Enes Kanter Freedom on China and Free Speech: 'This Is Bigger Than Basketball'
"While we are dribbling a ball on the other side of the ocean, people are losing their loved ones, losing their lives, and losing their hopes."

Enes Kanter Freedom knows firsthand how important it is that citizens be allowed to criticize their governments.
Born in Zurich, the basketball player spent most of his young life in Turkey—a place to which he can no longer safely return. Freedom, who now lives in the U.S. and has played for a decade in the NBA, made a name for himself as an outspoken critic of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government. His family has been targeted for retribution, and Freedom can no longer safely contact them. But he hasn't slowed his roll, choosing to criticize the basketball world's close ties with the Chinese Communist Party, which carries out some of today's most heinous atrocities: interning Uyghur ethnic minorities in prison camps, stripping Hong Kongers of their most fundamental civil liberties, surveilling political dissidents, and censoring speech. But China is filled with basketball fans who give the NBA a lot of money—and full of factories, possibly even those using forced Uyghur labor, where athletic companies like Nike produce their shoes.
When Freedom was growing up in Van and Ankara, it was a tough sell getting his family to support his basketball dreams. "I want you to be a good student before being a good basketball player," his dad told him. His dad, a scientist, and his mom, a nurse, were all about education. "They wanted me to go to school, then focus on nothing else, just studying all day—until I made my first check. After that, they're like, 'OK. You're playing basketball from now on.'" He moved to the U.S. in 2009 to attend a California prep school for one year before signing with the University of Kentucky, where he studied for a short time before the Utah Jazz drafted him in 2011.
Since then, Freedom has also played for the Oklahoma City Thunder, the New York Knicks, the Portland Trail Blazers, and the Boston Celtics. In February, the Celtics traded Freedom to the Houston Rockets. The Rockets waived him, releasing Freedom before his contract was over. Freedom claims this was due to his outspoken criticism of the Chinese government, something NBA Commissioner Adam Silver has denied.
During his time in the NBA, Freedom has feuded with players like LeBron James, criticizing him for his "money over morals" attitude—in Freedom's words—and James' reluctance to criticize the NBA's relationship with China. "Sad & disgusting how these athletes pretend they care about social justice," tweeted Freedom last year. "They really do 'shut up & dribble' when Big Boss [Chinese flag emoji] says so," he continued. "Did you educate yourself about the slave labor that made your shoes or is that not part of your research?"
Freedom says he got little pushback from the NBA when he was speaking out about the Turkish government's atrocities. But his commentary on China has drawn the ire of both NBA higher-ups and star players.
In June, Reason's Noor Greene spoke with Freedom about his new last name, his antagonism toward companies and players who cozy up to China, and the Turkish government's enmity toward free speech.
Reason: You said in one of your interviews the name Freedom was inspired by a visit that you made to the U.S. in 2009.
Freedom: In 2009, I was going to prep school for the first time. We had a really tough practice. After the practice, we were all sitting around in the locker room checking our phones. Back then, we all had Facebook. So I saw one of my teammates criticize the president and was very scared for him. I was like, "Dude, what are you doing?"
He's like, "What happened?" I was like, "I saw your post." And he's like, "OK." And I was like, "Well, you might be in jail tomorrow." He started to laugh and he was like, "This is not Turkey. This is America."
He started to explain to me about freedom of speech, religion, expression, protest. I still didn't get it. If you did that in Turkey, you'd be in jail the next day, so I was very confused. People explained to me: You are not going to be thrown in jail, your family won't be tortured just because you talk about some of the problems that are happening in America.
I was like, "Wow, this is so beautiful." I think after water and food, freedom is the most important thing human beings can have. So I was like, "I want to make this part of me. I want to make that word part of me and inspire millions of kids out there."

So you changed your name. Do you get an option during your U.S. citizenship process to change your name?
They showed me a paper and they were like, "Would you like to change your name? Would you want to add another name?" so I was like, "Yeah, I do," and I made Freedom my last name.
You became a U.S. citizen in November. But you had a problem in the past with your application. Why was it so hard for you to become a U.S. citizen?
I started to talk about some of the problems in Turkey. Back in 2013, there was a big corruption scandal. President Erdogan and some of his family members were involved in it. After that scandal, he started to go around putting innocent people in jail—prosecutors, lawyers, judges, and police and some innocent people. After that, he started to shut down media outlets, magazines, newspapers, TV channels. I was like, "This is unacceptable, and I'm going to say something about it."
I literally put a tweet out there. Because of the NBA platform, it became a conversation. I was like, "Wow, even one single tweet can affect this much. From now on, I'm going to start to pay attention about what's going on in my country more and more."
I started to study about what's going on in my country, in America, the relationship between America and Turkey, the things that are happening in the Middle East. I started to talk more.
Because of the NBA platform, many media outlets wanted me to interview and write op-eds for them. The things I talked about really bothered the Turkish government and affected me and my family. My dad got fired from his job. My sister went to medical school for six years; until this day, she still cannot find a job.
The saddest one was my little brother. He wanted to be an NBA player like his big brother, but he was getting kicked out of every team. He was telling me, "I'm the tallest one in my team" or "I'm the best player in our team. Why am I getting kicked out?"
They were getting affected so much, they had to put a statement out there saying, "We are disowning Enes." I remember going to practice that day. It was definitely one of the toughest days of my life.
The Turkish government didn't believe that. They sent police to my [parents'] house in Turkey and raided the whole house. They took electronics away because they wanted to see if I was still in contact with my family. Phones, computers, laptops, iPads—they took all of them. They couldn't find evidence, but they still took my dad to jail for a while. But we put so much pressure from here, with politicians and media, that they had to let him go.
After that, they revoked my passport and put my name on the Interpol list. I still count as an international criminal. I didn't have any passport and I wasn't an American citizen; I just had a green card. So that's why, because my name was on the Interpol list, I couldn't really travel anywhere outside of America. I had to wait five, six years to become a citizen.
How is your family back in Turkey?
Well, because my dad was in jail, they're really scared. Because [the Turkish government] listens to everything—all the phones, they track down phones, I.P. numbers, and they try to see if there's still contact with me or not—if there is any communication, they'll all be in jail.
The last time I saw my family, it was back in 2015. But my brother plays basketball in Poland, so I ask him, "How's my family doing? How's my mom? How's my dad?" He sends me pictures sometimes of them and stuff, so that's the situation.
Do you remember the last time you talked to them?
To be honest, I can't even remember. It's been that long.
You are passionate about human rights and civil liberties. You focused for a while on the Uyghur issue in China. How did that come about?
Last summer, I was at a basketball camp in New York. After the basketball camp, all the kids and parents were lined up, getting pictures and autographs one by one. I took a picture with this kid.
While I was taking a picture, his parent called me out in front of everybody and said, "How can you call yourself a human rights activist when your Muslim brothers and sisters are getting tortured and raped every day in concentration camps in China?"
I was just shocked. I took a picture, I turned around, and I was like, "I promise I'm going to get back to you." I canceled everything that day. I went back to my hotel and I started to study about what's going on, not just Uyghurs. I started with Uyghurs.
First of all, I was like, "I cannot believe that I have not or no one has said anything about this issue before." I called my manager. I was like, "I need you to find me a concentration camp survivor." He was like, "What are you talking about?" Because on the internet, you can find all news—good news, bad news, fake news. You don't know which one is true. So he found me one. Actually, the woman that he found [Tursunay Ziyawudun], you just interviewed.
So I sit down on a Zoom and start to have a conversation with her. She was telling me about all the tortures, gang rapes, forced sterilization, abortion, and how many people were actually inside, the numbers, and how many people are getting killed inside, how are they brainwashed. She told me about organ harvesting and surveillance cameras.
If a human being carries a heart, you have to talk about it. It doesn't matter what it costs.
At the end of our conversation, I asked her, "OK, what can I do for you?" She said, "Nothing." I was like, "What do you mean 'nothing'?" She said, "Well, I'm in America. I'm here. I'm safe. But there are millions of people in concentration camps right now, waiting for your help. Help those people, not me." I was like, "Whoa."
While I was studying Uyghurs, obviously other links popped up. I clicked on it. It was about Tibet. I was always hearing about Taiwan on the news, and Hong Kong. I hear about Mongolia.
So I was like, "You know what? These are the biggest human rights abuses in the world today and I'm going to say something about it." It was the perfect time because it was right before the [Beijing] Winter Olympics.
What was the most controversial tweet you put out there?
