TikTok Gets 9 Months
Plus: Masking protesters, how Google Search got so bad, Columbia's anti-apartheid protests of the '80s, and more...

Senate approves massive spending: Last night, the $95 billion aid package meant for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan passed the Senate. "The vote reflected resounding bipartisan support for the measure, which passed the House on Saturday by lopsided margins after a tortured journey on Capitol Hill, where it was nearly derailed by right-wing resistance," reports The New York Times. "The Senate's action, on a vote of 79 to 18, provided a victory for the president, who had urged lawmakers to move quickly so he could sign it into law."
"When it matters most, will America summon the strength to come together, overcome the centrifugal pull of partisanship and meet the magnitude of the moment?" asked Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.) in an address announcing the bill's passage. "Tonight, under the watchful eye of history, the Senate answers this question with a thunderous and resounding 'yes.'" (If only the "centrifugal pull" were strong enough to force legislators to actually consider whether the federal government actually has that kind of money to spend, the answer to which would probably be a "thunderous and resounding" NO.)
TikTok's death knell: The House had divided the bill into four pieces, which were then combined for voting in the Senate. The last part of the package—and possibly the most controversial—forces the social media app TikTok to be either sold to an American buyer or, if it retains Chinese ownership, banned in the United States. Expect the ban to be challenged in court, and for the government to have to flesh out its national security-related justifications for this to pass muster.
"There's a speed to how TikTok facilitates conversations and trends, and its algorithm is unnervingly good at picking up on a user's interests and showing them what they want to see," writes The Atlantic's Kate Lindsay. "You could use the app for just five minutes and come away with a new song to listen to, a new recipe to try for dinner, and a new piece of kitchenware already being packed up and shipped to you."
But the app definitely isn't a universal good, and it's shifting in concept, turning into what feels like a shopping platform, akin to Instagram's pivot to e-commerce. "It went from a plaything for regular people—the dancing tweens, the animal antics—to a stage for brands and creators, and continues to make moves that push itself further from its original premise," argues Lindsay. That shift aside, there are plenty of indicators that the app may have already been on track to lose popularity even if the government had never intervened: new user growth is plateauing, and the old people—those in their 30s and 40s, compared to the app's Zoomer mainstays—are crashing the party.
Still, what happens in the long run remains to be seen. TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, has been given nine months to broker a deal with an American buyer—a deadline that may be extended by the president by 90 days if need be.
Masks and keffiyehs: Whenever you look at videos of the pro-Palestine/anti-Israel activists on college campuses, something conspicuous sticks out almost every time: it's 2024, and these 20-year-olds are nearly universally masked.
My hunch, shared by many others, is just that it's a performative way to signal belonging to the left. Maybe there's some amount of gatekeeping on the left by long-COVID cuckoos who remain insistent that masking is what morally pure and righteous people do. But also, masks are surely being worn as a means of protecting one's identity from being found out, to both literally hide from surveillance and also to ham up the danger element, as if their plight is akin to Hongkongers protesting the Chinese Communist Party or some other authoritarian regime that might disappear the disfavored.
"The semiotics that used to be associated with anarchists, whose masks stood out at rallies, are now popular with activists participating in non-violent civil disobedience," writes David Weigel at Semafor in a deep-dive into how masks have endured.
Scenes from New York: Do all "New Yorkers of color" feel the same way? I highly doubt it!
New Yorkers of color are not trying to return to the Giuliani era https://t.co/3FRxvqTO0I
— Tiffany Cabán (@tiffany_caban) April 23, 2024
QUICK HITS
- Last week, in "Google Fires 28," I covered the beautifully unceremonious axing of Google employees who felt as though Israel-related sit-ins were appropriate at work. Now, Pirate Wires' Mike Solana follows up, covering Google's new mission-first clarity, and a little on how we got here: "There was no CEO, at a private dinner, or in hushed whispers over drinks, who didn't understand they had inadvertently overseen the dawn of a wildly hostile workplace environment, or worry their Red Guard HR team's obsession with open discrimination against white and asian men was possibly illegal."
- How did Google Search get so horrible?
- Related: The possible future of large language model optimization, and what we might lose when it takes hold.
- Some Columbia protest movement history, from Geoffrey Miller, on the anti-apartheid protests of the '80s compared with the anti-Israel protests today.
- Speaking of: "Columbia University was emerging from a night of tense standoff early Wednesday…A midnight deadline set by the university late on Tuesday for protesters to disband passed without signs of police moving onto the campus to quell the demonstrations that have upended the final weeks of the spring semester and challenged the school's leadership," reports The New York Times. But the university's deadline was fake, and at "around 3 a.m., a statement from the university said student protesters had agreed to remove a significant number of the tents erected on the lawn, ensure non-students would leave, and bar discriminatory or harassing language among the protesters."
- This:
There is a disgust reflex when something that used to get rationed through time and luck gets rationed with money instead, but c'mon. Everyone takes the money option when they can afford it—it's easier! https://t.co/vxtV7l2r8l
— Byrne Hobart (@ByrneHobart) April 23, 2024
- RIP Reddit?
New from 404 Media: we found a service called 'ReplyGuy', an AI that automatically plugs your product on Reddit. Shows that Reddit, basically the last social platform that heavily emphasizes human interaction, may also be soon overrun with AI garbage https://t.co/zbKQZA2HFW pic.twitter.com/yRIwOhngfI
— Joseph Cox (@josephfcox) April 23, 2024
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
How did Google Search get so horrible?
When they started making Hitler black?
Was way before this year.
I switched to DuckDuckGo some time ago. Not that they're perfect; but every once in a while, when they produce lousy results, I try google again, and they've larded it up with so much sponsored results and screen clutter that even when it does have better results, they're hidden, and it's months before I get desperate enough to try again.
I primarily use Brave, but it has issues. Will use DDG in those cases. Never use Google. It is worthless now.
Google is great when I’m searching for something obscure and apolitical like Boncuklu Höyük or Hox genes 7, 8, and 9.
The second you get into anything mainstream the results become junk. I usually split between Duckduckgo and Brave.
Duckduckgo does censor results to some extent or at least deprioritize some. They bragged about that with some results on the vaccines during Covid.
DDG says they index files on sites. They may be better for scientific queries.
they also bragged about reducing pro-russian content
Yes. If they are willing to censor, why should I trust them when they insist they are not tracking me and selling my info?
I switched to DuckDuckGo as fast as I heard of it and have never been disappointed.
Another great feature of DuckDuckGo is that it’s name naturally makes it unusable by the intellectually lazy. I mean, how many times have you heard someone say:
“C’mon! DuckDuckGo ‘9/11 Airplane fuel and steel buildings!' C’mon! DuckDuckGo dat shit!”
🙂
😉
I use Brave now but had the same experience. Whenever I try Google again, the results are anywhere from less useful to absolutely useless.
Depends on what I'm search for but yup, did the same.
DuckDuckGo for me, but maybe I'll try Brave.
"When it matters most, will America summon the strength to come together, overcome the centrifugal pull of partisanship and meet the magnitude of the moment?"
Bipartisanship in Congress means America is going to be walking funny the next day.
DAP or DVP? Or both for Trans people? Airtight for Krunkt Kackling Kammie?
🙂
😉
TAP with a DVP and two in the blowhole is how I see it.
How did Google Search get so horrible?
It was never great.
I despise the new "resume your journey" thing. I type the site I wana go to and hit enter. Before I would just go right to that site. Now occasionally the "resume your journey" thing pops up and I have to make extra clicks to go to where I wana go. It's obnoxious.
I miss Netscape.
Did you ask Jeeves if he had anything to say?
I'd go around the world for Magellan, just like Crow T. Robot would give his right arm to be ambidextrous.
🙂
😉
AltaVista or GTFO.
"excite@home enters the chat"
Fuck Bill Gates. He proved to me how much of an asshole he was back in the 90s over this.
