of confidence in the press. But "trust in the media, which has averaged 45% since 1997, has not reached the majority level since 2003," notes Gallup.

The poll—conducted September 1–17—also found waning trust in government:

Less than half of U.S. adults (44%) say they have a great deal or fair amount of confidence in people who hold or are running for public office, rivaling the record low of 42% from 2016. Meanwhile, a small majority (55%) express a similar level of confidence in the judgments of the American people under the democratic system, the lowest Gallup has measured to date but not meaningfully different from 56% readings in 2016 and 2020….

Gallup's trends on these measures, dating back to 1972 (for politicians) and 1974 (for the American people), reflect a continuing decline in confidence in politicians and voters over the ensuing decades. Americans have been consistently more likely to express trust in voters than in people who hold or are running for public office, but both trends have generally ebbed in the 2000s and again in the 2010s.

In 1974, 68 percent of people Gallup surveyed said they had a great deal or a fair amount of trust in elected officials.

Trust in the federal government's ability to handle foreign and domestic issues is also low.

"Trust in the federal government's handling of international problems has fallen nine percentage points since last year to a record-low 39%, and now matches the level of trust for its handling of domestic problems," Gallup reported in September. In addition, confidence in the judicial branch—while still at 54 percent—was down 13 percentage points from 2020.

"In every reading dating back to 1997, the public has expressed more trust in the judicial branch of the federal government than in the executive and legislative branches," noted Gallup, and "over the past decade, U.S. adults' confidence in the executive branch (headed by the president) has exceeded confidence in the legislative branch (composed of both houses of Congress)."

In September's poll, 44 percent of Americans said they trust the executive branch and 37 percent said they trust Congress.


FREE MINDS

Google and YouTube are adding climate change denial content to the list of things you can't say if you want to monetize your videos or websites. The ban applies to content that goes against "well-established scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change," and "includes content referring to climate change as a hoax or a scam, claims denying that long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to climate change."

The move is part of an ever-expanding attempt to combat misinformation online, something tech companies have been under increasing pressure from lawmakers to do (or else). But in this case, Google cites not government pressure but advertiser and user wishes. From Axios:

Google said it's making these changes in response to frustration from advertisers and content creators about their messages appearing alongside climate denialism.

  • "Advertisers simply don't want their ads to appear next to this content. And publishers and creators don't want ads promoting these claims to appear on their pages or videos," the company said.

Yes, but: Google often makes changes to its ads policies to reduce misinformation, but this update is notable, given how hard it can be to characterize certain commentary about climate change as denialism or misinformation.

  • The tech giant says that when evaluating content against the new policy, "we'll look carefully at the context in which claims are made, differentiating between content that states a false claim as fact, versus content that reports on or discusses that claim."

FREE MARKETS

Democrats disagree over spending priorities. With their $3.5 trillion spending bill looking less and less likely to become reality, Democrats are forced to prioritize—and some really don't like it. But their infighting over what to spend on may prove a blessing in terms of stopping, at last, some of their more egregious spending plans. Rep. Suzan DelBene (D–Wash.), who chairs the New Democrat Coalition, told NBC News the 95-member coalition has four priorities:

Extending the $3,000 to $3,600 annual per-child cash payments to most families, continuing the expanded Obamacare subsidies under the American Rescue Plan, closing the Medicaid coverage gap and "going big" on measures to address climate change.

The narrower and deeper approach would avoid "short-term cliffs that mean important programs may not get extended," she said.

But some leading progressives want to go in a different direction.

"If we have to trim a little, then what we would prefer to do is have our priorities and these programs fully represented but perhaps for a shorter number of years, because I don't think we can pick and choose between child care and climate change," Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., the chair of the 96-member Congressional Progressive Caucus, said Tuesday on MSNBC.

The contrasting views are a challenge for Biden, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., as they hear the demands of their members. The three leaders are tasked with crafting a massive bill that can pass through the slimmest of margins in Congress, with zero margin for error in the evenly split Senate and just three votes to lose in the House before it collapses.

All have their priorities. Not all can be met.


FOLLOW-UP

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed into a law a measure banning "stealthing" — that is, secretly taking off a condom without a sex partner's consent. As Reason Roundup noted in September, the law would be a first of its kind in the U.S., effectively creating affirmative consent for condom removal. Under the new measure, "a person commits a sexual battery who causes contact between a sexual organ, from which a condom has been removed, and the intimate part of another who did not verbally consent to the condom being removed."


QUICK HITS

• The Senate voted yesterday to raise the debt limit by an increase of $480 billion. "The breakthrough came less than two weeks before the US was set to be unable to borrow money or pay off loans for the first time ever," notes the BBC. "US lawmakers will still have to address this issue near the new December deadline to avert a default."

• In September, the unemployment rate fell to 4.8 percent.

• The California school cop who shot a woman in the head as she was fleeing a fight is being investigated for homicide, the Long Beach Police Department announced yesterday.

• New Netflix movie The Guilty "isn't as progressive and critical of cops as it pretends to be," says Salon.

• America "is running out of everything," complains Derek Thompson at The Atlantic. "The Everything Shortage is not the result of one big bottleneck in, say, Vietnamese factories or the American trucking industry. We are running low on supplies of all kinds due to a veritable hydra of bottlenecks."

• A federal appeals court has "rejected a challenge from journalism associations seeking to argue against an exemption to Assembly Bill 5 that applied for freelance writers, arguing that it inhibited free speech," reports The Hill. A.B. 5 is the California law that redefines many independent contractors and gig workers as employees.

• This looks dangerous:

The ENABLERS Act encapsulates a key idea that analysts say is, to a large degree, already standard in most other countries. The main provision is this: Lawyers, investment advisers, art dealers, realtors, accountants, public relations firms and others would be required to engage in some form of "due diligence" to ensure their clients aren't paying with or trying to move around money of suspicious origin.

• More frightening tales from the college culture war:

NEXT: The Hidden History of the Trillion Dollar Coin

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. Based on the timing of the letter to the DoJ over parent domestic terrorist groups and the DoJ response timeline, it appears as if Bidens administration is colluding with outside groups to issue these doj based aggressions.

    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/gwendolynsims/2021/10/07/breaking-mark-levin-shares-evidence-of-biden-administration-colluding-to-silence-americas-parents-n1522525

    1. Psaki defends Garlands letter.

      “These were threats against public servants, threats against members of the school board. Regardless of the reasoning, threats & violence against public servants is illegal”

      The 10 examples shown in the letter to the doj showed no actual or threatened violence.

      Also Garlands son in law is an executive at a CRT development firm making millions from schools.

      1. The 10 examples shown in the letter to the doj showed no actual or threatened violence.

        “He looked at me funny.”

          1. I made over $700 per day using my mobile in part time. I recently got my 5th paycheck of $19632 and all i was doing is to copy and paste work online. this home work makes me able to generate more cash daily easily.ZXv simple to do work and regular income from this are just superb. Here what i am doing.

            Try now……………… READ MORE

            1. Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…FKX And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.

              Try it, you won’t regret it!……< VISIT HERE

        1. He raised his voice at me.

        2. “His very existence is a threat. All white people should die.”

      2. These sound like statements from authorities who know they are illegitimate, and that certain responses to them are both justified and necessary

    2. Their ‘threats, and intimidation’ are my ‘spirited debate’. The AG can go fuck himself.

      These school board meetings are mostly peaceful, right? 🙂

      THANK GOD MITCH MCCONNELL TORPEDOED THE NOMINATION OF THIS MANIAC GARLAND TO THE SUPREME COURT!

      1. It’s hilarious to me, how many lefty SWPL folks insisted to me that Garland was “a moderate”, during his confirmation woes. The ‘Bubble People’ really don’t see the World in the same way that I do and, I suspect, that many of you here do as well.

        1. Moderate, my ass. McConnell exposed him. My question is why didn’t anyone ‘divine’ the fact that Garland was an uber-lib from his judicial decisions?

          It could not be that the MSM was actively avoiding the topic…nah.

        2. Breyer, pt II is how I pegged him at the time. I figured he was exactly the wrong kind of moderate: moderate in all the places I’d prefer an activist liberal, activist in all the places I’d want some restraint. No thanks, not ever.

        3. The Pajama Class was bad enough when they lived in their urban and inner-suburban enclaves. The COVID diaspora has pushed them out into the rest of the country, along with their fashionably fascist ideas.

          1. Ugh, I hadn’t thought of those ramifications, in those terms.

      2. Yea, Garland not being on the Supreme Court totes saves us from tyranny. Thank Science for mitch McConnell. Let us all continue burying our heads in the sand and pretending the horrors of Nazi Germany or the USSR won’t happen here.

        1. Because a nation with the likes of Nikolay Yezhov Merrick Garland running the KGB FBI, the universe’s most incompetent general purging the military of non-Democrats, a shadow junta puppeteering a demented corpse, and a press core actively smothering actual news and inventing phony panics, is one that’s almost there.

    3. Does this surprise anyone?

      1. Just a continuation of Obama policy of Sue and Settle yo pass laws through court agreements.

    4. I wouldn’t be surprised if these accusations were true, but they are extremely circumstantial. It’s all about timing and many “unnamed sources”. Even where they talk about meetings happening, not a single name is mentioned for us to know if this was the Cabinet or just some schmoes talking.

      1. I give no considerations on a politicians motivations or ability to collude to evade rules or appearances. I will always side against the politician. Especially in the current white house as they brazenly lie about everything. Even a fake White House sound stage.

        The quick turn around of a letter that goes through multiple layers and usually consideration by the WH and OLC is telling.

        1. That is essentially what I said: It is circumstantial evidence.

          To be clear- that article alleges exactly what I have suspected all week. But it isn’t a CONFIRMATION of those suspicions- merely some other guy saying “isn’t it convenient…”, as I did earlier this week.

          1. One thing to keep in mind here is that the NEA declared, after parents started pushing back against this shit a couple months ago, that this holiday weekend is when they were going to start pushing anti-white hatred HARD as an open policy rather than a surreptitious one as they have previously. It’s certainly circumstantial, but the timing of all this is extraordinarily convenient, especially considering Garland’s conflict of interest regarding his son-in-law.

    5. My apologies for being a little slow on the point JesAZ is making.

      So Merrick Garland, Biden’s AG, just recommended to the FBI to investigate parents who protest school officials about CRT. And the shit-heel’s son-in-law co-founded a company that sells CRT educational products to schools?

      It’s prison for the motherfucker. Do your job, congress.

