Reason Roundup

Has the Russian Invasion of Ukraine Already Begun?

Plus: CDC withholds data, court upholds nutritionist licensing, Ottawa police break up Freedom Convoy, and more...

|

War is nigh…or already here? The rift between Russia and Ukraine got more extreme on Monday, as Russian President Vladimir Putin said he was sending Russian troops into eastern Ukraine. While that might sound like an invasion is already starting, onlookers have been cautious about describing it as such.

"Europe edged closer to war on Monday," wrote Yahoo News White House Correspondent Alexander Nazaryan. The Associated Press reported that "a long-feared Russian invasion of Ukraine appeared to be imminent Monday, if not already underway."

The confusion seems to have come from Putin's wording, which did not make clear if the troops were already on their way into separatist regions in Eastern Ukraine or simply about to be and, regardless, described their presence not as an invasion but a "peacekeeping" mission. "The developments came during a spike in skirmishes in the eastern regions that Western powers believe Russia could use as a pretext for an attack," notes the A.P.

Fighting between Ukrainian forces and Russia-backed separatists in Ukraine's Donbas region has been going on since 2014.

"I consider it necessary to take a long-overdue decision: To immediately recognize the independence and sovereignty of Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic," Putin said on Monday.

Putin's "combative address" was "a nearly hourlong recitation of decades worth of historical grievances and an unmistakable challenge by Moscow to the post-Cold War international order dominated by the West," says the Wall Street Journal. "The speech, ostensibly aimed at recognizing the independence of two breakaway statelets that Russia carved from Ukraine in 2014, outlined Mr. Putin's view that Ukraine was a historical accident that the U.S. has turned into a launchpad to attack Russia."

(For a play-by-play of Putin's speech, see this Twitter thread from Dmitri Alperovitch, the Russian-American founder and former Chief Technology Officer of CrowdStrike and founder of The Alperovitch Institute at Johns Hopkins University.)

The U.S. responds. In response to Putin's Monday announcements, President Joe Biden issued an executive order banning trade and investment between Americans and those in "the so-called Donetsk People's Republic (DNR) or Luhansk People's Republic (LNR) regions."

"This E.O. is distinct from the swift and severe economic measures we are prepared to issue with Allies and partners in response to a further Russian invasion of Ukraine," the White House said in a statement. "The United States will not hesitate to use its authorities to target those supporting efforts to undermine Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity."

Update: On Tuesday morning, the White House began calling what Russia is doing in Ukraine an invasion. "We think this is, yes, the beginning of an invasion, Russia's latest invasion into Ukraine," Jon Finer, principal deputy national security adviser, said. "An invasion is an invasion and that is what is underway."

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen called Putin's announcement "a blatant violation of international law."

The bigger picture. Washington Post columnist Robert Kagana senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, prominent hawk, and ardent defender of the U.S.-led postwar order—offers a depressing analysis for what this could mean: first, a full takeover of Ukraine and then a realignment of the international order. "It is wishful thinking to imagine that this conflict stops with Ukraine," Kagan writes:

The map of Europe has experienced many changes over the centuries. Its current shape reflects the expansion of U.S. power and the collapse of Russian power from the 1980s until now; the next one will likely reflect the revival of Russian military power and the retraction of U.S. influence. If combined with Chinese gains in East Asia and the Western Pacific, it will herald the end of the present order and the beginning of an era of global disorder and conflict as every region in the world shakily adjusts to a new configuration of power.

His predictions are far from assured, but represent a common thread in centrist-hawk concerns.

The Post editorial board also offers a gloomy short-term prognosis:

This is the way the postwar world ends, and the post-Cold War world, too: not yet with a bang, and not with anything close to a whimper, but with a rant.

The Cato Institute's Alex Nowrasteh points out that European countries are going to see a surge of Ukrainian refugees:


FREE MINDS

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has kept a ton of COVID-19 data out of the public eye, The New York Times reports. This includes data on coronavirus hospitalizations broken down by age, race, and vaccination status, as well as data on COVID-19 in wastewater. One of the reasons the agency offered as an explanation was worries that people might draw conclusions from the information that officials didn't want them to—which is to say, our national public health agency withholds public health information that doesn't conform to political messaging standards.

Scientists quoted in the Times piece are understandably upset about this. "I mean, you can't find out anything from them," said Yvonne Maldonado, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics's Committee on Infectious Diseases.


FREE MARKETS

Licensing requirements for dietitians and nutritionists don't violate the First Amendment, court says. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit held on Friday that Florida's Dietetics and Nutrition Practice Act, which mandates licensing for dietitians and nutritionists, does not violate an unlicensed nutritionist's right to free speech. The case involves Heather Kokesch Del Castillo, who ran a health-coaching business called Constitution Nutrition.

"She started her business in California, which did not require her to have a license to operate it," the court explained in its decision. "After moving to Florida in 2015, Del Castillo continued to run her business—meeting online with most of her clients and meeting in person with two clients who lived in Florida. She described herself as a 'holistic health coach' and not as a dietician. Del Castillo tailored her health coaching to each client, which included dietary advice."

To make its decision, the court cited a previous decision related to interior designers: "a statute that governs the practice of an occupation is not unconstitutional as an abridgment of the right to free speech, so long as any inhibition of that right is merely the incidental effect of observing an otherwise legitimate regulation."

Law professor and blogger Eugene Volokh disagrees with the decision: "Regulation of (say) surgery or the distribution of pharmaceuticals is regulation of conduct, and the speech between surgeon and patient might well be incidental to that conduct," he writes at The Volokh Conspiracy. "But the regulation of people who give advice about diet (or who give psychotherapeutic advice, without prescribing drugs) is all about regulating speech."

"And the government is regulating the dietary coach's speech precisely because it communicates information to people—information on which the people might act in ways the government might think is harmful to themselves (or perhaps, as to some professions, to others)," adds Volokh. "The government is thus regulating the speech, and the assessments and research involved in producing the speech, precisely because of what the speech communicates. This is a speech restriction, and relabeling it a conduct restriction strikes me as just obscuring the matter."


FOLLOWUP

The Canadian Freedom Convoy has been pushed out of Ottawa. "As of Sunday, police had arrested more than 190 protesters, issued 389 charges, towed nearly 80 vehicles, and fenced or cordoned off large swaths of the capital as law enforcement entered what Ottawa interim police chief Steve Bell called the 'maintenance phase' to keep out demonstrators deemed illegal," reports The Washington Post:

Even as residents celebrated the start of a return to normalcy, Canada's Parliament debated Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's invocation of the Emergencies Act. Members are set to vote Monday to accept or reject use of the special powers authorized under that law.

The act is expected to pass, though critics from both the left and the right have objected to its use. Trudeau said no other efforts to quell the "illegal and dangerous activities" affecting the country's economy and security were working.


QUICK HITS

• The FBI seized nearly $1 million from Carl Nelson and Amy Sterner Nelson and never charged them with a crime.

• England is ending COVID-19 policies related to isolation periods, testing requirements, and contact tracing. And, in April, the country will also stop providing free rapid tests and requiring people to carry proof of vaccination.

• Donald Trump's new social media platform, called Truth Social, has launched.

•  A "fuck the police" shirt isn't sufficient cause for arrest, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit reminds Ohio cops.

• How anti-smut activists made the 1950s rock song "Louie, Louie" famous.

• There's little evidence that mask mandates made a difference during the omicron surge.

• Colombia has decriminalized abortion. "The ruling by Colombia's Constitutional Court follows years of organizing by women across Latin America for greater protections and more rights, including access to abortion, and significant shifts in the legal landscape of some of the region's most populous countries. Mexico's Supreme Court decriminalized abortion in a similar decision in September and Argentina's Congress legalized the procedure in late 2020," notes The New York Times.

• The Associated Press looks at skyrocketing U.S. rental prices. "In the 50 largest U.S. metro areas, median rent rose an astounding 19.3% from December 2020 to December 2021, according to a Realtor.com analysis of properties with two or fewer bedrooms. And nowhere was the jump bigger than in the Miami metro area, where the median rent exploded to $2,850, 49.8% higher than the previous year. Other cities across Florida—Tampa, Orlando and Jacksonville—and the Sun Belt destinations of San Diego, Las Vegas, Austin, Texas, and Memphis, Tennessee, all saw spikes of more than 25% during that time period."

NEXT: Bitcoin Can Fix Financial Deplatforming of Canada's Truckers—But It Won’t Be Easy

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. Has the Russian Invasion of Ukraine Already Begun?

    Is it better for my Raytheon stock to know for sure?

    1. Yesterday Kabul, today Ukraine. Where will the Biden regime bring trouble to next?

      1. Taiwan is rather obvious at this point.

        1. Has Hunter ever served on any boards or commissions there?

          1. [JOIN NOW] I am making a real GOOD MONEY ($200 to $300 / hr.) online from my laptop. qcr Last month I got cheek of nearly 30,000$, this online work is simple and straightforward, don’t have to go office, Its home online job. You become independent after joining this job. I really thanks to my friend who refer me this:-
            ..
            SITE….., http://moneystar33.blogspot.com/

      2. Yes, the Biden "regime" is invading neighboring free countries.

      3. Put your mind to work on this thought experiment.

        Where would we be today if Trump had won in 2020?

        1. His seventh impeachment?

    2. Boy, that whole agreement with Clinton for them to forfeit their nukes was a great move.

      1. Object lesson in not trusting the USA when your own security is at stake.

        1. Hilarious! Yep, like this fucking traitor:

          Trump Trusts Putin More Than U.S. Intelligence Agencies

          https://www.gq.com/story/trump-trust-putin-more

          1. Territory delivered to Russia by the Biden regime: 17,000 km2 and counting
            Territory delivered to Russia by Trump: 0 km2

            1. Lets not forget Obama. He added 27,000 km2 in 2014.

            2. He’s as bad a Russian puppet as he was a Hitler. Total loser.

          2. Kill yourself.

          3. Cannot imagine why anybody would lack faith in the US intel agencies. Rock solid.

            1. I was a military intel specialist for 24 years. I make Ronald Reagan look like a commie. And I don't trust the 3-letter agencies to tell anything like the truth since about 2010.

            1. He buys it for the articles.

              1. When I lived in New Orleans years back, the joke was "yeah, we live in the French Quarter but he's just my roommate."

          4. US intelligence agencies work for the democrat party.
            Why would anyone trust them? Other than fascists like you.

          5. Considering the IC has continued to spy on us, even while lying about it, and worked with the Democrats to try and frame an incoming, legitimately elected President, everyone should trust Putin over them.

          6. So strange that Putin made no moves on Ukraine when his puppet was president.

      2. So was that agreement about not moving NATO shit into Warsaw pact countries.

        Sure seems like this whole situation was caused by a series of US foreign policy fuckups, maybe we should just stop.

        1. Well the Victoria Nuland coup in Ukraine sure didn't reassure Putin much. Now she works for Biden. If the Russians installed an anti American regime in Mexico we might be sending peacekeepers into Arizona at some point.

          1. Baja California, Chihuahua, Sonora or one of the other three states that border on the US might be better example.

            Just saying.

            This Russian incursion might have been forestalled if not completely prevented if the US had simply said to Russia, "We will promise that Ukraine, Georgia et al will never be allowed to join NATO (an alliance that has outlived its usefulness to the US, IMO) and in return you will vacate the Crimea and all other Ukrainian and Georgian territory that you are currently occupying and renounce all claims to said territory.

            Unfortunately, the democrats and many republicans are so beholden to NATO and other European interests that they will not give up on the idea of complete encirclement of Russia.

    3. The Russian Insurrection™️.

    4. I'm wondering: if there is a risk that the U.S. could end up in some sort of warlike state* with Russia, wouldn't it be a good idea to improve security at the southern border? The way it is now you can practically march a circus elephant through some parts of the border, and that seems like a vulnerability the Russians would cheerfully exploit.

      *We all know there won't be a Congressional declaration of war, but hey the Constitution was written by dead white slaveholding cis hetero shitlords so we don't pay any attention to that anymore do we?

  2. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has kept a ton of COVID-19 data out of the public eye...

    Information is power, and you don't get to have any.

    1. Consider me shocked that they aren't exactly working for our best interest.

      1. now now, I'm sure Fauci's wife warned him of any bioethics concerns regarding bioweapons research that might escape a lab and kill tens of millions of people

    2. Speqking of supr3ssion of information, what the Hell happened to Billy Biniin's piece on President's Day? Did that person with the pink text in the Comments have anything to do with the Memory Holing?

      1. Looks like he wrote a blog post last year:

        https://reason.com/2021/02/15/on-this-presidents-day-stop-worshiping-the-imperial-presidency/

        Was there a new one this year?

        1. Hmm...I didn't notice the date. That would explain the closed comments.

          Thank you for pointing that out. Much obliged.

          So now, Reason is recycling entire old articles, not just juicier portions from the Archive. This doesn't look promising.

          1. The Russians are really invading Afghanistan.

          2. I think it's more of a weekend / holiday thing for them to do that.

            1. Nobody cares what you think bird.

  3. "The Cato Institute's Alex Nowrasteh points out that European countries are going to see a surge of Ukrainian refugees"

    I'm always impressed by the ability of Koch-funded libertarians to turn every issue into a plea for more cost-effective imported labor for their billionaire benefactor Charles Koch.

    #CheapLaborAboveAll

    1. This is one time I would let in lots of refugees (from Ukraine).

      1. Have we confirmed that Ukrainian Americans are as useful to us as Mexican Americans — IOW, that they work for low wages and vote Democrat?

      2. Yeah those [young Ukrainian women] are HOT!

        1. If Pornhub has taught us anything, anyway.

      3. Only the women between 18 and say 40?

        1. Post-menopause. Don't set a hard date.

          1. Fair enough.

          2. Did you mean to say pre-menopause? Although post- would eliminate any chance of anchor babies getting the fathers in.

            1. 18 to post-menopause. Menopause is still okay.

              1. They get really hot post menopause.

        2. That is acceptable.

  4. Days since enbs last yglasias reffrence: 5

    1. Dark times indeed.

      1. She had the help of a long weekend

    2. Still 0 on abortion.

  5. "The Associated Press looks at skyrocketing U.S. rental prices."

    Nope. All lies.

    Reason.com's leading economics expert says literally the only price increase in the entire country is an extra 10 cents for a pouch of spittin' tobaccy.

    #DefendBidenAtAllCosts

  6. One of the reasons the agency offered as an explanation was worries that people might draw conclusions from the information that officials didn't want them to...

    Phew, I was worried there might be a sinisterly paternalistic reason.

    1. Trust the experts.

    2. Withholding information because people might wrongthink worked out well for Cuomo.

      What we need is to find out if someone in the CDC ever inappropriately sniffed a woman's hair.

    3. Or just a stupidly paternalistic reason.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

      "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

      1. I would agree to that if there weren't large sums of money involved.

        1. So, greedy pharma companies are pulling the puppet strings of the CDC?

          1. Besides the PV people undercover explaining how much of a cash haul required boosters are for both government and corporations?

          2. Where does the CDC get its money, Mike?

            In fact, the CDC gets millions of dollars annually from Big Pharma and then turns around and recommends testing and drugs created and marketed by those same companies, and this is often done upon the contributing company’s demand.