"Can it be that it was all so simple then?...Or has time re-written every line?..."
🙂
😉
...forces the social media app TikTok to be either sold to an American buyer or, if it retains Chinese ownership, banned in the United States.
Steven Mnuchin gets a boner.
So does Lina Khan.
God help us, the spawn they'd produce...shutter the thought.
Jack Smith petitioned Judge Cannon to exclude memos between NARA and others in the classified documents case. All memos were delivered to Trumps defense team. We now know why. Judge Cannon ordered documents released and mostly unrelated. It shows coordination between NARA, Garland, WH Council, and even the J6 committee to form a predicate for the crime. They invented a crime.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fking-clown-show-unsealed-court-docs-reveal-biden-doj-colluded-national-archives-target
By September 2021, Stern had decided to draft a criminal referral against Trump to the Justice Department after documents were still not returned, according to an FBI interview summary with a NARA employee, identified as “Person 53” in the court documents.
.
“Stern approached [Per. 53] to formally draft a letter to DOJ raising concerns about PRA materials from the TRUMP administration which remained unaccounted for by NARA,” the FBI memo stated.
.
In his interview with the FBI, Person 53 noted in his “years of experience,” he “understood NARA never had to make such a referral to DOJ…to accomplish such an ask.”
https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/new-court-docs-show-archives-biden-wh-coordinated-trump-probe
The fact that NARA pursued a criminal charge through collusion with the white house despite the PRA being a civil law should show the depravity to form a criminal charge against a political enemy.
Wonder how jeffsarc will spin this today.
They'll lie.
First they'll say it didn't happen.
Then they'll misrepresent what happened.
Then they'll admit that it happened but that it's a good thing, normal operating procedure, etc.
If only he'd cooperated, this woulda never happened.
-sarc
Can't wait for Jacob's article on this calling for criminal prosecution of all involved, impeachment process or not...
They all have immunity. I mean it's not like they're presidents.
Interdepartmental co-operation! The horror, the horror.
“Plotting” is the word you are looking for.
CONSPIRING is the correct term since thats what they used against J6 protestors just for texting each other to go to the protest and they are using that verbage against Trumps lawyers for doing their job of lawyering
I stand corrected
Shrike, youre struggling this morning. PRA is a civil law, not criminal. The documents literally show them colluding to formulate a criminal act. They worked directly with the White House to do so.
But I get it. Soros promotes lawfare and use of state against enemies so you do as well.
Note the documents have NARA working with WH Council to formulate the document used by Garland to justify the raid. Note they worked timing of releases with the J6 committee.
My guess is you would have defended Stalin using the state against his political enemies if Soros told you to.
If this was so on the up and up why did Jack Smith try to withhold the documents from the defense?
Interdepartmental co-operation! The horror, the horror.
To find a crime to charge the opposition candidate with? Absolutely.
Fucking Nazi.
To Soros acolytes, classical liberal means supporting Stalin.
...it's 2024, and these 20-year-olds are nearly universally masked.
They still might need to be employed by Jews one day.
Jews will replace them.
With what?
AI? At least SkyNet doesn't throw rocks at windows and get emotionally overloaded on YouTube #Shorts.
🙂
😉
AM was pretty emotional, so was Johnny 5.
"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"
Useless trivia: HAL was named by backing up IBM by one letter in the alphabet.
Masks are the more modern, fashionable version of that Democrat classic; the white hood.
Ouch.
Obligatory.
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/160af503-ee3d-41c9-a23a-4112138b6f44
On Tuesday, Politico published a story revealing the existence of a weekly Zoom call that includes “some of the country’s most well-known legal and political commentators.” The call is “an exclusive weekly digital salon,” Politico’s Ankush Khardori wrote, “whose existence has not been previously reported, for prominent legal analysts and progressive and conservative anti-Trump lawyers and pundits. Every Friday, they meet on Zoom to hash out the latest twists and turns in the Trump legal saga — and intellectually stress-test the arguments facing Trump on his journey through the American legal system.”
The key phrase is “anti-Trump.” When group members stress-test arguments, they’re trying to find the arguments that will be most effective in bringing down Trump. That’s what it is about.
The group includes names you will recognize if you watch CNN or MSNBC a lot: Andrew Weissmann, George Conway, Bill Kristol, Norm Eisen, Laurence Tribe, Barbara McQuade, Joyce White Vance, Jennifer Rubin, Mary McCord, Harry Litman, Elliot Williams, Asha Rangappa, Norm Ornstein, Renato Mariotti, Shan Wu, Ryan Goodman, Karen Agnifilo, Jeffrey Toobin, and more.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/daily-memo/2975683/groupthink-chorus-emerges-trump-trial/
There is no conspiracy.
Did Jeffrey Toobin pull out his dick again?
And if he did, did he turn off his video feed?
If their zoom meetings are like my inner circle's, calls for "Jeff, keep your dick your pants no matter how hard this gets you" would be at least weekly for the first few months.
I doubt you would be as apoplectic if there were another group that regularly got together to work on defences for Trump, to co-ordinate pro-Trump media responses, etc.
Free speech and freedom of association. They exist.
Shrike, did you think this was intelligent? Do you have an example of media and connected lawyers on the right colluding to form legal arguments to lock their enemies up?
I do like how you pretend I said they shouldn't be able to communicate. What a wild way to defend the bad acts and collusion of lawfare from the left. Is that the Soros talking point?
It’s the new “PrIvAtE cOmPaNiEs”
The Arkansas Project comes to mind. Or Trump, Fox News and Hillary working together to sink Obama with Birther claim (though I guess that's bipartisanship in action).
Those were media narratives. In the story they discuss both narrative building and helping identify areas to use lawfare. So it is the active jailing piece that is the issue.
The Arkansas Project was certainly not just a media narrative, it worked to find dirt on the Clintons to be used in legal proceedings against them (whether more accurate – Jones – or less so – Foster).
Edit: Also, I'm under the belief this behavior is as old as the Republic - probably TJ and Adams election)
“I doubt you would be as apoplectic if there were another group that regularly got together to work on defences for Trump, to co-ordinate pro-Trump media responses, etc.”
You’re a fucking idiot. In addition to this being a fascistic and depraved response it’s stupid beyond measure.
You’re trying to equate a group of people plotting ways for the administration to imprison an opposition candidate, with trying to mount a defense against those attacks.
The fact that you think that is a legitimate comparison should tell everyone here exactly what you are.
"I doubt you would be as apoplectic if there were another group that regularly got together to work on defences for Trump, to co-ordinate pro-Trump media responses, etc."
When you have no argument, try a strawman, as shit-for-brains does here.
"Free speech and freedom of association. They exist."
Or you can hint that your opponent is trying to 'outlaw' something, as shit-for-brains does here.
I doubt you would be as apoplectic if there were another group that regularly got together to work on defences for Trump, to co-ordinate pro-Trump media responses, etc.
This is the stupidest false analogy you've ever used, and that's saying something considering that's your stock in trade.
Cmon now. Freedom of association means you also can't criticize antifa.
The left is apoplectic that something like Fox News (not a fan) even exists. If even one right-of-center journalist or talking head expresses anything negative about a Democrat, it's a "conspiracy theory" and the MSM all doubles down in their efforts to discredit any such notion. When facts on the ground support the "conspiracy theory", a new attack is formulated and promulgated amongst the self-chosen defenders of the Democrats.
That was certainly a take.
Just wow.
Bear in the trunk tier.
Not sure why hypotheticals mean more than reality.
Journolist never went away, it just got more retarded.
The group includes names you will recognize if you watch CNN or MSNBC a lot: Andrew Weissmann, George Conway, Bill Kristol, Norm Eisen, Laurence Tribe, Barbara McQuade, Joyce White Vance, Jennifer Rubin, Mary McCord, Harry Litman, Elliot Williams, Asha Rangappa, Norm Ornstein, Renato Mariotti, Shan Wu, Ryan Goodman, Karen Agnifilo, Jeffrey Toobin, and more.