  2. I don’t know if I trust that Gallup poll.

    Also, fuck Joe Biden

    1. Fuck Joe Biden…

      And hail Tulpa! (fuck you White Mike)

  3. As companies begin to fire the unvaccinated, Biden brags about the compliance rate of employees vaccinated increasing. Due to the firings. Biden is not the brightest.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-boasts-bigger-story-isnt-mass-firings-but-vaccine-mandates-working

    1. The end justifies the means.

      1. Eggs and omelettes.

    2. It’s just bizarre. And he also uttered this gem:

      Let’s be clear: When you see headlines and reports of mass firings, and hundreds of people losing their jobs, look at the bigger story.

      “The bigger story”, indeed.

      1. The bigger story:
        September jobs report: Economy adds back disappointing 194,000 jobs.

        1. The bigger story:
          THE WURLD IS ROOLED BY DOPS!

        2. Biden’s on TV right now bragging about 4.8% unemployment.

    3. The aristocrats don’t care about the plight of some piddly peasants.

      1. They eventually might…

        1. The sans-culottes are too fat and distracted right now.

          1. ‘Anti-fa’ and black lives matter supporters think that they are this period’s sans-culottes. The occasional building, and less occasional threatening of a guillotining from these skinny pants soy-latte soft handed fuckwits is always a hoot.

      2. Only when their monocle polisher quits.

  4. What is the consequence of the lack of trust? That, there, is the crux of the problem. There is no incentive for the media or politicians to earn trust.

    1. Give it some time….the people usually come up with ways to make it painful enough to force change.

      1. Tar and feathers would be a good start.

    2. “The crux of the biscuit is in the apostrophe…”–Frank Zappa.

      Media and government always talk about lack of trust like it is a bad thing, but never say the same thing about lack of trustworthiness.

      1. Nail upon the head, here. ‘They’ care not a whiff if they are trusted, except in the abstract, in terms of how it impacts sales. I suspect they understand full well that they are not trustworthy.

    3. This is all tied into the big-tech censorship idea. Last year you couldn’t even talk about the possibility that COVID was leaked from a lab and you were banned for discussing. Now, you can’t even talk about ivermectin without being labeled as misinformation. You can’t even talk about Natural Immunity in the vaccine discussion without being demonetized.

      When there’s certain things they’ve decided people aren’t allowed to have frank and earnest conversations about, trust falls rapidly. Banning people from even talking about it is basically an admission that they can’t win the debate.

    4. Well, Trump’s election was a vote of no confidence in both political parties. That was a consequence. I don’t really know the long term results yet, but I don’t think either political party is going to come out of the next few election cycles unscathed.

  5. Sigh, nothing on Brain-Dead Biden’s proposal to snoop into every bank in America worth just $600 (or more) to find tax cheats among the wealthy? Seems like an awfully wide net. It is not as if this could be weaponized against ‘dissenters’, could it?

    1. What do you think this is, a libertarian publication?

      1. Nah. There used to be a publication called Reason. Somehow, Reason transmogrified into Emote!, with ENB as High Priestess.

        1. It’s just a daily list of things to piss us off. That is the current model for successful journalism.

          1. When she eventually writes for Salon, some will ask how Reason did not notice, as with Weigel, that they had a leftie writing for them instead of a libertarian.

            1. She’ll more likely end up at Jezebel.

          2. Bingo!

            But at least we have a fairly open comments section. Try that at the NYT or WSJ.

    2. They had the president of the Missouri State Banker’s Association on local radio talking about this last night. It’s a huge crazy overreach.

      I’m not even a big fan of the $10k+ cash deposit / withdrawal reporting requirement. This one is like that, on crack. It’s $600 annually in total activity. Deposits, withdrawals, transfers, whatever. Not just transactions of $600 or more. Not just cash transactions. Total activity.

      https://fox17.com/news/local/congressman-targets-biden-proposal-forcing-banks-to-report-annual-transactions-over-600-politics-reconciliation-build-back-better-irs-democrats-republicans-banking-jefferson-van-drew-usa-news

      The banker said that there is no way that anyone in the industry is set up to comply with this, because it would cover virtually every active account.

      1. Is it a coincidence that $600 is the threshold for payments that require reporting on a 1099?

        It is targeted specifically against middle class homeowners paying our immigrant friends or gig workers for small jobs. Oh, and the immigrants and gig-workers. In other words, the super-wealthy.

        Maybe getting robbed a couple times because she has to have cash on hand to pay the maid and the gardener each week will wake up Molly McBluevoter.

  6. “we’ll look carefully at the context in which claims are made, differentiating between content that states a false claim as fact, versus content that reports on or discusses that claim.”

    Right.

    1. Something tells me they won’t be touching the false and misleading claims frequently made by climate alarmists.

      1. Yes, this is not attacking misinformation. It is attacking viewpoints that advertisers and whole viewers do not want to exist. Whether that content will speculation, or scepticism based in fact and reason may not be relevant.

        1. Stossel has a video on the topic. He talks about how fact check organizations label thing that are stone cold fact as “misleading” if you don’t explain why it isn’t relevant and other things are way more important. They even claim to review and grade material that they never even looked at.

          So no, do not believe a single syllable of their explanation of controls. They simply block people expressing views that they want blocked. That is the beginning and end of the story.

          1. He should have a lawsuit about videos. Say the one censored over California wildfires being more caused by inept forest officials and land management than climate. Maybe sue the silicon valley companies for defamation.

            Then reason can cover it….

            1. This is really so bizarre to me.

              If Reason doesn’t want to be accused of some weird ideological bias, they should be acknowledging this. It is fine if editorially they disagree with what Stossel is doing, but they should then make that case. Or if they don’t disagree with it, they should be explaining why civil suits are different from federal regulation- though that would lead to some uncomfortable questions about Trump’s “absurd” suits, or the “baseless” suits from Ted Cruz, et al.

              The complete silence on this subject is baffling. They could have even posted an article to say “We know this is being reported, but we can’t opine on it for these legal reasons” or something. But the fact that they won’t even do that and instead won’t even mention it leads me to believe that there is some sort of editorial decision being made to avoid uncomfortable conversations. It is bizarre.

              1. But, but, the cocktail parties!

              2. It’s neither baffling nor bizarre to me. Reason has an agenda, and the story conflicts with that agenda. The end.

        2. And I bet there are advertisers that are fine with being associated with climate skepticism. Why not just let advertisers choose what kind of content they appear on if this is really driven by advertiser complaints?

          1. Because if people are allowed to choose then they may choose inappropriately.

          2. Billions(?) of posts a day make it difficult?

            Facebooks Tower of Babel will fall under it’s own weight. Human nature being what it is.

          3. Cato and Reason are both heavily compromised by the deep pockets of wealthy men.
            The advertisements are almost immaterial.

            1. Cato has already been accused of taking money from Google not to criticize them particularly on section 230.

              1. Because of course those whores did.

                1. They can force their cock down your throat, but stroking the balls, that’s on you.

    2. The premises there is dependent on they have the expertise to judge what is fact aside from deferring to the authorities whose claims are being disputed.

    3. And by the way, let’s not let this little statement from ENB go by:

      “The move is part of an ever-expanding attempt to combat misinformation online, something tech companies have been under increasing pressure from lawmakers to do (or else).”

      Just 3 months ago, Soave was posting that the notion these companies were acting under direction from the government was “absurd on its face”:
      https://reason.com/2021/07/07/trump-class-action-lawsuit-facebook-twitter-youtube/

      And now here we are 3 months later and Reason has shifted from “If Liberal Companies want to Censor people on the Right, the government should stay out of it,” to “Yeah it is bad that these companies are censoring the right, but it is Governments’ fault”.

      I don’t think they realize what is going on here.

      1. Perhaps in 90 days the Reason by-line will be ‘social media censoring of conservative and libertarian viewpoints, the libertarian argument for…’

  7. Biden told a heartwarming story last night of his office calling a hospital to get a dear family friend to the head of the emergency room line.

    https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2021/10/07/biden-appears-to-confess-to-an-abuse-of-power-n453317

    1. IMPEACH!

      1. If getting caught taking bribes multiple times didn’t do it, and telling the FBI to try to entrap the incoming national security advisor for a fake crime of lying to investigators (notes say this was explicitly done) didn’t do it, and saying “this violates the constitution but I shall do it anyway” doesn’t do it…..

        Yeah, we ain’t holding any of these folks accountable.

        1. The Bidens, both Joke and Jill are looking more like the Ceaușescus everyday.

    2. Was is Hunter?

    3. With luck, better detail comes out on this. The story is framed as the dimwit definitely pulling strings, and it seems like a strong possibility, but there is nothing certain spelled out. If there is a violation of ethics, there will be the media ‘nothing to see here’ cascading decision to not cover, and social move to suppress discussion. Biden presidency standard.

    4. The weirdest thing about this story? The idea that a person who has enough influence to get a message to the POTUS to the extent that the POTUS takes timely action doesn’t call a local official or just call the hospital themselves.

      It reeks of Corn Pops and Green Zone gunpowder.

  8. ..the US was set to be unable to borrow money or pay off loans for the first time ever,..
    And you guys said Trump was going to bankrupt us.

    1. Great! Finally get to watch something without ads.

    2. I guess now we know climate change isn’t real. If Google blocks it, it is true.

    3. Pseudo-libertarians that were declaring over the last for years that censoring and silencing others is perfectly fine as long as it’s not the government (or at least as long as there’s a Chinese wall there), may have been a bigger threat to free speech than anyone else.

      Just because libertarians don’t think that the government has the right to make ostensibly private censorship illegal, doesn’t make the ostensibly private censorship morally right.

      1. Agree. It is legal, but we can still call it out as unhealthy or wrong.

        1. The ‘wrong’ is in Politicians using the point of authority to enact censorship as was well-established and utterly ignored by the main-stream press when President Trump got censored.

    4. I read “demonetize” as “demonize” the first time I read it. Which I guess works just as well.

  9. Durham investigation into the origins of the Trump rissia investigation has moved into a security contractor with deep ties to Hillary and her campaign about using tax payer funded classified data to create the illusion of trump talking with russia through servers.

    https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/08/durham-investigates-pentagon-cybersecurity-contractors-who-helped-clinton-campaign-plot-russia-hoax/

    1. “The walls are closing in!”

    2. RealClearInvestigations had an extensive write-up on Durham’s investigation. He seems to have made remarkable progrogress. WTF were all those Pentagon IT contractors doing, anyway?