The most attention that I had was about Nike, because it was the first time ever that a player called what Nike—the biggest sponsor of the NBA—is doing modern-day slavery. They stand up for Black Lives Matter in America, the Latino community, no Asian hate, LGBTQ community. But when it comes to China, they remain silent. And I was like, "We have to expose this."
When I was a kid, whenever I watched an NBA game, the first thing that I was watching was the shoes. What color? What brand? Then I was going out there and buying it.
So I wanted to do it in a very unique way where I could put all these abuses on a shoe and go out there and play. There's no rule against it in the NBA. A lot of people were putting Black Lives Matter, Breonna Taylor, "I can't breathe," and all these phrases, so I was like, there's no rule against it.
So we worked with this artist who had been oppressed by his government and he created the shoes. Free Tibet, Free Uyghurs, stop organ harvesting and surveillance camps. It was getting so much attention. I remember my first game. It was on ESPN, Madison Square Garden. The whole world was watching that game. I put the shoes on, I went out there, and I started to warm up and all the players were looking at my shoes. They're like, "This is very interesting. I've never seen this color," because it was so colorful and there was a flag on it and it was saying, "Free Tibet."
Right before the game, we sang the national anthem, we came in a huddle, and two gentlemen from the Celtics came to me and said, "You have to take your shoes off." I'm like, "What are you talking about?" He said, "Your shoes have been getting so much attention. We've been getting so many calls. You have to take your shoes off."
I was like, "I cannot believe they're telling me to take my shoes off." It was a perfect moment because I was just getting ready for my citizenship test. I closed my eyes. I was, "OK. There are 27 amendments: First Amendment, freedom of speech." I was like: "No, I'm not taking my shoes off. I don't care if I get fined."
They said, "We are not talking about a fine. We're talking about getting banned." Literally they were threatening me with getting banned just because I was wearing those shoes.
At halftime, I went back to my locker room. I had thousands of notifications on my phone. I clicked on my manager's text message. He said, "Every Celtics game is banned in China for the rest of the year." I was like, "That shows my point."
There's 24 minutes in one half. It took China 24 minutes to ban every Celtics game on television. That's literally the censorship and dictatorship that I was talking about.
After the game, obviously there was a huge media storm and I told my manager, "I'm not going to do any media," because I didn't want my teammates to think I'm doing this for attention. For the next one or two months, we did not do any media.
After the game, I was getting calls from the NBA and the players association. They told me, "Take your shoes off. You're not going to wear this ever again."
I talked about the problems that were happening in Turkey for the last 10 years, and I did not get one phone call. I talked about the things that happened in China, and my phone was ringing once every hour, me and my manager's.
They were harassing us so much that I was like, "OK, I promise you I'm not going to wear Free Tibet shoes ever again." So the next game, I wear Free Uyghur shoes. They call me after the game. They're like, "You're a liar. You lied to us. You said you're never going to wear Free Tibet shoes." I was like, "I did not wear Free Tibet shoes. I wore Free Uyghur shoes." At that point, they understood that they're not going to handle me because they're not going to make me apologize or take my tweet down. They're not going to make me say, "Oh, I didn't know enough. I was not educated enough." I was like, "I'm going all in."
I wore Winnie the Pooh shoes. Winnie the Pooh is banned in China. People were making fun of the president, Xi Jinping—they were telling him, "You look like Winnie the Pooh." So he literally banned the whole cartoon in the whole country.
And then the next one we talk about Nike. And the next one, we talk about Hong Kong and Taiwan and stop organ harvesting. Everyone was asking me, "Where can I buy these shoes?" I was like, "I'm not going to even sell them because I'm literally doing this just for human rights."
You mentioned earlier that you were concerned that some people might view this as a bid for attention. Was there any indication to you that some people thought that?
I didn't want to put the shoes out there for sale or anything like that, because I didn't want anyone to think that I'm doing this for attention, especially my teammates. I was talking about very uncomfortable situations that the NBA never wanted to talk about.
I remember my teammates were coming to me one by one in the locker room and saying, "You know this is your last year, right? You are not going to be able to get any contract after this." They were telling me, "Listen. You attack Nike, you attack China, you won't play another minute in this league ever again."
I was like, "Well, this is the right thing to do. I'm just going to continue to keep doing what I'm doing."
Was there any truth to what they were telling you?
Of course. Obviously, the NBA's not going to come out there and say, "We released him because of that." In February, I got traded to not just any team, but the Houston Rockets. The Houston Rockets was the first time that a general manager tweeted something about Hong Kong. Then he had to pull his tweet down and apologize.
Houston Rockets was China's team because of [former NBA player] Yao Ming. It was the first team that went to China and played a friendly game, I believe it was against the Lakers.
When was the last time you played?
February.
Where are you with the NBA now?
Good question. Obviously, before everything, I'm a basketball player. I am very thankful for the NBA for giving me this huge platform worldwide. But if they're going to do something wrong, I'm going to expose them.
Where am I with the NBA right now? I don't even know. I'm just waiting to hear from them. And I told every team, I told my agent to tell every general manager in the NBA, every owner, every coach, "I'm ready to play. I want to play."
Obviously playing basketball is very important to you. Do you have any regrets?
I played 11 years in this league and I want to continue to play. I'm healthy. I'm 30. I can play.
But this is bigger than basketball, this is bigger than myself, and this is bigger than the NBA. While we are dribbling a ball on the other side of the ocean, people are losing their loved ones, losing their lives, and losing their hopes. How can anyone tell me to stop talking about the problems that are happening around the world and just focus on your game?
I'm coming from a country where if you say anything against the government, you'll be in jail the next day. If you say you don't like the president, your family might be tortured. My manager's wife's dad liked one of my posts on Twitter; he was in jail for 13 days. So I have seen the pain. I experienced it firsthand. So no one should tell me to just stop talking about all the problems and focus on your game. This is bigger than basketball and I have no regrets.
This interview has been condensed and edited for style and clarity.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "'This Is Bigger Than Basketball'."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
“I was like, “I cannot believe they’re telling me to take my shoes off.” It was a perfect moment because I was just getting ready for my citizenship test. I closed my eyes. I was, “OK. There are 27 amendments: First Amendment, freedom of speech.” I was like: “No, I’m not taking my shoes off. I don’t care if I get fined.”
They said, “We are not talking about a fine. We’re talking about getting banned.” Literally they were threatening me with getting banned just because I was wearing those shoes.”
Well, we know from these pages that getting banned by a private organization over presenting a message the organization is not censorship, nor does it involve any constitutionally protected rights, so I am not certain what the point of this article is, exactly, as it nothing to do with what Reason normally considers “free speech”.
Uhm. At what point does either Kantur Freedom or the Reason interviewer suggest any sort of coercion to force the NBA to allow him to play? Or any coercion to force the NBA to cut ties with China? In fact, he says he doesn't care about a fine or a ban, that he's going to continue speaking up. It's his freedom to do so just as the NBA has the freedom to set league policy.
I believe the point that Kantur is trying to make here is the blatant hypocrisy on the part of the NBA and LeBron James specifically. At no point in this article do they endorse coercion against the NBA.... O.o
So im trying to figure out what YOUR point is
Enes Kanter Freedom on China and Free Speech
Enes Kanter Freedom knows firsthand how important it is that citizens be allowed to criticize their governments.
Right there in the title and the first line of the article. Not to mention the whole tenor of the article is that the NBA is punishing Freedom at the behest of the Chinese government.
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I did not ever think it would even be achievable , however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks, easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail.
For more detail visit this site… http://www.Profit97.com
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a (ad-03) lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
Just open the link——————–>>> https://smart.online100.workers.dev/
You read the quote I used in my original post? You read the headline of the article?
Here, let me spell it out for you, since some of you cannot seem to argue beyond simplistic black/white narratives.
Every instance of a person's voice being silenced is a type of censorship.
Censorship by a private individual using private resources is, and ought to be, a legally protected expression of private property rights.
Not every expression of private property rights is wise or just or defensible or moral. Defending the right of a private individual to censor speech on his/her own private property does not in any way endorse or condemn the speech being censored.
Censorship by the government is and ought to be illegal and unconstitutional.
Got it?
“Every instance of a person’s voice being silenced is a type of censorship.”
I can’t believe that I’m doing this on a Jeff post, but this^. (The rest of course is typical authoritarian BS)
Free speech doesn’t begin and end with the government. The first amendment isn’t the sole justification.
Censorship by a church, corporation or association may be legally permissible but it doesn’t make it morally right.
Only in instances that directly lead to the infringement and abuse of the rights of others should censorship be considered.
