The Schoolyard Taunt Election
Plus: DSA takes on the Venezuelan election, Israel kills Hamas leader, and more...

New slur just dropped: Perhaps it started with the online meme, which was semi-believable but untrue, that Sen. J.D. Vance (R–Ohio) wrote of humping a couch in his coming-of-age memoir, Hillbilly Elegy. Or perhaps it started with the most normal, almost boring politician in the world, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who has been using this talk track for months but is only just now going viral.
But the Democrats' new strategy is to call their Republican opponents—particularly J.D. Vance, former President Donald Trump's vice-presidential pick—"weird." ("Elegant in its simplicity," said one Democratic party strategist of Walz's invention.)
"People kept talking about, look Donald Trump is going to put women's lives at risk. That's 100 percent true. Donald Trump is potentially going to end constitutional liberties that we have and voting. I do believe all those things are a real possibility, but it gives him way too much power," Walz said on CNN. "Listen to the guy. He's talking about Hannibal Lecter and shocking sharks and just whatever crazy thing pops into his mind. And I thought we just think we give him way too much credit."
Walz, a former public school teacher in Mankato, Minnesota, is aggressively earnest and plainspoken, and "actually knows how to fish" and hunt, according to an approving former senator from nearby North Dakota. He looks like he shops at Costco and doesn't know what boba tea is.
Meanwhile, Vance—the frequent target of Walz's line—has had some damning comments resurface (naturally) from a Fox News interview in 2021 in which he said the nation was run by "childless cat ladies" who are "miserable."
"How does it make any sense that we've turned our country over to people who don't really have a direct stake in it?" he asked.
Out of this soundbite and Walz's frustration, a slur was born. Here's a supercut of Democrats calling Republicans "weird" from the last week, in case you don't believe me. More here and—enjoy this Fox News chyron—here.
Does the "weird" line make any sense? Admittedly, it is a little weird for Vance and some of his fellow Republicans to express such blatant contempt for other people's life choices—particularly childless and single women, not their male counterparts who are surely also to blame (unless they're busy with the couches, in which case: ride on). But I wonder whether Democrats are taking a premature victory lap, claiming the schoolyard insult is effective, when they're not exactly the party of normal, well-adjusted people like Walz.
It's the Democrats who can claim Sam Brinton, the crossdressing, gender-fluid, lipstick-wearing Biden administration Energy Department official who kept stealing suitcases (containing clothes and makeup) from luggage conveyor belts at airports. It's the Democrats who currently have gentle-parenting Instagram lady experts using kindergarten-teacher talk to condescend to people worried about big-government regulatory policy. It's the Democrats who have spent a LOT of the last decade holding drag queen story hours at public libraries and expecting everyone to stay really calm about it, and who have promoted an awful lot of gender-doesn't-exist/gender-isn't-binary talk. It's the Democrats, in the form of teachers unions, who held protests with coffins to combat school-reopening plans during COVID-19, implying that they would die if expected to go to work (while schools stayed open in much of Scandinavia, to great effect). Don't even get me started on the fixation with white-lady tears, or the literal Hamas headbands detected on some college campuses this spring.
For right now, though, people seem fired up enough about Vance's rude comments to accept and promulgate the "weird" insult.
Sometimes it backfires, though. The X account for the Nevada Democratic Party posted this, quote-tweeting an image of the two politicians: "You can't make this up: Sam Brown and JD Vance are claiming to be champions for hardworking Nevadans—from a private jet. They're not only hypocrites…they're just plain weird."
Unfortunately for them (and for him), Sam Brown, who is running for the Republican nomination for a U.S. Senate seat in Nevada, sustained heavy facial scarring from burns that came from an improvised explosive devise explosion while he was serving in Afghanistan in 2008. It took him three years of rehab and 30 surgeries to get to where he is today, but his face doesn't look, well, normal. (Brown gracefully pivoted away from the insult.)
But therein lies the problem with this schoolyard taunt approach: It looks not only low and mean, but it denies the reality most voters (especially the double-haters) know to be true.
American politics is full of terribly weird, thoughtless, and impulsive people, reflecting exactly who we are as a nation. The Tim Walzes and the Sam Browns are actually the exceptions, not the rule. Former President Bill Clinton had sex with his intern, featuring a cigar as a sex toy. Former President George W. Bush declared "mission accomplished" when it just…wasn't. He flew over Katrina-devastated New Orleans on his way back from vacation instead of actually visiting. The Kennedys, that political dynasty that just won't go away, seem to have a hereditary philandering problem. Trump was just convicted of falsifying business records related to hush-money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels, with whom he had an affair. It's not just politicians, but the political periphery as well: January 6 saw the introduction of another wild character, the QAnon shaman, who after being sentenced for his role in the Capitol riot was granted a special organic food prison diet. Of course.
It's no wonder people want to tune out.
One last reason why the "weird" taunt might backfire: Though Vance is wrong to speak about childless people in such terms, his family…looks like a lot of American families nowadays. Three (biracial) young kids, two working parents, one of whom is a striver who came from a hardscrabble background. Just as thrice-married Trump, who pays lip service to the idea of the church but barely attends, is representative of the social values of a portion of the country, Vance appears to be representative of another chunk: Those who are upwardly mobile, who care about providing for their young families.
Scenes from New York: Inside the Shujun Wang trial. Wang stands accused of being a spy for the Chinese Communist Party. If he is convicted, he will face up to 25 years in prison.
QUICK HITS
- MSNBC contributor Molly Jong-Fast claimed on the air that Republican vice-presidential candidate J.D. Vance wants only "white children" in America, which is an odd thing to say about a man who has three biracial children with his wife, Usha.
- Israel killed Ismail Haniyeh, a top Hamas leader, as he was visiting Tehran.
- Interesting developments with Project 2025:
NEWS: Project 2025 director Paul Dans has stepped down at Heritage Foundation after pressure from Trump campaign leadership, ongoing power rift over staffing control for potential second Trump admin, per internal email. This suggests Project 2025 will likely shut down. Story TK.
— Roger Sollenberger (@SollenbergerRC) July 30, 2024
- "My cover story in the new Aug/Sept issue of Reason Magazine explores the paradox that the faster the federal debt accelerates towards a debt crisis, the less voters seem to care," writes Brian Riedl on X.
- Stunning:
The Democratic Socialists of America @dsa_intl_comm congratulated Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro for stealing the election, then deleted their post pic.twitter.com/rHdA2otLUA
— Jonas Du (@jonasydu) July 30, 2024
- An artificial intelligence "friend" you wear around your neck? No thanks.
- It's time to stop the white-lady parenting influencers who are trying to get out the vote for Democrats:
There's a reason why we call it the nanny state, folks https://t.co/0fRWrr7OZF
— Liz Wolfe (@LizWolfeReason) July 30, 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
The Schoolyard Taunt Election
Your candidate is so fat that when he sits around the House...
Your candidate so black that when you squeeze her tits, purple drink comes out.
"Drink your big black cow, and get outa here."
Sir, its spelled "purple drank", please appropriate correctly
Sir, it’s spelled “barely black.” Please identify correctly.
It’s the presidential version of Eric Cartman vs Wendy Testaburger.
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.
I'm gonna give you that one.
Your mom calls him jeff?
My dad can do more pushups then your dad.
But not Hunter's Dad.
"Elegant in its simplicity," said one Democratic party strategist of Walz's invention.
Might want to fire that hack.
This thing has had the out-of-touch focus group --> DNC propaganda pipeline written all over it from go. Its a Hillary special
Jd Vance is the tolkin white guy.
No.
He likes LOTR I assure you
NO TO THE PUN.
What made you go Sauron the puns?
The odds of a Tolkien pun pleasing a crowd outside of a convention hall are one in a Silmarillion.
This pun hobbit when chumby is absent needs to stop.
Listen, Chumby will arrive precisely when he intends to
I gave it a 7
I thought this one went to Elven.
Ah, the spinal tap rating system.
maybe I'm just fey'ning spinal tap?
Are you familiar with the South Park reference also being made?
NO TO THE MISSPELLING OF 'TOLKIEN'!
One typo to rule them all
I wonder whether Democrats are taking a premature victory lap, claiming the schoolyard insult is effective
How far we've come since MEAN TWEETS!
And how far from "let your freak flag fly"
It's notable that leftists are using "weird" as a pejorative now after marinating in being so for over 50 years.
“Keep ___fucked-up-liberal-city___ weird…”
But like racism, there is good (lefty) weird and bad (MAGA) weird.
I mean the pivot on a dime should have the medias head spinning, if they werent so bought.
We just had Pride last month. The norm is that if you DONT celebrate queerness and grown men parading around in women's lingerie or sex slave costumes, you are a bigot.
They have made weird/queer the backbone of their degenerate party, if they think this is going to win them the swing state rust belt votes they actually need, they better get back to the focus groups
Apparently, normal is the new weird.
Vance talks about the books he reads, the left hates literacy.
They do seem to want us plebes ignorant and barefooted.
And of course unarmed.
But not pregnant.
My bad, you're right. Abortions all around, for everyone!
Oh please. You have to be pregnant receive the sacrament of abortion.
But I wonder whether Democrats are taking a premature victory lap...
Hillary reminds us Dems never do that.
Happy birthday future president.
Maybe my favorite pop culture moment to look back on was Kate McKinnons smug face doing her Hillary celebration party on SNL after the access hollywood tape.
Did a nice little touchdown dance spiked the ball and talked shit with 1 quarter left to go.
I think on the show she as Hillary ended up doing an all-too-earnest piano piece of something or other after the loss. Whatever I thought of Trump at the time, 2016 was a glorious year for schadenfreude.
But not enough progressive cunts and soy boys moved to Canada.
I stayed up watching them cry on CNN for election night 2016. I've rarely enjoyed television so much.
I did the same thing in 2020. Went to bed at 11 on the left coast and the gloomy panel on CNN said “well, it looks like a good night for team trump, but not for the country. Sniff.” Click.
What a difference 8 hours made.
Funny how everyone says the same things at the same time.
Life is one big subreddit.
I know, weird isn't it?
Walz, a former public school teacher…
All you need to know.
and that he got the term from a democrat party strategist
Are the people who voted for SleepyJoe in the primary truly happy that their vote didn’t matter?
Yes.
They keep chanting, "One of us, one of us, one of us."
Showing that "Vote Blue No Matter Who" pride.
Vote blue no matter who!
Don't look at me! 3 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Funny how everyone says the same things at the same time.
Fuck off, Buttplug.