        1. “The ICs bidding.”

          This. Think, “Color Revolution.”

          1. Does anyone think that there’s a chance all these guys will one day pay?

            1. Little to no chance, my 2 cents, having worked in government.

      1. “Remarkable progress”

        Sheesh.

        1. Yeah, my bad. Shitty typing. Sorry! 🙂

      2. I’m sorry, but we could get a video of Obama, Biden, and the Clintons talking frankly, explicitly saying “I don’t care if you have to make it up, just do it”. Heck, they could actively order assassinations.

        I don’t think it would budge the current administration one bit, and anyone who shared it would be blocked and/or arrested.

  10. McConnell and 9 other feckless GOP bail put Schumer and democrats over raising the debt ceiling. Laying way to keep reconciliation spending of 3.5T (really 5T) on the table for democrats. This minority of the GOP continues to act as the normal light foil to the democrats to merely pretend they are against the spending. The usual actors were involved woth Murkowski, Romney, etc. Cowards and frauds abound.

    https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/08/mitch-mcconnells-surrender-in-the-debt-ceiling-fight-opens-the-floodgates-for-dems-3-5-trillion-spending-bill/

    1. I wonder if their personal finances are this fucked up. Constantly begging the card companies to raise their limits while blowing through cash at the mall and casinos?

      1. You can call your credit card company and ask for a limit increase. Some of these guys probably run 100k-200k balances (not a joke).

    2. Not so sure it is as ‘cut and dried’ as The Federalist portrays. Don’t the reconciliation procedures require votes on all bills, and all provisions added to bills? I see a very, very protracted and contentious process for Team D.

      To me, Senator McConnell merely gave them a warning, and some rope.

      1. McConnell first told Schumer of no voting for debt ceiling in July. They had months to have the votes.

        1. Yeah JesseAZ, I hear you. When it comes to Senator McConnell, I have always appreciated how he thinks everything through. He has laid the groundwork for months. He now appears conciliatory.

          Senator McConnell has handed a fractured Team D a rope. They will tear themselves apart with the reconciliation thing….which is fraught with boatloads of procedural pitfalls. And Senator McConnell knows the procedures like no other Senator.

          Hopefully, the Biden agenda will be stymied. Team D simply cannot reconcile their fundamental differences.

          1. You have more faith on people noticing liberal on liberal infighting than I do.

            1. Or that it will be beneficial in any way. Sinema and Manchin will cave and we will be worse off.

              1. “Sinema and Manchin will cave and we will be worse off.”

                You know, I’d have thought that too—and God knows they still can disappoint me—but they’ve held fast surprisingly well so far. Especially Sinema. Never would have predicted this kind of restraint from a Socialist. We’ll see, I guess.

                1. They haven’t held fast. They’ve both hemmed on meeting in the middle of the bill. There has been no official vote because the House is in disarray. It is all politics in the House at the moment.

                  1. They haven’t agreed on approving the 3.5. That kind of hold fast.

                    I have low standards, at this point.

                  2. It would have been very easy for them to cave by now, with special carve-outs for Arizona and West Virginia, so they do deserve credit. Unless they cave later of course.

                    Manchin was holding the line at 1.5 trillion (vs. 3.5 trillion), but seems willing to go over 2 trillion now. He seems to not be a fan of throwing 2 trillion away fighting the weather, even if his concern over that stems from the impact on the West Virginia coal industry.

                    Sinema wanted the wreck-the-nation bill to stay below 2 trillion I believe, and actually called out the Prog Caucus for holding the infrastructure bill hostage to their overspending demands. Too bad Pelosi didn’t have similar backbone.

              2. No way = Sinema and Manchin will cave

                I think they are both angry, rightfully so, on how they have been treated by their fellow travellers in the Team D tribe.

                Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned: Sinema
                You can all go screw yourselves: Manchin (did you see his reaction to Schumer speaking?)

                1. Sinema was an activist doing the very same things being done to her now. You again have more faith than I. I know her history fairly well.

                  1. JesseAZ, yeah Sinema was a ‘lib’ in her early career. She still is. But she doesn’t strike me as an uber-lib kind of gal. And you cannot publicly humiliate her without ‘payback’. I tell you, she will dig in and tell the progressives to fuck off.

                    Remember too, there is a lengthy break for Thanksgiving. There is way less time for Team D to get this done than is immediately apparent.

                    At least, that is what I am hoping for.

                  2. She barely won under extremely unusual circumstances. So my suspicion is that her actions are totally pragmatic and given the opportunity she would gladly go further left.

                    1. The Dems will bribe her with the promise of some cushy, no-show job should she vote correctly and then lose her reelection bid.

                    2. They’d dump Kamala for Sinema?

  11. This marks the second-lowest level of trust in media since Gallup started measuring trust in U.S. institutions in 1972. The record low came in 2016, when just 32 percent of people said they had either “a great deal” of trust in media or “a fair amount” of trust.

    I wonder what happened in 2016 that caused so many people to distrust the media? And is it in any way related to what’s going on now?

    1. It’s obviously Trump’s fault.

      1. Exactly what I was thinking – I’m pretty sure Trump can safely be credited in large part for the fact that so many people have stopped trusting the media, but let us not forget that Biden has played a significant role as well.

        1. Um, not the fact that most (left-leaning) media all but promised a Clinton victory and blue tidal wave? And then had to deal with a very disappointed public? (At least the “better” half of the public)

        2. It wasn’t the media obsessing over a bullshit story for years on end then?

  12. Newsom has signed into a law a measure banning “stealthing” — that is, secretly taking off a condom without a sex partner’s consent.

    Serious question: If a condom breaks, um, inside is that “stealthing”, and if so can the partners sue each other?

    1. Julian Assange was charged with rape over such a situation.

    2. Sleight of hand magicians hardest hit.

      1. “Nothing up my dick!”

        1. “Hey, Rocky…”

          “Again, Bullwinkle?” *Rolls eyes*

    3. Clearly this is the greatest problem facing California today.

    4. Don’t rubber the wrong way.

    5. I guess you should only go bare back. No reason to risk a crime. Skip the safe sex.

    6. Consider it a mask for your other face.

    7. This seems like it’s a rather hefty “He said, she said” situation.

      Meaning the man is utterly and royally fucked.

    8. Just tell Newsom: “You can take my stealthed condom when you grab it from my cold, dead…” Oh, wait…none of this works… 🙂

    9. As long as paternity fraud is still legal and encouraged then ENB and the rest of the feminists don’t care.

    10. This law is a trojan horse.

  13. In other news, 36% of Americans are apparently either idiots or suck-ups.

    There is no possible way you could live as an adult through the last few years and claim to trust the media to report the news “fully, fairly and accurately”. It just is not possible.

    I get that between 10 and 33% of people believe in all manner of nonsense, but we are way beyond the point where there is a defense for faith in fair, accurate and complete reporting.

    I suppose over 30% out of that 36% is cheerleading for your side rather than actual trust.. But still… C’mon, man!!

    1. I no longer trust any federal agency. That is so sad, because I used to think very highly of the FBI. No longer. They are all venal and corrupt.

    2. I wonder what the overlap is between the 36% of Americans that trust the media and the 36% of Americans registered Democrats.

    3. “In other news, 36% of Americans are apparently either idiots or suck-ups.”

      You are being way too generous.

    4. Don’t forget, 29% has a “fair amount” of trust. For many people, this means that they trust basic facts on non-controversial issues. Like, if there was a crash on I-10 that killed two people. I would trust the news to report that. However, I cannot trust any political story implicitly from any source.

      I would not classify that as a fair amount of trust, but I do know some people that would.

  14. In September’s poll, 44 percent of Americans said they trust the executive branch and 37 percent said they trust Congress.

    I really had no idea that mental retardation affected that many people, we really should do something about the fact that 4 out 10 people in this country are incapable of being trusted to eat with a fork.

    1. Half the population has a below average IQ.

      1. Below median, but the point is taken. Likely over half are below average now, considering who we’ve been prioritizing for importation over the last sixty years.

        1. Given that anyone with socialist tendencies has some degree of economic retardation, I bet more native-born Americans qualify, compared to the average immigrant who wants to work.

          1. It would be nice if it worked that way, but plenty of very smart people believe in very bad ideologies and economic systems.

    2. Look on the bright side, J. Perhaps those folks trust the executive branch and congress to fuck things up.

      1. Damn, you’re right! It just occurred to me that I’m part of the 40% that trusts the government completely.

        1. I trust government and media…to be government and media!

  15. Good job Google. The science is settled. Don’t let those pigeons try to unsettle it.

    1. Although we can criticize Google’s decision, as libertarians we can all agree we must respect a private company’s First Amendment right to put whatever content they want on their own site, to please their customers, who are their advertisers. We can all agree on that, can’t we?

      1. Again. If you actually pushed and followed libertarian thought you wouldn’t need to constantly remind people you think you’re a libertarian.

      2. The fact that many of these “corporate” decisions have been made in response to threats from the feds is not even close to government restrictions on speech, right?

        1. From ENB’s blog post above: “But in this case, Google cites not government pressure but advertiser and user wishes.”

        2. There is no evidence, in this case, that government pressure is in play.

          1. yea no company would ever admit they are doing something illegal for the government at the beheast of the government since that would get them in more hot water with the government. never ever happened.

            1. There’s still no evidence. So Earth Skeptic is merely speculating above.

      3. …And agree to use DuckDuckGo instead.

      4. as libertarians

        You never have been, and never will be, a libertarian.

        Libertarians for “well-crafted, free market enabling regulation” will never be a thing.”
        https://reason.com/2020/12/18/the-bipartisan-push-to-gut-section-230-will-suppress-online-communication/#comment-8647905

        1. The ‘I’m a libertarian’ trips the 180 degree rule. A statement or mission statement from someone that only supports policies, laws, politicians that are anathema to civil liberties and rights, but claims to be for civil liberties. Their statement/mission statement is 180 degrees off from the truth. There’s a good-sized contingent commenting here, and on Volokh. The A’CL’U, SPLC, the vast majority of the social ‘justice’ movement, the entirety of the DEI/CRT push, the feminism is about equality people.

      5. Especially when it involves paying people who are using their free service. They are under no obligation to allow people to profit from content they disagree with. Demonetizing isn’t as bad as banning, though the end result may be the same.