            Congress authorized the CDC to accept “external gifts” from industry and private parties in 1983, and in 1992 passed legislation for the creation of a nonprofit foundation to encourage relationships between industry and the agency. In fiscal year 2014, the CDC Foundation raised $52 million, $12 million of that from Big Pharma. Also in 2014, the CDC received $16 million in direct funding from corporations, individuals and foundations, including the CDC Foundation, which makes the foundation nothing more than a pass-through organization.
            -----
            And that was 2014. It's much worse now.
            --------------
            The Food and Drug Administration has moved from an entirely taxpayer-funded entity to one increasingly funded by user fees paid by manufacturers that are being regulated. Today, close to 45% of its budget comes from these user fees that companies pay when they apply for approval of a medical device or drug.
            https://today.uconn.edu/2021/05/why-is-the-fda-funded-in-part-by-the-companies-it-regulates-2/#
            ---------------
            Do you think they give millions of dollars out of the goodness of their hearts?

            1. It’s cute that you think Dee is going to read any of that and learn something.

            2. I think big corporation in a mixed economy tend to have mixed motivations. But I do acknowledge that, ultimately, one of the reason medical researchers work at pharma companies is that they have the *good* motivation of wanting to help people.

            3. I bet I can find an old Leftist screed hitting all the same anti-corporate talking points.

              1. I bet you’re too lazy to try.

              2. Don't even have to look for an _old_ leftist screed:
                https://childrenshealthdefense.org/cdc-who/

                1. Congratulations on making the effort.

            4. At the time, the introduction of user fees into FDA was considered a reform, possibly a libertarian one, inasmuch as the beneficiaries would be paying the bills rather than the general taxpayer.

          3. Lots of politicians, including the queen of market investment and hedge-fund-beater Nancy Pelosi happened to buy a lot of stock in Pfizer and other biomed companies right before they coordinated with Fauci and the CDC to be in lock step on their "COVID zero" and "100% vaccination" campaigns.

            And to every question asked to CDC director at one conference: "....uhhhh ya you need a booster. Get a booster. Everyone needs a booster"

            So yes, if you think the dems coordinating with big pharma and big pharma themselves didnt make out like bandits, purposefully, you are absolutely a naive child.

            1. Mike Liarson is a squawking bird named Dee.

              1. I'm picturing the one on the Red Bull commercial, that gets a rock shot up its ass.

          4. The "why" for all this bullshit:

            https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1495784033850175490?t=v9qoVqOq5382QVgJ8rRQYg&s=19

            I'm reading The Fourth Industrial Revolution, by World Economic Forum Chairman, Klaus Schwab, and it starts off really encouragingly. He and his want to shepherd us through "nothing less than a transformation of humankind," in the first sentence of the book.

            For those aching for the punchline of The Fourth Industrial Revolution, it lies here: a technological fusion of the "physical, digital, and biological worlds," which is creepy transhumanism under their direction. Schwab repeats this theme over and over in his two subsequent books

            This is the pretext for the existence of the World Economic Forum: the changes coming are inevitable and so fast and so dangerous that we need stewardship of them in the WEF technocrats, who are the only ones who can understand them adequately. This is the power grab.

            Actually, that was the pretext for the power grab ("it's so complex and dangerous!"). This is the power grab ("we need global coordination, under our expert control, of these changes").

            Their solution is a fusion of the kissing cousins of Communism and fascism, of course, for our "collective future," we need "a comprehensive and globally shared view" that rejects "linear (non-disruptive) thinking." Enter "stakeholders."

            Read this however you want, but this is Schwab's stated objective: to take the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which is already naturally underway, and shape it according to his vision. That vision is elsewhere seen to be fascistic, Communist, transhumanist, and under WEF control.

            Here's how Schwab characterizes the Fourth Industrial Revolution: enhanced cognitive powers, ubiquitous internet and surveillance technology equipped with AI. That's what he wants to control under a global hivemind.

            I'll just put these two things next to one another (first two images), noting that TIME Magazine has been the Great Reset Magazine for a while now (third image).

            Again, this book is designed to warn about the disruptive potential of the technological changes brought about by the internet and to justify the WEF and its stakeholders as the shepherds through this time, toward their global vision (see Canada today for a preview of utopia).

            [Links]

            1. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

            2. That is more discouraging than Average is Over by Tyler Cowen. He predicts about 15% of the human race will have meaningful lives and the rest will be on the dole, and of course do what they're told.

              And no second chances; once you're social credit score is in the toilet, it's going to stay there.

              I suppose the two concepts align rather nicely.

            3. I'll just put these two things next to one another (first two images), noting that TIME Magazine has been the Great Reset Magazine for a while now (third image).

              Yeah, the catchphrases these people use (Great Reset, Build Back Better) are so common across the elites of various nations, if this stuff isn't actually being coordinated at a global scale, it's certainly indicative of how incestuous their think tanks are.

      2. It is amazing how you refuse to see the banality and need for control by government and willfully cover it up w stupidity or good intentions.

        They are not generally good people.

      3. Libertarians for defending the government lying to us!

    4. Not paternalistic. All maternalistic now.

      Yeah, dad might not have told you everything, but he still let you drink beer and cuss, and maybe even took you to the titty bar. And he probably did not have a master plan for your career, socialization, and personal relationships.

      On the other hand, mom had all this in mind, and more, and pulled more devious shit on you--while simultaneously smiling and giving you that look.

      1. Munchausen-by-proxy as public policy

  7. Licensing requirements for dietitians and nutritionists doesn't violate the First Amendment...

    Good to know that the War on Drug Users has some competition from the War on Competition in destroying the Bill of Rights.

  8. Pretentious and self referential regular poster Ken Shultz reviewed events in Russia and the Ukraine yesterday in a typically long winded and typically partisan post, claiming that the Germans would not back Biden's encouragement of their cancelling of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline over these events. Of course he thought it likely they wouldn't since in his mind Biden is weak and addled and of course lowering Biden's numbers was all he appeared to care about the crisis.

    Well sorry Ken, your wishful thinking analysis - like how you and your MAGA pals are somehow a majority of Americans - was wrong again. Enjoy:

    "Germany puts a stop to Nord Stream 2, a key Russian natural gas pipeline.
    Germany halted certification of the pipeline linking the country to Russia in response to the Kremlin’s recognition of two separatist regions in Ukraine."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/business/nord-stream-russia-germany.html

    1. Good. Hopefully, they’ll stick to their decision.

      All of this in a country that had significant nuclear power production. Sigh.

      1. If you two idiots like it, it must be bad.

        1. Thanks for making clear that you have no idea what is going on.

          FB and Fox News?

          1. Kill yourself.

      2. The website signed me out, so I saw "Don't look at me!"'s brilliant comment: "If you two idiots like it, it must be bad."

        Just remember the utter stupidity and trollism of that comment whenever anyone accuses me of being a troll. I'm trying to seriously discuss Germany's energy security and how it affects the current international crisis. And he's going for insults to impress the Trump Mean Girls.

        It doesn't even make sense. Even Ken Shultz would agree that it is a very good thing for Germany not to go forward with the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Any serious commenter here would agree it's a good development in a shitty situation.

        1. HA HA. Always an excuse why you see posts from those you have “muted”.

        2. Mike, the good faith seriousness of your posts is obvious to anyone here not a MAGA parrot. Unfortunately that type predominates.

          1. Get a room.

            1. Sarc's going to be so jealous.

              Someone telling a compulsive liar like Dee that they post in good faith, is like a smoothie telling an ugly girl how beautiful she is to him.
              Instant panty remover.

            2. Get a room like Armin Meiwes and Bernd Brandes did.

          2. Thanks.

            1. Did you see the muted comment when you were changing your sock?

              Replying to yourself is sad.

        3. Do you have evidence to support your claim?

        4. The website signed me out, so I saw "Don't look at me!"'s brilliant comment: "If you two idiots like it, it must be bad."

          Lol, we all know that your regular mute list announcements are strictly performative. You don't have to make up excuses, you fraud.

        5. It’s weird how often this site logs you out.

          1. Meh. Just wait until your bank does that.

            1. I’m in a credit union.

        6. You have done such a bang up job of alienating nearly everyone with your transparent bullshit that even when we might agree on something (German energy independence) you still come off as a smug know-it-all asshole that no one wants to associate with.

          Joe is so comically stupid he regularly gives shrike a decent run at most idiotic poster here, so it’s completely understandable why someone’s reflex would be the opposite of whatever he says.

          1. Joe Friday is dumb enough to be White Mike.

    2. This is interesting. Admittedly, I’m not up on Germany’s energy sector (and why would I have been), but from this article it sounds like they still have their nuclear power plants on line, or at least available to reboot:

      https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/gas-pipeline-nord-stream-2-links-germany-russia-splits-europe

      “Proponents of the project also argue that Nord Stream 2 could provide the energy currently supplied by nuclear power plants, which are planned to be taken offline by 2022.”

      1. That's good if so. I also thought they were already on the way to being dismantled.

        1. Replying to your own comments.
          What a fag.

      2. Looking into it a bit more. Here's what Wikipedia says:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Germany

        "Nuclear power in Germany accounted for 13.3% of German electricity supply in 2021,[3] generated by six power plants, of which three were switched off at the end of 2021, the other three due to cease operation at the end of 2022 according to the complete nuclear phase-out plan of 2011."

      3. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/germany-pull-plug-3-its-last-6-nuclear-power-plants-n1286771

        Looks like the three that were taken offline already, were taken offline in December. So, hopefully, they have not dismantled them to the point where they cannot be brought back. It's hard to find detailed information on it.

        1. You can't just flip a switch and turn a nuke plant back on.

          1. In Dee’s defense, she’s very dumb.

      4. Gas plants and nuke plants are completely different propositions.

        The former are low fixed cost, higher operating cost, fast response systems that do a fantastic job of offsetting variations in other less reliable (read: green energy) power inputs.

        The latter are extremely high fixed costs, lowest of low variable cost, run-flat-out-24x7x365, baseload supply types.

        At some level, yes, electricity is electricity. But in the actual generation business, gas and nuke are not remotely interchangeable.

    3. The news must be wrong, because Ken is always right.

      1. https://reason.com/2022/02/22/has-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-already-begun/?comments=true#comment-9368280

        To Ken's credit, he will admit when he gets a prediction wrong.

        To not his credit, he'll never admit to being illogical, or giving only the half of the facts that support his position.

        1. Worse than being wrong and engaging in wishful thinking was his only concern being a hoped for disaster for Biden, as if that wouldn't negatively impact millions of Ukrainians and our democratic allies in Europe, and ultimately the US.

          1. Worse than being wrong and engaging in wishful thinking

            Sort of like, "mRNA vaccines will stop COVID in its tracks."

          2. “If you’re not for us, you’re against us!”

        2. I'm honestly surprised.

        3. I'm honestly surprised.

        4. Just a reminder folks that White Mike is a troll who has stated many times here that they've targeted Ken for daily harrassment.

          For example:
          "Mike Laursen
          September.18.2021 at 11:38 am
          SQRLSY, can you cover for me today? In a typical day I usually post a comment or two pointing out logical flaws, contradictions and partisanship in Ken’s essays, which he regards as examples of flawless logical thinking"

          Also, a reminder that sarcasmic has also joined in on harassing Ken, partly to impress Dee and partly because he's furious that Ken muted him for trolling.

      2. Sarc’s not here to pick fights. Just ask him, he’ll tell you.

    4. The pipeline is built and probably already filled with gas. All Germany did was delay delivery until the opportunity for virtue signalling passes.

      Dumb as they are, Germans don't want to freeze in the dark.

      1. This.

    5. Germany has decimated their fossil fuel industry in favor of windmills and solar panels. Without Russian natural gas the German people will pay much more of their income to stay warm. That is just a fact. They will burn coal if they can but the German government is passing the increased costs directly to the German people for the purpose of posturing on an issue they have absolutely no way of having any control of.

    1. I feel so much better.

    2. On a roll today.

    3. Is there such a thing as an adult high chair? With easy-to-clean surfaces for cleaning off Jello Pudding and Boost oopsies?

      1. Ever been to a senior care center?

    4. The sycophants bleating out how great Biden is as he “leads” us directly to war with Russia is ducking sickening.

  9. The Canadian Freedom Convoy has been pushed out of Ottawa.

    Mooselini is a master tactician.

    1. Now the city is blocked by police instead of truckers. Police who demand to see your papers. Much better.

      https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/kitten-corner-your-papers-please/comments?utm_source=url

      1. I’m sure jeffy will be along to explain how showing papers and explaining what your business is to police is ok.

        1. That's what libertarianism is all about!

        2. You see they only have to do this in Canada because trump

        3. Canada can always add German to the list of official languages like English and French.

        4. It’s not tyranny because we don’t call it tyranny.

          1. How can it be tyranny if they are being polite?

    2. Trudeau said no other efforts to quell the "illegal and dangerous activities" affecting the country's economy and security were working.

      I mean, if you don't actually try any other efforts besides, say, hurling insults and epithets, this becomes technically correct. And technically correct is the best correct!

      1. Sure, we could haul away illegally parked vehicles without freezing the owners' bank accounts, but where's the profit in that?

      2. I still don't understand how screaming "Racist!!!" at a multiethnic group of protesters didn't work.

        Don't they Twitter? You're supposed to apologize for your white supremacy and leave when wokies do that, no matter what race you are.

      3. Probably a matching Mussolini quote somewhere.

        1. Nothing outside the State, nothing against the State....

      4. Except it's not even that. It's an outright lie. They cleared the bridge in Windsor with no special emergency powers.

    3. Tangentially related: when will searching for "Tiananmen square" be banned in Canada?

      1. As soon as they sell Vancouver to the Chinese. Oh, wait...

    4. People seriously need to take notice. Canada was able to grant the government nearly unlimited power over businesses to steal from anyone it disagrees with using a mere 55% of the vote. Financial institutions are granted complete immunity from liability for cooperating.

      55% of representatives just made it legal to steal all the assets of the other 45% using only the barest pretense. It's hard to overstate exactly what's happening-it's not as dramatic as storming the Winter Palace, but it amounts to the same. Private property might as well not exist in Canada.

      1. You can keep your private property as long as you think the right things.

      2. Two wolves and a sheep vote on what's for lunch.

      3. A dozen or so NDP MP's said they only went along with it so their coalition wouldn't fall.
        Mindblowing. They put their party's access to power ahead of their country.

        1. Duh.

        2. Amazing that they actually fucking admit it. They know it's wrong and they vote for it anyway out of political expediency.

          1. At this point, as blatant as things have been, there's no point in hiding. The Media will just cover your ass and nobody cares about the abuse of power regardless. No point in speaking up because they aren't the Jews.

    5. Mooselini! LOL! I love it! 🙂

    6. Mooselini from "I Was a Teenage Zombie", with noted libertarian actor Allen L. Rickman?

  10. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has kept a ton of COVID-19 data out of the public eye,

    Trust us, were the government; when have we ever lied to your detriment?

    1. Do you know who else in government kept data from the public?

      1. Hunters art brokers?

      2. That guy that claims he told Biden that Kabul would fall before it fell?

      3. The Warren Commission?

      4. [REDACTED]?

      5. FISA courts

        1. Thomas Jefferson (inventor of slavery and rape)?

      6. Pretty much everybody in government?

  11. [A] realignment of the international order ...

    A state that loses the power to influence international affairs invariably sets its sights upon its own people. There will be a realignment, but if we the people are not to be trampled beneath the heel of a dying empire, the realignment must also be domestic -- with new, independent states arising.

    What will the post-American world look like? It will look much the same abroad, but it will be a nightmare domestically unless we stop it.

    1. The war that matters isn't in Ukraine, it's here and it's happening now.

      1. Bingo

      2. We Canadians are absolutely a test run for what the States can expect this summer. It's definitely going to happen, don't imagine that it won't.

        All of you need to start planning and preparing now.

        1. there's a lot of other Rittenhouses all through the country

        2. I think the lesson learned is don’t be peaceful when protesting.

          1. Actually the lesson is get your money out of the banks before you start the protest. I see a good market for home safes.