It's the Democrats who have spent a LOT of the last decade holding drag queen story hours at public libraries and expecting everyone to stay really calm about it...
The Dems have a total capture on cultural media and therefore the day's Overton window, so they get to define normal.
express such blatant contempt for other people's life choices—particularly childless and single women, not their male counterparts who are surely also to blame
Men are to blame for women choosing to be crazy cat ladies? Is there anything women are capable of doing without men?
When 90% of young women are competing for the top 10% of young men, it gets a little hard to blame the bottom 90% men for becoming incels.
I think you may be on to something. I am no longer young, but seems you don't meet many young women who don't believe they are entitled to the absolute best of everything. Thus, the childless crazy cat ladies.
I didn't come up with it, it's been a pretty popular theory on the internet for the past ~5 years now.
That's the SOP for many mammal species.
Don't want to be an incel, get a job, take a bath, learn how to talk to women. What do those top 10% of men have? Good jobs and personality.
Real men don’t take baths.
Don’t want to be an incel, get a job, take a bath, learn how to talk to women.
What percentage of young men are dirty homeless bums in your opinion mod?
Are you saying my opening line on the apps shouldn’t be “Hey baby, taxation is theft.”?
The problem is that a lot of women in their 20s now don't want to settle down and get married and have kids. They've been told that can wait until their 30s or 40s by the feminist movement. Then they decide in their 30s that they want kids, but the men they would want to have them with (that they find suitable, or less of a settle) have options because they made themselves appealing by getting a good job, being fit, etc. These men that want a family are more likely to look for the women in their 20s as better options to give them kids (more fertile and more attractive). The women in their 30s and 40s then shame men for wanting younger women, and shame the younger women for sacrificing their youth for a man. At no point does the feminist movement blame the women for why this happens. Men are "weird" or creepy if they want younger women, or they are misogynistic for trying to hold younger women back from being the boss babe when younger.
You make me happy that I am an old married man.
"Men are to blame for women choosing to be crazy cat ladies?"
No I think that what Liz was saying is that if childless women are to blame for making changes to our society without having a beneficial stake in it (children to inherit that society), why isn't there equal opprobrium for the childless men out there.
Can men make children? Do men have a choice? Men are to blame for women's choices?
Women choose who can be a father. Women choose when, or if, they become a parent. Men don't get to choose. Hell, women get to choose to be pregnant and take your money even if you don't want to be a father.
There's no comparison.
That's horse shit. I am a father, and I know literally hundreds of fathers. They are not fathers solely because of some woman's decision. Did they have to convince a woman to be their wife? Absolutely. But if you are a man going through life thinking that women have sole control, you are just as useless to society as the perpetually aggrieved who think their terrible life is solely due to Racism. It is an excuse.
You are right in a lot of ways, but ultimately, in the human species, women are the sexually selective ones. It has always been the case that more men than women fail to reproduce. So while I agree that it is wrong to put it all on women, women are in a lot of ways the bottleneck. If a lot of women are deciding for put off or forego reproducing, then there isn't a lot that low status men can do about it. Though just giving up and just doing porn and hookers isn't going to help either.
This is like saying that car sellers are in a lot of ways the bottleneck- after all, they are the ones who have the car and choose whether or not to sell.
Yes, women control the supply. They get to set the price for having a baby. But men have the ability to pay, and if they don't have the ability to pay that price, they absolutely have the ability to do better and make that payment. My wife wanted to defer children because we were still starting on our careers. I spent a year working my ass off to get a better job, and I helped create the conditions where she was comfortable "selling". She set the price, but it was a price I had the power to meet.
Now who are we going to blame for setting that price? Women? I'll agree that there are some lefty/neo-feminist/malthusian beliefs of SOME women that should be ridiculed. But a video about the population collapse that Diane sometimes shares here shows that most women continue to have the same desire to reproduce as they have in history. What they show is that the "Selling price" of reproduction is going up in heavy correlation with inflation.
Now should we blame a woman for setting a high price due to government or other external factors? Do you vilify the car dealer because tariffs and inflation have bumped up his prices?
Nevertheless, what JD Vance is calling out are those crazy lefties who for various Malthusian, Feminist, etc reasons have remained childless. And I can guarantee you that I know many, many men who have done the same. Unfortunately there are increasing number of men who have opted out completely in some masculine version of victimhood that is completely unbecoming of men. That should be resisted.
If interested, this is the video that Diane would always post:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6s8QlIGanA
Think about inflation from an axiomatic economic standpoint. Inflation is most impactful to the young because they do not have hard assets. And yet the Young are the ones we want to have children. If you want populations to start having children again, then you need young women and men to be able to afford the price of parenthood. And inflationary monetary policy is almost 100% targeted at them, preventing them from having the conditions where they can afford that price.
“This is like saying that car sellers are in a lot of ways the bottleneck- after all, they are the ones who have the car and choose whether or not to sell.”
Not really a great analogy because car sellers don’t usually care who the next owner is, while most young women are incredibly picky about who impregnates them.
If car-sellers turned down the vast majority of potential purchasers because of the way they looked then the point might stand.
That's just a different expression of price. Yeah, women want a guy who satisfies their romantic interests. Is that shocking? And yes there are women out there who have unrealistic expectations- they are setting their price too high. On the other hand, there are plenty of men out there who refuse to learn simple shit, like "How to tie a bowtie" or "how to imagine a romantic evening that extends beyond fucking".
If car salespeople are too much a stretch, then use some longer term relationship. How about your Lawyer or House Cleaner or Doctor?
The principle is the same. The seller of a service or good needs to set a price, but the buyer has the power to meet that price. The argument being made by the incel crowd is that all these women out there are setting impossible prices- that the men have no ability to meet that price. It is absurd.
“Yeah, women want a guy who satisfies their romantic interests. Is that shocking?”
No. Because that wasn’t what I was saying.
“The principle is the same. The seller of a service or good needs to set a price, but the buyer has the power to meet that price.”
No. The principle isn’t the same at all. The difference between selecting a mate and selling products isn’t even remotely in the same ballpark. Your not divesting yourself of something for money or offering a service. If anything the woman would be the purchaser or client, not the seller.
This is like saying that car sellers are in a lot of ways the bottleneck- after all, they are the ones who have the car and choose whether or not to sell.
Okay, now I KNOW you've never even MET a woman.
What a retarded analogy.
Oh really, Azathoth? I have gone 100% through life without meeting a single woman. Are you projecting, little thoth? Are you one of these incels who spends all his time on message forums about how no woman appreciates his muscles and 12-year-old maturity?
It's okay little kiddo, the good news is that men remain sexually viable well into their 60s. So maybe in 20 years or so, you might acquire the maturity to compete with your average high school graduate.
You have a chance to convince a woman to become your wife and have kids with you if she wants to be married and have kids. If not, it's like trying to sell a Prius to me. I don't want it. I won't buy it.
The fathers you know are all fathers because of a woman's desire to have children, unless you are bragging about knowing men that keep women chained in the basement.
The notion that the same percentage of women want to have kids as has traditionally been the case is blatantly false.
75 years ago more than 95% of women wanted kids. It's not true anymore. It used to be women wanted kids more than men. It's no longer true. Young women today feel pressure to not have children. It's the reverse of how things used to be.
Despite all that, I can't say I'm the slightest bit "aggrieved" by being male. I'm not sure I would feel the same way if I were 30 years younger. I think I had the good fortune to grow up at the end of the golden age to be a child in the United States. Young enough to learn the new technology as it came about, but old enough to have had a childhood untarnished by social media.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/07/25/the-experiences-of-u-s-adults-who-dont-have-children/
Well, you SAY you are a father, but we have no idea if that's true.
You certainly talk as if you've never actually encountered a woman particularly when this --
Did they have to convince a woman to be their wife? Absolutely.
Undermines your whole point.
Women control whether or not the have a baby. Period.
They don't have "total control", but then, no one was suggesting that they did.
Just that they have control over whether they have a baby or not.
Which means that the women who become the 'childless cat ladies' society caters to CHOSE that.
Men can only become dads if women have their babies. That's why men don't get the blame.
Men, and particularly dads, get blamed for more than we deserve, so it's okay to lay something at the feet of the women who are perpetrating it.
The point that Vance was trying to make is that there are these people out there who want to dictate the direction of society, but have no long term investment in it. The "Crazy Cat Ladies" are women who have elected not to have children- they have opted out of a key responsibility (in Vance's view) of society, but still want to tell all the rest of us what to do.
Men equally opt out. There are many men who decide they don't want to have kids. There are men who want to have kids, but they are too immature to woo a woman into a decent relationship. And there are even men who get into a relationship with a woman and yet decline to have children. To the extent that these men also become screeching harpies in public policy, they should also receive the scorn of people who hate the cat ladies.
They are not fathers solely because of some woman’s decision.
I'm not sure where you're going with this. Well, maybe I do know where you're going with this and at the 10,000 foot level, I think I agree with you. But when the leather meets the pavement, it's the woman's decision. I had children because my wife wanted to have a baby. I wanted a baby too, but had she said, "I don't want kids" then my choice would have been to:
1. Agree to disagree and then not have kids.
b: Dump her and (hopefully) find someone else who made the same decision and has the same opinions on the matter that I have.
And then there's the ugly part of the equation where if I decided I no longer wanted children say, 1 month into the pregnancy, I can:
1. Leave the marriage and be on the hook for child support.
ii: Agree to disagree and do my best as a father.
It cannot be understated that when it comes to the act of having a child, the balance of choice is significantly on the woman's side.
Can men make children?
Sure, if you hit it raw. Outside of radical medical procedures that only came about in the last 40-odd years, women typically don't get pregnant unless a man dumps a load in her.
I get your point, but men have to take accountability for their own short-sightedness here, too. You don't have to worry about potential pregnancies if you don't fuck hos or at least wrap it. And if you don't actually want kids but still want to hit it and quit it, for fuck's sake, just get a vasectomy. That alone is going to chase off a lot of potential women looking for their retirement plan because they won't be able to trap you with a kid.
Can men make children?
Get a load of the guy who doesn't woke. It's 2024, bigot! Weird is now good, except for when it's bad.
Yeah, I parsed it both ways, too and decided to give Liz the benefit of the doubt and assume she meant the later phrasing.
why isn’t there equal opprobrium for the childless men out there
Maybe there would be if we had more choice in the matter.
If the Democrats want to play the "weird" card, let's get a national poll on things like drag-queen story hour, gender reassignment for 8 year olds, and Sam Brinton.