        But I would criticize it strongly for being anti-science. Science doesn’t stop once something is “settled” by some “consensus”. Science remains open to new theories and new evidence, and must cast aside old theories when new evidence overturns them. The biggest leaps in scientific understanding have come when some weirdo who questions the consensus comes up with a new theory and is later proven correct.

  16. Remember, when Galileo was put on trial, it was in large part for mocking the scientific consensus of the time.

    It is bad for science to outlaw scepticism from general discussion.

    1. There are consequences for spreading disinformation and doubt about the dogma.

      1. I just read a good definition of the difference between authoritarianism and totalitarianism yesterday. Authoritarians demand that you obey their dictates and are satisfied when you do, totalitarians not only demand that you obey their dictates but that you profess your love for them as well. You are only welcome on social media so long as you denounce the unbelievers as kulaks and wreckers, both-siders will not be allowed.

        1. Mussolini coined the term, and his definition really says it all.

          “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”

          Authoritarians only demand obedience over a limited scope of human activity. Exactly how limited does vary.

          1. Recall that FDR admired Mussolini, and Biden admires FDR.

        2. It all comes down to whether you accept authority as the final truth, or the truth as the final authority. Extremists on the left and the right want to ignore evidence that questions their preferred authority (dear leaders, ancient texts, or robed priests/judges/scientists). Worse, those on the left now want to stop unbelievers from even sharing information that questions that authority.

    2. Yeap. Put on trial due to the church using the concept of parallax to confirm heliocentricism. That was scientific consensus, not religious.

      1. I believe Galileo was put on trial more for his assertion that it wasn’t up to the Church to determine the truth of the matter rather than for his belief in heliocentrism, after all he’s not the one who came up with the idea, Copernicus had argued the idea nearly a century earlier. Copernicus was a Church lawyer and his ideas were being discussed by the Church without prejudice. And remember, Galileo was an asshole who considered Kepler a retard for theorizing that the planets had elliptical orbits since Galileo knew God would naturally create circular orbits and anybody who thought otherwise was an idiot.

        1. You are right. I was thinking of the copernicus debates.

          https://www.scientus.org/Copernicus-Stellar-Parallax.html

        2. It would have all came out in the cosmic wash much better and faster if the Church and State weren’t in the realm of ideas at all…and without governments spending us $Trillions into debt we might have even been to those Planets even faster and on the way to the stars…

        3. And the church already changed the calender based on a helio centric view of the solar system. Galileo pissed of a high ranking member of the church and they used that as an excuse to execute him.
          I’m glad we are pass that way of operating in the modern age… By the way any more news on the founders of backpage that donated to kamalas political rival?

          1. This!

            Nicolaus Copernicus had previously dedicated his De revolutionibus orbium coelestium to Pope Paul III, and it was well received.

            The argument raged on because when assuming purely circular orbits, heliocentrism was an even worse mathematical fit than geocentrism. Galileo also took no interest in Kepler’s elliptical orbits, erroneously arguing that the tides were proof of the earth’s orbit round the sun.
            It wasn’t until much later when the orbits were found to be elliptical as per Kepler that the math worked and everyone accepted heliocentrism.
            There were other issues too, like no discernable stellar parallax’s, but those were less debated.

            Pope Urban VIII, who was also a polymath and a friend and admirer of Galileo, and had asked Galileo to write arguments for and against heliocentrism from an observational viewpoint. Urban VIII himself supported Aristotelian geocentrism from a mathematical viewpoint.

            Galileo published a piece that featured a character named “Simplicio” (idiot), who repeated Urban’s public arguments, which he then refuted. This super pissed-off Urban.
            Hence the tribunal and the forced recantation of the book.

            Now this isn’t the first time Galileo had argued with Catholic church researchers. Previously he had called Jesuit astronomers morons for thinking that comet’s were celestial bodies originating from beyond the moon, while he knew that they were actually perturbations in the ether.

            But unlike that time, the pope wasn’t on his side anymore.

            The Protestants, who had been largely against Copernican theory, immediately switched sides when they saw this, and started pushing heliocentrism. They basically started calling the Catholics the sixteenth century version of “science-deniers”, and created the modern legend about poor Galileo that we all know today. A lot of which parallels Luther’s fight with the church.

          2. I don’t know what you mean by executed though.
            Galileo was never actually charged with heresy by the inquisition. His book ridiculing the pope was withdrawn and he was placed under house arrest (which meant he needed permission to leave Rome). He also received a pension.
            When he died of old age in Florence at 77, the Grand Duke of Tuscany, Ferdinando II, wished to bury him in the Basilica and erect a marble mausoleum in his honour. This was turned down because his old ex-friend Urban was still butthurt about the book.

            1. The idea that Galileo was executed by the Church for dissenting against orthodoxy is big among the lefty crowd. I would guess the myth was started by Protestants long long ago, but even so, sad to see it repeated on Reason.

              They also like to exaggerate the deaths under the 300 years of the Spanish Inquisition (32k) by 3 or 4 orders of magnitude. I have seen claims as high as 50 million.

              1. Post-truth seems to be the hallmark of the new left.

          3. Meanwhile, astronomers and astrophysicists make discoveries like this all the time when unimpeded by the Church:

            It Rains Diamonds in Space on Neptune and Uranus
            https://youtu.be/bX-NWhsjEtY

            1. That’s your takeaway?

              You’re such an utter ahistorical fucking idiot. You’re like the atheist version of the creationist stereotype. You’re one of those guys who thinks he’s educated because he “likes” IFLScience memes on Facebook.

              Every major university in the western world got its start as a school for clergy, dipshit. The giants whose shoulder’s 20th century astronomy and physics stood on – Newton, Galileo, Kepler, Copernicus, Brahe, Kelvin, Faraday, Hooke and Max Planck were all churchmen or worked for the church at one time or another. The Big Bang Theory was developed by Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian Catholic priest who held dual doctorates in math and physics, for fuck’s sake.

              1. But there’s never has been any actual scientific or empirical evidence that any God, Gods, Devils or Angels have ever existed.

                Unfortunately, anyone who publicly (or even personally) exposed and criticized the fictional orthodoxy of a dominant religion was branded a witch, and either burned at the stake or stoned to death.

  17. What percent of Americans support vaccine and masks mandates? It seems higher than the percent who trust media and government.

    1. If you were to travel around different states, you would see that supporting mask mandates is in the minority.

      1. Yes, there does seem to be a strong divide between the elites and the other classes on this. Masking up is mostly for show for the lower classes. Polls might claim high support for mask mandates, but personal observation shows almost universal disdain for mask-wearing.

        News says people in New York are supposedly complying strongly with the vaccine checking, but New Yorkers are claiming that it’s almost non-existent.

        I’m reminded of some discussions that I’ve heard about Soviet double-think. Everyone was miserable but no one would admit to being miserable for fear of being punished. Thus, they thought everyone was happy. It seems that some sections of our society are becoming dishonest on a fundamental level.

    2. The same percent who thought that 9% of Americans had already died from COVID in summer 2020(!), and that 40-50% of infected people end up hospitalized.

    3. Vaccine, si, mandates, no! And my answer is precisely because of my trust in actual science and lack of trust in media and government.

  18. “The move is part of an ever-expanding attempt to combat misinformation online…”

    I think you mean “attempt to combat scientific inquiry and political dissent”.

    1. It’s only that if you’re a Violent Insurrectionist. If you’re a good citizen that doesn’t get Investigated by the FBI, it’s Combating Misinformation.

  19. No mention of Tesla moving their corporate HQ from CA to TX?

    OBL, where are you?! We need your take on this! #ByeByeCA

    1. They moved to Austin. I.e., California East. So not terribly different. Though summers will be amusing…

      Then again, it is a great depressurization chamber for acclimating to Texas culture vs California culture. Or at least, it used to be.

  20. You Must Not ‘Do Your Own Research’ When It Comes To Science
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/07/30/you-must-not-do-your-own-research-when-it-comes-to-science/?sh=4a7f7b6f535e

    “Research both sides and make up your own mind.” It’s simple, straightforward, common sense advice. And when it comes to issues like vaccinations, climate change, and the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, it can be dangerous, destructive, and even deadly. The techniques that most of us use to navigate most of our decisions in life — gathering information, evaluating it based on what we know, and choosing a course of action — can lead to spectacular failures when it comes to a scientific matter.

    1. Questioning authority has become too much of a good thing, and it’s killing people
      https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/questioning-authority-has-become-too-much-of-a-good-thing-and-it-e2-80-99s-killing-people/ar-AAOMJGm

      “Popular information,” to Madison, meant information that was available to, and easily understandable by, the general public – the electorate. Today, technology has made information more “popular” than Madison could ever have imagined, and it is easier than ever to question authority. But when that leads to undermining public trust in authorities that are essential to the proper functioning of democracy and civil society, we have too much of a good thing.

      In the last year, millions of Americans have come to believe that local and state election officials allowed a presidential election to be stolen, and to suspect that public-health officials and medical experts have ulterior motives in trying to get as many people as possible vaccinated for the deadly coronavirus – despite no real evidence to support either belief.

      1. Is it just a coincidence that the American media establishment sounds so similar to the Chinese media establishment?

        1. Soviet media, to my ear. But yours is much more relevant.

      2. If that kind of talk doesn’t turn your stomach, you aren’t thinking.

      3. The Left stopped being liberals a long time ago…

    2. I read through about half the article. It’s another arrogant physicists who thinks he is morally superior to most people. He is narrow minded in his arguments, not taking into account the whole of life.

      1. Trust the high priests. Don’t do your own analysis.

    3. ‘It’s absolutely foolish to think that you, a non-expert who lacks the very scientific expertise necessary to evaluate the claims of experts, are going to do a better job than the actual, bona fide experts of separating truth from fiction or fraud.’ The writer comes off as more than a bit of a dickhead. Given that consensus and bias are quite serious issues that impact research, the ‘bona fida experts’ may be separating fabrication that they desire from fact that they do not in terms of outcome.

      1. It’s so dumb. What if there are several experts who don’t agree? Then how do you decide what to believe? You just pick one expert and stick with it? That seems like a pretty poor way to make sure you are getting good information.
        There is rarely complete consensus on scientific questions and experts are wrong all the time.

  21. Google and YouTube are adding climate change denial content to the list of things you can’t say if you want to monetize your videos or websites.

    Grifter vs Grifter, and the grifters won this round.

    1. first it was vaccine denial now climate denial next will be gun denial then any natural rights denial

    2. Youtube is a great location to discuss DC vs Marvel or whether you like the latest My Little Pony movie.

      However, at this point, it’s just not feasible to get decent political content on it.