            1. Banks, or no banks -- it does not matter. It is the willingness to crack skulls that matters.

              The system pigs are, for the moment, able to be deployed without much resistance but that can change very quickly. It is not difficult to find out where cops live and, once a campaign of genuine retribution begins, with real fighting on the ground, that is when we will begin to see the country's descent into a battle of "zones of control" vs. everything and everyone else.

              How many McVeighs is the government willing to put up with? How many beltway snipers? How many planned executions of police sitting in their squad cars? Then the military gets deployed, at which point you end up with Northern Ireland, but X 1000, and everywhere.

              Is that the world we want to live in? Nope. But that is what we are going to get.

            2. Oh and I would add delete everything on your phone and leave it at home.

        3. We Canadians are absolutely a test run for what the States can expect this summer. It's definitely going to happen, don't imagine that it won't.

          Nah, the glowies already shot their wad on January 6th. Every follow-up protest has been such an obvious gay-op that it gets hardly any participation.

          The trucker's protest was a genuine grassroots movement, which is why Trudeau and his fellow WEF whores cracked down so hard on it. The ones they're trying to get started up here are just going to be honeypots to Patriot Act the participants.

          The elites still need the cover of "right-wing terrorism and racism" to justify implementing these security procedures. It's hardly a coincidence that the DoJ told the NSBA to put the language in their letter comparing parents to terrorists, as it's meant to nerf pushback against the general faggotry and hatred of white people being pushed in schools.

          If a no-kidding civil war does break out, it will be due entirely to the elites making this in to an existential conflict, of which we're clearly right on the cusp. Once that happens, all bets are off, because this country's infrastructure and civil institutions are far more vulnerable than even its leaders truly realize.

  12. It's not just the CDC hiding data, although they are the worst at it. Snohomish county disappeared ALL their vaccinated info. All that's left it knowing the racial makeup of those who got the vax. Super super important stuff, while nobody can seem to figure out "Is this person in the hospital because of covid?" or "Did covid cause this person to die?"

    https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/et-tu-snohomish

    That brings us, at long last, to Snohomish County. For months they have been breaking down data between vaccinated and unvaccinated cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. It was one of the only places left that I could be confident in the numbers because they were easily available. Last month’s vaccine efficacy chart looked like this (data through December):

    The data was clearly showing the protection granted by the jab faded quickly, which tracked with nearly everywhere else around the world. I looked forward to the new report being released and seeing what the new numbers were.

    Well, the report is out, and guess what we don’t see inside? Not only have they removed the vaccine efficacy charts, THEY HAVE REMOVED EVERY PIECE OF DATA RELATED TO THE BREAKDOWN OF CASES, HOSPTAILIZATIONS, AND DEATHS. All of it. Gone. The numbers get inconvenient? Disappear ‘em!

    Of course, data is only ‘inconvenient’ if the goal is one other than truthfully informing us of our risks. This is one of the dangers of central planning. The ‘leaders’ get tunnel vision and ignore everything but the goal of getting people vaccinated, and soon they are lying to us to ‘increase uptake’. This problem won’t be solved by hiding even more data.

    1. Most numbers are bullshit, and I don't fully trust the death numbers. With that being said, they seem to be the only thing other than shots administered that can be tracked somewhat reliably. Anyone with half a brain can tell by this point that the vaccines have had VERY limited impact as a population-wide damper of covid-related negative outcomes. More people have died since vaccines have become widespread than prior to having any. 80% of the vulnerable population has been vaccinated, yet 15,000 Americans died of covid in the last week.

      1. "I don't fully trust the death numbers"

        For good reason... not all who die are rushed for testing or autopsy. Total/excess death analysis consistently shows total covid-driven death totals are higher than official counts, with spikes superimposed on reported covid case/death period spikes.

        e.g.

        Update on Excess Deaths Associated with the COVID-19 Pandemic — United States, January 26, 2020–February 27, 2021
        "These updated estimates indicate that approximately one half to two thirds of one million excess deaths occurred during January 26, 2020–February 27, 2021, suggesting that the overall impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality is substantially greater than the number of COVID-19 deaths"
        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8344999/

    2. Hey, the internet was getting dangerously full so like some twenty-something in his parent's basement the county had to delete unimportant stuff. Also stuff that might get him in trouble.

    3. Standard skeptic number check in passing.

      Washington state report released last week lists some raw case numbers by vaccination status for the past month, by county including Snohomish:
      https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/421-010-CasesInNotFullyVaccinated.pdf

      This doesn't break out data by booster shot, so shows a relatively smaller delta: unvaccinated only 7-8 times more likely to be hospitalized or die, state-wide.

      (Booster makes an order of magnitude type difference with omicron, e.g. CDC figure for Sep-Dec shows 97x increased death per capita for unvaccinated relative to fully vaccinated and boosted.)

      Using the Washington data, full year "COVID-19 deaths in unvaccinated and fully vaccinated individuals in Washington state", slicing only by 'vaccinated' (not booster), and using the partisan vaccination gap as a rough estimate of politicized vaccine refusal impact, you get an estimate of about 2,500 lives lost in Washington state to anti-vaccine campaigning and misinformation as saturated in partisan media and online discussion.

      2,500 unnecessary deaths may sound like a small haul, but Washington has lower covid death rates overall. If you revisit the politicization estimate taking into account the booster and look at nationwide data I'm sure you'll get 100K or more propaganda-driven deaths in the last wave/season, which is more of a real cull. *That's* how anti-vax activists have truly stuck it to elites, health care workers and fellow community members.

      You could go further, take that death estimate and compare to some calculation of average impressions/ratings-boosts associated with explosive anti-vax scoops, and have an interesting estimate of the value of human life relative to media impressions.

      Hope this helps and good luck. Btw have you heard of Andrew Wakefield? He exposed some of the dark secrets of the vaccine conspiracy and was censored by elites, as a result almost no one has heard what his actual scientific study concluded. Do you think such people should be censored and jailed? If not, maybe you can incorporate some of his powerful information about the impact of vaccines on autism that you can pepper into your commentary and potentially boost follower count.

      1. Rambling and incoherent. Raving anti-vaxxers got nothing on you.

  13. England is ending COVID-19 policies related to isolation periods, testing requirements, and contact tracing.

    Who would have thought that the Limeys would outpace its former colonies on individual liberties.

  14. • There's little evidence that mask mandates made a difference during the omicron surge.

    FTFY

    1. I await the scads of studies you have to prove this. Clearly you are informed.

      1. LOL who needs studies when you can look at the actual data from the actual real world?

        1. That and the cdc literally said the same thing. Even they can't keep that lie up

      2. Studies to prove a lack of evidence?

        1. My thoughts exactly.

      3. You mean OUTSIDE of it being caught by so many vaccinated people who wore masks?

      4. There is 2 years if data. From the real world.

        1. I think he is going to pull a "CDC" and bury his head in the sand, then hide the data completely refuting his point. He will be back tomorrow with the same lines, even after looking at the data.

          At what point does misinformation turn into propaganda? Hard to tell with those pushing the govt/media narrative nowadays

      5. Would you drink contaminated water filtered through a cloth face mask?
        Why would you think it could stop viruses?

        1. Magic. And believing really, really hard.

      6. Two fucking years is all the evidence anybody with half a brain needs.

      7. You are hilarious. There has never been any evidence that masks do work. It's not like it's well established and some weirdos are challenging established science.

  15. Know how I've been saying for years Democrats have become not only the pro-corporation, pro-billionaire party, but also the pro-military-intervention party? The Bulwark's Sarah Longwell confirms:

    Lots of differences between our focus groups of Texas R’s and D’s, but one of the wildest was that the Dem group was more open to sending troops to Ukraine than the Republican group.

    Wow. The Republican Party made a disastrous blunder when it pushed out the early 2000s neocons (Kristol, Frum, Boot, Rubin, etc.). GOP's loss is the Dems' gain, of course.

    #LibertariansForSendingTroopsToUkraine

    1. Trump has been such a disaster for the Republicans.
      They're not even supportive of the military-industrial complex anymore, and are shedding neocons like a mangy cat sheds hair.

  16. • A "fuck the police" shirt isn't sufficient cause for arrest, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit reminds Ohio cops.

    But "fuck the police diet" is.

    1. What I don't understand is despite the douche name, why do so many people hate sting?

      1. Hahahahahhaahahahahahah, that would be a hilarious response to a cop giving one shit about wearing such a shirt.

        "No no no, Officer! I'm talking about the band! Fucking Ghost in the Machine, man."

        1. "Now that we're past the misunderstanding, don't stand so close to me."

          1. Working Genesis in there too?

            If that's the case, the Officer might take you in saying: "I got a name and I got a number. And I got a job to do."

      2. Terrible music?

      3. I guess because he's into Tantric sex and brags about how good it is in public and people get jelly about it.

    2. It wouod be kinda pornographic to stick your dick in donuts and coffee.

      1. Well that damned near may me snort coffee out my nose.

        1. I'm sorry about that. Please don't hurt yourself over my deranged pruient thoughts. Always make sure the device is away when you embibe. 🙂

    3. A "Fuck the Police Union" would be the one that gets you roughed up.

  17. Young Americans for Liberty
    @YALiberty
    .@JustinTrudeau's deputy tells Canadians the only way to get their bank accounts "unfrozen" is to stop protesting the government.

    1. #Stop Resisting!

    2. And Canadians SUPPORT this nonsense.

      Heavily.

      Those who support it DESERVE their tyrannical overlords.

      1. ^Exactly. People want to make it sound like Trudeau and his ilk are just running amok. They're not. Canadians elected him knowing full well who he is. And if they had an election today, they'd still vote him in.

        1. It sucks for the non-whipped non-psychopaths in that country. But Canada is just a larger California now, which is sad.

        2. ^Exactly. Ask California...

        3. Trudeau and his party only got 33% of the vote. The Conservatives who make up the official opposition got 35%.

          The Conservatives were lead by Erin O'Toole in the last election, a WEF stalking horse who was loathed by the grassroots. Imagine Liz Cheney as Republican party nominee.
          Many Conservatives split the vote with the libertarian PPC or just didn't vote.

          The Conservative party pitched Erin O'Toole a few weeks ago as this protest started. There's every indication he would have had the Conservatives go along with Trudeau.

          People didn't actually expect the NDP (15%) to go along with Trudeau either. But Leader Jagmeet Singh is a graduate of the WEF Global Leadership course like Trudeau is.

          This is what is important to note. According to the WEF's own website, Trudeau, O'Toole and Singh are all WEF global leadership fellows, as is the Deputy Prime Minister, the speaker, and the judge who ordered convoy donations illegal.
          The only premier to act against the convoy, the Premier of New Brunswick, is also a fellow.

          The heads of three of Canada's banks and the first to freeze accounts on their own initiative are also fellows.

          This has been in the works for a while. They were waiting for something like the convoy so they could effect it.

          1. Here's a Conservative MP asking about the World Economic Forum's involvement several days ago. The House Speaker pretends that they can't record the question because of a sudden audio glitch.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFTVCJr8-qg

            1. I’m not going to trust that, it could have been edited by some right wing looney. - Jeff

              1. It was a deepfake on the Canadian Parliamentary channel - t. chemjeff

          2. How many seats did the PPC win again? According to country bumpkin’s like you they’re super relevant, so they would have at least some representation? At least Maxime’s in your parliament right?

            1. You don't understand how parliament works, do you Shrike.

              The PPC got 5% of the vote and zero seats, while the Greens got 2.3% of the vote and two seats. The Bloc Quebecois got only 7.6% of the vote but thirty-two seats, while the NDP got 17% of the vote but eight fewer seats than the Bloc.
              Finally the Conservatives beat the Liberals 35% to 33% but got forty-one fewer seats.

              So seat count means fuck all when it comes to support.

              1. The frog Canadian party only runs in frog Canada but controls the frog province. So it’s not really comparable to the other parties.
                PPC+Tories:40%. NDP+Liberals:50%

                You’re still in the minority you slack jawed cousin fucker!

                1. The NDP+Liberals isn't two different shades of the Democrats.

                  The Liberals sure, but the NDP are, or were before Singh, Natives and old-fashioned trade unionists and very different from liberal urban elites.

                  Also, you're ignoring (probably deliberately) the Bloc Québécois which is a coalition of ultra-conservative Catholics and communists united by Quebec nationalism.

                  1. I mentioned the frog party.

              2. Hope you enjoy your shitty cured meats(probably raccoon or squirrel) and your shitty rye tonight you backwoods fucking hick.

                Bigoted white trash FASCIST !

                Lying antisemitic racist loser!

                1. Too far north for trash pandas, you anti-semitic Nazi.

                  1. Also I'm only half white.

                    1. You’re still white trash.

                  2. You support Chuck. He gives 10% of his income and sends his kids out to recruit for a church that hates non-Christian’s, non-whites, and LGTB folks.

                    You’re a fucking bigot for supporting bigoted Mormons you inbred fuck!

        4. He's still running amok

  18. • The FBI seized nearly $1 million from Carl Nelson and Amy Sterner Nelson and never charged them with a crime.

    Agent provocateurs aren't cheap.

  19. The abject and pathetic weakness of POTUS Biden is on display to the entire world. The Soviets Russians are making Biden look like a doddering fool. Absolutely useless.

    POTUS Biden is a redux of Jimmy Carter. That was disastrous. I remember that time vividly. More war is coming; Taiwan is next. We have an utterly incompetent POTUS and a really shitty national security team managing this.

    Susan Rice, Austin Lloyd and Jake Sullivan should be dismissed.

    1. Want to laugh your ass off? Take a look at this shit:

      https://twitter.com/DanODonnellShow/status/1495915042428043264

      This sad little bit of bluster aged about as well as his infamous July 8 press conference about how well things in Afghanistan would go.

      This is what happens when you completely tear your own credibility to pieces the way he has. What a fucked up situation.

      1. What a mess we have. It will not end well.

      2. Weird how Putin gets all aggressive and land-grabby under Democrats.

    2. What do you suggest should be done?

      1. Buy food that keeps well.

      2. Nothing in Ukraine, but we need to get real and stop the Soviet totalitarian takeover here.

    3. Hey, what's your beef with Jake the Heavy? 😀

    4. The Soviets Russians are making Biden look like a doddering fool. Absolutely useless.

      To be fair to Joe, everything he does, from the time he wakes up in the late morning to the time he goes to bed in the late afternoon, makes him look like an abject, pathetic, weak, doddering fool.

  20. If you wonder why people call Mike and Jeff leftists, it is because they fall into the only group that supports fascist actions being taken against citizens in the US and Canada. Jeff has now defended Trudeau actions against protestors including freezing their bank accounts.

    Democrats overwhelmingly favored Trudeau’s response with 65% approval to 17% disapproval. Republican responses were weighted even more heavily against Trudeau, however, with 87% of likely GOP voters disapproving to just 8% approving. Respondents who said they did not belong to either one of the two main parties cut against Trudeau’s crackdown with 74% disapproving versus 21% approving.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-poll-majority-of-democrats-back-trudeaus-crackdown-freezing-bank-accounts-of-truckers

    1. Sort of like how Democrats are the only group who trust the media.

      1. Democrats trust the media and Republicans/conservatives trust *their* media.

        One at least is half rooted in reality.

        1. Shhhh. If you point out that there is conservative media, it undermines the conservative victimhood narrative.

          1. Look at these two defending the support of actual fascism and the invocation of marshal law on a libertarian website.

            Remember this the next time they're yelling "tribalism".

          2. “…conservative victimhood narrative.” Lol.