Yeah, it is pretty funny that that is what they have come up with when the American left has basically been fighting a war on normality for the past several years.
Don't forget that fat admiral thing they parade around.
Oh, Rachel, the Babylon Bee's Man Of The Year?
I guess we aren't going to Keep Austin Weird anymore?
This is what is so hilarious. These people are so trapped in their bubble that they think no one realizes how terribly insincere this is.
But what if they count only the votes from the bubble?
It's Not Who Votes That Counts, It's Who Counts The Votes
Joseph Stalin- The most quotable mass murderer of all time
It’s almost like they thought something was going to happen to Trump and they didn’t have a good plan B lined up and are now just flailing.
+1
IOW, "Oh shit!"
Isn't there the meme that everything the left accuses their opponents of they are guilty of themselves.
The idiots on the left didn't learn a thing from the failure of Hillary Clinton. "Weird" is going to end up on the wall right next to "deplorable" in the hall of failed shaming tactics.
-jcr
They aren't even pointing out anything strange (save for the couch fucking accusation.) It's an odd accusation to lob when they push for all sorts of deviant behavior
Couch sexual is protected sexual identity. These people are couch-phobic bigots. Disgusting.
I identify as chaise/lounge.
I demand more cushion for the pushin’.
I do like that if someone was into weird Loli porn, and fucked a motorized pocket pussy while watching pansexual cartoon CP the left finds a way to incorporate this into their LQBTQ sexual deviancy umbrella, but FURNITURE?!?!
Thats just too much
The first I saw of this meme was from Nick Kroll's Insta. If you have any idea what Big Mouth is, you'll know why.
The progressive elite, with their fondness for cutting edge deviance, can't help themselves.
And is a early puberty boy fucking a couch really particularly unusual?
Couch Humpers would be a good band name.
Ummmm…..
Here is the thing: Most of the United States doesn’t know shit about JD Vance. They have not heard him speak. They have read or heard little blurbs about him. Democrats are trying to prepare the groundspace- set peoples’ opinions before they have a chance to interact with him.
This is exactly what they did with Quail back in the Bush years. No one really knew much about him- or experienced his speeches. But everyone saw the SNL bits about him being a young kid. And from that point forward, it was how everyone framed his discussions.
JD Vance is an extremely articulate, intelligent man. I do not agree with half of what he says, but he is very, very good at speaking. And he is incredibly thoughtful. His biggest flaw is that he goes off half cocked quite often, which is where you get these “Cat Lady” comments. There are OOOOODLES of those comments. Sullum and Boehm continue to pull out one extemporaneous comment he made several years ago about taxing Harvard Trust Accounts. It isn’t in a policy paper he published, or legislation he pushed- it was a statement made in a long tirade on Hannity (I think). But he said it, and they will never let you forget about it. This cherry picking is how they think they will get the “Weird” moniker to stick.
He would do well to drop the beard.
He's got too much of a chubby baby face to go cleanshaven for politics. If he was gay, it wouldn't be a big deal, but that's not the case here.
Yeah, I saw the pic of him without it. I’m guessing his wife wouldn’t be happy if he shaved it.
He'd honestly look like Pritzker without the pockmarked complexion if he shaved. He's better off keeping it.
So it was your dad that was fat.
You got issues if you think a dude in the 200-225 range looks similar to a guy in the 350+ range.
What are you, a buck forty?
Fuck off, Buttplug, you fat fucking pedo.
LOL, pissed off because I slagged your fellow Democrat, you hicklib pederast?
The whole Kris Tyson drama must have you absolutely sweating bullets.
Ha
https://x.com/NoContextHumans/status/1818693111574368597
Absolutely not. Some dudes look better with beards. He looks like he would make a good pirate or old school military commander.
Shaved, he would look doughy
Why would divorcing his wife be a good move?
His movie is top 10 on Netflix. People are learning.
I haven't seen it- I've just read a lot of his policy writing.
I always figured the movie would not make him look good.
I haven’t watched it, but it autobiographical about growing up in a poor broken home and succeeding.
It humanized him fairly well from what I understand.
Just saw it this weekend. It was pretty good, and mostly shows him as having a shitty childhood and how he persevered through it.
Correct me if im wrong, but isnt the story more about people from the area his family are from, not him directly? I thought his direct family (his grandparents) got out and due to that he had a much more normal middle class life, but is intimately aware of the problems his family historically faced (as do others) and thats the material for the story.
His grandparents did get out of Appalachia when she got pregnant, but that’s just a little of the beginning of the movie with a few flashbacks to it. The primary story is his mother being a drug addict.
Kinda. It feels more like a tribute to his grandmother. For all of her flaws she tried teaching him to walk the line between remembering his roots and pushing him to be more than anyone in the family could be. She is more the main character of the story than he is. I think enough people on both sides have seen it to humanize him in a way that makes you cheer on his pursuit of the American dream. The media is trying to kill the public's memory
"This is exactly what they did with Quail back in the Bush years. No one really knew much about him- or experienced his speeches."
I have the feeling the dems will enjoy the opposite effect with whatever VP they decide to give Kamala. We don't even know who it is yet and people are throwing around names I have literally never heard of.
Time immemorial for hideous hermaphoditcal, sons of half breed squaws, sired by Mulatto fathers.
I'd add half of it though is how the candidate responds - hint don't get in a tank and pretend to be GI Joe or incorrectly correct a kid on their spelling.
He was reading from a card.
Fuck off Buttplug, you fat fucking pedo.
Quayle had an incredible talent for saying stupid things. Not just the occasional half-cocked comment. "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure." is only the beginning. They won't get it to stick with Vance simply because he is capable of speaking and people will see more of him because he is quite likeable. I disagree with him on a few things. That's fine.
Quayle? His remarkable history of saying stupid things may be unparalleled. If you need a few minutes of hilarity, see below for Dan's greatest hits.
https://www.bauer.uh.edu/rsusmel/Other/Quayle.htm
Friends of mine who know Quayle have told me that his problem is just stage fright. He's not a bubblehead like Kamala. He locks up when speaking to a group of any size, which is quite a handicap for a politician.
-jcr
“The future will be better tomorrow” was always one of my favorites because it verges on being a Yogi-Berra-esque quip, but was completely unintentional.
I think Vance is a little weird *looking* and his eyes seem a bit off to me, but I don't find him to be particularly odd. I don't find him to be particularly *anything at all*.
I probably would have gone with the insult of "Bland Man," from the SNL Bachelor skit of the same name.
They aren’t even pointing out anything strange (save for the couch fucking accusation.) It’s an odd accusation to lob when they push for all sorts of deviant behavior
Teenagers masturbate, news at eleven.
Meanwhile, the boss kept trying to fuck his daughter, the candidate got her earlier positions by fucking the mayor, and they staff high positions with tranny luggage thieves and crossdressers just because they are trannies and crossdressers.
Fuck them.
I don't care about dudes in dresses, but I draw the line at kleptosexuals. To hell with those thieving, degenerate perverts.
-jcr
My theory is that the Ds are making a, grantedly pathetic, attempt to be inclusive leading to crap like White Dudes for Kamala. Yeah we know we've been telling you for decades that you are worthless scum but you can redeem yourself by joining up with this bunch of self loathing pussies. And when we call you weird it's better than being deplorable. But you don't want to be weird do you? Chicks don't like weird white dudes.
It looks not only low and mean, but it denies the reality most voters (especially the double-haters) know to be true.
It just goes to show that there are always new areas to find to gaslight the public.
'Inside the Shujun Wang trial. Wang stands accused of being a spy for the Chinese Communist Party. If he is convicted, he will face up to 25 years in prison.'
When can we expect trials for US government security agency staff who were spies for the Democratic Party?
Trials and executions. I don't care to feed them for 25 years.
MSNBC contributor Molly Jong-Fast claimed on the air-
Stop right there.
Israel killed Ismail Haniyeh, a top Hamas leader, as he was visiting Tehran.
"Call me Wasmail..."
Damn, dude.
It's why I'm beloved.
It was inspired. Now he is Deadmail.
TOO SOON.
Should have gotten trip insurance.
Iran is denying this happened, btw.
Do they have morning TV talk shows?
Beautiful.
'MSNBC contributor Molly Jong-Fast claimed on the air that Republican vice-presidential candidate J.D. Vance wants only "white children" in America, which is an odd thing to say about a man who has three biracial children with his wife, Usha.'
I wonder if Molly supports free abortions for POC mothers.
Skin color is the most important thing
We've had a ring side seat to the devolution of the media for several years now; makes me wonder if we are approaching the denouement of the shit show. There is literally nothing they will not say or do to oppose Trump and all of his deplorable minions.
I do wonder where the limit is. Before Trump I’d occasionally watch Morning Joe. I rarely agreed with anything they said but they still presented as sane. Now I see clips of their show and they don’t even pretend that they’re honest and serious people.
I certainly support her and her whore mother self-aborting.
I wonder if Molly is aware that black women, who are encouraged, for freedom, by the democrats to use planned parenthood to better their lives....
....are 13% of the female pop but get 40+% of the abortions.
You would almost think these kind of stats would lead to the exact thing they are projecting their opponents want...
I mean, they just had two whites only events where they talked about how racist republicans are…
I forget who it was, but some years back I remember seeing figures on how many black kids were aborted and what their percentage of the population would be without the organization that racist asshole Margaret Sanger started to carry out her genocidal desires.
-jcr
CONGRATULATIONS TO THE SUBCONTINENT!
"East Indians" have finally joined other Asian peoples in being considered "White" by moronic leftists.
Well done, India. You have finally made it to the big leagues.
This suggests Project 2025 will likely shut down.
I'm sure then that will be the last we have to hear about it.
Surely qanon is still running somewhere?
QAnon is dead, long live BlueAnon. 100x bigger with 10x the hive mind and 1/10000th the brain power.
"Here's a supercut of Democrats calling Republicans "weird" from the last week . . . "
[Shows supercut of legacy media]
Saying the quiet part out loud now.
It's been that way for the past several years.
Yep, the "Threat to Democracy" compilations were especially creepy.
I adore Ms Wolfe, but I think she missed that we have already moved onto Phase 2 of the schoolyard taunting. Generally the vibe from Democrats now is "Wow, who'd have thought that calling someone Weird would be so unacceptable to Republicans."
This is just like the gas-lighting during the Kavanaugh hearings. They spent weeks dragging his name through the mud and amplifying whichever crazy statement they could find, and then when the Judge said "How dare you", they tried insisting that his reaction meant he wasn't fit to be a judge.