(The rest of course is typical authoritarian BS)
Defending private property rights is now "authoritarian BS" to ML. Not surprising really, since he's an authoritarian himself and so he has to deflect from his own socially conservative authoritarianism to try to gaslight everyone else into thinking that everyone else is as bad as he is.
You weren't defending private property rights, you were excusing censorship.
Censorship by private individuals on private property? Of course that is defending private property rights.
If you come on my property, even if invited (somehow), and start spouting your right-wing bullshit, I have every right as the property owner to tell you to shut up and leave. That is my right to do so as the property owner. And that right doesn't change if the property is a virtual space or a physical space. That is defending private property rights.
You are an authoritarian on the matter because you are using a "free speech" crusade to invade and invalidate the private property rights of individuals in order to have the government force them to host speech that they don't want. That is wrong.
Again, you're deliberately conflating legality with morality. No surprise you don't understand the difference.
Particularly since your analogy is shit.
If you invite me to come a speak on your property and don't like what I have to say and try to censor me, close my bank accounts, credit cards and mortgage, you may have a legal right, but you're an evil piece of shit...
And you are an evil piece-of-shit, Jeff.
I’m not sure that all pathological liars are “evil”, but I bet they’re more likely to be than other people.
Wonder if he’s all for property rights when it comes to Catholic hospitals. See next comment by Mickey Rat…
Your comments are always so completely disconnected from anything I said. You're like Sqrlsy's lamer, more pedantic brother.
So, you are arguing FOR government compelling speech from private companies.
Is this where Mike argues censorship is speech but also it isnt corporate speech under 230?
"So, you are arguing FOR government compelling speech from private companies."
No, that's not what he was saying at all, slimebag.
Reading comprehension fail or cheap rhetoric again, Mike?
You can tell jeff, mike, and other leftists didn't bother to read the 60 page fifth circuit ruling that went through all 5 USSC cases related to these companies and speech. The cpurt even discussed how censorship is not speech. And how the nobody claims flyers on a community board is the speech of the company.
But Mike and others are intellectually lazy so they stick with the most sophomoric arguments that agree with their first impressions or there desired outcome.
You can tell that Jesse never reads anything outside of his right-wing bubble.
The fifth circuit is a right wing bubble? What an odd accusation.
It totally negates the 60 page ruling and the direction of the prior 5 USSC cases. Meaning jeff doesn't have to read or understand it.
Exactly what I claim he would do.
Your comment is biased.
Jesse: "the 60 page fifth circuit ruling that went through all 5 USSC cases related to these companies and speech."
Jeffy: "riGhT-wINg bUBbLE."
At least he is consistent. But don't you dare fucking call him a leftist.
So a judge on the Fifth Circuit wrote a 60-page ruling that supports Team Red's agenda of wanting to punish social media. A federal judge wrote a SIXTY-PAGE ruling! How can you argue against THAT????????? Of course he doesn't even acknowledge the flaws in the ruling because those don't appear in his right-wing media feed. Here is a deconstruction of this ruling:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/fifth-circuits-social-media-decision-dangerous-example-first-amendment-absolutism
Wow, you're using an actual Democratic Party house organ to attack the court ruling? You can't even bother to pretend you're not a shill any more, huh.
And to think that you accused Jesse of being in a bubble. Imagine your meltdown if he was quoting opinions directly from RNC Research?
I see. So you ignore the content of my link because it came from outside of your bubble.
So let's review:
Jesse: Here's a 60 page ruling from a Fifth Circuit judge which totally pwns you!
Me: Umm that ruling is flawed, and you are living in a bubble if you tout that ruling as authoritative without considering its criticism. Here is a reference that criticizes that ruling.
ML: That reference falls outside of the right-wing bubble and is therefore invalid! And I am totally not living in a bubble!
Imagine your meltdown if he was quoting opinions directly from RNC Research?
Umm he does that, every day. It's called the NY Post, Washington Times, Daily Caller, Federalist, Breitbart,...
Jesse: Here’s a 60 page ruling from a Fifth Circuit judge which totally pwns you!
Me: Umm that ruling is flawed, and you are living in a bubble if you tout that ruling as authoritative without considering its criticism. Here is a reference that criticizes that ruling.
This isn't what you said! Who do you think you're fucking kidding? It's literally seven comments above. Who do you think you're tricking?
Jeff is doing bis best to prove the assertion i made above lol. He has yet to actually criticize the arguments from the ruling. Instead creating pure ad hominem attacks on the ruling.
Because the ruling was very well written and thorough on precedent.
I have presented a criticism of the ruling, Jesse. Why don't you offer your rebuttal to that?
And the whole point is that you have refused to even look at any criticism. You take this judge's position of authority as the final word on the matter because it supports your team's narrative.
You posted a link. I got this far:
“The initial reaction to the decision among policy experts and legal scholars has been, to put it mildly, harsh. It’s been called “legally bonkers,” a “troll to get SCOTUS to grant cert,” an “angrily incoherent First Amendment decision,” and “the single dumbest court ruling I’ve seen in a long, long time.” As someone who has argued for the constitutionality (and indeed desirability) of some government regulation of platform content moderation, I was hoping that the first judicial decision upholding such regulation would be a thoughtful and measured approach to what is indisputably a hard, even wicked, problem.”
How about, in your own words, you criticize the decision instead of linking to a hyperbolic lefty rant. (That advocates government censorship)
Such a point by point take down. Jeff posts the best links.
How about you read the entire fucking thing.
How about no. If there’s a point, why can’t you just make it yourself?
How about, you don't want to actually be educated on the topic, you want to instead pick nits in my comments and use those as a basis for trolling.
You can’t make the point in your own words, got it.
Unless you think calling the ruling “legally bonkers” is educational. But that would make you a moron, so that can’t be true.
BIAS!
The NBA, ESPN, and Disney can do whatever they want, but they’re not getting a fucking dime of my money. I’ve got a lot more entertainment options than watching a bunch of millionaires play shitty basketball.
If you have a pension fund or a major index fund you probably are still funding them.
It was bad enough that my city paid for close to half of the new stadium for the shitty Kings, and I’m sure you’re right about my own retirement funds as well.
Progressives stand against Catholic hospitals acting in accordance with Catholic ethics.
"However, under the directive of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and in line with Catholic social teaching, they cannot “perform or promote” abortion, contraception, sterilization, IVF, and (in states where it’s legal) euthanasia...
... on Twitter, Jill Filipovic, an author and abortion-rights activist, wrote that: “If Catholic hospitals refuse to offer a basic standard of reproductive care, they should not be in business — and certainly shouldn’t be getting government resources or tax breaks.”
Imagine being so singularly committed to progressive dogma that you would prefer a hospital close than continue being Catholic. Indeed, one reason Catholic hospitals are so successful is because of their high standard of care for patients, regardless of how they identify.
Though abandoned by many clinicians, Catholic health-care professionals still operate under the principle of “first, do no harm.” The only restrictions on medical interventions set in place by Catholic hospitals are for those done to impair or destroy healthy bodily functioning — which are typically performed for non-medical reasons. For instance, contraception and sterilization (for contraceptive purposes) aren’t medically necessary because fertility isn’t a disease...
...In May 2016, the Obama administration issued its “transgender mandate,” requiring health-care providers to participate in gender-transition procedures. Nine states, multiple religious organizations, and an association of more than 19,000 health-care providers challenged the mandate in two federal courts. The courts found the mandate to be unlawful, defending health-care workers’ freedom to exercise their own conscience and professional judgment.
In response to progressives’ post-Dobbs hysteria, Biden issued executive orders calling the lack of abortion access across the country a “healthcare crisis.” But the true crisis is social and moral." - Madeline Kearns
Inter-religious squabble: The Priests of Moloch versus Catholic Bishops.
Now do conservatives who think that businesses that hire undocumented workers should be fined and jailed and run out of business.
There's a whole lot of people out there, on both teams, who think that running a business ought to be a privilege afforded to those who adopt certain social rules. Like only supporting the "right" causes or only hiring the "right" people.
Because not killing babies and hiring people illegally in the country in order to evade onerous employment regulations is same-same.
Look at you avoid the point:
Because a belief that running a business ought to be a privilege afforded to those who adopt certain social rules is shared in common by both teams.
That wasn't the point. And anyway, hiring illegal aliens to evade paying employer mandates is illegal, not paying for baby abattoirs isn't.
Hey look, it’s Lefty Jeffy deflecting for the left! Again.
Hey look, it's the guy who claimed to be "vociferous" in standing against dishonest people, criticizing ME for making the HONEST point that both teams tend to view running a business as a privilege not as a fundamental right of private property ownership.