            “They gonna put y’all back in chains!”
            “Only 12 years to save the planet!”
            “(Insert hobby horse here_ )disproportionately impacts people of color, the poor, blah, blah”
            -AOC, Bernie, Lizzie stoking class resentment.
            -White nationalists everywhere!
            -“Everything Is So Terrible And Unfair!!!(Tm)”

            We know who the real victimhood pimps are, mike. Maybe those cons just learned from the masters.

            Haha. What a doosh.

        2. It’s more accurate to say that only democrats trust the media, while independents and republicans do not:

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

          The media only have majority support from democrats.

          1. In general, 64% of US voters have little or no trust in the media.

            1. Indeed Brian, and this is partly explained by the non-stop efforts of the lying cult figure Trump who has been intent on destroying opposition to his non-stop and obvious bull shit. That close to 1/2 of voters fell for this clown is depressing enough, but of course many of them avoid the only reputable news sources - NYTs, WaPo, WSJ, Reuters, etc - that still have international and regional desks and resources. Keeping his followers ignorant is Trump's goal and you guys have complied.

              1. Lol. It wasn't the lies od the media and loss of the facade of objectivity... it was trump.

                1. The weird timeline restructuring people have to do. Media trust was evaporating during the Obama years because they were running cover for the administration. Surely these people remember BenGhazi and how media trust went downhill because the media was picking up the administration narrative about this being over a youtube video. Then you start looking at the NSA, Snowden, and Wikileaks, and the actual corruption happening in the Obama administration.

                  So many other false narratives spread. "Hands Up, Don't Shoot." People STILL believe that Rachel Jeantal was Trayvon Martin's girlfriend because the government fucked up, bought Ben Crump's bullshit, and put a fake witness on the stand to perjure herself and pretend she was her half-sister (Trayvon's actual girlfriend). Zimmerman's suit was denied because people can't believe one of the most shocking abuses of power imaginable was actually taking place, and the media was running cover for it.

                  1. "Joe Friday" is a sockpuppet of one of our other fifty-centers anyway.

                    I suspect Shrike.

                2. Jesse, the "media" means whatever you want it to mean, but the reliable news sources we have are that and that's what they sell, not partisanship. The NYTs and WSJ have opposing editorial content, but only fools buy them for that reason. The reason to buy them is they both have excellent news reporting which anyone of consequence keeps up with to know what is going on - they appear on the desks or desktops of executives around the world in both government and business - and even the 2nd hand opinion writers - like this site - get their real news there or they don't know WTF is going on. That so many of the regulars here brag of their ignorance is telling as is their sure conviction that only MAGA conforming opinion journalism is true.

                  1. "Jesse, the "media" means whatever you want it to mean, but the reliable news sources we have are that and that's what they sell, not partisanship. "

                    Did they not report heavily on the fraudulent Russia scandal with Trump for YEARS? I'm not sure credibility exists for them.

                    1. damiksec, perhaps you are not familiar with the report from the GOP led Senate Intell Comm released in the summer of 2020 which confirmed pretty much everything reported on by our major news sources about Trump Russian collusion during the 2016 election. It was a real scandal with disgraceful actions by Trump, his son, and several important campaign officers.

                      Enjoy:

                      "The Committee’s investigation totaled more than three years of investigative activity, more than 200 witness interviews, and more than a million pages of reviewed documents. All five volumes total more than 1300 pages."

                      https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/senate-intel-releases-volume-5-bipartisan-russia-report
                      https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/senate-intel-releases-volume-5-bipartisan-russia-report

                    2. I'm going by the SOURCES for the dossier saying they made the whole thing up.

                      You can try and pretty it up as you wish, but the SOURCES are saying it is bullshit.

                  2. Haha. Imagine being this gullible on a daily basis.

                  3. MSM is a term that has been used for decades now and is well understood. You're just gaslighting people. I don't think you're too stupid to understand who MSM refers to.

              2. Keep trusting experts, you’ll be fine.

                1. Will do, Don't. You keep trusting the morons on this site and you'll remain fucked.

                  1. Everyone else is stupid but not you, huh?

                    1. Mostly true here Mother with a very few exceptions.

                    2. Lol, okay.

              3. Apparently,

                1. Trump was incredibly unpopular and elected against the will of the people
                2. He convinced everyone to mistrust the media.

                You should pick one.

                or at least provide a cite For your “Trump ruined the media!” Theory. And op-eds without data do not count.

                1. Brian -

                  1 is a fact.
                  2 is not. He convinced his minority of supporters to mistrust the media, not "everyone".

                  I didn't say Trump ruined the media, I said he increased the numbers blaming the "media" for everything. How he convinces anyone of anything is beyond me. It's hard to even imagine someone more obviously full of self serving bullshit.

                  1. "2 is not. He convinced his minority of supporters to mistrust the media, not "everyone"."

                    64% is a minority?

                    1. You see, approximately 30% of the country loves Trump, and they have been turned against the media by him alone. Another 30% can't stand him and mistrust the media because they don't go hard enough against him. The other 4% are libertarians who just hate everyone.

                      Ergo, mistrust in the media is in large part (~90%) due to Trump. SCIENCE!

                  2. Contrary to what some people think, history did not start in 2016. The media was distrusted and mocked by the right (and many independents) long before Trump became the media's favorite obsession. Clusterfucks like the RussiaRussiaRussia hoax really just fed the confirmation bias of people who already despised them, while those on the Left bitterly cling to the media's narratives no matter what.

                    Trump's ability to persuade is addressed in Scott Adams' book Win Bigly. Note that Adams is not a right winger, nor is he a Trump supporter. He never says Trump is good; he merely argues that Trump is an effective persuader and specifically explains the techniques. It's worth reading for anybody interested in politics, since persuasion is at the center of politics.

                    1. How many non-fiction books do you suspect Joe has read in his life outside of school?

              4. Anyway, shouldn’t you be conceding to the popular will of the people here?

                1. No Brian. I think in a democracy the majority should rule with protections for minority rights, but I don't always agree with the majority.

                  1. Well, now you have a good reason for why popular votes aren't always the bestest thing in the world.

                    1. Yes, it sounded like support for the electoral college.

                    2. Hilarious!

                      You walked him right into that.

                    3. Doesn't follow Brian. Protection of minorities doesn't mean they get to run government but that they have rights which cannot be abridged by the majority, which should always be in control..

                    4. they have rights which cannot be abridged by the majority which should always be in control.

                      You just negated the first half of the of your statement with the second.

                      That's why constitutions and laws are the ultimate authorities and not the will of the majority.

                      ...Also Trudeau's party only got 33% of the vote the last election. The opposition Conservative party got 35%.

              5. If the media could stop lying, it would be much easier to trust them.

                1. If they stopped lying they would die, like sharks needing to swim to breathe.

              6. The number has scarcely cracked 45% since Iraqi Freedom, but sure - all Trump's fault.

                Trump has - at most - a ~10 point influence on this figure, judging from the move from 14-16. But even then that was more likely due to their own blatantly unprofessional conduct driving away member of all parties leading up to the election. But this problem predates him, begging the question: is there a single poorly performing institution in this country you won't reflexively support?

                From 2005 - 2014:
                D's: down 16 points
                I's: down 16 points
                R's: down 4 points (this group was a trend leader: from '02 - '04 the media lost 15 points for obvious reasons and never recovered their standing)

                1. Not all trump's fault, but in large part.

                  1. GFY

                  2. Those years were all pre-Trump, you realize.

                    1. You can bring an innumerate feelzbox to a graph, but you can't teach him to read it.

              7. Yeah, it has nothing to do with their complete debasement and utter fecklessness.

              8. Trump is a symptom, not a cause.

                That you think the NYT, WaPo, etc. are still reputable and not purely ideological at this point, that explains a lot.

            2. Shhh. Let the two idiots give each other reach arounds

              1. They are either 50 centers [and hardly worth that], TDS obsessed [if you haven't noticed the resort to "Trump" whenever their "argument" falls apart, or just cannot begin to conceive of notions like individual liberty over governmental collectivism.

                For many, when Obama became POTUS, "the" government became, in their view "their government." And it exists on one hand to provide for them, and on the other to force others to respect, support, and entitle them.

                1. They seem to be the only ones interested in talking about Trump at this point. I don't think anyone else ever brings him up.

            3. And a follow-up:

              Democrats tune out national news during Biden era

              It marks the first time since the study began in early 2018 that Democrats report having less interest in national news than Republicans and independents.

              While respondents across the political spectrum all reported a decline in interest in national news over the past year, Democrats' interest has declined the most, with just 34% saying they paid a great deal of attention to national news in 2021, compared to 69% in November 2020.

              https://www.axios.com/democrats-national-news-biden-era-engagement-38881407-3e4f-4002-b3fa-e03de1be4e14.html

        3. The reality of whiny, panicked 13 year old drama queens.

    2. It's a pattern I'm noticing more and more lately; independents overwhelmingly agree with Republicans.

      1. The left and democrats have essentially ran far away from independents, not much else changed. The independents mostly have the same priorities, the left just went full on elitist authoritarian wokeness that the independents are looking at them like they are crazy (they arent wrong)

        1. I guess that makes independents alt-right.

      2. There's a real political shift going on, it seems. The mainstream left is 100% authoritarian and pro-corporate and the right seems to be the only place to go for free speech and any kind of respect for individual rights. Looking at many supposed "right-wing" news sources, I hardly see anything about traditional issues of the right like abortion or sexual morality. I have to remind myself sometimes that they still aren't actually libertarians. But I see zero common ground with the left at this point.

    3. The threat of freezing bank accounts is enough to move me into (defensive) action. Money may need to be moved, assets adjusted. Biden supports Turdeau. This is as close to the predicted civil war as I have seen yet.

      1. It did seem like a remarkably good time to make sure I had some cash squirreled away in the safe.

      2. There's another coin shortage so don't use cash!

  21. Donald Trump's new social media platform, called Truth Social, has launched.

    Aaaaand it's gone.

    1. What do you mean? I just went to their website and it looks like it is still there. I'm on their wait list for an account.

      1. Sorry you didn’t get the joke.

        1. What did you expect? Progtards have no sense of humor. Their humor gene is double recessive.

          1. It’s still pretty amazing that after all these years, Dee doesn’t understand what Fist is doing.

            1. Political and rhetorical autism is tough.

          2. Sadly, South Park's creators seem to have lost their humor. Their new season is painfully unfunny so far and their pandemic episodes pretty seriously sucked.

            1. Parker and Stone are a couple of middle-aged Gen-X dick suckers at this point. Thanks to the woketards becoming mainstream, that generation in the entertainment industry is trying to pretend they weren't a bunch of envelope-pushing edgelords back in the 90s.

          3. Mike is a victim.

  22. A "fuck the police" shirt isn't sufficient cause for arrest, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit reminds Ohio cops.

    Must be a pretty stiff penalty comes from false arrest. I'd hate to be those cops right now.

    1. Two week paid administrative leave.

  23. There's little evidence that mask mandates made a difference during the omicron surge.

    BUT WHAT CAN THEY HURT.

    1. How can anyone deny the solid science of the life saving old tee shirt strapped across your face ?

      1. Well, by "they" I meant the mandates more than the masks.

      2. Well, for the two weeks to flatten the curve, I wore a single layer of cheesecloth from my bottom lip to the bridge of my nose, and never got the Communist Chinese Virus. Then the governors on free America came to their senses, and I still haven't gotten it.
        (just out of curiosity, I checked my blood oxygen percentage for the first 20 minutes of wearing that piece of street theater, and it dropped from 98% to 92%)

        1. Oxygen is white privilege.

  24. 'Watch that horse video – awesome’: Canada police investigate officers' gloating texts after peaceful protesters supporting the Freedom Convoy in Ottawa were trampled by police horse - including woman on a mobility scooter

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10538587/Canadas-mounted-police-investigate-texts-officers-gloating-protesters-trampled.html

    Cops are the same everywhere.

    1. People already linked this while you were teaming up with jeff attacking the protestors. So much for principles.

  25. And nowhere was the jump bigger than in the Miami metro area...

    One wonders what was so special about Florida in that time period that made rentals become competitive.

    1. Hurricane Newsome?

  26. "Has the Russian Invasion of Ukraine Already Begun?"

    There are two sources of confusion here"

    1) In the minds of some people (journalists especially), they have a hard time believing things are true--if they don't want them to be true. They don't want the United State to go to war, so they'd rather pretend anything that might make that a reality isn't really happening.

    2) Some people are having a hard time differentiating between the Russian-backed rebel controlled areas of the two "breakaway republics" and the two regions themselves, but they're two different things. The Russian backed rebels only control a third of the two breakaway regions.

    By way of analogy, it's like Mexico has recognized Arizona and New Mexico as independent republics--but the pro-Mexican forces that are in those two breakaway republics only control about a third of Arizona and New Mexico.

    The Russian backed rebels only control about a third of the two "breakaway" regions, and there are hard lines and Ukrainian forces dug in between them. In order for Russia to take the other two-thirds of those regions--that they do not control--they will need to break through those Ukrainian lines in order to seize that territory. Unless Russia was planning to break through those Ukrainian lines, there was no reason to send Russian forces into the one-third of those breakaway regions that pro-Russian forces control.

    Meanwhile, back to the analogy, if the Mexican army deployed into the portions of Arizona and New Mexico that were under pro-Mexican rebel control, Americans would be correct to interpret that as a Mexican invasion of American territory.

    The Russian-backed rebel held one-third of those two provinces that the Russians have invaded are not recognized by anyone in the international community except Russia--certainly no one in the Ukraine or the United Nations recognizes those rebel governments as the legitimate representatives of those territories. Rather, Russia is seen by the international community as aggressively invading Ukrainian territory--by everyone but Russia.

    Propagating "confusion" as to whether a Russian invasion of Ukrainian territory is really an invasion of Ukraine is propagating Russian propaganda. Please stop immediately.

    I suspect people are just doing it because they don't want the United States to go to war over Ukraine, but there isn't really any danger of that. You're not preventing war with Russia by refusing to acknowledge the truth. The damage you're doing by disseminating Russian propaganda, however, is dangerous in all sorts of ways--dangerous to your own credibility among them.

    The fact is that Russia has invaded Ukraine, laid claim to parts of Ukraine that not even the rebels control, and the only apparent purpose of invading these parts of Ukraine appears to be to break through Ukrainian lines and seize the rest of the regions its recognized as independent states--if not the rest of Ukraine, as well.

    The Ukraine, however, is not part of NATO. We are not obligated by treaty to defend the the Ukraine from foreign aggression, and it is not in our best interests to go to war over the Ukraine. None of our allies wish to go to war over the Ukraine, and there is no danger of the United States going to war over the Ukraine.

    Putin's territorial ambitions, however, are much greater than the Ukraine. They include retaking Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland, and we are obligated by treaty to defend each and everyy one of them if they're invaded or attacked. It is, therefore, in the best interests of the United States, everyone else in NATO, to see Putin's territorial ambitions fail miserably in the very first step in the Ukraine. We should be and are arming the Ukrainians with everything they need to defend themselves.

    Putin's primary demand to avert war is that the Ukrainians grant him a veto over the Ukrainian parliament so that they can't do anything without his consent, and if the Ukrainian people would rather go to war than submit to that, God bless them and all other people in the world who choose to fight against tyrants for their freedom. IF IF IF and when it ever becomes in the best interests of the United States and NATO to admit the Ukraine as a member, we should be free to do so IF WE WANT.