To be fair, the appropriate messaging from JD Vance really should have been, to post all these pictures of him and his family, and all his speeches saying things that most people agree with, and saying "Ask your local democrat why they think this is weird."
To be fair, the appropriate messaging from JD Vance really should have been, to post all these pictures of him and his family, and all his speeches saying things that most people agree with, and saying “Ask your local democrat why they think this is weird.”
The GOP hasn't had effective counter-messaging like that since Reagan.
They really need to dial up the "Kamala is a skank who has committed slavery against black men and tried to murder one of them by suppressing the DNA evidence that sprung him from death row" messaging.
-jcr
It's the GOP's election to lose... and I'm afraid they're gonna pull defeat from the jaws of victory yet again.
It just has to be a simple side by side.
JD and his normal family, something about his bootstraping up from poor to Yale, etc.
vs
Sam Brinton, Rachel Levine, any random photo from pride, and maybe a snap of the BLM riots burning down a building
Just a quick little side by side
With the meme caption "Which of these is weird?"
I think that is a different (but effective) message.
Just posting the picture of Vance and his family makes a different statement: the Democrats are calling YOU weird if you have basic values that 90% of conservatives and 80% of independents have.
Like this regarding the border czar topic:
https://x.com/Stephend1776/status/1816231433125716018/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1816231433125716018¤tTweetUser=Stephend1776
Oh, my steadfast belief is that she made the subtle implication on purpose.
...the faster the federal debt accelerates towards a debt crisis, the less voters seem to care," writes Brian Riedl on X.
I think that's mostly about the increasing distractions everyone gets fed on a daily basis.
Weird
But if you run out of bread, will the circus even matter? I'm thinking the proletariat will be providing all of their own entertainment [Zombie Apocalypse] at that point.
I think it is more that this won't be a problem until it is a problem. Much like climate change, you can only scream "The end is nigh!" so many times before people tune you out.
We have been screaming that the budget is unsustainable since 2000 (or earlier) and every year it gets worse. Until we draw a direct line between the deficit/debt and pain people feel right now, we will never get people serious about the budget.
The sad thing is that this deficit spending absolutely does impact our lives- by crowding out private investment, causing inflation and reducing the amount of money government can spend elsewhere. But no one is interested in focusing on these unseen costs (and if you tried, there are enough lefty "economists" out there to deny it to your face).
It's like SS. I've been told when I started high school in the early 80’s that it would be phased out soon. Still hasn't happened.
"Social Security. Has run out. For you and me." Circle Jerks
Circle Jerks are currently touring with The Descendents.
I mean, they weren't wrong...
If only they taught math in schools now. We are headed for the mathematical certainty that we cannot raise the revenue to pay the interest on the debt. The debt crisis will come sooner than that exact point as there will be a growing refusal to buy bonds resulting in inflationary increases of the money supply.
Instead they teach that math is "racist."
After a certain point, fatalism sets in. What possible fucking good does it do to give three flat fucks over the national debt, when it skyrockets no matter what people vote for?
Seriously, even including the L candidate, who could I vote for that would end up actually reducing the national debt?
After a certain point, I have to limit what I care about to things that I can even slightly possibly influence.
Call it economic nihilism or something.
'It's time to stop the white-lady parenting influencers who are trying to get out the vote for Democrats'
Higher taxes on cats?
Funny we get a barrage of stories about 2025, but nothing about build back better, or esl for sdg (un/nea insanity)
They keep bringing up Project 2025 and yet no Reason contributor has read it. It's almost as though it's nothing more than an ignorant attack piece. Weird.
BlueAnon will never let Project 2025 go. At least, unless the DNC sends out new talking points.
White Women for Harris is weird.
I think the "segregation for Kamala" thing is quite odd.
It was weird and cringe, but definitely the star was the gentle parenting goofball lady talking to a bunch of adults like that. Oof, hard to watch
Did you see her video about talking to her grandpa about gas stoves? It made me reconsider the NAP.
I didn't, but I did see one she did on climate change and the arctic, and couldnt help but think....literally who the fuck is this for.
I have trouble imagining even prog women who agree with her want to hear infantilizing baby talk back to themselves to echo a message they already agree with. And it definitely isn't convincing anyone in the middle of the road.
Though in fairness, I could copy paste that whole paragraph for the entire "X demo for Kamala" groups, that are just an echo chamber celebration
The Democratic Socialists of America @dsa_intl_comm congratulated Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro for stealing the election, then deleted their post...
Pretty soon Stalin will be the only one left in the photo.
An artificial intelligence "friend" you wear around your neck?
Clippy!
"It looks like you are trying to assassinate a political candidate. Do you want help with that?"
No that's the usss not ai
“It looks like you’re aimlessly walking.
“Would you like me to:
A) Assist you?
B) Give you a list of places to go?
C) Fuck off and don’t show me this tip ever again, at least until you have to reboot?”
It's time to stop the white-lady parenting influencers who are trying to get out the vote for Democrats...
Fortunately my feed has not been yet exposed to this fresh hell.
They are out in force. My wife's insta is being bombarded
Yesterday, the IDF killed the Hezbollah commander responsible for the murders of 241 Marines in 1983 in Beirut. How long should it take for General Smith to thank them officially on behalf of the USMC?
-jcr
It should take 2 nanoseconds.
Well, certainly by COB on Friday! And preferably much, much sooner.
Just how toxic is Reason's open borders agenda with American voters?
It's so toxic that this pro-Harris ad tries to portray her as the only candidate who will secure the border.
I am happy to live in the post-truth era. I guess.
BlueAnon makes QAnon look like child's play.
“Only I can solve the problem I created!”
And she's done such a good job of it already!
Sandra, what are your thoughts on JD Vance?
He's weird.
No opinion yet. Hillbilly Elegy is still on my Netflix backlog.
Joking aside he's an underwhelming, inexperienced pick. Not as indefensible as, for example, Kari Lake would have been. But it's hard to believe there weren't stronger options.
Being used as the same impeachment insurance policy as Kamala was.
He's:
a former marine with a law degree from Yale,
a self made millionaire venture capitalist and became a senator in what I believe was his first political campaign
a bestselling author before politics
a married father of 3
It's been a long time since we had a president that could claim accomplishments to match. What have you done?
His accomplishments already exceed what you could do in a thousand miserable, sniveling lifetimes.
Jealousy is a very ugly emotion. Get help.
-jcr
Sandra also isn't a VP candidate. Get the fuck over people having opinions.
American politics is full of terribly weird, thoughtless, and impulsive people, reflecting exactly who we are as a nation. The Tim Walzes and the Sam Browns are actually the exceptions, not the rule.
Do you have any idea how utterly stupid that comment is? The lead-off to your article is Walz engaging in precisely the sort of school-yard taunt that anyone would consider thoughtless. No, Tim Walz isn't an exception, no matter how much you want him to be. Or are you going to have him replace Jared Polis as Reason's favorite "libertarian Democrat". Maybe you should find out if he plays video games.
Shrikes amazing economy.
Heather Long
@byHeatherLong
Important story: Homelessness in the USA was the highest ever on record in 2023.
In 2024, homeless shelters and services are seeing an uptick in people WITH JOBS who are living in cars, etc.
Low-wage workers can't afford rent.
Graph
https://x.com/byHeatherLong/status/1817925286912258055
Even WaPo noticed.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/07/28/homeless-lack-of-affordable-housing-economy/
All profit, no downside. They just want jobs.
Julio Rosas
@Julio_Rosas11
From a DC law enforcement source: They have received intelligence that Tren de Aragua has officially given the green light to their members to target US law enforcement.
TDA is a violent gang from Venezuela that now has members in the US due to the Biden-Harris border crisis.
In their defense, a lot of Americans do not want to kill cops...so they are doing jobs Americans, by and large, will not do.
At a lower price! Win-win!
We need more Haitians so we can have cop food trucks.
If anyone watched the House grilling of the current acting lead of the secret service, you likely heard comments that the Trump Assassin is believed to have an account. He used the words on the open that the account was anti semetic and anti immigrant. Because of course, makes so much sense.
What he didnt count on is that the GAB CEO was present and presented the entire testimony of the online accounts the FBI asked for.
The account mentioned would have been when the shooter was 14 or 15. But the FBI also asked for an account from when he would have been 18 and 19, just a few years ago. Here is what he testified about.
Andrew Torba
@BasedTorba
BREAKING: The FBI is now claiming that the Trump shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks had an unspecified “social media account” in 2019/2020 (when he was 14/15 years old) that posted “anti-immigrant and anti-semitic” content.
This is not consistent with Gab’s understanding of the shooter’s motives based on an Emergency Disclosure Request (“EDR”) we received from the FBI last week for the Gab account “EpicMicrowave” which, based on the content of that EDR, the FBI appeared to think belonged to Thomas Crooks.
Many, particularly regime media reporters, have doubted Gab’s claims that this request existed. Normally we don’t confirm the existence or content of law enforcement communications. In this instance we had to make an exception due to the overwhelming public interest in disclosure and transparency.
As a courtesy to law enforcement, we are not going to post the entire request. This is the first page of that request.
The story is this: the account for which data was requested was, UNEQUIVOCALLY, pro-Biden and in particular pro-Biden’s immigration policy.
To the best of Gab’s knowledge, as of 2021, Crooks was a pro-lockdown, pro-immigration, left-wing Joe Biden supporter.
Big surprise
Ree Tardy Oswald
Democrat Twitter account drops a Tulsi level nuke on Kamala regarding her history as California AG.
https://x.com/PushBidenLeft/status/1817937373751091301
Pure evil.
Contrast this to Reason's embarrassing article trying to portray Harris as a ray of hope regarding Marijuana policy. At best, Harris can be described as an unprincipled hack who will adopt whatever policy she thinks will get her elected. But a more realistic view is that she is a petty authoritarian who might whisper platitudes about freedom while using the government to fuck you over in the most administratively brutal ways possible.
she is a petty authoritarian who might whisper platitudes about freedom while using the government to fuck you over in the most administratively brutal ways possible.
What if she just masturbates on you and then feels bad about it after?
Not rape!
Well as long as they promised that they felt bad after...
The fact that 90% of her staff quits on her is telling.
A reporter just released stories from his son who interned for her.
Demanded nobody talk to her. Forced employees to stand and say hi general when she walked in. Generally an awful person.
JesseAZ, do you happen to have a link to that. Or the author's name? Would love to check it out. Thanks.