No no, when Troll Mac said he is vociferous against "dishonest people", what he really meant was "people he didn't like".
Care to share the link of my statement you keep citing?
Why don't you?
If I am such the lying liar that you claim that I am, how can you trust any link that I provide?
Lol. If you post a link to a comment I’ll believe it’s real. Fucking idiot.
I'm not interested in doing your work for you, asshole. If you want the quote, you go look it up.
But you keep referencing.
We don't call him Lying Jeffy for nothing.
Holy false equivalence Batman!
Nope, it's the same idea. A whole lot of people who think that running a business is a privilege that ought to be granted only to those who adopt certain social norms.
Just one hour previously you made a comment advocating for the government to tell a private company what to do.
I’m sure you can quote exactly where he did such. Right?
Who makes his shoes?
Nike. Air Jordan 35.
Democrats call to go after Saudi Arabia for fucking with a Biden.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/biden-humiliated-by-saudi-oil-cut
You'd think with all the oil and gas Saudi Arabia has they'd be smart enough to hire one of the foremost experts on oil and gas, Hunter Biden. Maybe it's not too late to hire him and patch things up with the Big Guy.
Maybe they don’t want to pay 10% to the Big Guy.
The Saudis are pretty strict about their drug war. Hiring Hunter would be a bad example for the children.
-jcr
Sure. Only a couple of minor details to hammer out, so please send Hunter into the nearest Saudi Consulate—ALONE!!!
I really thought the fist bump was the key to 2.00/gallon gas.
Maybe an elbow bump would have been more effective.
Shoulda bowed down like Obama.
Or bent over like Kamala.
After leaving my previous job 12 months ago, i've had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me.They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $4500.Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.
Read all about it here........>>> OnlineCareer1
If you rearrange the letters in "Recep Tayyip Erdogan," you get "A Cad Eyeing Property."
If you have too much time on your hands.
It's quick and easy:
https://wordsmith.org/anagram/
I had to write one of these program using prolog in college.
Let's have some fun.
Joseph Robinette Biden Jr...
Jibbed Preteens John Tiro
Ha, beautiful.
Donald Trump = Damn Turd Pol
Donald Trump = Lord Damp Nut
Donald Trump = Old Damp Runt
Donald Trump = Tan Dump Lord
TDS much, chemtard?
He got so hard typing that.
Just you just call Erdogan a bureaucrat?
Agent Kevin Helson acknowledged that a female member of the FBI's Human Intelligence Validation Unit, with two decades of intelligence experience, had raised concerns that Danchenko may be a member of the Russian military intelligence service known as the GRU, but Helson dismissed the concern.
.
"This is a real problem," Durham declared, as he and Helson tangled over whether the FBI should have relied on Danchenko as a confidential human source.
So the fbi admits they were getting possible Russian disinformation while going after Trump for his Russian ties.
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/sunfrom-durham-cia-evidence-mounts-fbi-told-steele
And they wanted to pay him.
Helson dismissed the intelligence analyst's complaint, insisting Danchenko had provided significant help to the FBI in Russian counterintelligence analysis between 2017 and 2020, so much so that the agent had recommended the bureau compensate the Russian analyst with as much as $500,000 in payments.
In truth, the FBI had allegations that Danchenko tried to offer money to Americans he expected to go into the Obama administration if they would provide him classified information, Durham said. The prosecutor said that probe was improperly shut down when the FBI incorrectly concluded Danchenko had left the United States. In fact, he had not.
Not Russian collusion
FBI delenda est.
-jcr
Ceterum censeo FBI esse delendam.
Everyone warned you that Europe would become far right after the elections in Britain and Italy. Now they are going after vaccine developers! Those special people who saved us with no other motivation.
https://justthenews.com/world/europe/eu-prosecutor-says-it-conducting-investigation-covid-vaccines-refuses-provide-details
100% safe and effective with no downsides.
Well well. This must make Team Red happy. Oregon might get a Republican governor for the first time in decades, due to an independent candidate running.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/third-party-candidate-upends-race-governor-reliably-blue-oregon-rcna50251
If you take a look at the positions of this independent candidate, Betsy Johnson, they sound mildly libertarian-ish. She supports abortion rights and gun rights. She voted to limit the death penalty in Oregon. She opposed minimum wage hikes. She isn't a pure libertarian of course, she voted for some unlibertarian things too like banning smoking in restaurants, and she has appeared to swallow the Team Red hysteria line about transgender athletes. But she is undoubtedly more libertarian than either the Team Red or Team Blue candidates on the ballot. It would be interesting to see a Reason profile on her and her candidacy.
Interestingly, Oregon has an entirely vote-by-mail system. If the Republicans do win the governorship, I wonder if they will claim it was only because of MASSIVE FRAUD due to unreliable mail-in voting procedures?
Even in a post about an interesting third party candidate, and whether or not Reason will do an article on her, Lefty Jeffy can’t resist throwing in shots at Republicans. About something that hasn’t actually happened. But don’t call him a lefty!
Because only lefties can possibly be critical of Republicans. No one else can. Nope nope nope. Every single person who criticizes a Republican is a left-wing progressive socialist who voted for Bernie Sanders. Every. Single. One.
“left-wing progressive socialist who voted for Bernie Sanders.”
Had to add all that extra stuff to make it more dishonest.
Do you think a person can be critical of Republicans and not be a leftist? Yes or no?
If yes, then me taking a shot against Republicans has nothing to do with being a leftist or not, and you insinuating that I am a leftist is just another example of your dishonesty.
R Mac 2 hours ago
Even in a post about an interesting third party candidate…
Answer the question.
Can a person be critical of Republicans without being a leftist? Yes or no?
If yes, then your insinuation that I'm a "lefty", only because I criticized Republicans, is dishonest. Isn't that right, Mr. "vociferous critic of dishonesty"?
Yes, a person can criticize Republicans without being a lefty. Lots of people do.
“If yes, then your insinuation that I’m a “lefty”, only because I criticized Republicans”
That’s not my insinuation. That’s you lying about my insinuation. Again.
But remember you're right wing if you dare criticize the left.
Nope, a person doesn't necessarily have to be right-wing to criticize the left. YOU, Jesse, however, are very definitely right-wing, not merely because you criticize the left, but because you carry water for Team Red on a daily basis.
Which is exactly what you do for the Democratic Party. Jesse on the other hand shits on GOPe and RINOs constantly.
You never shit of any branch of the Democrats, You occasionally make vague references about the woke and progressive excesses, but you'll never attack a party member.
Well, then, so what if I use this opportunity about Betsy Johnson's candidacy to take shots at Republicans? You sarcastically implied that I'm a "lefty" because I took shots at Republicans. If non-lefties are permitted to criticize Republicans too, what is the big deal here?
No, I wasn’t being sarcastic. Now you’re not even pretending.
Then fine, you're just plain lying. Have it your way.
You think that would be having my way? Of course not. Just another lie.
Every time you call me a leftie, you are lying.
I thought you were being sarcastic. I was wrong. My bad.
Nope. You’re a lefty.
How so, R Mac?
Did I vote for Biden?
Do I support left-wing ideas like single-payer health care, Green New Deal, or gun control?
Don't you dare calling him a fucking leftist as he calls everything else right wing. He is privileged and you aren't.
Do you consider yourself a right-winger, Jesse?
Well well. Now we know what ML has been up to - he's riding around in his mom's stolen RV.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7zqgm/qanon-romana-didulo-rv-rental
Sounds like an “earth-shaking” convoy protest!
Scratch a prog and find a racist. Is this because I'm Metis and she's Native? We're exactly the same? All rook arike?
Or is this an attempt at nationalistic jingoism like White Mike often uses? "Hurr, durr, you're Canadian".
Also, QAnon doesn't exist, Jeff. It's a 4chan meme used by the WaPo to frighten wine moms and keep them on the ideological reservation.
You're Metis? Good for you. You're still an idiot asshole with the intellectual capacity of that of the "Qanon Queen of Canada".
Nice projection there, chemtard. Why don’t you go back to BlueAnon.
A feat you can only dream of, Jeffy.
“High treason. Deserves a milkshake,” wrote one (QAnon Queen) follower, using the group’s code word for execution.
You heard it first from Vice, “Milkshake” is a QAnon code word.
Andy Ngo might have something to say about that
https://reason.com/2019/06/29/antifa-andy-ngo-mob-milkshake-violence/?comments=true&#comments
Vice journolisming is about making shit up as you go along, because the lefty readers don't care.
NYT blames the racism of the minorities on the LA city council on white supremacy. This is not a religion.