Journolist 2.0. And after that, they'll move on to another target - probably whoever gets the 2028 ReThugliKKKan nomination. But it's OK, they're doing God's work - getting rid of OrangeManBad. Pincipals > Principles
The group includes names you will recognize if you watch CNN or MSNBC a lot: Andrew Weissmann, George Conway, Bill Kristol, Norm Eisen, Laurence Tribe, Barbara McQuade, Joyce White Vance, Jennifer Rubin, Mary McCord, Harry Litman, Elliot Williams, Asha Rangappa, Norm Ornstein, Renato Mariotti, Shan Wu, Ryan Goodman, Karen Agnifilo, Jeffrey Toobin, and more.
Trump is no 12-D chess master. He’s just an ordinary checkers player whose opposition struggles to be one dimensional.
FFS, imagine 18+ of the top 50 or 100 lifetime scorers in hockey, all on the same team, all unable to beat Gretzky.
"There was no CEO, at a private dinner, or in hushed whispers over drinks, who didn't understand they had inadvertently overseen the dawn of a wildly hostile workplace environment, or worry their Red Guard HR team's obsession with open discrimination against white and asian men was possibly illegal."
Maybe even a little immoral and counterproductive?
HR departments were the most cancerous thing to ever emerge in organizations in the twentieth century.
Blame it on the 19th Amendment.
^^^
'But the app definitely isn't a universal good, and it's shifting in concept, turning into what feels like a shopping platform, akin to Instagram's pivot to e-commerce.'
Does it offer Chinese real estate bonds? I hear the market there is about to boom. Or go boom.
"For Sale: Ghost City. Fully furnished. Just add people!"
🙂
😉
'My hunch, shared by many others, is just that it's a performative way to signal belonging to the left. Maybe there's some amount of gatekeeping on the left by long-COVID cuckoos who remain insistent that masking is what morally pure and righteous people do. But also, masks are surely being worn as a means of protecting one's identity from being found out, to both literally hide from surveillance and also to ham up the danger element, as if their plight is akin to Hongkongers protesting the Chinese Communist Party or some other authoritarian regime that might disappear the disfavored.'
In other words, immature, cowardly retards.
"In other words, immature, cowardly retards."
And yet, they are winning.
No grasshopper, they are not.
They're winning in the sense that they're the establishment's useful idiots.
The kookiest things about that video are that, one, Taylor Lorenz thinks that government people "gives" people shit and, two, whoever made the video (or the YouTube algorithm?) can't decide when they want to bleep out the wordy-dirds. So damn stupid all around!
...and bar discriminatory or harassing language among the protesters.
Self-policing? You know who else vowed to censor people?
Google?
Santa Claus?
The Catholics circa 1478-1834?
The Catholics circa 1478-1834?Religionists and Totalitarians everywhere and always.
FTFY
🙂
😉
I was specifically referring to the Spanish inquisition, but now that I've explained the joke, it's kinda ruined.
But no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
The edgy atheist strikes again!
He can't help it. He wouldn't be an anti-theist if he could.
Julius Malema?
Just for Hank, Anthony Comstock.
^+10
The CDC?
How did Google Search get so horrible?
Ledtist activism and group struggle sessions.
Just DEI and tech Marxism in general.
'Do all "New Yorkers of color" feel the same way? I highly doubt it!'
What makes you think people of color are allowed to have their own feelings?
Brought to you by the DNC. Democrats, telling black people what to do, since 1827.
Shouldn't that be 1619?
I have seen reddit, and there is no way to describe rediters as human
I'm pretty sure it's why the NPC meme was created. To my understanding the way the site is designed with all the upvote/down vote stuff is that everyone has to think the same to be "popular" and no one can disagree.
I never thought about it like that, but it makes sense. Would explain the impetus for ideological conformity on most sub-reddits.
Reddit is fine for video game hints, shit like that. Anything else I just wouldn't want a part of.
I go there just for NFL team discussions. Don't even have an account. But for some reason an instacart reddit is always on the home page. It is fascinating both the people who use it and those who work it. Both sides truly hate each other.
Cardinals fan?
Yeap. A tortured life.
R/drama was a ton o fun while it lasted.
Don’t forget the most important reason: hot fit milfs showing off the goods for free.
Wait, what?
Have you considered trying AnySpeech to make reddit seem more human for you?
OK so I still think Biden will win but I'm posting this just to combat the nonstop gaslighting from a certain Reason regular. You know, the hack who pretends dissatisfaction with #Bidenomics is an exclusively "MAGA wingnut.com" position.
Biden’s Gains Against Trump Vanish on Deep Economic Pessimism, Poll Shows
"The president is trailing Donald Trump in six of seven swing states as a majority of poll respondents see the economy worsening by the end of the year."
Good thing for Biden his base would line up to vote (D) even with $20 / gallon gasoline because they want their loans forgiven. 🙂
"nonstop gaslighting from a certain Reason regular"
We have at least three that match that description. Would this one also happen to be a Georgia Klansman and a pedophile?
Last I checked gaslighting was an attempt to get someone to question what they think and believe.
If that's indeed what the word means, then wouldn't arguing with someone about what they think and believe be gaslighting?
That would mean the folks you never criticize and always defend are the actual gaslighters, being that they literally tell people "That's not what you think and believe you liar! THIS is what you REALLY think and believe!"
*cue ironic gaslighting in the form of "You don't know what gaslighting means"*
Gaslighting is not making someone question their thinking, but making someone question their sanity. That was what the man was doing to the woman in the movie Gaslight, hence the name of the technique.
Gaslight (1944 Film)--Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslight_(1944_film)
Correct. The proper term for making someone question their thinking is patriarchal colonial oppression, assuming the questioning comes from a MAGA fascist and the thinking is done by a POC.
To the Wokesters, the whole Socratic Method is racist no matter who uses it.
where are those mofo jewels?
"Last I checked gaslighting was an attempt to get someone to question what they think and believe...
*cue ironic gaslighting in the form of “You don’t know what gaslighting means”*"
Oh sarcasmic, you do this for us on purpose, right?
Gaslighting actually means manipulating or attempting to manipulate someone into questioning their own perception of reality.
Oh, I see. Manipulating someone into questioning their perception of reality is totally different from trying to convince someone that they think and believe something other than what they know they think and believe. Because thoughts and beliefs have no effect on one’s perception of reality. Totally different things.
That’s sarcasm by the way.
I just wanted to be sure you'd defend people who engage in actual gaslighting with gaslighting. And you did.
Why do you get so defensive for being wrong? You should be used to it by now. Thats your calling card.
You really are this dumb, aren’t you?
"Oh, I see. Manipulating someone into questioning their perception of reality is totally different from trying to convince someone that they think and believe something other than what they know they think and believe."
Yes.
"That’s sarcasm by the way."
No, stupidity.
Just out of curiosity, does Jesse hum when he sucks your dick?
Just out of curiosity, is this you lashing out for being refuted?
If you'd actually think before typing about what you're typing, or realize that Shrike and Jeff have never once been reliable sources for you, you might spare yourself some embarrassment.
So it's only questioning someone's reality when people you hate do it?
Wut
The difference between most of your enemies and your allies is we back up our assertions. We also understand your arguments and read your links, more often than not countering your chosen set of narratives.
You, jeffe, shrike do the opposite. You read a headline or bumper sticker as your argument. Then ignore any new information that doesn't match your first impression on a topic. Often turning to sophist arguments instead of admitting you were ignorant.
What the fuck are you talking about?
Talk about a non-sequitur.
Lol. Top of your list. Permanent plaque.
I mean, yes they are fundamentally different.
And the people who constantly post against you aren’t trying to warp your thinking, they’re just flat out telling you that you’re wrong. Just sayin.