Took a second to find. Too many articles on how bad a boss she is.
https://freebeacon.com/democrats/dont-look-her-in-the-eye-father-of-harris-intern-recounts-office-horror-stories/
Thanks for the info.
This is probably why they wrote her speeches to sound retarded.
But the Democrats' new strategy is to call their Republican opponents—particularly J.D. Vance, former President Donald Trump's vice-presidential pick—"weird." ("Elegant in its simplicity," said one Democratic party strategist of Walz's invention.)
This is hilarious to me. The adjective has already been coopted by the right who simply posts WH photos of Kamala and the democrats woth their trans activism with the line "JD Vance is weird," utterly mocking the description.
It is like when sarc or Jeff think they have something clever and repeat it non stop despite it being mocked heavily here. There is zero self realization on the left. They live in their blue bubbles and deny they are continuously mocked.
One last reason why the “weird” taunt might backfire: Though Vance is wrong to speak about childless people in such terms, his family…looks like a lot of American families nowadays. Three (biracial) young kids, two working parents, one of whom is a striver who came from a hardscrabble background.
And this is especially hilarious as MSNBC contributor went on and said JD only wants white kids not knowing his kids are biracial. She got hit so hard she deleted her account.
See you mentioned it. Good work.
It is like when sarc or Jeff think they have something clever and repeat it non stop despite it being mocked heavily here.
Sarc and his "Trump's Deranged Supporters" says hi.
"Listen to the guy. He's talking about Hannibal Lecter and shocking sharks and just whatever crazy thing pops into his mind."
But Corn Pop, dog face pony soldiers , and Uncle Ambrose getting eaten by cannibals are normal.
Joe has a stuttering problem , ok?
Hey, June 2024 called and wants its DNC talking point back. The updated version: Our hero President is too tired to keep going, but to honor his millions of accomplishments you must support Kamalama (or whoever we eventually put on the ballot).
Hey look a Judge agrees with Fox- that the Ministry of Truth and Nina Jankowicz were indeed looking to engage in censorship.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24946488/july-22-jankowicz-opinion.pdf
Hey guys, remember all the people in these here comments who were insisting that just wasn’t the case? Days and days and days of them telling us not to believe those conspiracy theorists on the right, or, you know, our own lying eyes. Will we ever see a mea culpa from those people in these comments? I know, silly question.
But have you considered that facts changed since those days and you're a conspiracy theorist for noticing the before they changed?
They are liars, the ones who justified censorship.
No one "justified" the censorship. The issue was, the people around here running around like emotional idiots claiming that this was 1984 come to life.
YOU DID.
You.
You justified the censorship.
You fucking wrote reams and reams of apologetics for the shitty, fascist censorship they were forcing including the ‘disinformation’ tsar, and you did it right fucking here.
Don’t you dare fucking pretend otherwise now, you fucking Nazi clown.
Okay, prove it, gaslighter.
kkkemjeff yesterday: "It so creepy who you fucking stalkers keep all these quotes of the things we say"
kkkemjeff today: "Okay, prove it"
This is what not having any shame looks like. Luckily Reason has a search button for this reason.
Here we go folks:
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Personally, I haven’t been able to find this information anywhere.
As far as I can tell as well, it hasn’t been reported. There is maybe one or two articles representing original reporting on it, such as this one:
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-immigration-media-europe-misinformation-4e873389889bb1d9e2ad8659d9975e9d
However, there is a metric shit-ton of right-wing freakout over it. There’s at least 10 articles about it on Fox News alone. The right-of-center media is clearly trying to drum this up as something like the worst violation of our civil liberties ever ever ever. Because of the extremely hyperbolic nature of these claims, my instincts tell me that while it’s undoubtedly a bad idea, it’s probably not AS BAD as Fox News et al. are making it out to be. It would be nice to have more information on it so that rational people could form a rational opinion on the matter. But according to some around here (*cough* soldiermedic *cough*), anything less than the right-wing-media line of IT’S THE MINISTRY OF TRUTH COME TO LIFE constitutes defending the board and an endorsement of it.
https://reason.com/2022/04/29/aoc-defends-due-process-as-colleagues-greenlight-asset-seizure-bill/?comments=true#comment-9469510
Jeff is a retarded post modern leftist clown. And fat.
Fucking absolute clowntits:
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
And by the way. The world is more complex than this simplistic thinking going on, that modern politics can be reduced to simple metaphors of “freedom vs. fascism”. People may do things in good faith and with the best of intentions, that we nonetheless might strenuously disagree with, based on OUR good faith reasoning and OUR good intentions, and it doesn’t necessarily make anyone an evil fascist asshole. Real people are not cartoon caricatures of villains or heroes. So I’m going to reject the characterization of the board as this cartoonish representation of Minitrue from a dystopian 80-year-old novel. That doesn’t mean it isn’t a bad idea, or that we shouldn’t oppose it.
At the end of the day, do you want to coexist with these people, or not? Because if you do, you will at least have to understand why they are doing what they are doing, even if you don’t agree with it.
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Instead you stated it may not be that bad.
I stated that I don’t think it is AS BAD AS what the complete epic right-wing freakout meltdown over it claims it is. No, I do not think that due to whatever this Disinformation Board is, that you are going to be dragged out of your house at 3am and thrown in a gulag and shot in the head based on posting some shitty meme. I think that is hysteria and hyperbole. JUST LIKE, whenever Trump did anything, Team Blue would have an epic meltdown and claim that it was the dark night of fascism descending.
But to you, it must be either OMG MINITRUE or TOTALLY OKAY. No in between. You are smarter than this normally but this issue has fucked with your head big time.
https://reason.com/2022/04/29/aoc-defends-due-process-as-colleagues-greenlight-asset-seizure-bill/?comments=true#comment-9469581
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Probably because it is literally OMG MINITRUE
And you know this how? Because the fifty identical stories on right-wing media all told you so?
The truth is, we know very little about this board, what it is precisely supposed to do, what its specific duties are going to be, etc. That is not just me saying that, Square = Circle said the same thing above. Is he a “DNC shill” too now?
I get it, you are pre-disposed to view anyone to the left of Ted Cruz as evil fascists, and so the moment you heard about this board, you and the rest of Team Red jumped to the immediate conclusion that this was definitive proof of fascism in action. JUST LIKE, when Trump was in charge, Team Blue was predisposed to believe he was a fascist, and so interpreted every single action of his as definitive proof of fascism in action. All of y’all are behaving like tribal idiots, and I and a couple of others are actually behaving like rational human beings by not immediately falling for the hysteria and waiting until we actually have more information before definitely stating that yes, this is LITERAL OMG FASCISM. I’m not a shill for any team, you are.
https://reason.com/2022/04/29/aoc-defends-due-process-as-colleagues-greenlight-asset-seizure-bill/?comments=true#comment-9469670
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Trump (as a phenomenon) and the reaction to Trump probably did kick it into high gear, though.
Uh-oh, Zeb. How dare you insinuate that the Disinformation Board is anything other than left-wing evil emanating from the bowels of the fascist corrupt left. According to some around here, that means you are defending the left and should be ashamed of yourself.
https://reason.com/2022/04/29/aoc-defends-due-process-as-colleagues-greenlight-asset-seizure-bill/?comments=true#comment-9469542
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
The CISA Act is what gave DHS the authority to look into ‘disinformation’ in the first place.
https://reason.com/2022/05/02/dhs-disinformation-board-nina-jankowicz-mayorkas/?comments=true#comment-9472685
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
The Cyber Security Department was setup by the Trump administration. Its main job was to harden our infrastructure against cyber attacks. One work-stream, among many, was to a) Study misinformation campaigns abroad, b) generate awareness in the public on how these campaigns work, and c) create a hub for reporting foreign attempts to interfere with misinformation.
None of that included setting up a Ministry of Truth.
You got that from the strategic plan for the CISA that I posted earlier. So, then, what is the strategic plan for the Disinformation Governance Board? Hmm? Oh wait we don’t know what it is, we don’t know precisely what it will do, in fact we know very little concrete information about it at all. So then what is the basis for calling it a MINISTRY OF TRUTH? I’ll tell you what: all of the paranoid hysteria that has been generated surrounding its creation. That’s it.
https://reason.com/2022/05/02/dhs-disinformation-board-nina-jankowicz-mayorkas/?comments=true#comment-9472715
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Oh my, that sounds nefarious. Totally a MINISTRY OF TRUTH.
Now, let’s compare this to what happened in 2019:
https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/current-activity/2019/07/22/building-resilience-foreign-interference-misinformation-activities
As part of the effort to #Protect2020, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is working with national partners to build resilience to foreign interferences, particularly information activities (e.g., disinformation, misinformation). The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) views foreign interference as malign actions taken by foreign governments or actors designed to sow discord, manipulate public discourse, discredit the electoral system, bias the development of policy, or disrupt markets for the purpose of undermining the interests of the United States and its allies.
So the Disinformation Governance Board is not a new idea. And actually the CISA was built upon even previous efforts.
None of these ideas led to a MINISTRY OF TRUTH. None of these ideas led to citizens being dragged out of their house at 3am and thrown in a cage for posting a shitty meme on social media. None of these things led us down the dark path of fascism into utter tyranny.
It doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, but it also doesn’t mean it will be the end of free speech as we know it.
https://reason.com/2022/05/02/dhs-disinformation-board-nina-jankowicz-mayorkas/?comments=true#comment-9473006
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
The most comforting thing he said was that the board won’t have much actual power, since it’s only acting in an advisory role.
Yeah what this board is going to do is write a bunch of reports that no one reads. It’s not MINISTRY OF TRUTH, it’s just another useless government bureau that shouldn’t exist in the first place.
https://reason.com/2022/05/02/dhs-disinformation-board-nina-jankowicz-mayorkas/?comments=true#comment-9472022
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
The point here, though, is that this “authoritarian attack on free speech” did not lead to gulags and tyranny and MINISTRY OF TRUTH in the past.
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
I do not agree that “Things are already tyrannical”. I find that comment itself to be a wild exaggeration.
“None of these ideas led to citizens being dragged out of their house at 3am and thrown in a cage for posting a shitty meme on social media.”
Oops.
It is hilarious isnt it.
And he used the same misdirect as he did with the DoJ/NSBA letter calling parents terrorists--"oh it's not that big of a deal/oh, they're just having meetings1"
He's always alternating between "this isn't really happening/okay, it's happening, but it's not anything to be concerned about and it doesn't affect you" mode.
Yeah, Cartman needs to be fucked to death with an F350.
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
“…Nina’s role was to come up with strategies for the department to counter this type of campaign, and now they’ve just succumbed to it themselves.”