New York Times Opinion
@nytopinion
·
Follow
As the U.S. becomes less white, white supremacy could simply be replaced by — or buffeted by — a form of “lite” supremacy, in which fairer-skin people perpetuate a modified anti-Blackness rather than eliminating it, writes @CharlesMBlow.
.
It is a theory that worries me and that I have written about: that with the browning of America, white supremacy could simply be replaced by — or buffeted by — a form of “lite” supremacy, in which fairer-skin people perpetuate a modified anti-Blackness rather than eliminating it.
Skin color is the most important thing
That op-ed Blows.
Oh look. A grifter grifts.
https://news.yahoo.com/sidney-powell-nonprofit-raised-more-193700629.html
What makes it "grift", Jeffy?
Think hard, because Boy Howdy, do I ever have some examples for you.
Her entire "election fraud" crap is a giant grift. Here is a clue, there is no Kraken and there never was. Random morons on the Internet can be forgiven (somewhat) for falling for clever lies about election fraud, but lawyers like her know better.
Is this where you point out Team Blue grifters? Go right ahead. Grift isn't limited only to Team Red. It would be nice if your team would actually acknowledge that fact however instead of deflecting from your own team's grifters with whataboutism about the other side.
“Her entire “election fraud” crap is a giant grift.”
That’s a claim, not a reason. With no substantiation.
“Here is a clue, there is no Kraken and there never was.”
That’s not a clue, that’s also a claim. Again, with no substantiation.
“Random morons on the Internet can be forgiven (somewhat) for falling for clever lies about election fraud, but lawyers like her know better.”
Oh FFS, stop being so lazy.
“Is this where you point out Team Blue grifters? Go right ahead. Grift isn’t limited only to Team Red.”
Sure, but to spice it up how about some Team Blue grifters who masqueraded as Team Red but merely anti-Trump? The fine pedophiles at the Lincoln Project who collected millions from frenetic Blue Checks and pocketed most of it. Pretty much the only thing that they did with the money they pilfered from your ilk, was to dress blue hairs as tiki-torch racists and march as phony Youngkin supporters.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/sidney-powell-s-legal-defense-reasonable-people-wouldn-t-believe-n1261809
It was all a con to raise money and to ingratiate herself to Trump.
All you weasels always leave off the last half of the sentence, Jeffy.
"“reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process."
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/544399-sidney-powell-seeks-dismissal-of-dominions-13b-suit/
Completely different meaning when you don't deliberately leave off the last bit.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20520809-sidney-powell-court-filing
(pp. 37-38)
that is her own court filing presented by her own lawyers. So yes she really did state in court that she was not making statements of fact when she claimed whatever nonsense that she claimed about Chavez or Krakens.
But that’s not what it says.
It lays out in legalese, but still very clearly, that these are opinions, not established fact. In fact the section header states this: “The statements at issue are protected and not actionable”. It also establishes that some are statements as a lawyer on behalf of a client (pg 30).
You and your bosses are trying to distort the legal argument that she says she was voicing the clients opinion or has opinions which she believes are factual but aren’t yet established fact, with the idea that she is saying that she is admitting to lying. Which nothing in the court documents indicate.
The fact that you had to cherrypick incomplete sentences to achieve this illustrates how dishonest this is.
That’s completely decietful on your part, Jeffy.
I would encourage everyone here to read the court filing Jeffy linked, for a great example of how establishment media deliberately distorts statements and manufactures narrative. It’s radically different from what they’ve implied.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?478246-1/trump-campaign-alleges-voter-fraud-states-plans-lawsuits
In this news conference, she claimed, among other things, that there was "MASSIVE INFLUENCE OF COMMUNIST MONEY THROUGH VENEZUELA, CUBA, AND LIKELY CHINA, AND THE INTERFERENCE WITH OUR ELECTIONS HERE IN THE UNITED STATES". She also claimed:
There's no hedging there. She is outright stating that the Dominion software was used to manipulate the votes, and that reams of fake batches of ballots were fed into these machines.
That was on Nov. 19, 2020.
Then, in her defense of her defamation lawsuit years later, she claims that "no reasonable person" would have taken her statements at the time to be "statements of fact".
So what that means, if we are to believe her now, is that AT THE TIME when she was making these statements on Nov. 19, 2020, SHE KNEW THEY WERE NOT FACTUAL, and she said them anyway, and at the same time was raising money for her 'charity' to 'stop the steal'.
So EITHER:
1. She is a grifting liar who spewed lies in order to get rich by cynically using claims of election fraud.
OR:
2. She honestly believed her own nonsense at the time about Krakens and vote manipulations by communists, and now when she is being sued, she is lying in court NOW by stating that she was not making statements of fact at the time.
Either way, she's a crappy human being who does not deserve your defense or anyone else's.
So stop trying to defend the indefensible.
"She is outright stating that the Dominion software was used to manipulate the votes, and that reams of fake batches of ballots were fed into these machines"
And there's now far more evidence pointing to Dominion software manipulating votes, and reams of fake batches of ballots were fed into these machines, than not.
She was right.
Are you're talking-points out of date? Maybe ask your boss if you were supposed to go there.
She was right? SHE HERSELF said that her statements were not "statements of fact". Do you even understand this?
You really are going to go to the mat defending the nutjob Sidney Powell because she is on your team and I am criticizing her. You are just a Team Red tool.
Do you even understand this?
Yes, and when you don't leave off THE LAST FUCKING HALF OF THE SENTENCE, "but view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process.”, it makes it perfectly clear that she was voicing opinions that she believes are factual but not yet established as fact by the court.
Time to stop lying about what she said, Jeffy.
I'm not leaving out the last half of the sentence. I am quoting the entire sentence. You are quoting from a different part of the document. Once again, the part I quoted, from pp. 37-38, states:
It's all right there in the document.
Either Sidney Powell was lying then, or she is lying now. It is undeniable and you cannot bring yourself to criticize your own tribe if it means acknowledging that I'm right, because you hate me with such a blinding hot passion.
I am thrilled that I was finally able to get you to reveal yourself to be the unthinking emotional simp for Team Red that I always knew you to be.
And even accepting your version of events, what did she do?
She went on TV and made claims about Krakens and hacked election machines by the ghost of Hugo Chavez. She did so over and over again.
She did so knowing that those statements were not factual. She stated them as if they WERE true - did she say that there MIGHT be a Kraken? That the computers MIGHT have been hacked? - in order to raise money and "stop the steal".
Her statements were not true, she knew they were not true, she said them anyway.
"She did so knowing that those statements were not factual."
You're still working off of old talking points I see.
Bombshell Dominion 'Error Code' Uncovered in 97% of Georgia Counties
"Open records requests reveal 64 of 66 Georgia counties have the same unsolved 'Tennessee Error' that caused seven scanners to miscount hundreds of ballots."
Never heard of the Tennessee Error? It's this: https://www.eac.gov/news/2022/04/01/eac-issues-report-tennessee-voting-system-anomaly
"On February 14, 2022, the EAC received additional information from the manufacturer that allowed the agency to establish the root cause of the issue as an error in the scanner’s source code. A formal notice was shared with Dominion Voting Systems, requesting a fix to this problem."
Hardly an anomaly when it miscounts in just one direction in several states.
Dominion was hacked... or rigged.
Paper ballots and purple fingers are the only thing that will stop you guys cheating, Jeffy.
Huh. That's interesting. Did Sidney Powell allege fraud arising from this "Tennessee Error" issue?
Or is this you trying to obfuscate and deflect from the main point of discussion here, which is Sidney Powell's grifting?
Because according to your own article, this error was not discovered until October 2021.
So I'm thinking that this was not one of the issues that Sidney Powell raised in her incoherent court filings during the 2020 election.
You can't admit that Sidney Powell is a grifting liar, can you?
"Or is this you trying to obfuscate and deflect from the main point of discussion here, which is Sidney Powell’s grifting?"
That's rich:
1. The "errors" demonstrate that Dominion did indeed have the problems that Sidney alleged, directly addressing your original claim. Her claims were factual. It's exactly like she laid out in her court filing where the lawyers said her statements were opinions that could be proven factual after examination of the evidence.
At the time 70% of Americans thought that there was something suspicious about how Dominion reported results. Her statements weren't outrageous or extraordinary. They were common beliefs which are slowly being proven true.
How you can pretend that this is an unrelated tangent exemplifies the dishonesty that you're famous for here.
We all don't call you Lying Jeffy for nothing.
2. You still haven't explained how she benefited financially on a personal level from donations, which is what "grifting" actually is. Either you don't know what the word means or you're hoping we don't.