Dude, when Jesse posts something he argues against things I never said. When I challenge him by telling him I don't think or believe what he's arguing against, he calls me a liar and tells me what I really think and believe. How is that not gaslighting? That's literally telling me that my reality, what I think and believe, is not what I say it is but what he says it is.
That’s literally telling me that my reality, what I think and believe, is not what I say it is but what he says it is.
You are failing to grasp the difference between subjective and objective. Describing Floyd protests as "mostly peaceful" is gaslighting because they were objectively violent. The reporter who said it with protester lit fires burning behind him being a perfect example of what it looks like in practice.
What you think and believe is subjective. The fact that you continue to state that attempts to discern your meaning are gaslighting is an objective demonstration of a sophism.
Gaslighting is the attempt to convince another that their perception is false by lying about facts. Like Jeff the Chemist has continued to lie about what was known about COVID despite numerous citations.
Also, take the time and look up a good definition of solipsism. It might help you understand why others so easily see through your bullshit. What you think and believe has nothing to do with reality.
I post your words verbatim while you lie about what you said lol. I have literal evidence.
Umm. You literally defined it wrong retard. Lol.
Poor sarc.
The mean girls around here are pretty good at gaslighting.
ML in particular. He doesn't even stop to present a claim to be tested and challenged. He simply runs right over that step, implicitly asserting the claim to be true, and then begs a question based on the implicit correctness of that claim.
For example, instead of saying "Trump is being politically persecuted!", as a Jesse-level intellect might do, ML just goes straight to "Since Trump is being politically persecuted, how can you possibly defend the prosecutors bringing this case???" It lumps in a whole lot of false assumptions into one loaded question. He does this a lot.
Wow. Even dumber than sarc. Nice work.
Hey. It is hard work making sarc look good by comparison.
I’d guess you’d know about gaslighting as it’s your MO around here.
“ML in particular. He doesn’t even stop to present a claim to be tested and challenged. He simply runs right over that step, implicitly asserting the claim to be true, and then begs a question based on the implicit correctness of that claim.”
I literally posted a definition complete with a link to the source, but wow, look at Lying Jeffy go.
Hey Sarckles, take note. What Fat Jeffy is doing here IS the very definition of gaslighting.
Despite the fact that everyone can still clearly see what I posted, Jeff is trying to get us to disbelieve what we see and believe what he just wrote instead. Literally "attempting to manipulate someone into questioning their own perception of reality".
Fortunately Jeff is a little too dumb to pull off the mesmerism which he aspires to.
I'm not defending jeff, dipshit. While you're bending over backwards to defend your girlfriends. Everyone knows who they are.
So what if I was defending others here?
It still doesn’t change the fact that, 1. you were wrong about your definition of gaslighting when you attacked me. 2. Jeff was overtly gaslighting in response.
If your attacks are going to continue to be mindless and illegitimate, you bet I’m going to mount a defense. Expect it every time.
Ugh, not gaslighting. See medulla below.
You’re looking for bald face lie.
Edit: I'm the fool. The definition has been stretched to "lie". Point to ML.
Well Jeff was lying, but that's a given, it's what he is.
What I was pointing out to Sarckles was that Jeff was telling him not to believe what he saw with his own eyes when reading my post (reality), but to instead believe what Jeffy said I posted.
Much like the definition of "woman" has been stretched to mean "man with penis and facial hair LARPing as a female". Or "lesbian" is described as a "non-man attracted to non-men." Or "literally" means
"not literally".
'And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'
'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'
'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. 'They've a temper, some of them — particularly verbs: they're the proudest — adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs — however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!'
'Would you tell me please,' said Alice, 'what that means?'
'Now you talk like a reasonable child,' said Humpty Dumpty, looking very much pleased. 'I meant by "impenetrability" that we've had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the rest of your life.'
'That's a great deal to make one word mean,' Alice said in a thoughtful tone.
'When I make a word do a lot of work like that,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'I always pay it extra.'
Gaslighting is not the honest challenging of beliefs.
You need a better dictionary...Mirriam-Webster:
1 : psychological manipulation of a person usually over an extended period of time that causes the victim to question the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and typically leads to confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, uncertainty of one's emotional or mental stability, and a dependency on the perpetrator
2: the act or practice of grossly misleading someone especially for one's own advantage
Assembled from multiple sources:
According to the Newport Institute, gaslighting is a form of manipulation and abuse where the manipulator attempts to make their victim believe what’s happening to them isn’t actually happening and their reality is untrue.
The Newport Institute offers a few examples of gaslighting:
Lying about or denying something and refusing to admit the lie, even when you show them proof.
Insisting that an event or behavior you witnessed never happened and that you’re remembering it wrong.
Spreading rumors and gossip about you, or telling you that other people are gossiping about you.
Changing the subject or refusing to listen when confronted about a lie or other gaslighting behavior.
Telling you that you’re overreacting when you call them out.
There is also medical gaslighting and relationship gaslighting.
Gaslighting is different from genuine relationship disagreement, which is both common and important in relationships. Gaslighting is distinct in that:
one partner is consistently listening and considering the other partner's perspective;
one partner is consistently negating the other's perception, insisting that they are wrong, or telling them that their emotional reaction is irrational or dysfunctional.
Gaslighting Behaviors
The following are the kinds of behaviors that could mean someone is or has been gaslighting you.
Lying to You
People who engage in gaslighting are often habitual and pathological liars and frequently exhibit narcissistic tendencies. It is typical for them to blatantly lie and never back down or change their stories, even when you call them out or provide proof of their deception. They may say something like: "You're making things up," "That never happened," or "You're crazy."
Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that often occurs in abusive relationships. It is a covert type of emotional abuse in which the bully or abuser misleads the target, creating a false narrative and making them question their judgments and reality.
Distracting You
When you ask a someone who gaslights a question or call them out for something they did or said, they may change the subject by asking a question instead of responding to the issue at hand. This not only throws off your train of thought but causes you to question the need to press a matter when they don't feel the need to respond.
Shifting Blame
Blame-shifting is another common gaslighting tactic. Every discussion you have is somehow twisted to where you are to blame for something that occurred. Even when you try to discuss how the abuser's behavior makes you feel, they're able to twist the conversation so that you end up questioning if you are the cause of their bad behavior. For example, they may claim that if only you behaved differently, they would not treat you the way that they do.5
Denying Wrongdoing
People who engage in bullying and emotional abuse are notorious for denying that they did anything wrong. They do this to avoid taking responsibility for their poor choices. This denial can leave the victim of gaslighting feeling unseen, unheard, and as though the impact on them is of no importance. This tactic also makes it very hard for the victim to move on or to heal from the bullying or abusiveness.
Rewriting History
A person who gaslights tends to retell stories in ways that are in their favor. For instance, if your partner shoved you against the wall and you are discussing it later, they may twist the story and say you stumbled and they tried to steady you, which is what caused you to fall into the wall.
You may begin to doubt your memory of what happened. Encouraging confusion or second-guessing on your part is exactly the intention.
Gaslighting is not the honest challenging of beliefs.
The persons and behavior that ML is defending are anything but honest.
psychological manipulation of a person usually over an extended period of time that causes the victim to question the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and typically leads to confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, uncertainty of one’s emotional or mental stability, and a dependency on the perpetrator
That's what successful gaslighting looks like.
Are saying that repeated attempts at such manipulation by questioning and denying what people say that they think, perceive and remember is not attempted gaslighting? Because that's exactly what ML is defending. Or does it only count when the person falls for it?
You then list off examples which I skimmed, and they totally describe the folks and behavior that ML is defending.
How is posting your words as an exact copy a form of gaslighting? The gaslighting is you denying you said something often telling people what you said when the actual comment is posted word for word. Also known as lying.