So let me get this straight. So your ENTIRE argument, that the right-wing paranoid morons were correct all along in denouncing this board as MINISTRY OF TRUTH, was the vague claim of an anonymous staffer? Is that right?
So, can you tell me *precisely* what the phrase “come up with strategies” means? You’re CERTAIN it means some Orwellian stormtrooper tactics to throw freedom-loving patriots in gulags though. Right? How do you know this? I mean, it COULD mean that the strategies are things like, oh I don’t know, “develop educational materials” or “set up a central switchboard”. Like the previous manifestation of this board. Which didn’t throw anyone into gulags. But no, you are absolutely CERTAIN that it means some horrible awful dystopian nightmare. Why?
And can you tell me *precisely* what the phrase “this type of campaign” means? I mean, you are absolutely CERTAIN it means SPECIFICALLY right-wing domestic speech. How do you know? Maybe by “this type” it means an online campaign (which this one was). Or a campaign based primarily on personal attacks (which this one was). Or a campaign directed at a government agency (which this one was). No no, you are CERTAIN that this vague phrase “this type of campaign” means SPECIFICALLY “a campaign orchestrated by freedom-loving right-wing Americans”. Right?
Could it be, Overt, that you are right now projecting your own paranoid fears into this article in order to rationalize and try to validate your own past paranoid fears as somehow valid?
https://reason.com/2022/05/18/disinformation-board-nina-jankowicz-taylor-lorenz-pause-dhs/?comments=true#comments
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Yes, I used a little bit of hyperbole. So sue me.
Let’s be clear on what that means:
1) Use government resources
2) Create strategies
3) That the DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
4) Will use to counter (aka stop)
So far, we agree. And, so far, it’s a bad idea on this basis alone – it’s a useless waste of government money, like thousands of other bureaus. ALSO, all of the above can be reasonably inferred by what had been stated publicly by Mayorkas and others even before today.
5) speech by americans, and their elected representatives.
Nope, sorry, that’s stealing a base. Your entire argument rests upon the very thin reed that the vague phrase “this type of campaign” refers specifically to American right-wingers criticizing the government, when there are a thousand other plausible explanations, and that the words of this anonymous aide represent the official policy of the entire department. The evidence for this is very weak.
Jesus, you people are fucking sick. Stalk much?
Maybe chemfat shouldn't be taunting people to "prove it" if he doesn't want his own words thrown back at him.
The Nina Jankowicz articles are headline-searcheable. It's not like it's hard to find them.
That’s really your response after ML so thoroughly proved Lying Jeffy is lying right after he asked him to prove it?
You people really are psychopaths.
Hey retard. Jeff demanded links. ML searched for the stories.
You and Jeff love your lies though. Why you hate being held accountable.
See, this is how much of a piece of shit Sarcasmic is.
Jeff actually demanded I post these, and the drunken piece-of-shit tries to white knight and call it stalking.
What a garbage person Sarc is.
Not actual sarcasmic. For one thing, not muted already. SEE?!?! THIS IS WHY JUST MUTING THE STUPID FUCK IS BENEFICIAL!
Among other reasons, like "not having to read his retarded drivel".
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Steven Crowder got banned from YouTube for reading the statistics on Covid 19 and the flu from the CDC website. They said it was misinformation because it contradicted the CDC.
Sorry but I frankly don’t believe this claim. My hunch that if he did get banned, it was for something worse than merely “reading the statistics”.
https://reason.com/2022/06/04/youre-wrong-about-disinformation/?comments=true#comment-9527351
chemjeff radical individualist 2 years ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
I’m not doubting he got banned for something.
I am doubting the precise reason given for his ban. Cyto claimed it was for “reading the statistics”. Your article claims that the video “claimed it would uncover all the lies about Covid and the “liars who told them,” which is different than just “reading the statistics”.
My hunch is that he did something purposefully inflammatory so as to provoke a reaction, and then use the reaction to boost his own popularity. Because that is the pattern that he and other right-wing media darlings have engaged in before.
Get a fucking life, dude.
I know, right? It must be very frustrating to ML that he keeps getting pwned by someone whom he regards to be a Nazi.
"UH NO RITE?"
Fuckin' LOL. The only thing you've ever pwned in your otherwise useless life is the Country Buffet.
Wow, do you two retards think nobody can read what you just wrote, Lying Jeffy?
You demanded that I post these links.
You should just kill yourself. You can probably get Sarc to help.
You should just kill yourself. You can probably get Sarc to help.
How old are you? Until I stumbled across Reason I hadn’t heard anyone say that since middle school. “Why do you kill yourself!
Nya nya nya! Look at me impressing people by being mean! I’m so cool!”
I bet you cheer whenever there’s a news story about some teenager being bullied like that and then actually does it. I bet it makes you hard. I bet you’re proud of the people who relentlessly attacked someone’s child to the point where they took their own life.
You’re a sick, immature, useless piece of human garbage. I don’t wish that you kill yourself. I hope you accidentally say that kind of shit outloud to the wrong person instead of from the protection of your keyboard, and that person beats you to death.
That would make me smile.
If you and Jeff stopped lying about your past statements with such bravado we wouldn't need to prove you worthless leftists are lying.
Narrator: No matter what I or sarc might say, Jesse would bookmark past comments anyway, because he's a worthless troll.
Lol, keep going Lying Jeffy, you’re doing great!
The lack of shame here from Jeff and Sarc is spectacular.
Congratulations, you have just proved that you have way too much time on your hands, and that it is probably correct that you are a sad lonely little man living in your mom's basement.
Absolutely nothing in all of those quotes that you posted said anything about "defending censorship" or defending this Disinformation Board. In fact I even say "IT'S A BAD IDEA".
But, since you are a stupid pathetic little man, and a gaslighting fifty-centing moron, you deliberately conflate "objecting to the right-wing freakout" with "support for whatever leftwingers are doing". Because you are paid to do so.
But, since you are a stupid pathetic little man, and a gaslighting fifty-centing moron, you deliberately conflate “objecting to the right-wing freakout” with “support for whatever leftwingers are doing”.
Unfortunately that's what many people believe. And it's not just the idiots on the right. Idiots on the left equate criticism of them and their policies with support for whatever it is that they hate the most about the right. Idiots all around.
Oh I know. Unlike many around here, I actually do have RL friends who are lefties, and they confide in me some of the craziest left-wing nonsense. The current batshit insane one is their conspiracy theory where they think that the entire Trump assassination attempt was totally staged by Trump to generate sympathy for him and his campaign. I mean, there are so many holes in this conspiracy theory it is hard to know where to start. But they absolutely believe it. Because they are the flipside of the Jesse's, ML's, etc. around here who credulously believe every batshit insane conspiracy theory that makes Team Blue out to be a bunch of monsters.
Or we read both of yours posts and point out what is obvious to anyone who isn't a self deluded pathalogical liar.
chemjeff radical individualist 3 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Okay, prove it, gaslighter.
Me: Here you go...
chemjeff radical individualist 2 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Congratulations, you have just proved that you have way too much time on your hands, and that it is probably correct that you are a sad lonely little man living in your mom’s basement.
What is it like being that big of a living joke, Jeffy?
How about you, Sarckles? Do people mock you in the streets?
I skimmed through what you posted and didn't see jeff defend or support censorship. Most of what he said was objecting to the stupid hyperbole coming from the far right lunatics like yourself. The only thing you proved is that you're really fucking stupid.
Look at sarc try to make the same excuses he tries to make like when he claims he isn't mocking Babbitt, he is just attacking others pointing out the state shot an unarmed woman.
It is pathetic lol.
I skimmed through what you posted and didn’t see jeff defend or support censorship.
Either you're lying about skimming through or you're lying about what you saw.
Do you actually think that people are going to wade in far enough to see your post at this point without also reading the Jeff quotes? You're tricking exactly nobody by lying about it.
Either you’re lying about skimming through or you’re lying about what you saw.
Or I'm not a moronic liar like you who sees criticism of a bad faith argument as defense of what the liar is arguing against. You really are a gaslighter.
chemfat: "Prove it"
Also chemfat: "Proving it means you have no life and live in your mom's basement."
Nice that you get to have it both ways, eh, you fat child-lusting piece of shit?
This is the very definition of shameless. There should be a link to Jeff's posts here today on the internet.
Oh! Oh! The horror! I insulted Mother's Lament! How awful! After years of you all calling me a Marxist, communist, traitor, pedophile, groomer, psychopath, and all sorts of disgusting names, I accused ML of living in his mom's basement! Why, I should be so ashamed!
Like always, you got your own words shoved down your fat gob, and you don't like it so now you're trying to misdirect.
Seriously, that "mom's basement" crack is almost as pathetic as your lefty boos trying to make "weird" happen.
Leftists always project.
Overt: Will the dishonest people that justified censorship apologize?
Lying Jeffy (who absolutely did justify censorship): Nobody justified censorship.
Really couldn’t make this stuff up.
This was QUITE a satisfying thread to read.
And it’ll probably keep going. Lying Jeffy’s heading into bears in trunks territory with this one.
I truly think he’s a psychopath now.
You obviously didn't read the decision yourself. Please recall that this was a case about defamation, not a case about censorship per se. Jankowicz's claim was that Fox libeled her by making statements that were, in her opinion, "calculated to lead consumers to believe that Jankowitz intended to censor Americans' speech". And subjective evaluations of intent don't constitute defamation according to NY law. Further, because this was not a case about censorship but a case about defamation, the judge did not use a legal definition of censorship, but the dictionary definition - if you consider all possible meanings of the word 'censorship' in the dictionary, then the claim could be considered true. It was about whether ordinary people could plausibly believe that she was going to censor them, not whether her actions met any legal standard of censorship.
Furthermore, the conspiracy theory that was rebounding around here was that the so-called "Ministry of Truth" was deliberately constructed by Biden to suppress specifically conservative speech. That matter was not even evaluated by this court, and that is still a false conspiracy theory. I and others pointed out that this same bureau existed under Trump - in fact, it was Trump which AUTHORIZED the bureau's creation - and no one here said anything about "OMG MINITRUE". Because the concern here was never about "oh I don't want the government to be censoring speech", the concern was "I don't want the government to be censoring **MY** speech". Big difference. So no you don't get to steal a base and now claim that this bullshit theory is now true.