If the latter, it again exemplifies the dishonesty that you're famous for here. We all don't call you Lying Jeffy for nothing.
The "Tennessee Error" was not even discovered until OCTOBER 2021. How could Sidney Powell have known about this error in November 2020? Huh?
And here is more evidence of the grift:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/sidney-powell-defending-republic-donations/2021/12/06/61bdb004-53ef-11ec-8769-2f4ecdf7a2ad_story.html
On May 11, a Defending the Republic lawyer sent a five-page letter accusing Byrne of defaming Powell and spending in “wasteful and possibly fraudulent” ways. Threatening legal action, the letter demanded Byrne repay nearly $530,000. Among its accusations was that in hiring Weaver, Newman and two other employees, Byrne arranged for $50,000 signing bonuses that vested — or became permanent — 15 days after the new hires signed employment contracts. All four resigned two days after the vesting date, the letter said.
Her claims were factual.
Really?
So above, Sidney Powell claimed this:
IT CAN SET AND RUN AN ALGORITHM THAT PROBABLY RAN ALL OVER THE COUNTRY TO TAKE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF VOTES FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP AND PRESIDENT TRUMP AND FLIP THEM TO VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN, WHICH WE MAY HAVE NEVER UNCOVERED IF THE VOTE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD NOT BEEN SO OVERWHELMING IN SO MANY STATES THAT IT BROKE THE ALGORITHM THAT HAD BEEN PLUGGED INTO THE SYSTEM, AND THAT’S WHAT CAUSED THEM TO HAVE TO SHUT DOWN IN THE STATES THEY SHUT DOWN IN.
So, please present your proof that the reason why vote counting was shut down in so many states was because the manipulation of the Dominion software on the voting machines "broke the algorithm that had been plugged into the system".
Here you go, Jeff: https://www.eac.gov/news/2022/04/01/eac-issues-report-tennessee-voting-system-anomaly
It's changes results and has now been found in Tennessee, Georgia, Alaska and Iowa and testing is about to begin for it in 22 other states.
This can be your fire extinguisher, Jeff.
ML, duly noted. It was discovered in October 2021. So how did Sidney Powell know about this flaw in November 2020?
From your own link:
As part of the investigation, two other states that have certified this same system configuration were notified of the anomaly – Alaska and Iowa. Alaska is the only state of the two currently utilizing the affected configuration in its elections. There are no other reports of this anomaly, aside from the isolated incident in Tennessee.
So, the "Tennessee Error" did not affect ballots in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, or any of the other battleground states for which Sidney Powell claimed there was a Kraken of evidence, or whatever.
So what exactly does this "Tennessee Error" have to do with Sidney Powell's statements in late 2020?
“You’re still working off of old talking points I see.”
Coming up next: Lying Jeffy makes the claim that every lawsuit since the election ruled that it was a clean election.
Coming up right now: R Mac, vociferous critic of dishonesty, ignores all of Sidney Powell's monstrous lies and instead attacks someone he doesn't like for something he didn't say.
You keep saying that they're "monstrous lies" and "grifting" but refuse to say why.
Who do you think that's going to trick, Jeffy?
Only person lying in this thread is you, Lying Jeffy.
R Mac, do you think Sidney Powell is telling the truth?
I do, Lying Jeffy.
So please present your proof for this claim that she made on Nov. 19, 2020, as it pertains to the 2020 election.
> Dominion was hacked… or rigged.
The rig count is up?
I for one am shocked, SHOCKED!, that Lying Jeffy would leave out the part the doesn’t fit his narrative.
I have no problem condemning grifters of all types. Lincoln Project grifters, BLM grifters, "Stop The Steal" grifters, all of them.
Do you?
No. Instead I have a problem with you and your pals editing statements to ascribe different meaning.
So you haven't all along been trying to defend Sidney Powell's grifting? I see.
How has she been grifting? Misquoting her lawyers isn't proof.
She raised a ton of money based on inflammatory and outrageous statements about the election that she herself admits were not based on fact.
You know, kind of like when a group raises a ton of money based on inflammatory and outrageous statements like "the police systematically murder black people".
So? Raising money on outrage isn't "grifting" unless you're pocketing it. Was she pocketing it, Jeff? The Lincoln Project boys certainly were.
Also, her statements aren't outrageous if they're true, and it's looking more and more like they were.
The Soros/Dominion lawsuits were preemptive, to set legal precedent before the facts were all discovered, as all the "errors" discovered this year have clearly demonstrated.
The Soros/Dominion lawsuits were preemptive, to set legal precedent before the facts were all discovered
That is you wishcasting. That is you attempting to rationalize her outrageous defamation and grandstanding. That is you putting team loyalty above honesty and integrity.
"That is you wishcasting. That is you attempting to rationalize her outrageous defamation and grandstanding."
I just gave you fucking links that demonstrate exactly what she claimed happened, Lying Jeffy.
It's not "outrageous defamation and grandstanding" when it actually happened you dishonest shit.
You claim that she discovered an error in the Dominion voting machines in November 2020, that wasn't actually discovered until October 2021? Does she have a time machine or something? Furthermore no one has found any evidence that these errors affected any votes in any of the swing states for which she claimed a Kraken's worth of evidence.
You also claimed:
The Soros/Dominion lawsuits were preemptive, to set legal precedent before the facts were all discovered
On what basis can a lawyer file a "preemptive" lawsuit alleging facts that aren't true and may never be true? Sounds like lying to me.
And yet we see one more time that you are trying to excuse her grifting with your own version of sealioning. Just create doubt and keep the discussion going and going and going.
How is this sealioning you fantastically retarded motherfucker. I'm not demanding citations to well known facts, I'm asking you to defend your claim.
For fuck sake, Sarcasmic's been rubbing off on you. Not only do you not know the definition of "grifting", you don't know what sealioning is either.
More bias.
All you are doing is just continuing to inject doubt into the conversation when the facts are plainly known. You're just throwing sand in the air to cause confusion and doubt.
The facts are plainly known and they're pretty much what she said. You're the gaslighter here.
So, Kari Lake might very well be the next governor of Arizona.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11318861/Arizona-GOP-gubernatorial-candidate-Kari-Lake-seen-future-force-national-politics.html
How is it that Team Red is attracted to people like this? She is a former Kerry-supporting, Obama-supporting Democrat. But NOW, she claims that she is totally pro-Trump and thinks that abortion is "the ultimate sin". Really? You supported Obama and you also think that abortion is "the ultimate sin"? I don't think principles really matter to her. She is just a contrarian. She was a Kerry-supporting Democrat when it was cool to oppose Bush and the Iraq War. Now she is a Trump-supporting Republican when it is cool to oppose Biden and the "radical left". Seems to me, she's just an angry shouty contrarian who makes good memes on Facebook but that's about it. A completely shallow and vapid candidate who stands for nothing but is very angry and shouty. That is Team Red's dream candidate right there.
Oh wow, no Road to Damascus conversions for Jeffy.
But that's not even actually necessary.
Look at Greenwald, Gabbard, Rogan, Peterson, Brand, Musk, Rowling, Fry, Maher, etc. All now labeled right-wing demagogues even though their positions haven't changed one iota from when they were viewed as lefties or "Kerry-supporting, Obama-supporting Democrats".
It's because the crew that identifies Democrat (including you) has rejected classical liberalism for batshit-insane Wokianity.
I’m glad you brought up Glenn Greenwald. Because he is a guy who actually does have some principles. He’s a socialist. He has actually given talks at international socialism conferences. He supported Bernie Sanders and attacks Democrats from the left. He recently said that he thinks Tucker Carlson is a socialist. (lol) Recently he said:
“I think the vision is, you know, you have this kind of right wing populism, which really is socialism, that says we should close our borders, not allow unconstrained immigration, and then take better care of our own working class people, and not allow this kind of transnational, global, corporatist elite to take everything for themselves under the guise of neoliberalism,” Greenwald said.
https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/03/glenn-greenwald-interview-tucker-carlson-socialism-christian-datoc-omeed-malik-populism/
And yet right-wingers around here love him. Why? Because he says angry shouty things against the people that right-wingers hate.
So I’ll amend my original statement by saying that there are two types of people who seem to be attractive to Team Red nowadays. One type is people like Kari Lake (and Trump), who have no principles at all and who simply says stuff to be angry and shouty and contrarian against the people that Team Red hates. The other is people like Greenwald (and Gabbard), who DO have principles, they are left-wing principles, but who are also angry and shouty and contrarian against the people that Team Red hates.
Either way, what defines the attractive Team Red figure nowadays isn’t principles or policies, it’s people who say things that are angry and shouty and contrarian. It’s emoting, in other words.