    1. wildly speculative

      honestly I can't even tell if this is a bad idea

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk_People%27s_Republic
      ...
      The planned referendum was held on 11 May, disregarding Putin's appeal to delay it.[66] The organisers claimed that 89% voted in favor of self-rule, with 10% against, on a turnout of nearly 75%. The results of the referendums were not officially recognised by any government.[67] Germany and the United States stated that the referendums had "no democratic legitimacy",[68] while the Russian government expressed "respect" for the results and urged a "civilised" implementation.[69]

      1. If they had mail in ballots it’s totes legit.

      2. "wildly speculative"

        Can you be specific without quoting Russian propaganda?

        "The two areas—now nominally independent “people’s republics” inside the larger regions of Luhansk and Donetsk—have turned into impoverished, depopulated enclaves that increasingly rely on Russian subsidies to survive. As much as half the prewar population of 3.8 million has left, for the rest of Ukraine, more prosperous Russia or Europe. Those who remain are disproportionately retirees, members of the security services and people simply too poor to move. Current economic output has shrunk to roughly 30% of the level before the Russian invasion, economists estimate.

        ----WSJ, February 4, 2022

        https://www.wsj.com/articles/dismal-russian-record-in-occupied-eastern-ukraine-serves-as-warning-11643988253

        Go to the Wayback Machine and read the whole article.

        1. P.S. In 2022, Saddam Hussein won 100% of the vote for President of Iraq.

          In 1995, he won 99.5% of the vote.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Iraqi_presidential_referendum

          You don't want to be a victim of propaganda, do you?

          1. "wildly speculative"

            "Can you be specific without quoting Russian propaganda?"

            I can quote you -- "if not the rest of Ukraine, as well."

            there's no reason to think this is all that much different than the various central European independence movements, except that Russian borders are involved

            "P.S. In 2022, Saddam Hussein won 100% of the vote for President of Iraq."

            no, he was quite dead in 2022

            but sure, we all remember when Kuwaiti separatists founded their own pro-Iraqi states ::eyeroll::

            can't just label anything you don't like propaganda

            1. "There's no reason to think this is all that much different than the various central European independence movements, except that Russian borders are involved"

              Here's an article by Vladimir Putin from July of 2021 titled, "On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians", in which he methodically argues that the Ukraine was, is, and always will be a part of Russia--going back to the Kievan Rus'.

              http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181

              Read it for yourself, straight from the tyrant's mouth. Why shouldn't we believe him?

              1. here is a picture of Cindy Crawford from the 1980s

                https://www.posteramerica.com/collections/all/rare-vintage-cindy-crawford-poster

                Putin would love to hit that but like the Soviet Union, it's gone forever

                1. The idea that countries that were under the thumb of the Soviet Union can never subjugated by them again--just because--is absurd.

                  1) Why not?

                  2) Even if they can't, why does that mean Putin won't try?

                  Because Putin shouldn't do something, doesn't mean he won't. Governments do stupid things they shouldn't do all the time.

                  1. who said never? I said now

        2. So, seriously, because I have no idea, what resources are in that area? Oil? Gas? Coal? Port access? (They already have that with the Crimea, right?) I mean, it's gotta be something, if it's not the economic productivity. Just sheer bloody-minded "I gotta control more land" on the part of Putin?

          1. Biden’s weakness has emboldened Putin.

          2. It's strategic value to Russia is the territory itself. It's traditionally been a buffer zone.

            I usually see "The Netherlands" referred to as "The Netherlands" rather than "Netherlands", and I suspect that's because in English, we need to supply the article "the" to a proper noun in speech when it might be confused with a generic noun.

            In Dutch, "The Netherlands" translates to "The Lowlands", just like "High German" is the dialect they speak in the mountains (rather than what they speak in court). When people are talking about The Lowlands, they need to make it clear that they aren't just talking about any lowlands or a lowlands. They're talking about THE Lowlands, so in English we've come to say, "The Netherlands".

            My understanding is that the Ukraine is the same way in that "Ukraine" means borderlands. You'll often see people talk about "the Ukraine", which is probably the same carryover from the translation into English. You don't want to confuse The Borderlands with any borderlands or a borderlands. You need to indicate that you're talking about THE Borderlands so you use the definite article, "the".

            Anyway, my understanding is that the Ukraine has been traditionally important to Russia as a borderland between Russia proper and its military rivals in both western Europe and what is now Turkey. In terms of Russian security, it isn't as important in terms of national security today as it is in terms of its symbolism. Putin wants the borders of the Soviet Union back, and getting the Ukraine back is the first step.

            1. "It's traditionally been a buffer zone."

              from what? trans activists? Western Europe is only a threat to itself

              1. We're going back a long way, historically, and Russia was invaded by western Europe, with devastating consequences, as recently as World War II. The Ottoman Empire was a big threat, too. They were invaded by Napoleon, and they had wars with the Turks and other Muslim groups going way back. That's the general area where Roman Catholicism, Orthodox Christianity, and Islam have come together and been an issue for a very long time. And it's been called the borderlands in Russia since the Viking Rus arose in Novgorod.

                1. "as recently as World War II"

                  somehow I doubt Putin's worried about European millennials pouring through the Fulda Gap

            2. "Putin wants the borders of the Soviet Union back"

              yes, but in much the same sense that of wanting date with the 1980s version Cindy Crawford

              Putin's appeal is limited to a few Russians along the borders, he's no transnationalist Communist revolutionary

              1. That's factually incorrect.

                I've linked before to Putin's essay from July of 2021, where he argues that the Russians and the Ukrainians (and the Lithuanians and the Polish) are all spiritually, culturally, and territoriality one people. Putin was present during the disintegration of the Soviet Union, so he's old enough to remember when it was all part of Russia.

                Putin was a KGB agent in East Germany when the wall came down. Don't tell me his ambitions towards Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland are too far fetched for his imagination. He remembers when they were all part of Russia. Saw it with his own lying eyes.

                1. are all spiritually, culturally, and territoriality one people

                  Now, where have we heard that before... ?

                  1. The anglosphere, or pretty much every "peoples" not contained within 1 nation state?

                2. "Putin's appeal is limited to a few Russians along the borders, he's no transnationalist Communist revolutionary"

                  "That's factually incorrect. [cites Putin's rather pathetic attempt at national bravado as evidence]"

                  do you see how both those things can be true?

                  Putin can't just waltz into Kiev, and has little to gain by it

                  1. Because you don't buy Putin's justification, doesn't mean that isn't his justification or that the bulk of the Russian people don't also buy that justification. Again, you seem to be assuming that because people shouldn't buy something or do something, they won't. That is a bad assumption. And Putin is expressing widely supported beliefs within Russia.

                    1. again, wildly speculative

                      no one in Kiev wants Putin

                      but many in Donetsk do

                      your entire thesis is based on hysterical assumptions that Putin can occupy parts of Eastern Europe where he is not at all popular

                      that isn't how this works

          3. perlhaqr....Ukraine is the 'breadbasket of Eastern Europe'. Lots of farming; major wheat exporter.

            I am perfectly willing to fight the Soviets right down the the last Ukrainian.

            Give Ukraine all the weapons they can carry. Every Russian tank they take out makes a NATO counter-response that much easier (if needed). If we are not moving a lot of hardware to the Baltics right the fuck now then our military leaders are totally inept.

            Basically, I'd like to see a degradation on the order of 10%-15% of the 190K troops in the area. A very bloody nose.

            As for America's response....no way I am supporting fighting for Ukraine. Those bastards are corrupt AF (Hunter Biden and Big Guy, anyone?), and Ukrainians aligned themselves eagerly with the Nazis in WW2; I don't forget that. They are not worth the life of a single American soldier. Not one.

            1. "If we are not moving a lot of hardware to the Baltics right the fuck now then our military leaders are totally inept."

              Sad that we know the answer to this, isn't it?

            2. Give Ukraine all the weapons they can carry.

              Change that first word to 'sell' and I am all in. Fuck NATO, the socialist pricks can pay for their defense.

              1. What will they "buy" them with?
                US foreign aid, aka tax dollars.

            3. Maybe we can get the Afghans to ship all the stuff we left behind to the Ukrainians. They probably still have a beef with the Russians, right? 😀

    2. Unless Russia was planning to break through those Ukrainian lines, there was no reason to send Russian forces into the one-third of those breakaway regions that pro-Russian forces control.

      Doesn't actually follow. Notionally they could be there to "set" those lines and make sure the Ukrainians don't take the 1/3rd back.

      I'm not saying that's the likely interpretation. Just that it's not as 100% as you're saying.

      That said, I don't know enough about the situation to really have an opinion on the rest of it, beyond that I'd rather not have the US in another fucking war. Also that as a New Mexican I'm not enjoying your analogy. 😉

      1. "Doesn't actually follow. Notionally they could be there to "set" those lines and make sure the Ukrainians don't take the 1/3rd back."

        There is no danger of that and there hasn't been since the second Minsk agreement in 2015.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_Protocol#Minsk_II

        Meanwhile, the Ukrainian government lets the people of the breakaway "republics" cross back and forth at will.

        "Ukraine recognizes the residents of the occupied territories in Donetsk and Luhansk as its own citizens, and allows them to enter to renew their documents, obtain medical, mail and banking services unavailable in the breakaway republics—or resettle permanently if they so choose. Even residents who opt for Russian citizenship usually keep their Ukrainian passports, which allow visa-free entry to the European Union.

        "The crossings into Russian-occupied areas were relatively easy before the Covid-19 pandemic. Currently only the checkpoint at Stanytsia Luhanska, just across the river from Luhansk city, operates daily.

        ----WSJ, Ibidem

        Putin is alleging genocide of Russian speakers--not that the Ukrainians are threatening to invade the breakaway republics. Don't believe him.

        1. of course Putin lies constantly

          so do our leaders

          at worst Donetsk joins Russia

          so what?

          1. think this through Ken... what are the % of Ukrainians in the other regions?

            we're talking about a tiny slice of the Ukraine, one that has been disputed forever

            unless Russia engages in mass resettlements it's much ado about nothing

            there's nothing in the Ukraine Putin wants, except to salve Russian pride

            1. You're making rationalizations for a free people to be subjugated, and I won't condone that for any reason.

              Because I oppose the United State invading Rwanda doesn't mean I need to make excuses for genocide.

              Invading Rwanda was not in the best interests of the United States for a list of reasons. Going to war over the Ukraine is not in the best interests of the United States either.

              That doesn't mean I need to make any excuses for what Putin is doing to the people of the Ukraine. It is not in the best interests of the United States to go to war over the Ukraine--even if all the worst stories about how the Russians are treating the Ukrainian people are true--because I care about the interests of the United States.

              It was not in the best interests of the United States to invade and occupy Iraq--not even if all the stories about Saddam Hussein were true.

              It was not in the best interests of the United States to invade and occupy Vietnam--but that doesn't mean I need to go pose on a North Vietnamese antiaircraft gun and spread communist propaganda like I'm Hanoi Jane.

              Opposing a U.S. war over the Ukraine does not require you to propagate Putin's propaganda.

              1. It's amazing to see torch his credibility to simp for the people who brought us the Russiagate hoax.
                Fn boomers, man.

              2. how is founding your own tiny republic being subjugated? isn't that sort of the opposite?

                1. "how is founding your own tiny republic being subjugated? isn't that sort of the opposite?

                  I don't suppose you're getting paid to spout Russian propaganda, but if you're going to spout Russian propaganda, you might as well get paid for it.

                  1. are you saying they didn't vote? it was a mass hallucination?

                    1. The referendum began early on 10 May in Mariupol, which according to the separatist group's election official Sergey Beshulya was due to the possibility of Ukrainian security forces returning.[52] Other locations also reported early voting in some areas.[47] For the remainder of the province, polling began at 8am on 11 May. Donetsk and Luhansk residents living in Russia were able to cast their votes in Moscow.[53] Non-binding votes were also cast abroad, including in Barcelona as a show of support.

                      many irregularities, but doubt very many votes in the region come off like those in wealthy OECD suburbs

                      I see CNN got in a lather over someone voting multiple times

                      irony is the first casualty in any war

              3. It was not in the best interests of the United States to invade and occupy Vietnam-

                we didn't invade and occupy North Vietnam, that's why the country is still run by Communists

                if we had they might have been more like South Korea than China, which would certainly have been in US interests, if not necessarily worth the blood and treasure

                Eastern Ukraine is still going to be Eastern Ukraine whatever flags people fly

                another Balkans

                1. You still seem to be missing the point that it isn't in the best interests of the United States to liberate or defend Ukraine--regardless of whether they're being subjugated by the Russians.

                  It wasn't in the best interests of the United States to invade Rwanda to stop genocide there. It wasn't in the best interests of the United States to invade Cambodia and stop genocide there.

                  Whether Saddam Hussein was a tyrannical authoritarian that made his people suffer didn't matter. What mattered was whether invading Iraq, deposing Hussein, and occupying the country was in the best interests of the United States, and it was not.

                  The nature of our efforts in Vietnam didn't matter, whether we're talking about the North or the South. What matters is that it was never in the best interests of the United States to occupy Vietnam.

                  That doesn't mean it was ever necessary to pretend that the genocide in Rwanda wasn't happening or that the atrocities in Cambodia weren't happening. That doesn't mean it was ever necessary to assume that Saddam Hussein didn't have WMD--since it wasn't in the best interests of the United States to invade and occupy Iraq regardless of whether Saddam Hussein had WMD.

                  It wasn't necessary to argue in favor of the North Vietnamese or carry an ounce of water for them, and it wasn't necessary to pretend the government of South Vietnam was worth defending--since it wasn't in the best interests of the United States to be in Vietnam regardless of whether the government of South Vietnam was terrible or democratic.

                  Meanwhile, it isn't in the best interests of the United States to go to war over the Ukraine--regardless of how well or how badly the Russians are treating the Ukrainians. It just so happens to be the case that the Russians are treating the Ukrainian people like shit, and there is no good reason to pretend otherwise.

                  Because it isn't in the best interests of the United States to go to war over Ukraine is not a good reason to believe or disseminate Russian propaganda. It is extremely important for the Kremlin's purposes for people in the west to question whether the people of Ukraine are really suffering under the yoke of Russian domination. Whether they're suffering under Russian occupation shouldn't matter to us in terms of whether we go to war over the Ukraine because it isn't in our best interests to go to war over the Ukraine regardless of whether the people of the Ukraine are suffering under Russian domination.

                  That doesn't mean we should become purveyors of Russian propaganda efforts. If the people of the Ukraine are suffering under the domination of a Russian invasion and occupation, then that's what's happening--and there is no good reason to flush our credibility down the toilet pretending otherwise. We should leave it to the progressives to insist that the only reality that's true is the one that supports their preferred narrative. That's one of their major weaknesses.

                  We can see the truth clearly, and it is unnecessary for us to pretend that the Ukrainian people want to be invaded and occupied by Russia or that they want their government to be subjugated to the will of Vladimir Putin. It is unnecessary for us to pretend any of those things are true because the truth is that it is not in the best interests of the United States to go to war over the Ukraine, and that truth does not depend on how the people of the Ukraine are being treated.

                  It isn't in the best interests of the United States to go to war over the Ukraine even if the Ukrainian people are being treated horribly.

                  1. no one's suggesting invasion except you

                    Saddam was removed by a coalition comprising most of the world because he invaded Kuwait -- irresolute international incompetence made the job take 12 years and hundreds of thousands of lives, but no one much cared what Iraq did before 1991

                    you seem to be some sort of bot that just says "RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA" whenever you see information you don't like

                    do the Ukrainian nationalists who want to keep Donetsk have any propaganda? or is everything they say always true? what about the international press?

      2. "Also that as a New Mexican I'm not enjoying your analogy. ????"

        It's not invasion if they're "migrants", so there you go!