Finally, bureaus like this were created not for malevolent intent, but to try to solve a real problem: there is a lot of bullshit information out there, and people every day make bad choices using this bullshit information. This is a problem, particularly when those bad choices lead to particularly bad outcomes - not just political in nature, think of foreign actors propagandizing, or even fraudulent scams where people lose actual money. The "solution" of course proposed by Team Blue (and also Trump) was to create another government agency to try to 'fix' it. That's the wrong solution to this problem, but the problem *actually does exist*. For all the whining and complaining that you and your team do about 'censorship', you don't say much if anything about how to solve these real problems.
For all the whining and complaining that you and your team do about ‘censorship’, you don’t say much if anything about how to solve these real problems.
End universal suffrage.
That was easy.
Umm, no.
Why not?
Every policy that you propose gives power to demagogues (universal suffrage, expanded house, open borders).
It's not working.
I did and obviously so did Overt, you fucking pettifogging piece of shit.
No matter how you try and disingenuously twist it, the link is right there, the judgement is in plain English and is only 17 pages long.
Your entire post is bullshit, you corrupt DNC shill, and everyone can read the link for themselves and see for themselves. So how on earth do you think you’re going to trick anyone aside from Sarcamic?
Your entire post is bullshit
Okay, prove it.
You can't because you are a gaslighting fifty-center.
Well, I proved it below with quotes from the judgement.
So what now Lying Jeffy?
No, you didn't. Read what I wrote above.
He really did though.
Read what I wrote below. Quotes directly from the judgement. You're not going to Lying Jeffy your way out of this one.
I read it. It says that censorship means to "suppress" while the intention of the board was to "identify." Takes a real moron to think those two words are synonyms, so I'm not at all surprised that you did exactly that.
And sarc will claim tomorrow he isnt defending the state seeking to determine what is and isn't misinformation.
This is just pathetic sarc. Youre defending state abuses with shit weasel type analysis. Lol.
I'm not defending anything you ass. I'm saying that ML's argument is a lie.
I know that you're incapable of this because you have no intellect, no ethics, no integrity, and no principles, but some of us don't like it when people use lies and falsehoods as arguments. Pointing that out isn't supporting whatever the liar is arguing against. If you cared about honest debate, instead of flinging shit like a monkey, you would understand this. But you don't. You can't. That dirty dish sponge inside your cranium can't comprehend it.
Sarc, if you're going to lie and also accuse others of lying, be at least smart enough not to do it in the same thread that has the evidence that you're lying.
If you were at least a clever liar it wouldn't be so nauseating to have to constantly put up with your bullshit.
https://reason.com/2024/07/31/the-schoolyard-taunt-election/?comments=true#comment-10666610
A direct quote from the ruling: "I quoted Fox contends, and I agree, that Jankowicz has not pleaded facts from which it could plausibly be inferred that the challenged statements regarding intended censorship by Jankowicz are not substantially true,
On the contrary, as noted above, censorship is commonly understood to encompass efforts to scrutinize and examine speech in order to suppress certain communications. The Disinformation Governance Board was formed precisely to examine citizens’ speech and, in coordination with the private sector, identify ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation,” and ‘malinformation.’”
“I quoted Fox contends, and I agree, that Jankowicz has not pleaded facts from which it could plausibly be inferred that the challenged statements regarding intended censorship by Jankowicz are not substantially true,
On the contrary, as noted above, censorship is commonly understood to encompass efforts to scrutinize and examine speech in order to suppress certain communications. The Disinformation Governance Board was formed precisely to examine citizens’ speech and, in coordination with the private sector, identify ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation,” and ‘malinformation.’”
So the judge didn’t say that the DGB was engaging in censorship. It said that stupid people like you might think that it is. And because the brains of FOX News viewers are malleable like putty, they’ll believe it. Therefore it wasn't defamation.
What that statement does not say is that the DGB was engaging in censorship.
Again, to be clear, I'm not defending anything. I'm just saying that you're really fucking stupid.
“scrutinize and examine speech in order to suppress certain communications.”
Scrutinize and examine is the identify part.
Labeling it whatever you want because it goes against the governments narrative is the attempt to suppress.
We literally saw them do this during Covid.
And seriously, what the fuck? The government doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt on this.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure that Overt is going to complain (like he has in the past) that I am too busy criticizing the right's overreaction rather than the left's own actions. Here's the thing - the right's overreaction (and similarly the left's overreaction wrt Trump et al.), is a big reason why we are in this polarized mess that we are in. The much bigger problem overall, is that either side views the other as not just wrong, but evil and demented and out to crush and destroy the opposition by any means necessary. In the big picture, this is the much BIGGER problem overall, than whether some specific agency may or may not have acted improperly. Because if either team is going to continue to view the other as irredeemably evil, then the only possible 'solution' is for one side to eliminate the other. You don't cooperate or bargain or negotiate with Nazis, you try to destroy them, right? And that holds equally true whether it is the left viewing the right as Nazis or the right viewing the left as Nazis. This has to end, because otherwise it is going to lead to a very dark place, much darker than whether Jankowitz censored someone on Twitter or not.
So I am going to stand for truth and objective facts and reason for being valid bases for making public policy decisions, rather than emotional appeals or narratives built on half-truths. And the whole bit about the Disinformation Board being 1984's MINITRUE come to life was pure emotional garbage, that was only intended to further sow division and discord.
“and the whole bit about the Disinformation Board being 1984’s MINITRUE come to life was pure emotional garbage”
Ho-ho, so you do remember how you made excuses for the censorship board and tried to handwave it now. It must be hard trying to remember the things you posted, being such a consummate liar and all.
Intelligent people can understand that there is a difference between objecting to the Disinformation Board, and claiming that the Board represents MINITRUE come to life, and that it is entirely consistent to believe the former but object to the latter. But you are not an intelligent person, you are paid to lie here.
Jesse still thinks I supported mask mandates because I responded to his strawman argument that masks are useless because they don't filter out individual viruses by saying the purpose was to filter saliva droplets. He read that and concluded that I'm a leftist who supports mandates. Or when I objected to the claim that all protesters are rioters. He read that and concluded I'm a leftist who wants riots.
These guys are certifiable morons.
The pore size in the latex of a typical condom is much larger than the size of a typical virus. Yet I have never heard a single one of them claim "condoms don't work".
You do realize that condoms protect against herpes, which is a virus, right? Because equating condoms to face masks is one of the dumber equivalences you've attempted here.
Your argument that "masks don't work because viruses can pass through the pores of masks" is the exact same as the argument of "condoms don't work because viruses can pass through the pores of condoms".
So, since condoms "work", do masks "work"?
Sperm and air are the same.
Try breathing through a condom and wearing a mask over your chode when you ejaculate, Jeff, and then tell all again how they are same-same.
Media Matters isn't sending us their brightest.
the *argument* is the same, not the physical objects themselves.
god you are a tiresome liar
The argument is literally about the physical objects, lol.
Are you fucking high Lying Jeffy?
"chemjeff radical individualist 5 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
The pore size in the latex of a typical condom is much larger than the size of a typical virus. Yet I have never heard a single one of them claim “condoms don’t work”.
I get it now... You're trying to exasperate us to death, aren't you?
You love your false equivalencies almost as much as your false dilemmas and fried twinkies.
Lmao! Holly shit you’re dumb as fuck Lying Jeffy!
And I really think that with the Team Red crowd, their 'policies' really come down to a quasi-religious dogma.
I think of it along the lines of the Catholic dogma of transubstantiation, where the bread and wine of Catholic Mass are, literally, transformed into the body and blood of Christ. I mean, there is no possible scientific or rational way that bread and wine could possibly transform into the *literal* body and blood of Christ. But that is part of the Catholic dogma, and if you want to be a Catholic in good standing, you have to publicly state that it is true and act as if it was true. The dogma is more important than the truth.
And that is how it is with the right-wing morons around here. You have to repeat the Accepted Republican Dogma in order to be a Republican in good standing. That dogma includes:
1. Masks don't work
2. The election was stolen
3. The COVID vaccine is worse than the virus
4. Illegal immigrants are violent criminals
5. Democrats are Marxist communists who hate America
Etc.
It doesn't matter if those statements are true or not, they are the Dogma that have to be recited and acted upon as if they were true, just like Catholic transubstantiation. That is what it has come down to.
I notice you dropped the “biden had dementia in 2018!” from your strawman list… Why?
That dogma includes:
1. Masks don’t work
2. The election was stolen
3. The COVID vaccine is worse than the virus
4. Illegal immigrants are violent criminals
5. Democrats are Marxist communists who hate America
Etc.
Which one of those wasn't proven true in the end, Lying Jeffy?
Well, the Democrats are Nazi psychopaths who hate humanity, but other than that...
They are all false as general statements.
On the other hand, your team holds them to be true as dogma, as you are demonstrating. Members of the Church of Trump must repeat the dogma and faithfully believe it to be considered a MAGAhead in good standing and receive communion.
“They are all false as general statements.”
Look at this psychopath go.
No, they're all true statements that have been conclusively proven time and time again, despite your BlueAnon conspiracy theories to the contrary.
Lol. Sarc defends Jeff's lies with his own lies. Fucking amazing. Do you want to pull a jeff and have your past words?
I'll even add in you crying about people noting Australia locking people up for being outside.
“It’s not a concentration camp unless they throw everyone in the ovens.”
I objected to the term “concentration camp” because it was deliberately insulting the families of people who died in actual death camps. You read that and concluded that I fully supported rounding up sick people and confining them against their will.
Another great example of how fucking painfully stupid you are. The things you conclude from what people say makes my head hurt. Literally gives me a headache.
Yup, ONLY TWO possible choices:
1. Fully support rounding up sick people and holding them against their will
2. Fully oppose the quarantine camps, up to and including comparing them to Nazi death camps
they really are a bunch of stupid binary thinking retards
If you criticize the argument they are making, then you fully support whatever they are arguing against.
Say that their argument against masks is a strawman, that means you support mandates.
Object to them characterizing all protesters as rioters, that means you support riots.
Object to the use of the term “concentration camp”, that means you support forced quarantine.
Object to the Disinformation Governance Board being characterized as something from 1984, that means you support censorship.
That’s how their minds work. I say “work” loosely here, because their minds really don’t work.
“Fully oppose the quarantine camps”
Lol, Lying Jeffy just told on himself.
2. Fully oppose the quarantine camps, up to and including comparing them to Nazi death camps
It was Sarckles who compared concentration camps to extermination camps, Lying Jeffy. And I know that you remember that.
Everyone else was 100% right in comparing the involuntary Covid camps with concentration camps, because that is exactly what they were.