I’m sensing some bias here.
Definitely bias.
"And yet right-wingers around here love him. Why? Because he says angry shouty things"
Greenwald isn't wrong. Carlson is pushing elements of socialism lately, but you know what neither of them are doing?
Pushing the economic fascism and political authoritarian totalitarianism that your ilk do. You're just as much Cheney, Bush and Romney as you are AOC, Pelosi and Biden.
That's why democratic libertarians, conservatives, liberals and socialists are teaming up. Just like Churchill and Attlee did when Hitler appeared they recognize that the real threat to humanity is your employers, chemjeff.
Yup that is just irrational emoting. "All the people I don't like are just like Hitler!"
Did you miss the fact I was actually referencing Churchill and Attlee, or are you just crying "Godwin's Law" in order to run away?
You mean, the comparison of Nancy Pelosi and Mitt Romney to Hitler? That invocation of Godwin's Law?
Hey, it's not for nothing that I believe you're a Nazi.
You call me a Nazi because you are a shallow idiot who cannot think beyond tribalistic black/white terms.
A person is either a loyal member of your tribe who is to be defended to the hilt even if that person is wrong; OR that person is a disloyal traitor and an evil Nazi who must be condemned even if that person is right.
FFS you are going to the mat to defend Sidney Powell above, a person so cuckoo that even Trump kicked her out of his team. But because she is in YOUR TRIBE, you turn off your brain and defend her. It is ridiculous and nuts.
No one should believe your characterization of anything. It is merely the result of childish simplistic black/white reductionist garbage.
Do you think the EU is just a free-trade agreement, Lying Jeffy?
Because even when I disagree with Greenwald his position is well thought out, usually has some logic behind it, and he is ridiculously principled.
Conversely, Progressives turned against him because he decided to stick to his principles and didn’t lose his fucking mind because Trump won.
Because even when I disagree with Greenwald his position is well thought out, usually has some logic behind it, and he is ridiculously principled.
But that is true of many people, even many who strenuously disagree with Trump. Like Jonah Goldberg for example. And yet there is no Goldberg fan club around here, only a Greenwald fan club.
It's because he's a contrarian who hates the same people you hate.
Jonah Goldberg was a warmongering neocon who gave the Bushies excuses for killing Iraqis, and you admire that he's sticking to those bloodthirsty principles?
Fucking fascist.
Jonah fucking Goldberg? Fucking idiot.
Team Red: Hey Google, stop filtering our fundraising emails into the spam folder!
Google: Okay, we will make an exception for you.
Team Red: I will ignore your words and continue to accuse you of bias and perfidy!
https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/13/23403259/google-gmail-republicans-gop-spam-filtering-program-midterms
Why it's almost as if Team Red's complaints against Google are bad-faith trolling.
Probably because it's doing the opposite and still spitting them directly into spam folders.
It is? How do you know this?
People explained to me: You are not going to be thrown in jail, your family won't be tortured just because you talk about some of the problems that are happening in America.
And then he met the Woke and Cancel Culture...
I gotta say I'm impressed with this guy. I'm sure he's banked all he needs to live comfortably for the rest of his life so he's got that freedom to speak most don't have. But most of his peers are willing to work for blood money so they can buy that third mansion or whatever other indulgence they want. In a world of grifters he's a stand up guy and certainly has my respect.
And look, even more grifting from Team Red.
https://archive.ph/3PYLm
Of course Trump himself already owned 90% of the shares. But that wasn't enough. Melania's share would have to come from everyone else, not from his 90%.
Damn jeff. You are just the purest libertarian of them all. Purer than Michael Hihn, even. Excellent work in this thread.
BTW do you have any more links to libertarian essays? Like that one from the great libertarian theorist Umair Haque about how we need to root for DARK BRANDON to SAVE DEMOCRACY and DEFEAT FASCISM? Wow, that was a good one. 🙂
#LibertariansForBiden
Fascism is ascendant across the West, what do you think two years of rioting by Antifa/BLM was, and what do you think the collusion between Big Tech and government is, what with all the directing the results of production towards national goals?
“two years of rioting by Antifa/BLM”
Anarchist, not fascist, rioting.
More like the Democrats' own brownshirts.
They weren't demanding government actions from their riots?
Youre a fucking idiot Mike.
“collusion between Big Tech and government is”
Exaggerated by the right wing.
Bunk. When most of Big Tech is controlled by Democrats and those who lean left/far left, and the government is controlled by the Democrats right now, it is collusion, and corporatism at that.
Youre a fucking idiot Mike.
See berenson lawsuit.
The fucking president and his press secretary admitted it, and the CEOs of Twitter and Facebook confirmed it. Yet Mike Liarson says it’s being exaggerated.
How the hell is owning the majority shares in your own media group startup "grifting"? Is bloomberg.com a grift?
I'm starting to think that you might not know what the word means.
If you really want to grift you create a nonprofit foundation like this. Not a company paying taxes without the cover of charitable donations.
Let me put it to you more plainly.
Trump owns 90% of the shares in this company.
Trump wanted his wife to have some shares.
Instead of giving a few of his own shares to his own wife, he demanded that everyone else give some of their 10% of the shares to his wife.
He's trying to screw over his own investors.
Uh, that’s not screwing over anyone. Are you retarded? Do you not understand how shares work?
Demanded?
That’s still not grifting. SMH.
Meanwhile:
https://spaceworms.substack.com/p/risking-nuclear-war-for-what
Risking Nuclear War for What?
State Department ‘Human Rights Report’ reveals what our government really thought of pre-war Ukraine.
The only material differences between Russia and Ukraine in the State Department’s report are related to Russia’s unfair elections, an issue the department does not attribute to Ukraine despite the Obama Administration’s interventions into their elections in 2014. That said, there is no question that Russian elections are less-than-legitimate. Despite Putin’s popular support (which has been cited in numerous western outlets), he certainly shapes the system to his advantage - whether it’s extending his legal term limit, imprisoning opponents, or outlawing online speech that demonstrates “disrespect” towards “state authorities”.
However, even granting that Ukrainian elections are likely freer and fairer than those in Russia, if our goal is to defend democracy, why have we refused for almost a decade to recognize the secession of Crimea?
Months after the widely disputed Crimean referendum to join Russia which passed in early 2014, Gallup, one of the oldest and most respected polling institutions in the US, in partnership with the Broadcasting Board of Governors, a US federal agency whose stated mission is to “promote freedom and democracy and to enhance understanding by broadcasting accurate, objective, and balanced news and information”, polled Crimeans on whether the referendum reflected the views of the people living there. Not only did 82.8% of the population confirm that it was, but 68.4% of ethnic Ukrainians did as well.
The following year, GfK, a German-based data and analytics behemoth, conducted a follow-up poll asking Crimean residents “Do you endorse Russia’s annexation of Crimea?” to which 82% responded “yes, definitely” with only 2% answering with a definitive “no”. One cannot claim to be defending democracy while aiding and abetting the Ukrainian government’s ongoing incursions into Crimea.
The real reason we are involved in Ukraine is not to help their civilians. It is not to preserve democracy. It is not to preserve national sovereignty. It is what US officials like Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Congressman Dan Crenshaw have both admitted. The true purpose is to ‘weaken Russia’. A goal in direct contradiction to “Standing with Ukraine”. This goal uses their home as our playground. It uses civilian lives as our propaganda. It does nothing for the ordinary Ukrainian whose life would experience no material difference if Russia were to govern Crimea (as it has done for nearly a decade with the approval of its inhabitants) or the Donbas (which has been mired in civil war for years with atrocities on “both sides”).
Oh yeah… and this goal also runs the risk of annihilating the human race.
Even from the distorted mindsets of Neocons and Neolibs in Washington, the cost-benefit just doesn’t make any sense. If by some miracle we are able to both stop Russia from annexing the Eastern regions AND do so without Putin using a nuke (at least on Ukraine), what have we gained by “weakening Russia”? China is a far bigger, more powerful nation with greater economic leverage over the US than Russia will ever be. Not only that, but Russian human rights abuses pale in comparison to China’s concentration camps and digital surveillance state.
secession of Crimea
Found the Pewtin shill.
A "vote" held with an occupying army breathing down your neck is nothing but a propaganda stunt, and you know it.
Go sit on a full-grown Saguaro, you degenerate scumbag.
-jcr
"Found the Pewtin shill"
Seriously?
Speaking of China, this happened.
Never heard of Bruce Aylward before. I wonder if he's a volunteer CCP felcher or they sent Fang Fang to get some video of him fucking farm animals.