People who engage in gaslighting are often habitual and pathological liars and frequently exhibit narcissistic tendencies. It is typical for them to blatantly lie and never back down or change their stories, even when you call them out or provide proof of their deception. They may say something like: “You’re making things up,” “That never happened,”
Sarc defined "my reality" as what he thinks and believes just above.
https://reason.com/2024/04/24/tiktok-gets-9-months/?comments=true#comment-10533805
It is pure ego defense. Solipsism means never having to admit you were wrong.
They've really stretched the meaning of that term.
No longer means "cause person to question validity of their observations", now is a fart sniffers way to say lie.
And with that, you just described Sarc, Jeffy, and Shrike.
Don't worry Sandy, no matter how far behind Biden is in those states there will be more than enough 2am vote dumps that are 99% Biden for him to win. So you can breathe a sigh of relief and blithely cheer on the "cleanest election on history" again.
No widespread fraud.
Correct. Just a few select precincts at a strategic moment.
It only takes like 11,000 votes.
The trick is to get the vote count unexpectedly big enough to thwart the cheating. This happened with the Cook County State's Attorney primary recently. The vote counters kept delaying the final tally to find more votes and failed.
Did you know that in 2000 George W. Bush's effective margin of victory was like 500 votes - in a state in which his brother happened to be the governor?!
Did you know that in 2016 Trump's effective margin of victory was tens of thousands of votes across a few tossup states - in an election Sam Wang Ph.D. calculated Clinton had a 99% chance of winning?
Yeah. Sometimes elections are close. Sometimes unexpected things happen. Whining about it for years after the fact isn't helpful.
But feel free to nominate toxic Congressional candidates in 2026 whose entire platform is "Trump was robbed in 2020 and 2024."
Sometimes unexpected things happen.
Like democrats in key areas violating election laws? Days of counting found ballots? Statistical outliers of batches being 98% for one party, well outside statistical expectations? Midnight ballot shifts? Found ballots.
I dont get why you think political parties would never manipulate elections despite acknowledging it in other areas of state power.
Is 3 over turned elections in the last 3 years for areas using 2020 election changes not evidence to you? Is a time article literally telling you what they did not evidence?
Why are elections the only non corrupt state function to you?
They went rather hard on it last time. They spent the weeks leading up to the election telegraphing it. I remember story after story explaining how we won't know who wins for several days. Either they were fucking cheating, or they were really worried about making Trump look illegitimate. For me, the icing on the cake was running around doing media with the bullshit "Office of the President-Elect" banners and podium.
Because she's a dumb fuck?
I don't understand why anyone would think the Democrats won't do it again.
See, the hypothesis that "the election was stolen" persists and persists because it is ultimately non-falsifiable, to the true believers. There is no amount of evidence you could present to a true believer to make that person change his/her mind, because that person can always continue to posit another conspiracy that REALLY explains the stolen election.
Switching the burden of proof is an infallible fallacy. Can't be beat.
See. This is jeff again trying to gaslight you and you falling for it.
The burden of proof is for those who validate an election. Instead you demand people accept a narrative of cleanest election ever despite the evidence you demand being held solely by the state under threat of criminal prosecution for seeking it out. You claim because the government has all the evidence and refuses to release it, it must mean the election was clean. The. Claim burden of proof otherwise is on those who don't have access to the evidence.
Chemleft is gaslighting you again, Sarckles. He claims it is "ultimately non-falsifiable", when in fact it is eminently falsifiable. If an actual nationwide audit would have been done when people demanded it in November and December of 2020, the issue would have been settled.
Even the precedent of half the country thinking the election was stolen, is bad. If someone thinks it wasn't stolen, they should be eager to set this to rest.
But instead they pretended a handful of recounts were audits, and then they kicked anyone who complained off the internet and had their jobs fire them and their credit cards cancelled.
The resistance to anyone who questions the results, through disingenuous means like gaslighting, censorship, and demonizing, would indicate to any rational observer that the election really WAS stolen.
If an actual nationwide audit would have been done when people demanded it in November and December of 2020, the issue would have been settled.
Booool sheeeet.
There's always another rock to look under.
That's not a rock, that's a mountain. Tell me any more effective way to dispel what you think is an erroneous belief by half the country, than a true nationwide audit.
The reason why you are pretending otherwise is that, 1. you think the election was probably rigged, and 2. don't care because orangemanbad.
It can’t be dispelled because a switched burden of proof is an impossible standard to meet. That was my point. And it’s not half the country. At most its half the electorate which is barely a third.
While you’re trying to get me to question what I think and believe, can you add a soundtrack? So I can know what I was listening to while I was thinking what you tell me I was I thinking. Totally not gaslighting though. That's diffe(R)rent,
It's not a "switched burden of proof".
You look at the ballots, compare signatures or death records and say "Yep, this is legit" or "Nope, this one is fake".
It's been done for thousands upon thousands of different elections. This one wasn't magically audit proof.
If an actual nationwide audit would have been done when people demanded it in November and December of 2020, the issue would have been settled.
sarcasmic is right, this claim is bullshit. We know this because every time there was any recount or audit or court case or anything that tried to establish the validity of the vote, the conspiracy mongers just moved the goalposts on to the next claim.
It would be something like "but it wasn't a REAL audit" or "but the audit in Detroit was corrupted in some way and therefore the entire thing is invalid" or "but the audit failed to consider this one point that my right-wing sources tell me is super-duper important therefore it's all bunk" or somesuch.
Besides, even the demand for a "nationwide audit" is a bad-faith claim because there is absolutely no mechanism for such a thing and he knows it. He's demanding the impossible and claiming that only the results of this impossible task can possibly resolve the controversy. Which is another way of saying he will believe in 'stolen election' nonsense forever.
We know this because every time there was any recount
Recounts mean fuck all, and I know that you know that. After all, it was the mantra coming from your party in 2000, 2004 and 2016. Which is why there were audits, and hanging chads and all that.
We call you ‘Lying Jeffy’ for good reason.
“or audit or court case or anything that tried to establish the validity of the vote, the conspiracy mongers just moved the goalposts on to the next claim.”
Give me an example. A real one, but just one, of anyone not involved with the Democratic party doing that after an audit. You don’t even have to give us a link or anything, just an example. But don't try and conflate an audit with a recount again which is your usual wont.
Also, are you still trying to pretend that there was a court case in 2020 regarding the veracity of the ballots?
Lol. There goes Chemjeff selectively nuanced defeatist again.
Everything he posts is all about what “we” need to do about this or that, except for the ones about things he doesn’t want done.
Those things are too hard.
He claims it is “ultimately non-falsifiable”, when in fact it is eminently falsifiable.
No. It is a non-falsifiable claim that the election was stolen because one could never prove that all the irregularities that have been uncovered are just the noise that occurs in any election. But where Jeff the Chemist goes way too far is implying there is something inherently wrong with believing a non-falsifiable claim. What would be wrong is to accept it or dismiss it without considering the weight of the evidence. Which both he and Sarc have, again and again.
“the election was stolen” persists and persists because it is ultimately non-falsifiable, to the true believers.
You are a fucking halfwit. It persists because it is, and always has been, a non-falsifiable theory. There is no evidence it didn't happen, there is only a lack of evidence that it did. You don't have to be a "true believer" to remain unconvinced.
After the Georgia senate seats were runoff, I was disappointed by the results but nevertheless intrigued by the numbers.
Jon Ossoff (D)
2,211,603 50.2%
David Perdue (R)
2,194,578 49.8%
(a total of 4406181 votes, and a margin of 17k votes)
Raphael Warnock(D)
2,230,231 50.61%
Kelly Loeffler*(R)
2,176,048 49.39%
(a total of 4406279 votes, and a margin of 54k votes)
You'd think that someone voting for Ossoff would also have voted for Warnock and vice-versa, and similarly that a Perdue voter was also a Loeffler voter and vice-versa (although I do admit Loeffler was a weak candidate so it makes a *little* sense).
But 20k fewer people voted for Ossoff than Warnock. There is a similar 20k vote differential in Perdue over Loeffler, so the implication seems to be that 20k people voted for Perdue AND Warnock, which I find virtually unfathomable.