  22. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed into a law a measure banning “stealthing” — that is, secretly taking off a condom without a sex partner’s consent.

    I can’t tell you how many women have tried pulling that on me. There ought to be a law.

    1. Mid-30s childless woman, “Oh, don’t worry! I’m totally on the Pill! Here, let me throw that out for you…” /Mid-30s woman

      1. My accidental baby momma said she had an IUD, but same idea.

        1. Should have gotten that in writing. And notarized.

          1. No, don’t rely on that. Ask to see it.

            1. Now I begin to understand some of those underutilized genres of porn.

      2. This is why Mrs. Howell or The Professor is the best option in the Ginger vs. Mary Ann debate.

  23. This was a lie, BTW, the DC police cleared the area to work on the fence there.

    Why Violent Protests Work
    https://www.gq.com/story/why-violent-protests-work

    The fascist revolution led by Donald Trump hit a crescendo on Monday when the president tear-gassed his own people—peaceful protesters standing outside the White House—to clear a path for himself to take a photo with a Bible in front of a vandalized church.

    …“We don’t have time to finger-wag at protesters about property,” she continued. “That can be rebuilt. Target will reopen. The stores will reopen. That’s assured. What is not assured is our safety and real justice.”

      1. AP Stylebook Discourages Use of ‘Riot,’ Expands Definition of ‘Protest’ to Include ‘Violence’
        https://www.nationalreview.com/news/associated-press-stylebook-discourages-use-of-riot-expands-definition-of-protest-to-include-violence/

        New guidance on AP Stylebook Online:

        Use care in deciding which term best applies:
        A riot is a wild or violent disturbance of the peace involving a group of people. The term riot suggests uncontrolled chaos and pandemonium. (1/5)

        — APStylebook (@APStylebook) September 30, 2020

        “Focusing on rioting and property destruction rather than underlying grievance has been used in the past to stigmatize broad swaths of people protesting against lynching, police brutality or for racial justice, going back to the urban uprisings of the 1960s,” it added.

        1. Confession through projection?

          1. Nah, just Newspeak.

      2. When you want the Supreme Court to not even dream of looking at any Election-related appeals…

  24. With their $3.5 trillion spending bill looking less and less likely to become reality, Democrats are forced to prioritize…

    Reality always fucks over the commies.

    1. Poor Democrats, having to prioritize spending, just like everyone who doesn’t have the ability to print money has to do.

      1. ….except they’re just printing money regardless.

  25. I trust ENB. To publish grrrrbortion articles daily.

  26. “Tesla will move its headquarters to Texas, Elon Musk says”
    […]
    “”This is not a matter of, sort of, Tesla leaving California,” he said. He added that the company intended to increase output from its Fremont and Nevada factories by 50%.
    Tesla could not be reached for additional comment Thursday night. The company does not typically engage with traditional news media…”
    https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/07/business/tesla-headquarters-texas-elon-musk/index.html

    Remember the law suits when Boeing left Seattle? Musk does.

    1. The factories will follow….hopefully. Starve the CA beast of tax revenue.

      1. Yeah, Boeing tried to close the Seattle factories all at once and ended up fighting all the way to SCOTUS (IIRC) before someone pointed out there is no ‘anti-going-out-of-business’ law to invoke.
        Cost the stock holders a LOT of money.

        1. “there is no ‘anti-going-out-of-business’ law”

          Not yet. That will be part of the Workers’ Social Justice Plan. Also included will be prohibitions on firing workers, reducing hours, raising prices, or taking any action against workers who do not work.

          1. I think Boston had actually tried something like that back in the Eighties and Cato did a report about it.

            They might as well call it The Life After People Documentary Subsidy Act.

    2. Tesla leaving California for a battery of reasons.

      1. Nobody heard it coming.

      2. It’s shocking!

      3. The taxes and regulations keep going and going and going…

  27. The breakthrough came less than two weeks before the US was set to be unable to borrow money or pay off loans for the first time ever…

    Correct me if I’m wrong (don’t really) but couldn’t Congress vote to authorize any of these things the debt ceiling allows done without effort regularly?

  28. In September, the unemployment rate fell to 4.8 percent.

    Thank you, President Biden.

    1. The labor decline was due to people leaving the labor force permanently. Thanks indeed.

      1. All the people who died from the China virus under the SleepyJoe regime.

        1. He’s ahead of Trump now. Go, Joe!

  29. Give Amazon and Facebook a Seat at the United Nations
    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-10-03/give-amazon-and-facebook-a-seat-at-the-united-nations

    If this all sounds a tad whimsical — comparing gadflies to goliaths — it may be because of the cultural dominance of the “Westphalian system,” under which the global balance of power has been envisioned, since 1648, as a mosaic of centrally controlled and culturally unified nation-states, each wielding a monopoly of force inside mutually recognized borders.

    1. But don’t forget, it’s Donald Trump that’s ushering in a Fascist Revolution.

    2. .. centrally controlled and culturally unified nation-states
      Don’t that just sound wonderful?

      1. “From a distance, we are instruments, marching in a common plan…”

        Oh, Bette, you’re making me wanna puke!

    3. Alls the the more reason to “Get U.S. the Fuck Outta the U.N. and Get the U.N. the Fuck Outta U.S.” (As the New York City Chapter of The John Birch Society would probably put it.)

    4. Well, not the UN.
      But the Olympics should stop being a competition between nations, since some nations have huge advantages compared to the others.
      Make it Nike vs Under Armour vs Reebok vs Adidas.

      1. What about the trans athletes?

  30. As the details came in about McConnell’s move yesterday, letting the Democrats raise the debt ceiling to December 4th, it became clear that McConnell sold opposition to the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill short our of fear that the Democrats would follow through on their threat to kill the filibuster if he didn’t. Joe Manchin had already gone public, yesterday, saying that he wouldn’t support getting rid of the filibuster. I think the Democrats were just bluffing.

    Regardless, as it turns out, the Democrats won’t need to vote on every provision with funding that will breach the debt ceiling–so long as they get the budget reconciliation bill done by December 4th. One of the problems with McConnell capitulating to the Democrats because they threatened to kill the filibuster is that the threat isn’t going away. Now, they Democrats don’t need to get rid of the filibuster. They can just threaten McConnell, and he’ll give them the votes they need without the filibuster!

    If there’s a bright side, it may only be that there is no guarantee that the Democrats will come to an agreement on the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill before December 4th. It isn’t just a question of getting Manchin and Sinema aboard by cutting the size of the bill down to $2 trillion instead of $3.5 trillion. It’s also a question of whether Bernie Sanders and the Congressional Progressive Caucus will accept anything less than $3.5 trillion.

    There is still hope. Just not as much as there was before McConnell sold the farm for some magic beans. It may be that McConnell knows something we don’t know about Manchin’s true willingness to resist lifting the filibuster in a limited way, but given what information is publicly available, it looks to me like McConnell blew it (which seems to be Rand Paul’s conclusion, too). If the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill fails, it will be despite McConnell’s efforts to stop it rather than because of them.

    1. Ken, I don’t think there is a hope in hell that either Sinema or Manchin vote for the reconciliation bill, regardless of price. They are furious at the treatment from their own Team D tribe.

      They will vote for the bipartisan giveaway infrastructure bill.

      1. I hope you’re right, but I hate to have to depend on the kindness of strangers. There is no good substitute for divided government, and we shouldn’t expect good things to happen when the House is dominated by the Progressive Congressional Caucus, the Budget committee is headed by Bernie Sanders, and the White House has decided to throw the moderate Democrats under the bus. This is like Baseball, where you can’t score on defense. All we can do is hope they strike out or get into a pickle.

        1. Ken, this is where I would like to see a Senator Collins quietly talk to Senator Sinema, commiserate Sinema’s her shabby treatment by her own party, and plant the seed that Sinema’s party will humiliate her more and more in the future….and just leave it at that. Maybe a follow-up visit from another ‘maverick’ Murkowski, with the same message.

          The sisterhood thing is at play here. You watch.

          1. I’ll be rooting for that.

            In some ways, Sinema is like Goldwater, and there should be a place for women like her in the Republican party.

    2. Just as I predicted might occur last week (in response to a question here from Ken), McConnell and 9 other RINO Senators just gave Biden, Pelosi, Schumer and their left wing media propagandists another three months to lobby/bribe/intimidate Manchin and Sinema to vote for their left wing multi trillion dollar spending bill via reconciliation.

      1. We had them where we wanted them.

        Ugh!

    3. The “compromise” will be cutting the 3.5 trillion for 10 years (an extra 350 billion a year we don’t have on stuff we don’t need) into a 2.0 trillion for 6 years bill (333 billion a year), I’m afraid. Maybe 8 years (250 billion a year) if we’re lucky.

  31. America should allow other countries to vote in the 2020 election
    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/2020-us-election-vote-trump-campaign-a8836076.html

    This is a country which calls itself ‘leader of the Free World’ and has huge global influence in terms of foreign policy and economics. Now that Trump won’t acknowledge basic things like climate change, it’s time other countries had a say

    1. Might as well, half of them are here already. Plus, no ID required.

      1. Maybe not for voting, but just try to get into a restaurant in NYC.

  32. We are running low on supplies of all kinds due to a veritable hydra of bottlenecks.

    The Kochtopus, probably.

    1. Everybody knows that capitalists make more money when commerce declines.

  33. “In coronavirus milestone, San Francisco set to lift some indoor mask rules”
    […]
    “In a sign of improving COVID-19 conditions, San Francisco is set to lift mask requirements in indoor gyms and offices next week — but only if everyone inside is vaccinated….”
    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-10-07/san-francisco-to-ease-indoor-covid-mask-rules

    So now, with three “mother, may I?” chants of sufficient sincerity, you’ll be allowed to take off that face diaper in 6 or 8 new locations!
    BTW, the current SF infection rate is ~72/100,000. That’s less than 1/10 of 1%, but we haven’t flattened the curve yet.