    3. Ken Dude, why would I read this over long screed after you spent yesterday predicting the Germans would knee cap Biden by not stopping Nord Stream 2, and the headline this morning is they did stop Nord Stream 2 ..... and you're not addressing that.

      WGAF what you think is happening, and if they do, why?

      1. Not stopped....the 'certification process' is delayed. That can be 'undelayed' at any time.

        Hopefully the US can ramp up NatGas production and ship it to Europe. POTUS Trump's administration approved a lot of plant upgrades and new LNG production. That is now coming online....it will help.

        I am glad the Germans are on board, however tepid. At the end of the day, this is a European problem. There is no vital US national interest in Ukraine, whatsoever.

    4. "minds of some people (journalists especially), they have a hard time believing things are true--if they don't want them to be true. They don't want the United State to go to war, so they'd rather pretend anything that might make that a reality isn't really happening."

      HahahahahahaHahahahahaha

      JFC, Ken.

    5. It's not an invasion if you're invited in.
      The people of Donetsk and Luhansk have the same basic human right of self-determination (i.e. secession) as the people of Virginia, or South Carolina, or Kosovo, or Scotland, or Taiwan, or anywhere else, the right spelled out in the US Declaration of Independence.

      1. yeah I think there's too much guilt by association with Putin

        the whole area is awash in corruption anyway

      2. I don't think that's a real right. Or if it is, it's one that can't be used in the current political reality.
        If "the people of Virginia" have a right to secede, then so does every individual in Virginia. Which makes any kind of government untenable. Now, I'm enough of an anarchist that I don't really mind, so I do support that notion of self determination.
        When it comes to nation states and their status, however, I really think there is no morality other than might makes right. If you can control the territory, you are the government. That's how pretty much every state in the world came to be and why all land borders are where they are. With perhaps a few exceptions, rights to self determination have nothing to do with it and probably never will.

    6. Reposting because Ken, who has plenty of good posts, does stray when he puts his neocon cape on and repeats Atlantic Council shibboleth.

      Nardz

      February.21.2022 at 8:13 pm

      Flag Comment  Mute User 

      You can believe the mass media talking points of Putin wants to reconquer the USSR and Russia is the aggressor in its relationship with NATO, because I'm sure they're telling the truth this time, or you can apply some logic.
      I've responded to Ken's neoconning before, but since you asked nicely I'll break it down again.

      There is no strategic motive for Russia to try to take over a bunch of economic shitholes that will only drain resources and create headaches. Between Belarus and the Baltic Sea, Russia has plenty of routes to ship oil/gas. Open conflict with Ukraine jeopardizes the pipelines which run through Ukraine, not secure them.
      When the USSR dissolved, one of the points negotiated for Russia to inherit USSR obligations was that NATO would not expand to former Warsaw Pact nations. NATO did just that starting in early 2000s.
      Putin has, multiple times, proposed Russia itself join NATO. First Clinton, then Bush 2 declined without legitimate reason.
      In Ukraine specifically, NATO/US orchestrated a coup in 2013-2014 (see: McCain-Nuland emails). Yanukovych was pro-Russian, and was unconstitutionally deposed. Proshenko, pro-EU, was installed. Both were corrupt, but Poroshenko turned out to be worse.
      Ukraine's government was immediately recognized by the globalist order, that same globalist order waging war upon its own people and dedicated to seizing totalitarian power, and the first thing it did is start passing anti-Russian laws.
      The whole situation provoked discontent in the ethnically Russian east, who justifiably feared they were going to be targeted, persecuted, and exploited. So rebellion formed in the east and was given limited aid by Russia.
      Russia moved quickly to secure Crimea, which was supposed to be autonomous, because it was majority Russian and had their only warm water port. Crimea then voted overwhelmingly via referendum to join Russia. The globalist order still hasn't recognized either Crimea's independence or annexation.
      The globalist world order is being hypocritical, as is characteristic, since they recognized and intervened in Kosovo's secession from Serbia.
      Russian autocrats going back to the 1600s have considered it their responsibility to protect Russian and Orthodox populations abroad, though this was interrupted by Soviet rule. Kiev has been attacking Russians in Eastern Ukraine for almost a decade now. Putin, and Russians, see protecting those people as Russia's responsibility, thus they will recognize secession since Kiev would not agree to or abide by humane treatment.

      Neither NATO nor the US has a legitimate reason to interfere with Ukrainian politics. They have been doing it and driving conflict since 2013.
      Antagonism with Russia doesn't help the American people, it hurts and puts us at risk. Russia, under Putin, should be a US ally. Russia is strategically located between Europe, China, and Iran. Plus, an alliance would put 90%+ of the world's nuclear weapons into alignment instead of opposition. But American leadership and the globalist world order don't have their people's interests at heart; they are at war with us.
      Putin and Russia are the biggest impediment to globalist tyranny because they're staunchly nationalist, he's smarter than them, and they have all those nukes. Immediately after the USSR fell, Bush/Clinton sent a bunch of economists to Yeltsin to loot the country and permanently destroy their economic potential. Putin stopped that, so he's been boogeyman #1 ever since. I realized how to read news stories a decade ago because the stories on Russia were so illogical. The Who, Where, and When rarely added up to the What, and never fit the Why.
      There's a reason they picked Russia, instead of China or Saudi Arabia or Israel, for the Russiagate hoax.

      Ken is an insightful and very meticulous poster, but also very rigid in adhering to his universal models. This is why it took 2 years for him to finally concede the strike on Suleimani wasn't a mistake. He'd conceived of a model that recommended against it, and couldn't incorporate some basic factors or fundamental formula. Ken's biggest weakness is failing to see anything outside his universal model. This works for physics, and often economics, and sometimes politics. But his psychological insight is lacking, and he tends to ignore cultural differences that influence formulas. This throws his foreign policy analysis off pretty consistently.
      With Russia and Putin, he's stuck in a boomer model which sees no distinction between Russia and the USSR, and takes the media narrative as gospel. I will give him credit for taking the narrative from other angles, but accepting that narrative still leads to a miss.

      With everything, and especially Putin/Russia, you have to stick to hard facts and do your own math on what they add up to if you want to get an accurate picture

      1. They still incarcerate the gays in Russia, so war it is!

  27. border is just a question of whether X% of Ukrainians will be unhappy or Y% of Russians

    honestly not sure why we should care which corrupt government a few hundred thousand generally very poor people pay taxes to

    this isn't even Saddam taking Kuwait, let alone Hitler taking Poland or China invading Taiwan

    1. No, it's Russia taking Ukraine. Which is just as serious. Ukraine is an independent nation. That Russian invaded them once before and ruled them for decades, does not mean it's Russia. It's still Ukraine and an independent nation.

      But I take it you have never updated your map from 1966, have you?

      1. Yes... but why is it our problem?

        As in, yes, I completely accept your premise that it's perfectly serious for the Ukrainians and that they're an independent nation. Why should the USA fight this war?

        1. Why should the USA fight this war?

          Did anyone say that?

          1. Nobody will come out and say it, but that doesn't comfort me much. Our politicians are not exactly known for their honesty and transparency.

            1. "I totes don't like lockdowns or mandates, but covid is so super dangerous and new, completely different from anything ever, that we should blindly trust government/media and do everything they tell us to."

              Useful idiots.
              It's the same shit with Ukraine. Say you don't want direct US participation, but uncritically repeat their narrative and give moral support to direct US participation.

              1. There's also the usual statement "well the military option should never be off the table so we can deal from a position of strength". Leaving the military option "on the table" means there is a risk we'll get militarily involved--they can't have it both ways.

      2. Can't wait for brandy to die fighting for Ukraine's territorial integrity while denying the US has any right to control our own borders.

      3. Wasn't Ukraine sort of always part of Russia before the USSR?

      4. Ukraine is an independent nation.

        In all seriousness, how is their constitution on natural rights? If it is no better than Russia, then what the fuck difference does it make?

      5. lol did you actually look at a map of the conflict?

        only around 5-10% is involved, and only that because they're full of some disputed number of Russians

        this is more like the US taking a few English-speaking counties away from Mexico... Texas, I think we call it now

        1. also, didn't the people in the new republics vote to establish them? were the votes rejected on some basis other than neoliberals don't like pro-Russia votes? really seems like the world ought to respect their rights unless they can show massive irregularities

          in which case another vote should be held

    2. does not matter who had it in the past what matters is who has it today. as someone above mentioned what if Mexico sent in rebels into U.S. states to reclaim, then Mexico claims to accept their claims and decides to send in troops to protect their claimed independence. Considering there are groups out there that want to reunite several U.S. states back to Mexico its not an irrelevant comparison.

      1. Except that those states were part of Mexico before they were taken as spoils of war. I'd say Mexico has more of a claim to Arizona and New Mexico than Russia has to Ukraine.

        1. Read some history then.

        2. Wow, you are completely ignorant of SW history.

          Have you ever heard of the Gadsden purchase? Maybe educate yourself next time you eat some foreign food like a cuban sandwich.

          Not shocked you believe in the leftist lies of Arizona conquest theory.

          1. Enh. Even way, way back in 7th grade NM History class I thought the setup on the Gadsden Purchase was pretty thuggish.

            "Hey, I wanna buy your car."

            "It's not for sale."

            "But, I really want it."

            *proceeds to kick the crap out of the guy whose car it is, drives off*

            A Week Later - Same guy, in the car:

            "Hey, I'd like to buy that set of rims. They'd look really awesome on my new car."

            "Fucking asshole. Fine, gimme ten bucks."

            I mean, you gotta figure the guy is leaving with the rims anyway, you might as well get something for it. It's just a jerk move.

            That said, what Zeb is saying around these threads is right. In the end, when it comes down to arguments between countries over borders, there's nothing to it but who has the mass to back it up.

            1. That said, what Zeb is saying around these threads is right. In the end, when it comes down to arguments between countries over borders, there's nothing to it but who has the mass to back it up.

              Yeah, saying "these are our lands by time and tradition" is just for legal niceties. If you don't have the capability to hold on to it by force when someone tries to take it from you, there's really nothing you can do about it.

              The only reason that pretense gets thrown around now is because of Enlightenment ideas about the rights of man, as applied to nations. Historically speaking, nations and peoples took what they could, when they could, and there wasn't shit the losing nation could do about it, other than accept their slavery.

        3. Mexico has about as much claim to Arizona and New Mexico as Denver does to Douglas County. Mexico only controlled those areas for about 25 years before the US took them over, and even that was in the most nominal sense. Those lands were desolate, full of hostile Apaches and Navajos from stem to stern, and the non-natives who lived there were extremely isolated and largely self-sufficient out of necessity.

      2. Ukraine was literally created by the USSR in 1948. It never existed before that as a cohesive or independent territory.

        1. Then why do they have their own language?

          1. It is very close to Russian and fairly mutually intelligible. There are quite a few languages spoken in Russia other than Russian.

        2. Just because it was a Soviet state doesn't mean Russia has a claim to it. The USSR gobbled up lots of territory. Are you saying that Russia has a claim to all of the former Soviet states? Putin would certainly agree.

          1. Read some history. Find me a cite to Ukraine as an independent cohesive nation/entity prior to 1948.

            1. Did I say it was?

            2. Regardless, I still don't see how that gives Russia a claim to the territory. Stalin made it part of the USSR and then forced millions of people to starve to death. How does that make it part of Russia?

              1. Russia isn't claiming the territory, they're noting that the territory has historically been part of Russia except for when portions have been taken via invasion.

                1. You're obviously up on your history or full of shit. And I doubt you're full of shit. Any source of information you can recommend to me other than random googling?

                  1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine

                    There are 2 instances you could argue for a cohesive, (semi)independent "Ukraine":
                    1. The Cossack Hetamante, 1649-1764, though it was still a vassal state to the Tsardom of Russia
                    2. Ukrainian People's Republic, 1917-1920, though it wasn't really ever stable or cohesive

                    Notably, neither entity included Crimea or the separatist areas currently hosting Russian troops.

              2. Stalin made it part of the USSR and then forced millions of people to starve to death.

                Tens of millions.

                https://hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB16A.1.GIF

          2. I don't think they have a claim to anything. Nation states are amoral entities. Might makes right. In that sense Putin has a claim to whatever he can effectively control. I'm not saying this is good, but it's reality and unless we want to fight everyone else's wars, I think one must accept that reality to some extent.

      3. what if Mexico sent in rebels into U.S. states to reclaim, then Mexico claims to accept their claims and decides to send in troops to protect their claimed independence

        Can we encourage this for Southern California? We lose the Superbowl champs, but the Raiders are in Vegas now, so I am OK.

  28. If sanctions against Russia prevent their psy-ops teams from posting on websites outside of Russia, Reason, and so many other sites, will have hardly any commenters left.

    1. LOL. True.

      It's interesting watching Edward Snowden on Twitter. He seems to be allowed free speech, as long as he doesn't touch on certain topics.

      1. Of course. He didn't move to Russia because he thought it was free. But you know that.

      2. Which makes him exactly like Canadians.

        1. Good point.

      3. it was a deal worth taking since clearly the USA Gov gang was going to murder him if they brought him home.

      4. It’s too bad Chocolate Jesus decided to impede Snowden’s ability to travel after he showed the world that the US government was a bunch of lying untrustworthy pieces of shit.

    2. Some people will say anything--and mean it--so long as they they think it's against conservatives.

      Jane Fonda went around vouching for the good treatment of American POWs by the Vietnamese. That wasn't because she was a a part of psy-ops. It's because she meant well and hated conservatives.

      It's hard to tell the difference between Russian psy-ops and progressive trolls just by reading their comments. I guess the real difference is their motivation. They both say the same factually inaccurate and irrational shit.

      1. Progressives hate Russia. Where have you been the past decade?

  29. the agency offered as an explanation was worries that people might draw conclusions from the information that officials didn't want them to

    Cue Senators Paul, Cruz, and Rubio saying "You *will* release these data!"

  30. I can't remember, are we supposed to be in favor of Putin or against Putin? Quick, someone ask Trump.

    1. I know, right? While it is, as others put it, "perfectly cromulent with Libertariwnism" to oppose war as a first resort to problems, Libertarians can and should oppose Authoritarian and aspiring Totalitarian tyrants like Putin and certainly should support using trade to full advantage against tyranny.

      Again, a fleet of tankers sailing to Ukraine and all of Europe carrying Light Sweet Crude from Keystone XL, ANWR, and elsewhere in the United States would make Putin back down, as well as keep out gas from going up to $4.50 or $5 a gallon.

      And we wouldn't have the pathetic and cowardly spectacle of Babbling Joe Biden begging and pleading with The Saudis and Iran to keep the oil flowing, which gives them both leverage to literally have the U.S. over a barrel.

    2. https://rollcall.com/2022/02/17/trump-is-giving-biden-a-pass-as-russia-threatens-ukraine/

      "The last statement from Trump about the Ukraine tensions came on Jan. 24: 'What’s happening with Russia and Ukraine would never have happened under the Trump Administration. Not even a possibility!'"

      So, Trump is staying silent, which is saying something. Although he made did make that essentially content-free statement on January 24th.

      1. And if he wasn’t remaining silent, Dee would totally objectively judge what he WAS saying.

      2. Wait, did it happen under Trump?

      3. WTF, Trump, why couldn’t you STAY silent?!

        We really don’t need Trump telling everyone that Putin is a savvy genius.

    3. Let's check the Steele Dossier as our guide.

    4. Trump was in favor of working with Putin when it was in the United States' best interests to do so, and he was against Putin when it was in the best interests of the United States to be so.

      That's the way it should always be on issues that are within the proper purview of democracy. There is no place for cancel culture in foreign policy. The idea that we should oppose Putin even when it's in our best interests to work together is downright treasonous.