Meanwhile, there was another state-wide race, for PSC
McDonald, Lauren Bubba i (R)
2,214,057 50.78%
Blackman, Daniel (D)
2,145,636 49.22%
(a total of 4359693 votes)
So it seems that about 46.5k people voted for Senators but didn't vote for a PSC. That is in itself not unusual, as it is not rare for people to only vote on the "important" seats and skip down-ballot votes.
The AMAZING thing to me is that despite 46.5k FEWER votes total, that 20k MORE people voted for a Republican for the PSC seat than voted for Senator Perdue and 38k MORE than Senator Loeffler. Heck even 3k MORE people voted for the Republican PSC candidate than voted for Jon Ossoff.
But pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Nothing to see here! Absolutely no shenanigans could possibly have occurred.
In this run-off election when EVERYTHING hinged on the Senate seats, I find it very hard to fathom that the Republican candidate for PSC District 4 received more votes than did 3 of the 4 Senate candidates. I have to admit the possibility that thousands of people would vote for Jon Ossoff *and* Bubba whatever his name was, and that there is a possibility that thousands of people would vote for Republican Bubba for PSC but not vote for either Republican for Senate. I mean how many people went to the polls to vote for their favorite Republican PSC and not for either of the hotly contested Senate seats?
Sure, it's possible. I'm just dumbfounded by it, so much so that if it came out later that somehow 15 or 20k votes for Republican senators were erased but the perp forgot to erase a similar number of votes for Bubba down-ballot, it would make a lot more sense than the alternative voting patterns.
This was even more suspect in Arizona. Comparing Governor and AG. Both seats barely won by the number needed to win and both had a disparate number of votes. Both margins under numbers effected by printer errors and in the case of the AG under the vote count for people whose ballots were not accepted because Hobbs as SoS switched their voting site to vacation homes instead of their primary residence making the votes not count (approx 3500 people)
Did Trump win 2016 with a bunch of statistical anomalies? Honest question because as far as I remember it just was automagically because of Russian interference and retarded memes on Twitter.
LOL, Sandy's hardly cheering that on. She's been pretty consistent in pointing out that Trump's a shitty candidate, which is an empirical fact for a multitude of reasons. Being aware of the 2 am ballot dumps doesn't change that.
When an industry is set up to have no vote verification at all, does it really matter how people feel about candidate? The surge in voter registration without ID or proof of citizenship is so bad, SSA who tracked it pulled down its website. We have seen multiple elections now overturned by courts for ballot harvesting. Continue to see affidavits of “voters” who said they never voted but showed up as having done so. In Arizona even the Libertarian candidate got caught with false voter signatures to get on the ballots.
Not biter verification. Laughable signature verification. Unexplained voter registration with unmatched SSA data. Media again talking about what the dems will do. Biden using federal agencies like Zuckbucks did. DoJ threatening poll watchers. Elias with 53 active election lawsuits.
But I’m sure 2024 will be the cleanest election ever.
I'm sure it won't be, which is why I also expect Biden to win again. Four more years pause.
Biden voters are notoriously fanatical. Even death won't stop them from casting a ballot.
And even when they are alive they vote while sleepwalking.
Biden voters are notoriously fanatical.
That is why they ignore rallies and never support him in person.
Wow, the stupid is strong with you Trump Cultists.
#JesseLevelStupid
You ignored the second sentence, which means that the fanatical voters don’t let death stop them. That was the joke.
Saying someone is JesseLevelStupid is a low blow. Save it for actual imbeciles and morons like Dlam and Big Mac.
Yeah, a lame joke is not "Jesse level stupid".
Man. You guys really are butt hurt aren't you. Lol.
Sorry your DNC narratives are easy to expose. Maybe get better arguments?
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Only talks about ideas, not people.
It always amuses me how you are a walking example for Dunning-Krugger. No matter how often you're shown to be wrong, you won't let it effect you.
Shrike is just a Soros shill trying to keep getting paid for finally convincing an idiot to agree with him.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
OK so I still think Biden will win
Is this OBL-style “I’m just agreeing with the Reason staffers” goatfucking satire, SPB2, or whomever’s “ACB will trigger a packing of the supreme court”-style goatfucking satire, or sarcasmic “I’m just observing facts and not really excusing or dismissing any particular party”-style goatfucking satire?
Because after your support for Ronnie D. and your “Boots on the ground in Ukraine.” prediction, it’s really just beginning to look an awful lot like you just enjoy fucking goats.
To wit, Bush won by a few hundred votes, Trump won by several thousand… exactly what would it take for you to acknowledge that 2020 was massively socially engineered in a distinctly anti-liberty fashion? Would 100.1% turnout with everyone locked in their home at gunpoint be evidence of fraud to you or just a rounding error and "some stuff that happened". Because, from where I sit, everyone absolutely should still be pissed that they had their rights stripped from them in 2020, since, and before. And it sounds an awful lot like your sentiment is “I still think Biden will win. Get over losing your rights.”
From Liz's link:
"But all of this is coming to an end. The advent of AI threatens to destroy the complex online ecosystem that allows writers, artists, and other creators to reach human audiences.
To understand why, you must understand publishing. Its core task is to connect writers to an audience. Publishers work as gatekeepers, filtering candidates and then amplifying the chosen ones."
This may be the most 'Atlantic' Atlantic article ever and this paragraph summarizes the magazine's entire purpose.
Gatekeeping is now a good thing. Without it how do you protect a narrative?
Nothing new. Every religion is founded on promoting a narrative and excluding others.
If Tic Tok gets nine months does that mean it's justifiable to abort it anytime we want?
It’s just a clump of sites.
Tiktok is nothing but a clump of code.
Yeah, but only 1 and a half calories.
"FTC bans all new non-compete clauses and strikes down most existing agreements"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/ftc-bans-all-new-non-compete-clauses-and-strikes-down-most-existing-agreements/ar-AA1nxnxx
Like Newsom's shutdown of the CA economy, I'm not certain of the harmful details resulting from this, but it is an absolute that when the gov't puts its thumb on the economic scales, most of the people involved will suffer.
I don't know how that's under FTC's purview, but noncompetes are common enough that someone will sue. FTC's track record under Kahn is a spectacular leader on lost lawsuits. I wouldn't be surprised to see the streak continue.
First place to look for a victim of it is whoever they profess to protect. They are typically just stupid and fuck the people they think they're helping. Often, they're a bunch of evil pricks and fuck everyone else while pretending to help.
Even the NYT recognizes the clown show known as the Bragg case.
https://1ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F04%2F23%2Fopinion%2Fbragg-trump-trial.html
"Do all "New Yorkers of color" feel the same way?"
Ya, the whole game of dividing everyone into what amounts to "straight white people" and "literally everyone else" seems to only be useful to be racist towards white people, not much else.
Turns out Japanese people, Indian people, and African American people all have distinct cultures and values and simplifying them down into one category of "not white" isnt really useful outside of activist academia
Ya, the whole game of dividing everyone into what amounts to “straight white people” and “literally everyone else” seems to only be useful to be racist towards white people, not much else.
That was always the entire point - to get a large enough number of people to outnumber straight whites so that they could openly hate "whitey."
Simplifying them into 3 categories?
Perfect!
My hunch, shared by many others, is just that it's a performative way to signal belonging to the left.
It's not a hunch, Liz, it's been confirmed. Also, ask one of your colleagues there who admitted that the only reason he wore a mask was to not look like he was on the right.
"There was no CEO, at a private dinner, or in hushed whispers over drinks, who didn't understand they had inadvertently overseen the dawn of a wildly hostile workplace environment, or worry their Red Guard HR team's obsession with open discrimination against white and asian men was possibly illegal."
HAHAAA! I'm laughing... I'm literally laughing. I can only hope this is true because it sure neatly aligns with everything I've been pointing out for years now.