    1. What about homeless camps?

    2. But not at 13 locations if they are all the same restaurant chain.

  34. Iconoclasm as a Prelude to Woke Horrors?
    https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/iconoclasm-prelude-woke-horrors/
    Iconoclasm has been a prelude to the woke spasms of today. The mass looting and arsons were preceded by physical attacks on conservatives, which were preceded by popular depictions of the murder and decapitation of President Trump, which were preceded by mob attacks on Confederate monuments. Like the other terrors which came before Wokeness, the greatest sin of today’s iconoclasts is often reducing infinitely complex characters to just one thing. Just as Muslims who revere Jesus as a prophet were reduced to intolerable heretics, a comparatively weak and benign king and queen were reduced to insufferable tyrants, and great discoveries were reduced to “Jewish science”, the Woke reduce historical figures to their worst common denominator. To them, a statue of Columbus is not a monument of a great explorer but an homage to an abuser and murderer of Native Americans; the Jefferson Memorial is not a temple for the man who penned some of our noblest ideals but an endorsement of his slave ownership; a stone on a modern street corner once used as an auction block for slaves is not a public reminder of past wrongs but a perpetual psychic aggression towards minorities. These modern iconoclasts intentionally confuse and confound the reason for the monument’s existence with the darkest of its crimes.

    1. You just know that was some mid-20s intern in their health department, who threw that in as a joke. “Yellow emblems are high-visibility, which immediately reassures other people of the wearer’s immunological safety…”, yadda, yadda. Stifled chuckle.

      What? They actually went for it?!

    2. Vaccine serial number tattoos are next.

      1. Ahem, “Anti-fraud biometric vaccine integrity measures.”

        1. And a QR or bar code tattoo.

    3. Old habits die hard

      1. Who could nazi this coming?

  35. “Now he’s being investigated, vilified, & shamed for subjecting students to blackface.”

    Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, on the other hand, is still governor. Apparently this is another example of bias against Asians.

  36. A federal appeals court has “rejected a challenge from journalism associations seeking to argue against an exemption to Assembly Bill 5 that applied for freelance writers, arguing that it inhibited free speech…”

    Better writing would probably have helped me parse that sentence. How many negatives can you toss into one statement?

    1. I’m glad I wasn’t the only one wrestling with that mess.

  37. The ENABLERS Act encapsulates a key idea that analysts say is, to a large degree, already standard in most other countries.

    Fungibility doesn’t exist in their world.

    1. But mom! All the other tinpot dictators are doing it!

  38. The Professor, a renowned composer who survived the Cultural Revolution, showed his class at @UMich a video of Laurence Olivier playing Othello. Now he’s being investigated, vilified, & shamed for subjecting students to blackface.

    Mao has nothing on woke academia.

    1. How dare a college professor threaten his students with knowledge of a thing that actually happened!

  39. Why Wall Street cheers China, despite growing business unease
    https://www.deccanherald.com/international/world-news-politics/why-wall-street-cheers-china-despite-growing-business-unease-1038129.html

    At the height of a market sell-off in late July, the deputy chair of China’s securities regulator, Fang Xinghai, summoned executives of BlackRock, Goldman Sachs and other firms to a meeting, trying to alleviate investor nervousness over Beijing’s crackdowns…

    Some 20 days later, regulators approved BlackRock’s application to offer mutual funds in China. Around the same time, a BlackRock executive told The Financial Times that China was underrepresented in global investors’ portfolios and in global bench m…

    1. Washington Examiner
      Newsom signs bills allowing children to hide sex operations and abortions from parents
      https://news.yahoo.com/newsom-signs-bills-allowing-children-171900404.html

      The first bill, AB 1356, will create new offenses arising from recording or photographing patients or providers within 100 feet of the entrance to a reproductive health services facility. The other, AB 1184, will keep patient information confidential for patients who are not the primary policyholder for their health insurance. Healthcare services that patients can keep confidential include “reproductive health care and gender-affirming care,” according to the governor’s statement.

    2. We’re going to be bailing them out, if the Chinese municipal bond debt bubble is as bad as was being warned about. Evergrande has, IIRC, about 350B equivalent USD exposure in the Chinese domestic market. The muni bonds, OTOH, are ‘estimated’ at 8T USD. And the funds holding those bonds, which I gather is like CALPERS, but on a much larger scale, recently got public permission from the CCP to invest in much shakier debt. Like moving from AA to B-ish.

      China is going to have a bad time, very soon. So are we.

      1. They’ll default on bond payments of non-Chinese investors. There is a tranche of notes in the 30-day grace period right now, on the order of a couple hundred million. All held by American institutional investment houses. Just watch. This is gonna get really messy.

        1. Agreed, and when you see Black Rock, think US Government. As far as I’m concerned, they’re this generation’s equivalent to the Resolution Trust.

      2. They ought to just write it off from the debt they bought from us the last 12 years.

  40. “New Netflix movie The Guilty ‘isn’t as progressive and critical of cops as it pretends to be,’ says Salon.”

    That’s disappointing. I learned in college that American cops are all racist psychopaths who put bullets in Black bodies for no reason — even when they’re in the HANDS UP DON’T SHOOT pose.

    #AbolishThePolice
    #(ExceptTheCapitolPolice)
    #(TheyDeserveMoreFunding)

    1. Indeed, Netflix needs to do better. Hopefully they listen to the showrunner of Dear White People, strong and beautiful transwoman Jaclyn Moore, and #CancelDaveChappelle.

      Like seriously, how can anyone deny Jaclyn is 100% woman? LOOK AT THE SUPER FEMININE WAY SHE TILTS HER HEAD.

      1. Totally hawt.

        1. Jaclyn is more womanly than 99% of the ciswomen I know.

          #TransIsBeautiful

          1. Just be ready when you head downstairs.

            #TheCryingGame

            1. That could be frot with peril.

      2. If you did not watch the final Chappell special, block out some time and do so immediately.

        He is fantastic. His condemnation of cancel culture was moving and poignant.

        And if you write for a libertarian publication, maybe watch it two or three times. And take notes.

        1. Yeah, that was great. Not as funny as some of the others, but a really good summation and response to the people trying to cancel him for his trans jokes.

        2. Is it full length or did they cut some parts?

    2. Yeah, the Gyllenhaal character was a bad cop, but he cared about protecting people. Sure he went beyond the training at times, and mistakes were made, and his service weapon discharged and all that. They should have made him more overtly evil. Even in the end when he “does the right thing” and admits his wrongdoing, he gets a lighter sentence than a civilian would have.

  41. https://twitter.com/RWMaloneMD/status/1446064487988146180

    This is fascinating.
    I am apparently no longer allowed to read the New England Journal of Medicine.
    They have blocked my internet protocol address.

    1. Gonna be home asleep at 2am? Asking for a SWAT friend.

    2. They told you not to do your own research. See the link above.

  42. A new Gallup poll finds just 36 percent of survey respondents say they trust the press to report the news fully, fairly, and accurately (down from 40 percent who said the same last year).

    Just like all of Congress vs my congressman, I hate all media except my chosen outlet.

    1. My Congressman is in the Prog Caucus and I don’t watch the news.

  43. It Begins: Federal Investigators Are Issuing Warrants for Google to Turn Over Anyone Typing in Certain Search Terms
    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/begins-federal-investigators-issuing-warrants-google-turn-anyone-typing-certain-search-terms/

    The U.S. government is reportedly secretly issuing warrants for Google to provide user data on anyone typing in certain search terms, raising fears that innocent online users could get caught up in serious crime investigations at a greater frequency than previously thought.

    In an attempt to track down criminals, federal investigators have started using new “keyword warrants” and used them to ask Google to provide them information on anyone who searched a victim’s name or their address during a particular year, an accidentally unsealed court document that Forbes found shows.

    Google has to respond to thousands of warrant orders each year, but the keyword warrants are a relatively new strategy used by the government and are controversial.

    “Trawling through Google’s search history database enables police to identify people merely based on what they might have been thinking about, for whatever reason, at some point in the past,” Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, told Forbes.

    “This never-before-possible technique threatens First Amendment interests and will inevitably sweep up innocent people, especially if the keyword terms are not unique and the time frame not precise. To make matters worse, police are currently doing this in secret, which insulates the practice from public debate and regulation,” she added.

    The government said that the scope of the warrants is limited to avoid implicating innocent people who happen to search for certain terms, but it’s not publicly disclosed how many users’ data are sent to the government and what the extent of the warrant requests are.

    1. Next, there will be a knock at your door, in the middle of the night.

      1. If they knock, that is.

  44. https://bravenewworldmedia.com/replacement-i-mean-replenishment-theory/

    There’s a very strange opinion piece at the Financial Times. Parah Khanna writes about the future of climate-driven immigration. Among other bizzare pronouncements about the future, there is this:

    Today’s fiscally strained and depopulating Visegrad countries could fuse into a larger federation to better administer their vital forests, agriculture and rivers in order to prepare for demographic replenishment by Arabs and Asians.

    1. They must really not like Orban. “Demographic replenishment…” LOL.

      I am becoming more and more of a Jacobin sympathizer every day.

  45. The reason why fewer Americans trust the news media is because hundreds of left wing media propagandists (who falsely portray themselves as journalists) at NY Times, WaPo, LA Times, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, AP, etc. and their allied Democrat politicians have been lying to Americans daily in an ongoing attempt to impose their nonlibertarian left wing socialist policies on all of us.

    1. The NYT news editors admitted, nay, bragged, that that their objective in covering “Russia collusion” was entirely to get rid of Trump. When that failed, they promised the news room that they would find another angle for getting rid of Trump.

      The result was the 1619 project and 2020 focus on racism for the nation.

      This was the News Editors. Not the editorial page.

      If you claim to trust the media to be complete and fair in their reporting you are either an idiot or a liar.

  46. Lockdowns will mess kids up, messed up kids will be diagnosed as ‘trans’, and will have their genitals cut off and be pumped with hormones and puberty blockers.

    Thank you, Dems.

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/top-trans-doctors-blow-the-whistle
    They said it was perfectly safe to give children as young as nine puberty blockers and insisted that the effects of those blockers were “fully reversible.” They said that it was the job of medical professionals to help minors to transition. They said it was not their job to question the wisdom of transitioning, and that anyone who did — including parents — was probably transphobic. They said that any worries about a social contagion among teen girls was nonsense. And they never said anything about the distinct possibility that blocking puberty, coupled with cross-sex hormones, could inhibit a normal sex life.

  47. Now you dont like the freedom tech corporations have under free enterprise to set there own rules as they see fit.

    Hope you are not suggesting, gasp, regulations?

    1. But that’s not what’s happening.

      1. Just force them to honor American speech law.

        You want protections of American IP law? Then you have to give something back to us.

        1. sounds a lot like regulations

          1. I have no problem with it.

    2. No, dimwit; you seem to think that you can read people’s minds and mindsets, in response to social media setting ‘there own rules.’ You cannot, you have presumed intent, inserted context, and an desired outcome, and by doing so, you look like the snarky fuckwit you clearly are.