      Trump wanted to wipe out ISIS in Syria without a full scale U.S. invasion of Syria. Trump cut a deal with Putin that had American aligned anti-Assad forces in Syria stop attacking Hezbollah, Iranian Revolutionary Army, and Assad's personal forces--and direct their efforts towards wiping out ISIS in Syria instead. In return, Putin had Hezbollah, the Iranian Revolutionary Army, and Assad's personal defense forces stop targeting American backed anti-Assad rebels, for a while, and attack ISIS, too.

      Once both Russian backed and American backed forces stopped targeting each other and started targeting ISIS exclusively, ISIS was completely wiped out--without a full scale invasion by the United States. That's why almost all the neocons were never-Trumpers--because he campaigned in 2016 on working with Putin to defeat ISIS in Syria, which destroyed their dream of another Iraq style foreign adventure. Trump actually delivered on that promise.

      Any anti-war libertarian who opposed Trump working with Putin in this regard is either ignorant or stupid. And if working with Putin elsewhere in the world today were--in the best interest of American security--even as it was in our best interests to let our defense contractors undermine his efforts in the Ukraine--then we should both support and oppose Putin today, too. Let's grow up.

      Good man, bad man isn't the question.

      Incidentally, it was in the best interests of the United States to both work with Stalin to destroy the Third Reich and chase Imperial Japan out of China, even while it was also in our best interests to oppose Stalin in other ways. It is wise to respect the Fifth Amendment rights of child murderers. It is wise to respect the First Amendment rights of idiots. It is wise to create trade relationships with our potential enemies. And cancel culture applied to foreign policy is profoundly stupid--like cutting off our nose to spite our face.

      Any libertarian who prefers a full scale U.S. invasion of Syria to shaking hands with Putin because Putin is a bad man is an idiot.

      1. So Ken, how was it in America's interest for Trump to defend Putin murdering political enemies in Europe by saying we - the US - does that too? How was it in the US interest to defend Putin's meddling in European elections and our election? Hw was it in America's interest for Trump to help Putin weaken NATO and seek to destabilize the EU?

        1. PS How was it in America's interest for Trump to get Russian financing and and to try and get his help opening a hotel there during the election of 2016 and lying about it?

        2. How was it in the US interest to defend Putin's meddling in European elections and our election?

          Boris Yeltsin's pickled corpse says it's okay when the US does it.

          1. Anyone who still believes that Trump was working with Putin to beat Hillary in 2016 is being willfully obtuse. It was a ridiculous accusation, and it's been debunked so thoroughly, you'd need to be a willfully obtuse progressive to still believe it.

  31. "Biden Administration Halts New Oil And Gas Drilling Permits"
    [...]
    "The Biden Administration has delayed or stopped work on federal oil and gas leases and permits following a court ruling that struck down the Administration’s “social cost of carbon” metric to account for climate risk when holding lease sales or issuing permits.
    Earlier this month, Judge James D. Cain, JR of a Louisiana district court granted a preliminary injunction sought by major fossil fuel-producing states in a lawsuit against the Biden Administration challenging the so-called “social cost of carbon” in rule-making and decision-making regarding lease sales..."
    https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Biden-Administration-Halts-New-Oil-And-Gas-Drilling-Permits.html

    The courts won't let Biden play funny games with the economy, so he throws a tantrum.

    1. Raising the price of oil will totally show those ruskies what's what.

      1. We need higher oil prices to slow consumption, but SleepyJoe will “work like the devil” to bring down gas prices.

        1. Anything except allow US companies to produce.

    2. Meanwhile, our NATO alliance is falling apart for fear of being cut off from Putin's natural gas.

      "Any eventual sanctions imposed on Russia by the European Union should not include energy imports, Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi"

      ----Reuters, February 18, 2022

      https://www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-crisis-italy-sanctions/any-eu-sanctions-on-russia-should-not-hit-energy-draghi-idUSL8N2UT5SA

      1. So it seems to me that cheap energy is way more beneficial for Germany or Italy than an independent Ukraine is.

        If they do act in favor of keeping the pipeline open it's because it's in their best interests. Who are we to scold them?

        1. Italy and Germany are benefiting from our taxpayers underwriting the cost of their security. We're in a ratified mutual defense treaty with them, with an obligation to defend them if they're attacked, and that gives us a right to criticize them when they capitulate to our shared enemies.

          1. So we shouldn't be subsidizing them anymore since NATO's justification for being ended more than 30 years ago

              1. Weird. Just 2 years ago you would have called someone a trump cultist for agreeing with him on anything.

        2. "If they do act in favor of keeping the pipeline open it's because it's in their best interests. Who are we to scold them?"

          Also note, I wrote this in response to Sevo's article about the Biden administration trying to stop natural gas exploration.

          It is in our best interests at this point to supply natural gas to the Europeans by letting frackers look for more, but the Biden administration is trying to shut down the frackers.

          1. This I can agree with

  32. "Germany said it halted moves to open the Nord Stream 2 pipeline that would allow Russia to bypass Ukraine in exporting natural gas to Europe"

    Biden deserves a tremendous amount of criticism for dropping his opposition to Nord Stream 2. If it weren't for Biden's foolish decision to do that, we probably wouldn't be looking at what's happening in the Ukraine today.

    That being said, the reason the Germans are halting Nord Stream 2 today is not entirely unrelated to Biden's efforts to get them to agree to cut it off if Putin invaded the Ukraine, and Biden also deserves credit for that.

    Don't say I never gave Biden credit for anything. On the other hand, he's the one that lit the place on fire, and arsonists only deserve so much credit for trying to put a fire out after the damage has been done. He still deserves the blame.

    The consequences of Nord Stream 2 were not only foreseeable but also foreseen. Biden did what he did over the objections of Senate Democrats--not to mention good sense. The Biden White House appears to be led by TDS victims who only do things, like capitulate to Nord Stream 2, because Donald Trump was opposed to it.

    They're like a bunch of idealistic college kids who have no idea how the world really works and end up getting people killed with their good intentions. The sooner the Biden's White House is checked by a Republican Congress the better.

    1. Dude, you were wrong about this. Admit it and STFU.

      1. Joe Friday...serious question.

        Would you send US troops to Ukraine to repel the Russian invasion (either as a part of a NATO operation, or alone)?

        If yes....please articulate the vital US national interest at stake.

        1. Commenter - I have not advocated for that, nor has anyone of substance that I have heard of. If Russia did not possess nuclear weapons, that might be on the table, but they do and it isn't.

          It is worth noting that for 76 years there has been no land war on a scale similar to what this crisis might become in Europe, the cradle of World Wars, and that streak will hopefully continue.

          1. Joe Friday...Thanks for answering the question directly.

      2. Kill yourself.

    2. "They're like a bunch of idealistic college kids who have no idea how the world really works and end up getting people killed with their good intentions."

      I would disagree with this in that its not good intentions. They know that what they are doing is hurting people.

      1. It's hard to believe that they didn't understand the likely consequences of Nord Stream 2--or their culpability for the humanitarian disaster afterwards if they dropped their opposition to Nord Stream 2. I can link to articles at the time where Democrats in the Senate were worried about what Nord Stream 2 would mean for the security of Ukraine. I've linked to them before.

        Think of it this way: If they understood the consequences of ignoring the withdrawal date (April of 2021) in Trump's agreement with the Taliban, would they have waited to start getting our allies out of Kabul until the Taliban overran the airport on August 15th? That decision had a tremendous political cost for them. They would have avoided doing that to themselves if they'd been smart enough to know what the rest of us were discussing here in comments back in April of 2021!

        When Chavez/Maduro decided to nationalize food distribution in Venezuela, there wasn't a libertarian in this forum who didn't know that this would lead to mass starvation in Venezuela. And when millions of Venezuelans were forced to flee Venezuela or face starvation, it was about as surprising to us as this morning's sunrise. Maduro wouldn't haven't done that to himself if he understood what would happen and why--even if it seems simple to us like tying our shoes. We know this, in part, because Maduro undid those policies once he understood the consequences.

        Everybody seems to have known what the consequences of Nord Stream 2 would mean for Ukraine--except the Biden administration. Even the Democrats in Congress knew! One of the reasons we know this was the result of ignorance on their part is because as soon as it became clear what the consequences of Nord Stream 2 would be, the Biden administration did everything they could to stop its completion. Biden wouldn't have done everything he could to stop Nord Stream 2 and hold it as a threat against Putin, if he didn't understand that dropping his opposition to Nord Stream 2 was a mistake.

        1. You assume the Dems in Congress have the same agenda as the people pulling Biden's strings. Thats not a good working assumption to make.

          As for Maduro, he only partially lifted his policies, and he only did it after he got people he didn't like anyway to leave. In short, it was a power move from the beginning, and it largely succeeded.

          1. I'll consider the possibility that their evil may explain their stupidity if you'll consider the possibility that their stupidity may explain their evil.

            1. Read the fucking WEF website

              1. Seriously this. The World Economic Forum website and their videos is an eye opening experience.

                "I can't even.." will be what's constantly on your lips 99% of your time there.

                It's like Scientology for billionaires and politicos.

                Don't forget to read their Global Leadership Fellows bios.

        2. https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1496149840018956288?t=ToURRTJ9Q3IfMxcOXg9TRA&s=19

          This is literally Communist education. This is exactly what they did in Communist countries.
          [Link]

      2. These are the marching orders for such policy.
        Go ahead and read through the cites yourselves.

        https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1495784033850175490?t=v9qoVqOq5382QVgJ8rRQYg&s=19

        I'm reading The Fourth Industrial Revolution, by World Economic Forum Chairman, Klaus Schwab, and it starts off really encouragingly. He and his want to shepherd us through "nothing less than a transformation of humankind," in the first sentence of the book.

        For those aching for the punchline of The Fourth Industrial Revolution, it lies here: a technological fusion of the "physical, digital, and biological worlds," which is creepy transhumanism under their direction. Schwab repeats this theme over and over in his two subsequent books

        This is the pretext for the existence of the World Economic Forum: the changes coming are inevitable and so fast and so dangerous that we need stewardship of them in the WEF technocrats, who are the only ones who can understand them adequately. This is the power grab.

        Actually, that was the pretext for the power grab ("it's so complex and dangerous!"). This is the power grab ("we need global coordination, under our expert control, of these changes").

        Their solution is a fusion of the kissing cousins of Communism and fascism, of course, for our "collective future," we need "a comprehensive and globally shared view" that rejects "linear (non-disruptive) thinking." Enter "stakeholders."

        Read this however you want, but this is Schwab's stated objective: to take the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which is already naturally underway, and shape it according to his vision. That vision is elsewhere seen to be fascistic, Communist, transhumanist, and under WEF control.

        Here's how Schwab characterizes the Fourth Industrial Revolution: enhanced cognitive powers, ubiquitous internet and surveillance technology equipped with AI. That's what he wants to control under a global hivemind.

        I'll just put these two things next to one another (first two images), noting that TIME Magazine has been the Great Reset Magazine for a while now (third image).

        Again, this book is designed to warn about the disruptive potential of the technological changes brought about by the internet and to justify the WEF and its stakeholders as the shepherds through this time, toward their global vision (see Canada today for a preview of utopia).

        [Links]

        1. Not "good but misguided intentions" unless they're your intentions.
          Hell, Hitler claimed to have "good intentions".
          They're fucking evil. That they are also to an extent stupid is the only thing that has delayed them.

  33. "Families are in distress after the first month without the expanded child tax credit"
    [...]
    "Had Congress renewed the expanded child tax credit at the end of last year, Jen Cousins would have received $1,000 from the government on Jan. 14.
    She would have used the money to fix the brakes on her family's only vehicle, a minivan. She would have taken her four kids to the eye doctor because they all need new glasses. Some of the money would have gone toward saving for fixing the roof of their house in Orlando, Fla.
    But in December, Congress left Washington for winter recess without passing President Biden's "Build Back Better" agenda, which included an extension of the expanded child tax credit, or CTC..."
    https://www.weku.org/local-news/2022-01-21/families-are-in-distress-after-the-first-month-without-the-expanded-child-tax-credit

    PR-piece for free shit, with the added hook of 'FOR THE CHILDRENZ!!!!!!'

    1. Man, that woman sure knows how to stretch a dollar. Brake job, 4 sets of eye exams and glasses, plus money left over for the savings account, all with $1000.

      1. Or the "reporter" sure knows how to tell a whopper.

        1. I don't think that the "reporter" is big into knowing the price of stuff.

      2. All she had to do was use aspirin as a contraceptive by holding it between her knees. Now that's no "medical disinformation."

      3. Or, take the kids to McDonald's a few times, spring for Disney+, and stock up on scratch-offs?

    2. sort of off topic I was surprised to find out amazon was selling nesspresso pods as snap allowed, not sure why a luxury item is allowed

      1. It astonishing what is allowed to be purchased with EBT. At my local 711, they offer a full pizza, but since EBT doesn't cover cooked and/or heated food, they only sell it frozen and heat it up for you after you buy it.

    3. As if government is just a big nipple in the sky.

    4. Most interesting, her major complaint is how the cost of everything keeps going up. Uh, yeah. Shall we discuss the why's of that?

  34. This is a dangerous time:

    Why is Biden now less popular than Trump? He's earned it.

    President Joe Biden is now so unpopular that he has fallen a bit below even Donald Trump’s dismal showing at this point in his presidency.

    https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/6828413001

    Will Biden, in a quest for unified popular support, start WW3 against a nuclear power?

    And will democrats reminder why they hated George W. Bush? Or will they replace Harris with Cheney, their new man crush?

    Only time will tell.

    1. "Trump's Behavior Could Start WWIII, Says GOP Senator"
      [...]
      "President Donald Trump could put the U.S. “on the path to World War III” because he treats the presidency “like he’s doing The Apprentice or something” said a senior Republican Sunday.
      Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee capped a week of insults he traded with Trump by saying he knows “for a fact that every single day at the White House, it’s a situation of trying to contain” the president..."
      https://news.yahoo.com/trump-apos-behavior-could-start-095753331.html

      TDS-addled asshole has yet to make a comment regarding the drooler-in-chief.

    2. World War V. The Cold War was WIII, The War On Terror was/is WWIV.

      But otherwise, yes. Someone needs to get Gramps to stop drooling on the Nuclear Football.

    3. Or will they replace Harris with Cheney, their new man crush?

      Who is stupid enough to seriously ask this question? Liz is useful as a prop on a specific issue, nothing more. She's the new Joe Lieberman.

      1. Liz, Dick, whatever. Same idea, different parts.

    4. But NO MEAN TWEETS!

  35. San Fran in the forefront of the fight against racism!

    "Dozens of S.F.’s Black-owned businesses learn they don’t have to pay back pandemic loans"
    [...]
    "Lloyd Lacy Jr., owner of a barbershop in the Ingleside neighborhood, said he almost had to pull his car over when he got the news that he wouldn’t have to pay back his $50,000 loan from the city.
    “It’s hard to put into words what this means to me,” Lacy, 76, said. “Some of my clients have been coming to my shop since the 1990s.”..."
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/dozens-of-sfs-black-owned-businesses-learn-they-dont-have-to-pay-back-pandemic-loans/ar-AATXB6s?ocid=uxbndlbing

    It's easy for taxpayers to put into words what it means:
    WHAT DA FUQ?!

    1. I guess they weren't really "loans", then. Just another fucking handout.

    2. Thanks, taxpayers!

      1. Thanks, white people.

        (Just kidding. No person ever has said, or will say, those words.)