Yes:
That's exactly what it is. My batshit crazy socialist sister has openly admitted as much to me.
My own batshit crazy socialist sister told me I needed to watch lady ghostbusters. I asked her if it was a good movie, she said no, but I should watch it anyway because it stars women.
*facepalm*
Although I'm glad to see I'm not the only one with a batshit crazy socialist relative (misery loves company). Actually I suspect a lot of us here have at least one close relative like that.
Everybody has a woo brother-in-law, right?
I have a couple of older boomer aunts who believe everything CNN and CBC tell them. "If it wasn't true why would they air it?"
They're sweethearts, but they don't use the internet outside of Facebook, and can't wrap their heads around the new corporate media paradigms.
About 10 years ago my sister posted something by Howard Zinn on Facebook and I responded that he was a Marxist who liked to rewrite even recent history that we could remember. She unfriended me.
I quit opening Facetwit and have never looked back.
Hmm...
I wonder if there's a connection? Maybe making hiring decisions based on DIE criteria isn't the best way to find and hire the best talent?
The DEI VP at my company got absolutely crushed when she did a presentation on generational differences. But only because the younger gen thought she was defending old people against them. The backlash was quite hilarious.
It won't be missed:
Nothing of value will be lost.
ruined my niece-phew
Eh, something of value was lost, but it was lost like 10/12 years ago when they cracked down on anyone to the right of Hillary.
That was the proving ground for the soros-bots and the 50 cent army that have infected just about every public comment board everywhere.
Reddit has always been very easy to manipulate if you have a few socks. Or, better yet, a few like minded upvoters and downvoters to bury the dissent as you head to the front page. Even before a decade ago there was a news article where people got to the front page with a few paid for upvotes to give them. Lots of corporate guerilla marketing, too -- Lego, Disney, GoPro, etc... -- using the same techniques.
Reddit has always been a stupid hive mind, but it has been overtly manipulated trash for 15 years.
>>Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.)
live evil.
>>Expect the ban to be challenged in court
oh I do, and I expect some asshole in a district court robe to overturn it because foggy bottom says so.
>>masks are surely being worn ... to both literally hide from surveillance and also to ham up the danger element
historically the reason for attending idiot liberal chick gatherings like this was to see how many idiot liberal chicks you could get naked how's that gonna go down if they're all masked?
how’s that gonna go down if they’re all masked?
At least you won't have to look at their faces anymore. Then again, most of those types do anal so I guess technically you never did.
>>There is a disgust reflex when something that used to get rationed through time and luck gets rationed with money instead
ya there's a worse disgust reflex from the class who scoffs at you for thinking you can eat at their digs.
I LOLed: "Sure every instinct in your body tells you you're getting swindled by paying twice for the privilege to access and then the actual goods but what are you going to do, not pay?"
same dummies ruined the phish ticket market in Vegas over the weekend ... four-figures for what once cost me $22.00
Ok gramps, my granola friends were already bitching about this in 2001.
no no I shell out all the dollars for phish and never complain it's just been three figures max until last friday
>>New Yorkers of color are not trying to return to the Giuliani era
I'm not on X somebody please ask this Tiffany moron where she draws the color lines and how
somebody please ask this Tiffany moron where she draws the color lines and how
Straight white people vs literally everyone else.
still waiting for why I'm white.
>> activists participating in non-violent civil disobedience," writes David Weigel
Weigel gets it wrong everywhere he goes?
Here we see David in his natural environment:
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/513902-cnn-ridiculed-for-fiery-but-mostly-peaceful-caption-with-video-of-burning/
ya I see we saw the same thing ^v
"activists participating in non-violent civil disobedience"
So, it doesn't apply to these guys, then.
>>How did Google Search get so horrible?
the Monsters Who Eat Everything are rarely friendly.
>>covering Google's new mission-first clarity
blame the overt racism on the a.i. machine.
"There was no CEO, at a private dinner, or in hushed whispers over drinks, who didn't understand they had inadvertently overseen the dawn of a wildly hostile workplace environment, or worry their Red Guard HR team's obsession with open discrimination against white and asian men was possibly illegal."
How did Google Search get so horrible?
Does anyone else get the impression Liz Wolfe was brought in as the community manager, explicitly hired to move Reason into the "Ok, it's happening" column?
The question is, when will they move into the "Ok, it’s happening, but it's a good thing because reasons" column?
The Law of Merited Impossibility
The coinage is Rod Dreher’s and goes back to the early debates on homosexual marriage. As Dreher formulates it, the Law of Merited Impossibility holds: “That will never happen, and when it does, boy will you [homophobes, transphobes, racists, sexists, whatever] deserve it.”
This Law is used, first, to disarm resistance to the latest leftist enthusiasm. Whatever the innovation is, it will have no adverse consequences. None! Puberty blockers and disfiguring surgeries have no downsides whatsoever. How dare you suggest they might!
Its second purpose is to dismiss out of hand “slippery slope” arguments—despite, or because of, the fact that every single such argument over the last twenty years at least has proved true. Worried that allowing people to “self-identify” as whatever sex they want will lead to pervy 50-year-old men exposing themselves to’ tween girls? Insist, loudly and indignantly, that that will NEVER happen and anyone who suggests it might is an alarmist bigot with a heart full of hate.
The third purpose is to enforce the new caste system. Those who get to impose fresh irrational indignities on the rest of us are the upper caste. Those who object, or even have reservations, are lower. The latter are not allowed to harbor, much less express, any doubts. Whatever humiliation the upper caste has planned for us, we deserve and must meekly accept. Hence when said pervy 50-year-old actually does start waving around “her” equipment in the girls’ locker room, if any parent dares object, let ’em have it with both barrels. That thing that ten seconds ago you said would “never” happen? Now it’s righteous punishment for the retrograde.
The Law of Merited Impossibility has done wonders for the Left in helping to ram through a wide variety of radical societal changes and cow into silence all opposition. It’s currently busy destroying girls’ and women’s sports, an outcome that we were assured would “never” happen. Though one wonders what the ladies did do to deserve it.
The Law is a bit passé, though, because our rulers rarely any longer feel the need to reassure normie Americans that everything will turn out OK, that the things we most fear won’t happen. Mostly, the holders of the Megaphone just skip to the second half, the angry insistence that we deserve it
https://americanmind.org/salvo/thats-not-happening-and-its-good-that-it-is/
>>New from 404 Media: we found a service called ‘ReplyGuy’
what’s jeff gonna do without all those $.50 deposits in his venmo?
New Yorkers of color? Who comes up with this shit? I've lived here my whole life. There's no unified New Yorkers of color, whatever the fuck that cumbersome turn of phrase is supposed to signify.
whatever the fuck that cumbersome turn of phrase is supposed to signify
Not straight and white.
Former Gorsuch law clerk explains the Ma A Lago raid. For those who haven’t been keeping track, Trump’s personal copy of the declassified Crossfire Hurricane documents (11 inch binder) has not yet been seized by Biden’s goons.
https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1778819259017376243?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1778819259017376243%7Ctwgr%5E3e5541ea9046f3edfdcffa254dac31ffd2af7a6f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Frevolver.news%2F2024%2F04%2Fhillary-clinton-portion-of-the-mar-a-lago-raid-comes-into-focus%2F
Again, the reason Biden (illegally) raided Trump is because Trump declassified (via memo on 1/19/2021) and kept his personal copy of his Crossfire Hurricane presidential records.
Biden, through his Deputy Counsel White House Jonathan Su, waived Trump’s claim of executive privilege.
Biden AG Merrick Garland personally approved the raid.
These Crossfire Hurricane records are devastating to Obama, Biden, Hillary, Clapper, Comey, and so many others.
They made up the Russian collusion hoax in 2016.
Because Russia almost certainly hacked Hillary’s home server.
Evidencing her Clinton Foundation foreign corruption as Obama’s Secretary of State.