  48. • The Senate voted yesterday to raise the debt limit by an increase of $480 billion.

    In fact, Mitch McConnell just gave Biden, Pelosi and Schumer an additional three months of time to convince (i.e. pay off) Manchin and Sinema to vote for the multitrillion dollar reconciliation bill that will destroy America.

    1. Wow, 480 billion to cover 2 months? That means the deficit is going to clock in around 3 trillion bucks this year….

  49. With their $3.5 trillion spending bill looking less and less likely to become reality, Democrats are forced to prioritize—and some really don’t like it.

    A real-life, real-time example of the proof of Sowell’s famous quote: “The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.”

    1. Rules (and economics) are racist!

    2. But there are multiple billionaires going into space. Can’t we just take their money?

  50. Now he’s being investigated, vilified, & shamed for subjecting students to blackface. He apologized, but that only made things worse.

    Ugh, stop apologizing.

    1. Looks like there’s a dedicated thread on this story, so I’ll say more there instead of repeating myself:

      https://reason.com/2021/10/08/bright-sheng-university-of-michigan-othello-racism/

  51. https://humanevents.com/2021/10/07/7-states-are-pushing-non-citizen-voting/
    Several states in the U.S. are pushing for non-citizen voting, something that has been a long-standing debate with the recent increase in immigration – both legal and illegal.

    So far, efforts to expand non-citizen voting don’t apply to national elections for president or Congress, nor to state offices like governor or state legislator. However, democrats have brought this to the table.

    Indeed, as reported by the Daily Signal, Congress passed legislation in 1996 prohibiting noncitizens from voting in federal elections. State constitutions vary, although so far the idea has been a local matter.

    Local laws also vary. Some apply only to legal residents, like green card holders, while others apply to illegal immigrants as well.

    States where local jurisdictions allow non-citizens to vote or are considering doing so include Maryland, California, Illinois, Vermont, District of Columbia, New York and Massachusetts.

    1. Then their votes for federal offices should be null and void unless they can provide concrete as all royal hell evidence illegals are not voting for Senate, House, or President.

      If they cannot or will not, well, their citizens chose to forfeit their votes. C’est la vie.

    2. California already allows ballot harvesting. This would just codify current practice.

  52. “American confidence in media is at nearly the lowest level since the early 1970s. A new Gallup poll finds just 36 percent of survey respondents say they trust the press to report the news fully, fairly, and accurately (down from 40 percent who said the same last year).”

    —-ENB

    This is a reminder not to internalize the progressives narrative we see in the media. On the one hand, everyone in this thread but the trolls knows the progressive news media is full of crap. On the other hand, because the narrative is so pervasive throughout the media (and not only in the news but also in movies, commercials, TV shows, and sports), we tend to assume that most of the people around us are buying into the progressives narrative. It’s an illusion.

    Going back to the Bulldozer Revolution in Serbia (the precursor to the color revolutions that followed, protesters used to go out into the street during the nightly news broadcasts, which were tightly controlled by the government, and bang pots and pans together so that their neighbors would know there was someone else out there who knew the news media was completely full of shit. As more and more people started to participate and the clanging and clanging became louder and louder every night, it because clear to those who were opposed to Milosevic were a significant portion of the population.

    I linked a bunch of “Fuck Joe Biden” chants erupting at college football stadiums all over the country yesterday, and this Gallup number is further evidence of the same thing. The news media is overwhelmingly progressive, and the American people hate them for it. When the poll came in showing only 32% of Americans had any trust in the Media, that poll was taken two weeks before Trump was elected president in 2016. And we’re not just talking about Republicans and libertarians knowing that the progressive media is full of shit. Look at the numbers in the Gallup poll for Independents!

    “Partisans’ trust in the media continues to be sharply polarized. Currently, 68% of Democrats, 11% of Republicans and 31% of independents say they trust the media a great deal or fair amount.”

    —-Gallup

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/355526/americans-trust-media-dips-second-lowest-record.aspx

    That means 69% of Independents responded that they have little or no trust in news media to report the news fairly and honestly. Here’s the interesting part, that number from 2016 came in during a presidential election year. If you think the news media is biased now, wait ’til you see what happens when the news media is full pro-Democrat pitch ahead of the midterm elections. If things don’t change, and I don’t see why they would, the Democrats will be slaughtered in 2022. The progressives want us to believe that they’re pervasive and inevitable. They’re not.

    Progressives are America’s most horrible people, and the polls show that the American people are disgusted by their narrative in the news media.

    1. Ah, that reminds me: Fuck Joe Biden

      1. It really can’t be said enough.

        Fuck Joe Biden.

        1. It’s never going to work for you.

          1. It always has suicide as an option, though.

    2. “On the one hand, everyone in this thread but the trolls knows the progressive news media is full of crap.”

      Sure, but what is glossed over when reciting the conservative victimhood narrative is that there is plenty of conservative media out there from which one can get a different take on current events.

      Every conservative commenter here manages to get alternative takes on the news somehow.

      1. Seems like the left has waged a bit of a war on alternate views.

        I bet you could get a fairly large number of liberals to agree on creating a Ministry of Truth.

      2. Define “plenty”?
        Which TV news networks, out of how many?
        Which major metropolitan newspapers, out of how many?

        1. Why do any of those things matter?

          1. Because too many people don’t even realize that there is another side to the debate. When David Brooks is your conservative voice, you really aren’t hearing both (or more) sides.

          2. Because you bring it up dumby. Geez. You know, I wish you the best in life. But quit wasting our time with your leftist adulation. Remembering to mute you again.

          3. “Why do any of those things matter?”

            Did you really not mean it when you said “Sure, but what is glossed over when reciting the conservative victimhood narrative is that there is plenty of conservative media out there from which one can get a different take on current events.”

            Access is fairly important.

      3. Mike (like the vast majority of left wingers) doesn’t understand the enormous difference between libertarians and conservatives.

    3. “” If things don’t change, and I don’t see why they would, the Democrats will be slaughtered in 2022. The progressives want us to believe that they’re pervasive and inevitable. They’re not.””

      The dems didn’t win much other than the presidency in 2020. Lost seats in the house, gained a couple in the Senate but not enough for a majority.

      The party of the president often loses in the first midterm after being elected. 2022 is likely not going to be a good year for democrats.

      1. Back on September 30 of 2016, when the Gallup poll showed that only 32% of the American people had at least some faith in the news media to report the news fairly and accurately, Donald Trump won the presidency just a few days later.

        Trump completely dominated the news at that point in time, and because the news media was dominated by the progressive anti-Trump narrative, the American people’s lack of faith in the news media should have been a huge leading indicator that they weren’t buying the anti-Trump narrative.

        People were wondering why the opinion polls didn’t predict Trump’s win in 2016, but their opinion of the news media was a legitimate proxy for the people’s willingness to buy the pro-Hillary Clinton narrative and the anti-Trump narrative. We’re in the same situation now.

        The news media is dominated by a pro-progressive narrative, and while there are several possible explanations for the American people not having faith in the news media, the most likely seems to be that, just like in 2016, the American people are rejecting the pro-progressive narrative.

      2. The 2020 vote for Dems was mostly just anti-Trump.
        Without him as the bogeyman in 2022, and with runaway inflation and the national debt over 30 trillion and an unpopular social agenda and redistricting due to the Census, Dems will lose significant seats in Congress and likely lose majority control in both houses.

  53. Is this surprising? You have propaganda outlets masquerading as news, you have random blogs and con artists on youtube pretending to have knowledge of anything at all, etc. That doesn’t even begin to include the slants that media has always had.

    Then you have a government that doesn’t do jack for its citizens yet takes a ton of taxes. One side is trying to blow it up and regress, the other is stymied by said party and too weak and ineffectual to do anything otherwise.

  54. “American confidence in media is at nearly the lowest level since the early 1970s. A new Gallup poll finds just 36 percent of survey respondents say they trust the press to report the news fully, fairly, and accurately (down from 40 percent who said the same last year).”

    But viewership and subscriptions of blatantly partisan media are up. Perhaps people do not want full, fair, and accurate reporting–and some are honest enough to admit that.

    1. I’m not sure that’s so.

      “In total day, Fox News averaged 1.36 million viewers, down 22%; MSNBC averaged 738,000, down 39%; and CNN had 598,000, down 38%. In the 25-54 demo, Fox News posted 227,000, down 25;, compared to CNN with 130,000, off by 46%; and MSNBC with 94,000, a drop of 48%.”

      —-Deadline, September 28, 2021

      https://deadline.com/2021/09/fox-news-msnbc-cnn-ratings-1234846126/

      Because of the streaming revolution, a lot of people are watching the news differently. There are streaming options on both the left and right that may be more extreme, OAN and NewsMax on the conservative side and channels like The Young Turks (TYT Channel) on the radical left. However, if that were the explanation, and people were simply watching more radical broadcasts that they agreed with, shouldn’t we expect to see trust in the media increase in Gallup’s poll?

      I think it’s just what they say it is. When 32% of Democrats say they have little or no trust in the media to report the news fairly and accurately, I don’t think very many of them are excluding the broadcasts they watch–just like when 11% of Republicans say they have at least a little faith in the news media, they aren’t excluding their opinions of Fox News either.

      And we should keep in mind that in addition to people’s opinions here, we also need to acknowledge that the progressive news media is completely full of shit, and people aren’t wrong to notice. What the progressives news media reported about some of the biggest stories of the day, like what they reported about the origin of the pandemic and the likelihood of vaccines becoming available in less than a year–that was all crap, and people were wrong to believe it.

      1. You might be right about mainstream sources that people can access for free. But paid subscriptions seem to be up, like a 6-fold increase of NYT readers since 2014. And I do believe that is driven largely by people looking for biased sources–and then accepting the “truths” they read.

    2. Perhaps people do not want full, fair, and accurate reporting–and some are honest enough to admit that.

      Most never did. Those that do are now homeless. Sifting through garbage and having to wipe the goo off before they can consume it.

  55. “California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed into a law a measure banning “stealthing” — that is, secretly taking off a condom without a sex partner’s consent.”

    Next up: laws prohibiting sexual climax unless the partner gives verbal consent.

    1. Still legal to lie about being on birth control, right?

      1. Believe all women

      2. Of course. One law for them, one law for the common folk.

  56. “The Everything Shortage is not the result of one big bottleneck in, say, Vietnamese factories or the American trucking industry. We are running low on supplies of all kinds due to a veritable hydra of bottlenecks.”