-jcr
He's (at least in part) responsible for why my daughter lost her job and got kicked out of school. He has a lot to answer for.
Ha, ha. They’re just so obvious. Chemjeff's top men.
A million dollars in your bank account is worth it I guess.
Also, now that the news that has broken that Reason hasn't even discussed, it's been fun watching people backtrack on vaccine mandates, of particular note, Piers Morgan who was a screeching Branch Covidian during the pandemic.
Speaking for myself, how backtrackers conduct themselves going forward will determine if I accept their apology.
Yeah, I’m still waiting for some apologies that I doubt I’ll get.
I think poor Piers Morgan has just had an epiphany that maybe, just maybe, the game is being rigged and the winning team doesn't want him.
Were you, personally, subjected to a vaccine mandate?
Were you, personally, embarrassed by your gaslighting on Friday?
"We didn't have vaccine mandates"
Bullshit. Own it.
Mike has no problem threatening peoples jobs and freedoms. They could have chosen never to leave their houses if they didn't want a vaccine.
Youre a fucking idiot Mike.
He’s exhibiting shrike levels of stupidity and assholishness after he got absolutely destroyed by Minadin on Friday.
A decent human being would apologize for being as wrong as he was and maybe slink off for a day or two.
With regard to the science behind the mRNA vaccines, I was an enthusiast early on - it seemed like it could have been a big breakthrough in vaccine technology. It looks like I was wrong about their potential effectiveness.
I was always against the mandates. So, yay for me on that front, I guess?
It's too bad the vaccines didn't work as promised. I still hope that they are able to improve them such that they will eventually be beneficial.
I have no interest at all in sportsball, but kudos to this guy for pissing off the commies.
The CCP is not a legitimate government. It is a terrorist gang with nuclear weapons, a billion and a half hostages, and two genocidal campaigns in progress. It is far and away the worst enemy China has ever faced, dwarfing the crimes of the Japanese imperial army with some 77 million murders, most of them Han Chinese.
CCP delenda est. I wish the Chinese people all the luck they need to give the dicator Xi the Ceacescu treatment.
-jcr
Speaking of Xi…here are the highlights of the Comrade’s glorious speech
China congress: Xi Jinping doubles down on zero-Covid as meeting opens https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-63226230
We haven't seen such a combination of evil, stupidity, and incompetence since L. Ron Hubbard died.
-jcr
That is both harsh, and at the same time, not inaccurate.
Well played, Mr. Randolph
Free trade deals negotiated under Republican presidents are terrific and putting America first.
Free trade deals negotiated under Democrats are "globalist" and a threat to American sovereignty.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/matt-gaetz-says-biden-admin-wants-european-union-like-deal-with-canada-and-mexico-globalist-order
You don't understand the difference between the USMCA and the European Union I see.
Or maybe you do and you're hoping that we don't.
The EU is just a free trade agreement? That’s even dumber than normal, Lying Jeffy. But hey, keep spastically linking to anything you can find that lets you criticize the right today. It’s a good look, convincing everyone you’re not a lefty.
Meanwhile, barely commented on, the Biden administration has launched a microchip trade war with China. Seems like it would be welcome from right-wing America firsters, but I’m not holding my breath for them to say they agree with something Biden did.
Maybe because it's too late?
Look at you, white-knighting for Team Red yet again.
Whatever, chemleft radical progressive. You've been posting anything and everything Team Blue all day yet again.
Free trade deals proposed under Republican presidents like Bush 1 is why he was not re-elected and Perot won 18.9% of the vote. Try again.
Add the 4th Reich to the stack of things you know fuck-all about.
-jcr
Sunday Podcast from Spiked.
Truss, Trans and Big Tech.
Reason-WT actual F with the pop-up video ads every few seconds?!
So, on the subject of transgenderism, since Diane brought it up.
Specifically as applied to children:
Is gender dysphoria a legitimate disease, or isn't it?
If it is not a legitimate disease, then I agree that offering "medical procedures" to "cure the disease" that encompass invasive surgery are wrong and immoral in a general sense.
However, if it is a legitimate disease, then both parents and doctors are obligated to try to alleviate the suffering of the child using an accepted standard of care.
What should that accepted standard of care be, and who decides?
The libertarian solution IMO should be that the decision ought to remain one between doctors and parents. Children alone cannot consent, just like they cannot consent to treatment for any physical disease such as cancer. Different situations will necessarily lead to different treatments for different patients. Some may receive only counseling. Some may receive counseling and medication. Some may receive radical gender reassignment surgery. Who among us has the moral authority, let alone the medical knowledge, to decide in every case what the proper treatment might be?
"But, what if the recommended treatment involves 'mutilating children'? Should that be legal?"
It depends on the best judgment of the doctors and counselors in consultation with parents and the child. Note that if the illness was a more accepted one like cancer, and the recommended treatment was something like radiation therapy, that treatment can potentially have permanent long-lasting side-effects. But we typically don't want to micromanage the doctor's decisions here, we trust in the doctor's best judgment in deciding what is best for the patient. We should apply the same standard here.
"So, anything goes? Doctors can mutilate children and nothing can be done about it?"
If the libertarian position is going to be "no government regulation of health care", then - yeah, that is the position.
But, I can see the case for government regulations requiring doctors to follow an accepted standard of care. So, not "anything goes", but if the accepted standard of care permits the possibility of gender reassignment surgery, then under those conditions, yes it ought to be legal.
I allow for the possibility that there are some people who genuinely have gender dysphoria.
However, what I’ve observed from my own personal experience when we were living among very progressive people in the Bay Area is that it has become trendy, especially for teen girls, to identify as gender fluid. Not even “trans” anymore, but the milder “gender fluid”. What conservatives are right about is it seems to be pure trendiness.
What conservatives miss is that girls caught up in the trend tend not to do anything as drastic as hormone treatments or surgery. Typically, they go no further than dressing in unisex clothes and pronouncing that everyone should call them “Triad” or something like that.
The progressive mothers tend to get excited and show off their gender fluid children, and the fathers tend to refrain from saying what they think.
So, conservatives are right that progressives are promoting non-traditional gender roles, but they are also missing that it’s not as extreme as they paint it, with all their proposals for laws against gender confirming therapies and surgeries. There aren’t that many kids seeking those things.
And Mike continues to lie to protect the left.
Regret rates on transition are up to 30%. what this means is people who have at least started drugs. These drugs cause harm and infertility.
Youre a fucking idiot Mike.
Regret rates on transition are up to 30%.
So it should be banned for 100%?
Of children?
For anyone?
Read what I wrote above, and tell me why you disagree with any of it (if you do).
gender confirming
You misspelled "denying".
-jcr
Fuck off groomer.
So libertarian.
You should give these non-libertarians a lesson in libertarianism by linking to more libertarian essays by libertarian theorist Umair Haque about how libertarians need to root for DARK BRANDON.
I don't think Umair Haque is a libertarian.
There are lots of people who are not libertarians who nonetheless sometimes say things that need to be said.
I don't agree with rooting for Biden. But I do agree with his critique of Team Red and their embrace of authoritarianism.
Including Biden’s Nuremberg imagery? Including Biden’s us versus them speech? You’re a fucking fascist, Jeffy, nothing more.
Been driving all day, and in a "fuck everyone" mood.
Why do we seem to be reverting to a world where everyone demands compliance with a Dear Leader and/or a dear ideology? Is my memory (of personal experience and world history) failing, or is some humanity pendulum swinging back towards authoritarianism? And if so, how can we get some of these partisan tribes to annihilate each other?
“is some humanity pendulum swinging back towards authoritarianism?”
Yes.
“how can we get some of these partisan tribes to annihilate each other?”
Joe’s doing the best he can!!!!-!-!1!
After leaving my previous job 12 months ago, i've had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me.They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $4500.Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.
Read all about it here........>>> OnlineCareer1
Life is full of difficult choices. From a libertarian point of view, the purpose of the NBA is to make a profit, not necessarily to set a high moral standard on international policy. Although I'm not personally a professional sports fan, it seems to me that Enes is a good example of a success for the "you catch more flies with sugar than you catch with vinegar" approach to international relations. He was attracted to freedom by watching basketball games. It may prove true that large numbers of Chinese fans will be similarly attracted to freedom by watching basketball matches in China. Either way the NBA will hurt itself by shutting itself out of a large revenue source by failing to toe the Chicom Party line at this point. If Enes wants to risk his own career by expressing his own opinions that's his own business. But the politicization of everything through virtue signaling is not a good trend in my opinion.
Glad at least someone is kicking back against the CCP status quo!