If Russia leaked the hacked material before the election, Hillary wanted to blame a Trump dirty campaign trick—falsely accusing him of colluding with Russia.
Conspiracy theory?
51 former intel agents, working with the CIA, ran the same play with Hunter’s laptop of Biden’s foreign corruption in 2020.
This is a criminal conspiracy.
Trump could have publicly disclosed these declassified Crossfire Hurricane records in his civil lawsuit versus Hillary over the Russian-collusion hoax
Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, a Democrat operative who bashed Trump on Facebook, was forced to recuse from that case.
Six weeks later, Reinhart’s clear bias against Trump (somehow) didn’t matter anymore. Reinhart approved Biden’s (through Garland and Jay Bratt, now Jack Smith’s counselor) unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful raid on Trump.
For presidential records Trump was allowed to have in the Office of the Former President, per the Presidential Records Act.
In other words, Obama and Biden have politicized and weaponized law enforcement and intel agencies to interfere in the 2016, 2020, and 2024 presidential elections against Trump.
Because Obama and Biden know Trump has the goods on their ongoing Russian-collusion criminal conspiracy.
The Trump 47 DOJ must deliver severe consequences.
The DoJ claimed to have had Biden revoke Trumps clearance, to create the violation. But they forgot to actually do so with paperwork.
Then they got the DOE to retroactively do it.
If this is correct, which is completely plausible and very likely, how long until Trump unleashes it? Does he wait and see how the legal cases proceed, wait until closer to the election, or just have a grand July 4 celebration and lay it all out for us? There have been rumblings of this since the raid, but this is the first time I've seen it laid out like that.
It’s gonna be yuuge!
October surprise?
Just curious, but how do you know this was 1) posted by a former Gorsuch law clerk; and 2) that the poster had access to any of the things you listed in your post?
Gear pointed this out, but if you would have clicked the link your questions would have been answered. The tweeter is the former Gorsuch law clerk, and there are photos of the documents attached to the tweet.
I did click on the link. Since I don't have a twitter account, so all I could see was the first screen. And I have no idea how twitter verifies the identity of posters. Do you?
Yes.
By credit card or by ID.
Again, the reason Biden (illegally) raided Trump is because Trump declassified (via memo on 1/19/2021) and kept his personal copy of his Crossfire Hurricane presidential records.
Biden, through his Deputy Counsel White House Jonathan Su, waived Trump’s claim of executive privilege.
Biden AG Merrick Garland personally approved the raid.
These Crossfire Hurricane records are devastating to Obama, Biden, Hillary, Clapper, Comey, and so many others.
This is why there needs to be some sort of Nuremberg trials for these people.
Irrespective of all the Crossfire Hurricane stuff, it’s blindingly obvious that when Hillary screeched “The Russians did this!” after she lost to Trump, it was total kayfabe. Center-right retards keep parroting “but muh Mueller Report!” but Mueller had nothing, which is why the Democrats couldn’t even muster an impeachment over anything related to Russia the whole time he was in office.
The “Russia collusion” claim was always a lie, remains a lie, and will forever be a lie, no matter what a bunch of center-right culture war surrender monkeys and their lefty leash-pullers claim.
"I still think Biden will win. You need to quit whining about your stupid, loser, pro-Trump political grievances from *two* elections ago." - Sandra (formerly OBL)
I can still point out that Trump is a shitty candidate while acknowledging that his enemies are evil.
Right there in the link
Mike Davis
FORMER: Chief Counsel for Nominations, Senate Judiciary Committee * Law Clerk, Justice Gorsuch
Meant as reply to MWAocdoc
>>Mike Davis
credible.
In my inbox today:
Democrat Gerry Connolly Proclaims ‘Ukrainian-Russian Border Is Our Border!’ On the House Floor
https://twitter.com/InsidersHut/status/1781734590844920016
Connolly went on, “It is the line between depraved autocracy and freedom-loving people seeking our democratic way of life. Do we have a share in that outcome? Yes. Undeniably yes. Are we going to seize this opportunity? Will we stand shoulder to shoulder with our Ukrainian brothers and sisters, who for 1151 days have been holding at bay the depraved, criminal dictator Vladimir Putin, who does not respect any norms of war?”
“We must meet this test today,” he added. “We must stand by Ukraine’s side. Slava Ukraine!”
What nerve he has. What country does he represent?
Again, I'd like to see Putin's aggression punished and dearly so. Preferably, someone will put him 6 feet under. Not sure that handing $100B or so to Zelensky is going to do that or just line some Ukranian oligarchs' pockets. Nor am I sure that borrowing $100B to hand to them will be worth it in the long run.
He's very brave speaking from the comfy confines of D.C. and very generous with Other People's Money.
What nerve he has. What country does he represent?
He represents Not America. You have to get out of the regional blue shitholes to actually be in America.
Dear Senor Connolly: That word you keep using - "undeniably" - I don't think it means what you think it means!
Can we have a border, too? I bet he's not as enthusiastic about that one.
Last week, in "Google Fires 28," I covered the beautifully unceremonious axing of Google employees who felt as though Israel-related sit-ins were appropriate at work.
When CoinBase and BaseCamp told all their employees to leave politics at home the bolsheviks in the media dutifully lined up to condemn them.
It's always jarring and awakening to see Funamentalist Religionist have this much candor about their hatred for the ideals of The Enlightenment espoused by The Founding Fathers:
Pastor Loran Livingston rebukes church over politics and the ‘God bless the USA Bible’
https://www.theexpositor.tv/blog/pastor-loran-livingston-rebukes-church-over-politics-and-the-god-bless-the-usa-bible/
While I wouldn't shell out $60 for documents that are Public Doman and free to everyone in Cyberspace, it is fun to see Fundamentalist Religionists writh in pain from seeing their "holy" books getting soiled with Enlightenment ideals that still inspire freedom-loving, rational people worldwide!
🙂
😉
You aren't very educated in western philosophy, are you?
I know Western Philosophy preceded Christianity by at least half a Century and that Christianity is an Eastern Religion embraced by Western people and that the best of the West could have lived and thrived better without it.
"this much candor about their hatred for the ideals of The Enlightenment espoused by The Founding Fathers"
Such as? I looked at the link and I don't see it. In fact, your link seems to be just a slap fight between a left-wing evangelical (the writer) and a Christian Americanism pulpiteer.
Also, are you cognizant of the difference between the anti-theistic French Enlightenment which justified racism (Voltaire) and the Scottish Enlightenment which did not and was not anti-theistic and gave us luminaries like Hume, Locke and Adam Smith?
Don’t know what you’re looking at. Here’s the author Bill Rhetts’ About Me page and the man is deep, deep into his religion:
https://www.theexpositor.tv/about-me/
And if you read the blog posting, both Rhetts and the Pastor Loran Livingston place their religion over the Secularism and Individual Rights upheld by The U.S. Constitution and The Bill of Rights. They would both impose Christian Theocracy on the U.S. if they could.
The Scottish Enlightenment and the French Enlightenment equally questioned clerical and religious authority. It’s just that the Scottish Enlightenment didn’t use a guillotine or other instrument of execution but instead used cutting Logic and Common Sense.
And while everyone was tainted with Racism back then, upholding Reason as Ethan Allen did when he called it The Only Oracle of Man gave us the best tool to combat Racism. Abe Lincoln gave the Axiom of Euclid preserved by the Renaissance and The Enlightenment that has the most application here:
Lincoln--Clip 3: Lincoln on Euclid
https://youtu.be/SPiw7bKwL2M?si=AcnE6VGCKmNRfhS-
Now, whether you misperceive Objective Reality or not is not my problem.
So why is there such wailing and gnashing of teeth over the CCP losing it's primary psyops tool for influencing GenZ?
Mainly because Australia and Brazil marxist vermin politicians are going to use it to justify putting Musk in jail for not being a fellow commie.