  36. It's OK. The sanctions will bring Russia to it's knees.

    Anybody in the administration done a google search on the oil sanctions against Japan in the last century?

    1. They probably won't bring Russia to its knees.

      But what would you do if you were President?

      1. Pop some popcorn.

    2. Now that you mention it, Putin does remind of a bit of a Tojo.

    3. Difference being Japan had no oil and little of anything else but rice and fish. Russia has plenty of resources on its own land.

  37. CDC withholds data

    We anti-vaxx conspiracy theorists knew this over a year ago. I wonder why it's news now. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

    1. "One of the reasons the agency offered as an explanation was worries that people might draw conclusions from the information that officials didn't want them to—which is to say, our national public health agency withholds public health information that doesn't conform to political messaging standards."

      Joe Friday is conspicuous by his absence.

      1. Whats the problem? They only withheld the data that would lead people to naturally do the opposite of what they were pushing. How were they going to get people to fall in line if the data was saying otherwise?

        Really, the benevolent overlords were just protecting us stupid, drooling peasants. Bless them

        1. "...the benevolent overlords were just protecting us stupid, drooling peasants."

          Best definition of authority I've seen in a while.

    2. Speaking of crazy medical conspiracy theories, Queen Elizabeth came down with Covid over the weekend.

      Anyone care to guess what she's taking for it?

      https://notthebee.com/article/queen-elizabeth-has-the-rona-and-it-looks-as-if-she-might-be-taking-horse-medicine

      1. The link says it all. Horse medicine.

      2. Yep, and they got caught:

        Australian TV network apologises for suggesting Queen took dewormer drug ivermectin to treat COVID

        A segment on the Nine Network programme A Current Affair on Monday, which discussed the Queen, showed footage of the drug Stromectol, which contains ivermectin and is used to treat roundworm infections.

        The shot immediately followed an image of the drug Sotrovimab, which has been approved for the treatment of COVID-19 infections.

        In an apology, the Nine Network said: “Last night our report on the Queen contained a shot that should not have been included.

        “The shot was included as a result of human error.

        “We were highlighting an approved infusion medication called Sotrovimab and the report accidentally cut to a shot of Stromectol - a product which contains ivermectin.

        1. Someone's getting unpersoned.

        2. So much for getting invited to tea.

  38. "Bill would force companies to publicly report pay by gender, ethnicity"
    [...]
    Last year California employers made their first reports to the state under a 2020 law requiring them to show how much they pay employees based on their jobs, as well as other indicators like race, sex and ethnicity.
    Now, advocates for wage transparency and closing gender and race-based wage gaps are building on that victory with a new bill, SB 1162, which would require companies to release more information about how much they pay employees, and the contractors they hire out through third parties.
    “The reason this is particularly important is that pay transparency is one of multiple tools that can be used to close gender or racial wage gap,” said State Sen. Monique Limón, D-Santa Barbara, the bill’s author..."
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bill-would-force-companies-to-publicly-report-pay-by-gender-ethnicity/ar-AAU0erl

    And if that doesn't chase businesses out of state, we'll require them to report by eye-color!

    1. Bets on how long before California gets to skull shape charts?

      1. PhrenologyIs back, baby!

    2. California's Stalinists (i.e. the people in charge) are doing everything they can to run the place into the ground.

  39. Law professor and blogger Eugene Volokh disagrees with the decision: "Regulation of (say) surgery or the distribution of pharmaceuticals is regulation of conduct, and the speech between surgeon and patient might well be incidental to that conduct," he writes at The Volokh Conspiracy. "But the regulation of people who give advice about diet (or who give psychotherapeutic advice, without prescribing drugs) is all about regulating speech."

    oh, he's SO close to getting it. Maybe eventually

    1. He's just scared. You know what's going to happen to him if he admits it.

  40. Google, how many days to midterm elections?

    Google says, "In 259 days."

    1. The date will be reset until the first of Never because of Russia and insurrectionists and stuff.

  41. does Brandon *know* he's gaslighting us about war, or does he believe the things he tells us?

    1. Do you know what gaslighting means?

      1. every time I'm amazed Ingrid Bergman chucks the kid into the lake.

        1. I'm serious. That word is being thrown around a lot and I have yet to see it used properly.

          1. my seriousness is not defined by whether you understand my reference.

            1. I've never seen the movie, nor do I plan to.

            2. "does Brandon *know* he's gaslighting us about war, or does he believe the things he tells us?"

              Gaslighting is trying to confuse someone by convincing them that something they know to be true is not. Not defending Biden here, but what you said is not an example of gaslighting.

              1. His state spokesman said there was evidence russia would invade last month. When questioned on what evidence he said he just gave it, being the statement regarding the evidence. They had no evidence. That is gaslighting you retarded fuck.

              2. Also sad you had to go look up the definition and it took 16 minutes lol.

              3. Yeah, I think this is more of a "pissing on you and telling you it's raining" thing that gaslight.

          2. You're the king of not understanding what words mean. LOL.

      2. every time (comma) ... edit function please!

  42. >>A "fuck the police" shirt isn't sufficient cause for arrest, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit reminds Ohio cops.

    NWA raised the bar 30 years ago dummies.

      1. Allegiant Airlines: Allied behind Karen.

      2. “The video in question depicts part of an incident involving a passenger who failed to comply with repeated crew member requests to adhere to the federal face mask policy,” the airline said in a statement.
        ---------
        Federal face mask policy states that your mask can't say "Let's go Brandon?"

  43. Good news, 4th dose of the vaccine may be recommended this fall!

    1. The article I read said the CDC was considering making it a yearly thing. And if you don't comply then you can't participate in society.

      1. Do they mean once a year? Given that one shot only lasts four months--wouldn't that mean three shots a year?

        1. I thought the shot didn't work at all. Get your narrative straight.

          1. Nice strawman argument. Nobody has said at all. They've said it was a prophylactic. But you create strawman arguments instead of arguing ideas despite your claims of the latter.

            Also the longevity of the shot makes the booster not that good, with a 3 month drop off. The average person catches a cold 2 to 3 times a year, so unless you are advocating quarterly boosters, there is a large period where the shots are lightly effective at best. But let's shut down society over that, right?

          2. It was a straight question. If the CDC says we need a yearly shot, how will that work if the shot doesn't actually last a full year?

            1. You're sneaking in a premise here. I don't know for sure if it lasts a year or not. I'm pretty sure they're still figuring that out.

              1. The CDC says the booster effectiveness wanes after four months. It's not my premise.

                1. If that's the case then yes the math doesn't add up.

                  1. Antivaxxer!!!!!

        2. The boosters are only good for 12 weeks, but they don't kick in for 2 weeks. So you really only have 10 weeks of coverage, so you'll need 5 shots a year.

          It's funny with all those antibodies produced that the boosters aren't more effective. Almost as if the original 2 shots aren't really wearing off, the virus is mutating and getting more of the original vaccine doesn't help much.

          1. This, of course, is what all of us were saying would happen with leaky vaccines. The evolutionary pressure for the virus is to evade (in the case the protein spike), and that's exactly what it did. The only question is -- after your protection has faded, does this leave you more vulnerable to the virus than if you had never been jabbed?

            1. You don't understand what a leaky vaccine is. I would link to the original "leaky vaccine" study's article explaining your misunderstanding, but I've linked to it several times before, so it's obvious you won't read it or learn from it.

              1. It's pretty ballsy for Mr. Sealion himself to refuse to provide a cite.

              2. What do you think a leaky vaccine is?

              3. Sure you have little buddy.

              1. Isn't that handy. The article tells you what conclusions you should draw from it right at the top. No need to think or read any further.

                I don't know what the right answer is, but I think that the possibility that it wasn't a great idea to go straight for mass vaccination should at least be publicly and openly discussed.

              2. I don't know if you've actually read this or not, but it doesn't say anything close to what you think it does. They flat out admit that it's a possibility, but that it's no reason not to vaccinate anyway.

                Now it's more than a possibility.

                1. "I don't know if you've actually read this or not, but it doesn't say anything close to what you think it does"

                  *spoiler*
                  He hasn't.

                  1. It's literally in the headline, too.

                    "Vaccines could affect how the coronavirus evolves – but that’s no reason to skip your shot"

                    1. “Leaky” has a very specific meaning, explained in the article.

                2. You misunderstood if you think it says that.

    2. I know people who got multiple vax shots and boosters across multiple states.

      They didnt wait for a recommendation they just did it.

    3. So what if it is? Plenty of vaccines require multiple doses. Why is this supposed to be some big "gotcha".

      1. It's true, I went in for my bi-monthly Tetanus, Polio, Diphtheria, Flu and HPV vaccines.

        1. Whenever I'm asked "Papiers bitte" for my flu passport, I can proudly show that I haven't missed a week.

        2. I've posted replies before on how many shots are in the courses for those diseases. You must have seen the comments, yet not internalized the information.

          1. Those are proven courses that have long lasting efficacy. At least 10 years, not 4 months.

          2. And you still don’t understand the difference in efficacy of those shots vs. the covid jab.

        3. Tetanus (for an adult who has never been vaccinated): 3 doses
          Polio: 4 doses
          Flu: yearly
          HPV: 2 doses

          1. And wr are on the 4th booster shot in a year and Isreal at 80% compliance still surged over the winter dummy.

          2. The Flu shot isn't a booster.
            Each one is for a different influenza virus with far greater genetic diversity than between a Delta and Omicron.

          3. Jesus h Science, and you think you’re intelligent?

          4. How many "breakthrough" cases of tetanus, polio, and HPV are there every year?

  44. "One of the reasons the agency offered as an explanation was worries that people might draw conclusions from the information that officials didn't want them to—which is to say, our national public health agency withholds public health information that doesn't conform to political messaging standards."

    Democracy! only works (in terms of providing desired outcomes) if the people are provided with curated information. The mask almost slipped off in 2016 when the left went on a rant about "disinformation" from Russians, alt-rightists, and ETs. Thank goodness they corrected themselves and got back on-message in 2020, and focused on demanding more democracy to fulfill the will of the people.

  45. If Mexico got some counties in south Texas to declare themselves independent republics and then sent in troops to "protect" them I would say it had invaded the US.

    1. I'd say if the folks in those counties wanted to be part of Mexico instead of the U.S., then let them. With reparations, of course, for any property taken from those who wish to remain U.S. citizens.

      1. Or, they could move to Mexico.

    2. Why would they do that when sending millions of "refugees" to send back remittances is so much easier?

    3. Should Russia care if that happened?

  46. monkeys killing monkeys killing monkeys over pieces of the ground.

  47. Biden just gave a speech, and it was great.

    He made it clear that we're not going to war over Ukraine.

    He made it clear that we will defend our NATO allies in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania if he comes after them, and he made it clear that U.S. assets already in Europe will be redeployed to those allies' countries for defensive purposes.

    Biden made it clear that Nord Stream 2 will not go forward.

    If Trump were the president, I don't think he could have given this speech any better, but if Trump were president, I don't think we'd be in this mess--because he never would have given Nord Stream 2 a green light. I'm looking forward to November when the Republicans take control of Congress, and Biden's power is significantly diminished. And no matter who the Republicans nominate for president in 2024, they'll need to try really hard to find someone worse than Biden. I'll be so glad when Biden is gone.

    All that being said, Biden made a good speech today, and it is what it is.

    1. The things is ... there was never going to be a war over Ukraine, no matter what happened.

      The United States military is not capable of fighting a war with any military power that has capacities even remotely on par with its own. That's just the reality of the situation. Germany and Europe need Nord Stream more than Russia, so they do not have much leverage either.

      None of this really has much to do with Biden, but with the fact that the United States' foreign influence is rapidly dwindling while, at the same time, it collapses domestically into a third-rate dictatorship that will inevitably be crushed by a mountain of debt.

      2024 is not going to fix this sinking ship.

      1. This

    2. ABANDONING OUR KURDISH.....ERRR....OUR UKRANIAN ALLIES!

      I think I did it right.

      1. Watching Ken go full, Biden-sucking neocon has really been something.

        1. Don't be like that.
          I disagree with Ken here too, and think he's dead wrong. But I also know that he thinks carefully about this stuff and is giving his honest opinion in the hopes of fair debate.

          Save your opprobrium for the Nazis, the fifty-centers, the trolls and the deliberate liars like Shrike, White Mike, sarcasmic, Jeff and all their socks.

          1. He thinks carefully to the extent he develops a one-size-fits-all model and then posts dozens of comments reiterating that model with rigid refusal to alter it in the slightest.
            Go back to the Suleimani threads - it took him 2 years to budge on his take that it was stupid to hit him, despite numerous detailed arguments refuting his paradigm and reality itself producing different results.
            I like Ken, but that shit is annoying. He speaks as if he's an authority and reinforces his own erroneous conclusions, misleading people.
            He leaves no room for "agree to disagree", but insists his autistic model is the way it is and is the only way it can possibly be- EVEN WHEN IT'S ALREADY BEEN PROVEN WRONG.
            In this case, Ken is literally pushing propaganda from the same sources as "WMDs in Iraq" and "Russian collusion", not to mention covid or any of the other bullshit, and lending moral support for conflict with Russia.
            Fuck that.

            Ken's a big boy, and he needs to hear when he's wrong/inflexible.

        2. To be fair, Nardz, when was the last time the US were allied with someone we disliked as much as we dislike Putin?

          Oh, wait...

          1. Turkey?

            But we really need to assess where we're at. Taking everyone at face value, that is governments acting for the benefit of their nations and people, from a realpolitik standpoint there is no more valuable potential alliance than the US+Russia. Geographically and militarily, it is uncontestable. Both China and Europe are unreliable allies and our only economic rivals.

            But we don't have that, we have the WEF running western governments and waging war ON US, THE PEOPLE, to subjugate/kill the middle and working classes.

            Putin is the enemy of our enemy, not a threat to us.

            1. I was thinking of Stalin. I would agree that there is nothing to be gained for us by reflexively opposing Russia when they are not rivals for resources we need.

    3. All that being said, Biden made a good speech today, and it is what it is.

      Was the antenna on his head visible?

    4. Without Nord Stream, Germany's gonna have a tough time keeping the lights on.

      1. The U.S. needs to start fracking like crazy again. Energy was always a foreign policy issue, and there isn't anything about the progressives' Green New Deal fantasies that changes that equation.

        Yes, Germany is still dependent on energy, and natural gas, and guess what? They have untapped natural gas reserves of their own they don't tap because of the political concerns of environmentalists in their own country!

        https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/how-much-does-germany-need-russian-gas-2022-01-20/

        If they want someone to do the dirty work for them, we should be doing that for them rather than Putin--and there's no good reason why we can't--except for the political opposition of environmentalists in our own country.

        1. Convenient for the WEF who wants to gut the people and raise energy prices so they can assume totalitarian power.
          But I'm sure it's just stupidity instead of some evil plan they actually fucking advertise openly and write books about...

          I mean, So who DOESN'T have a bust of Vladimir Lenin on their bookshelf? https://t.co/yNa6yUVrt0

    5. So will he now be Time's Person of the Year for keeping us from going to war?

      I'm [sadly] not joking. Still if they stick to their decades long schedule it will be after the mid terms.

    6. He made it clear that we're not going to war over Ukraine.

      Are you sure about that? Someone over there knows why Hunter was paid all that money. Guess we better hope it is Putin.

  48. افضل شركة عزل اسطح بالرياض
    افضل شركة عزل فوم بالرياض
    شركة عزل بالرياض
    للتواصل اضغط هنا adress

  49. adress
    شركة عزل فوم

  50. Didn't you hear? Bidenflation, high gasoline prices, 1/6 political prisoners in the Gulag, Biden Senility is all due to the Ukraine War!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.