    Which have nothing to do with years-long government-mandated shutdowns, official programs that discourage work, ideological restrictions on certain established technologies, and just plain bureaucratic interference with commerce and other life.

  57. “”Trust in Media and Elected Officials Near Record Lows in Gallup Poll””

    Not exactly right. Trust in other people’s elected officials is near a record low. Incumbents will still be the majority of winners in the next election.

  58. DESPITE representative govt, Majority of voters don’t get the laws THEY WANT thanks to filibuster, gerrymandering, and unfair representation of senators. America has the best government money can buy and have the laws that show for it, laws most voters DONT WANT.

    Of course trust of elected officials is low. Recent study says USA more like OLIGARCHY then democracy

    1. “”and unfair representation of senators.”‘

      Once again, someone who does not understand American government.

      1. yeah, the House districts are as gerrymandered as possible by the party in power. but the Senate districts are, um, fixed.

    2. You’re on a roll. Trying to prove you are the most ignorant and stupid new commenter? If you’re a troll, get better material.

  59. “American confidence in media is at nearly the lowest level since the early 1970s. A new Gallup poll finds just 36 percent of survey respondents say they trust the press to report the news fully, fairly, and accurately (down from 40 percent who said the same last year).”

    —-ENB

    Incidentally, Real Clear Politics has Trump’s favorable ratings at 42.3% and his unfavorable ratings at 52.5%, which apparently means that CNN and MSNBC are both less popular than Donald Trump and more unpopular than Donald Trump.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

    P.S. Biden’s favorable ratings are at 45.2% and his unfavorable ratings are at 50.0%, which means Biden would probably lose to Trump if the election were held today. After all, being significantly more popular than Trump in California and New York doesn’t translate into any more electoral votes, and chances are that the places where Trump is polling well are probably in Midwest swing states.

    1. If the election were held today trump would still loose to Biden. Didn’t you see the crap the dnc pulled in the last election?

      1. Have you seen all the Democrats who are afraid to vote for the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill for fear that it will cost them their seats?

        Biden is significantly less popular now than he was before the election. People thought they were getting a return to normalcy. Thought they were getting Bill Clinton.

        They got a president beholden to AOC and Bernie Sanders, and they hate it.

    2. P.S. Biden’s favorable ratings are at 45.2% and his unfavorable ratings are at 50.0%, which means Biden would probably lose to Trump if the election were held today

      Some have argued that Trump beat Biden in an election that was held yesterday.

  60. Google said it’s making these changes in response to frustration from advertisers and content creators about their messages appearing alongside climate denialism.

    “Advertisers simply don’t want their ads to appear next to this content. And publishers and creators don’t want ads promoting these claims to appear on their pages or videos,” the company said.

    I thought the whole advantage of Google’s advertising platform was targeted advertising? That advertisers could just throw their ads at Google and Google would figure out who wanted to see what ads. If that were the case, it would seem that Google should want the anti-AGW eyeballs to throw ExxonMobil and Chevy Camaro ads at. If you have to pay Google to take your ads and then pay to deal with the consequences of your ads being just shown to everyone everywhere, why not save money and just plaster up flyers?

    1. Google is facing an antitrust suit by the Justice Department, and the Justice Department is under the supervision of Biden’s handlers.

      When an armed robber is holding a gun to the head of a liquor store cashier, the question of whether she theoretically could refuse the robber’s demand to empty the cash register goes out the window.

      1. Again, you go with this overly simplistic take because it advances your anti-Democratic Party narrative. You ignore several other factors at play: advertiser pressure, the management and employees’ bias toward liberalism in the first place, big company’s actual desire for more regulation as anti-competitive strategy, the Republican’s own threats to impose regulations when they return to power.

        1. Not to mention Republicans trying to pressure social media companies at the state law level.

          Also, the big social media companies are international, so they are weighing how their policies play out in the EU, China, and elsewhere.

          1. Not to mention Republicans trying to pressure social media companies at the state law level.

            Oh, I see. You’re just grasping at any straw you can find. Even if it perpetuates or even exacerbates the inconsistency I raised.

            1. Don’t forget, if he presents you with a straw you didn’t ask for, that’s a $100 fine.

        2. Again, you go with this overly simplistic take because it advances your anti-Democratic Party narrative.

          Overly simplistic or not, it explains the issue I was raising while your “They’re just thinking about England.” doesn’t.

          1. Meanwhile both the White House spokesperson and Biden himself have admitted on camera to flagging posts and accounts for deletion by Facebook. Asking Google to do this isn’t as egregious as what they were doing to Facebook users.

            1. There was a Reason article just a couple of days ago about how Facebook is asking for changes to Section 230. Why have you not addressed that?

              1. None of your business.

  61. >>36 percent of survey respondents say they trust the press to report the news

    the fuck is the matter with the 36 percent?

  62. >>They can just threaten McConnell, and he’ll give them the votes they need without the filibuster!

    Ken this has been a thing for at least the last three administrations.

  63. American confidence in media is at nearly the lowest level since the early 1970s.

    When it was at its highest?

    ENB. An editor in need of an editor.

  64. Don’t know if this list is accurate but supposedly the following are exempt from vaccine mandates.
    All of Congress
    All Congressional staff
    6,000 White House employees
    2,500 Pfizer employees
    1,500 Moderna employees
    120,000 Johnson & Johnson employees
    15,000 CDC employees
    14,000 FDA employees
    8 million Chinese students
    2 million illegal invaders
    500,000 homeless and street people

    https://z3news.com/w/interesting-list-of-covid-serum-exemptions/#comment-188221

  65. The move is part of an ever-expanding attempt to combat misinformation online,

    No, it is not. That is their stated reason. The goal here is to make sure only ONE narrative is dominant. That is NOT the same thing as combatting “misinformation”.

    When the Church said that the Earth was the Center of the Universe, anything which suggested otherwise was declared “misinformation”.

    Jesus, quit aping the Church’s use of terminology. Grow a spine.

  66. The ban applies to content that goes against “well-established scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change,” and “includes content referring to climate change as a hoax or a scam, claims denying that long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to climate change.”

    Perfectly reasonable, right? Of course, any assessment short of ‘catastrophic’ or ‘existential threat’ will get spam flagged by Thunbergers and removed. Want a moderator to step in? Denying your viewpoint is denial is denial, duh.

    Google got a memo from the DNC. “We are ready to progress on the Green New Deal. Clear the road.”

    1. and even measured scientific criticism based on peer reviewed papers will get censored or flagged, for not representing the full context or acknowledging opposing views….

      1. Of course they will. 98% of completely discredited surveys of scientists who mention the climate agree that it will kill 98% of all life on the planet within 98 years.

        The Daily Show got 98 guys in lab coats to walk out on a stage! I saw it on my TV the very same day it happened!

  67. Er, ‘well-established scientific consensus,’ popularity contests are not part of the scientific process. And large groups are very capable of being dead wrong. This aside from the heavy-handed motivation for the decision behind demonetizing. Also, for fuck’s sake, nobody cares what salon thinks. About anything. If all the people associated with that venture suddenly stopped spewing bile, a few folks would notice that the world was more pleasant. Some wouldn’t see it in that light.

  68. In good news, Messi and Ronaldo have both been nominated for the Baboon d’Or.

    It is still unknown which commenters here have been nominated for the Baboon qui Jetant de Caca

    1. It could get messi.

    2. We know which one is nominated for “Chicken Little with PANIC Flag up his Ass”, shitbag.

  69. America “is running out of everything,” complains Derek Thompson at The Atlantic. “The Everything Shortage is not the result of one big bottleneck in, say, Vietnamese factories or the American trucking industry. We are running low on supplies of all kinds due to a veritable hydra of bottlenecks.”

    This is pretty much what ALWAYS happens eventually in a society that becomes too lazy, too dependent, and too socialist, you fucking dumbass.

    The more that America behaves like and comes to resemble the old Soviet Union, the more frequently all of us are going to find ourselves standing in front of an empty store shelf scratching our heads going “where the fuck is all the bread??”

  70. Slate, the favorite publication of Alan Vanneman:

    It’s Time to Give Up on Facts
    Or at least to temporarily lay them down in favor of a more useful weapon: emotions.

    So am I calling on the left to be more mendacious, in order to replace lies with lies? Certainly not; I would never suggest we adopt the ethically suspect tactics of exaggeration and wholesale invention, no matter how effective they might be, and I’m definitely not glancing furtively at Michael Moore and mouthing “Help us” while I say that.

    But it is time for us to look for the “Everybody to the Limit” of political discourse: something that is able to crowd out the lie, something that can leave a blank slate. In other words, we need a lie reuptake inhibitor: a way to foil the operation of the lie by mimicking its effects.

    Figuring out how, exactly, to do that will be an ongoing process. And no matter what, you’ll probably hate doing it.

    You’ll hate it because we liberals tend to pride ourselves on caring about evidence, science, and accuracy.

    That’s your media we’re supposed to trust.

    1. Criminalize lying and you’ll be able to trust everyone.

  71. So 36% believe anything the media spews? Not surprising given that 38% of Americans approve of the train wreck that is the Biden administration. This gives me hope because I thought that 50% of all Americans were stupid and now I am learning that only about less than 40% are.

    When I heard that 38% approved of Biden’s job performance the first thing I said out loud was “who are these people???”. Must be the most uninformed people on the planet. Or just stupid…or both.

  72. If the ENABLERS Act were to actually be enforced, the Bidens, Clintons, and many other politicians will starve to death in the dark.

  73. In 2016 we saw for the first time 24/7 anti-president partisan propaganda from all mainstream media outlets.

    We observed that for a full 4 years until we witnessed the sitting president be deplatformed, canceled, censored and banned from all media for identifying electronic irregularities.

    Now all we see is 24/7 president friendly media while our inalienable rights are trampled upon for good reason says the media propaganda of the day.

    If the media was as unfriendly to the Biden presidency as it was to Trump, I doubt Biden would still be in office and public trust would beat an all time low every day.

    Criminalize lying.

    1. “Election”irregularities.

  74. “something tech companies have been under increasing pressure from lawmakers to do (or else)”
    ^THE REAL NEWS IS RIGHT THERE…..

    Funny how so many Americans hate the Government they ?supposedly? voted for…… If that wasn’t a sign of election fraud I don’t know what would be.

Please to post comments