From google.com
A concentration camp is a form of internment camp for confining political prisoners or politically targeted demographics, such as members of national or minority ethnic groups, on the grounds of state security, or for exploitation or punishment.
People being put into quarantine and being let out when they're better are not political prisoners being targeted for punishment.
Right there in your own quote: "or politically targeted demographics,"
Covid internment was always a political, Sarckles, because many of the people interned had already tested negative and were interned regardless.
Everything government does is political, by definition you fucking moron.
The people who were quarantined weren't put there because they were Jewish or Japanese. They weren't put there because they were viewed as a threat to the government. They weren't put there as punishment or retribution. That's what makes it a quarantine center, not a concentration camp.
I can't believe you're still doubling down on this when you're so fucking wrong. Well, I can. Because you're the one with no shame.
Ha!
“I objected to the term “concentration camp” because it was deliberately insulting the families of people who died in actual death camps.”
See, this is where you lied last time by deliberately conflating concentration camps with extermination camps, and your still doing it now.
You were called out on it even then, but you’re too dumb to think up a new trick.
Ask people what they think of when someone says "concentration camp" and they're going to say "That's where Hitler exterminated the Jews."
You know this, which is exactly why you used the term to describe forced quarantine.
Then you've got the nerve to say I'm the liar. Sure, buddy. You're fucking mental.
“Ask people what they think of when someone says “concentration camp” and they’re going to say “That’s where Hitler exterminated the Jews.”
No. Because most people aren’t as dishonest and retarded as you, and know what an extermination and what a concentration camp is.
Do you giggle when you lie through your teeth like that? Just curious.
Oh cut the crap. You didn’t choose the term “concentration camp” out of truthful accuracy. You chose it to evoke a comparison to Nazi death camps.
Otherwise, why not just use the term that the Australians themselves used – “quarantine facility”. Hmm?
He doubles down on this lie and says we're shameless. True gaslighting right there.
ML is absolutely one of the worst gaslighters here. He will tell abject lies, but he will do so in a way that sounds so brazenly confident that you think there must be an element of truth to them. Nope, they're just lies told by a liar because he's paid to lie here.
Is sarc really complaining about people thinking of Hitler with the term concentration camps as him and Jeff have spent months saying the words vermin and blood are reminiscent of Hitler to go after Trump?
This is why people think you're a leftist joke sarc. Just like when you tried to define fascism. Another ignorant and retarded attempt against people who actually know and use the terms correctly.
I don’t think he’s paid. No, I think he’s a True Believer. And I think he believes much of what he says.
Sarc thinks random people he knows’ ignorance should make us not use correct terms.
Another restriction he wants on our speech regarding criticizing government actions.
ML is absolutely one of the worst gaslighters here. He will tell abject lies
I can point to six deliberate and purposeful lies that you told, knowing that they were lies, here in this thread, and two for Sarspastic.
I challenge either of you two inveterate liars to point out a single ‘lie’ that I said.
I can point to six deliberate and purposeful lies that you told
See, that is what I'm talking about. An excellent example of ML's gaslighting. He doesn't just go with the stock "you are lying" claim, that is too vague. Instead he goes with a claimed quantification of the lies (six) that I supposedly told. It implies that ML did the work and actually counted them (even though he didn't, he just made it up out of his ass), so it adds a veneer of credibility to his false claim. ML does this a lot. He doesn't just lie, he lies boldly and bigly. Just like his God-Emperor Trump.
“Ask people what they think of when someone says “concentration camp”…”
I think about FDR interring Japanese Americans in concentration camps.
Lol. The fuck you were you state defending shit weasel.
Haha. So, they were just gonna “identify” wrong speak but do nothing about it? Maybe condemn, but not suppress?
And this is ok with you? Never heard of mission creep?
What an idiot
Calling it the Ministry of Truth may be hyperbolic, but it’s not a lie. You know, considering their stated goal was to identify “misinformation” and “disinformation”.
You’d be a fucking moron to not realize they were going to do more than just “identify”.
Of course you think that. This is not shocking to anybody.
Also not shocking? Your deference to what the democrats proposed to do vs your setting your hair on fire at every Trump/Vance sound bite.
Awesome. Keep going Lying Jeffy, you’re doing great.
I and others pointed out that this same bureau existed under Trump – in fact, it was Trump which AUTHORIZED the bureau’s creation – and no one here said anything about “OMG MINITRUE”.
I’d never heard that so I looked it up.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said that the board is the “continuation of work that began in the DHS in 2020 under former President Trump”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation_Governance_Board
Interesting.
Oh. A lying dem secretary of the press gave you a talking point and you ran with it then linked to wiki who will also use any dem narrative to defend it?
First line on wiki:
The Disinformation Governance Board (DGB) was an advisory board of the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), announced on April 27, 2022.
So… not a continuation.
In the table:
Formed
April 27, 2022; 2 years ago
So not a continuation.
Then your wiki link cites.. Jen Psaki. So you defended Jen Psaki with a citation of Jen Psaki.
Are you fucking retarded?
Yes, yes he is.
The creation of the board was a formality to recognize work that was already being done and make it official.
It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you're too stupid to understand that.
Yes, that is essentially correct.
2018: Congress passed, and Trump signed, the CISA Act which created the CISA agency to "stop misinformation from foreign actors" or somesuch
2019-2020: CISA created this elaborate plan for "stopping misinformation" with regards to the 2020 election.
No one said "OMG MINITRUE". No one said "censorship".
2022: Biden said: Let's create this Disinformation Governance Board and put Jankowitz in charge, to coordinate all of these efforts that were started earlier.
Right-wing: TOTAL FREAK OUT MODE OMG MINITRUE HERE COME THE GULAGS
Sarc’s own link says he’s lying his ass off about it being “a formality to recognize work that was already being done”, you pathetic shill.
“The Disinformation Governance Board was announced and revealed to the public by the DHS on April 27, 2022, during a 2023 budget hearing before the United States House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security.[1] The board had begun operating two months prior to the announcement. The DHS had decided to form the board in 2021 after conducting research that recommended creating a group to “review questions of privacy and civil liberty for online content”.”
Announced in 2022 for inclusion in the 2023 budget, and the DHS had only decided to form the board in 2021.
If you’re going to lie try not getting caught with your own fucking links.
The board was created to oversee and coordinate work that was already being done. The people on the board don’t do any actual work. They review work that’s being done and make decisions what work is to be done. Boards like that, which are basically committees, are created after work has been started. Otherwise they wouldn't have any questions to review.
You keep relying solely on the words of Jen Psaki despite all evidence. Why?
Not solely, no. I did a little more research on jeff's timeline and it appears to be correct.
Whereas your argument relies solely on attacking the source, not what they said. This isn't Perry Mason dude. Facts are facts, regardless of who says them. Attacking people doesn't invalidate what they say.
Then cite something besides wiki whose only citation for your claim is... Jen Psaki.
You have yet to actually cite evidence of yours and Jeff's narrative. Instead you've defended it with Jen Psaki while ignoring the known factual dates that are available.
Youre literally blindly pushing a narrative.
I’m not digging into my search history to find it, nor am I doing a new search. Especially because you’ve never argued in good faith before, so you’ll just wage more attacks. Not playing. If you want to know, google jeff’s timeline. Find something that refutes it. Or shut the fuck up. Please. You make my head hurt. Dealing with you is like dealing with a perseverating autistic child. That's why I keep you on mute most of the time. Reading your comments gives me a headache.
I’m not digging into my search history to find it, nor am I doing a new search.
Of course. Because you’re deliberately lying. As proven by your own earlier link.
We read the jen psaki quote. Your wiki article cites jen psaki. Yet you continue to run with the narrative without thought lol.
Withou the "right-wing freakout," the board wouldn't have been shut down.
Turns out actually resisting the left instead of "compromising" results in them taking Ls. Who could have expected that?
Lying Jeffy doesn’t want the left defeated.
“You obviously didn’t read the decision yourself. Please recall that this was a case about defamation, not a case about censorship per se. ”
Then you obviously didn’t read the decision yourself, or my statement. I said the judge agrees with Fox- and disagrees with you. And if you read the opinion, it is clear that he does agree that the purpose of the DGB was to censor.
Who do you think you are kidding with all your parsing? A government body that engages in the dictionary definition of censorship is meeting the definition of government censorship. And the fact that you feel the need to engage in this hairsplitting reveals quite a bit about you.
In any case, I think ML provided enough of your absurd dissembling over this whole debacle. You think it is clever how you create this strawman argument and defend only it.
“For all the whining and complaining that you and your team do about ‘censorship’, you don’t say much if anything about how to solve these real problems.”
It is funny that you have moved from “It may not have been a good idea, but the right is totally blowing it out of proportion” to “Well it was really never that bad, and at least SOMEONE is trying to limit the flow of bad thoughts in this country!”
Here is a clue: if you believe that people saying incorrect shit on the internet is a problem requiring a solution, you aren't a libertarian.
Narrator: jeff was never in fact a libertarian.
Gee, I thought you were better than the Jesse's and ML's out there, but maybe I am wrong. They just want to troll and score cheap points. Is that why you are here too?
Go ahead, point to exactly where I "defended censorship". Quote the text.
You also misrepresented what was the "conspiracy theory" that I and others objected to. It wasn't about whether the Board was censoring or not, it was about the insane freakout over "OMG MINITRUE COME TO LIFE" and Team Red's insistence that it was purposefully constructed by Biden as a political weapon against *conservative* speech. That is the conspiracy theory that is a lie. Do you agree that this conspiracy theory is a lie? Yes or no?
if you believe that people saying incorrect shit on the internet is a problem requiring a solution, you aren’t a libertarian.
No, that is not what I'm saying. The problem is when people *make decisions* based on those incorrect statements. This is not too dissimilar from the concept of fraud, which every libertarian opposes. If I try to sell you a bottle of poison by telling you that it is a bottle of baby food, you and I and everyone else would rightfully object to that practice as an instance of fraud. The problem isn't the inaccurate speech per se, the problem is the DECISION that the fraudster is trying to induce the victim to make, based on the inaccurate speech. You are against fraud, are you not Overt?
“Gee, I thought you were better than the Jesse’s and ML’s out there, but maybe I am wrong.”
Why do the leftists here say things like this so often?
“Gee, I thought you were better than the Jesse’s and ML’s out there, but maybe I am wrong.”
Jeffspeak for being called out for lying.
"Go ahead, point to exactly where I “defended censorship”. Quote the text."
No, and this is exactly the disingenuous dissembling you engage in. All you do is try to get people to defend shit they didn't say. Your original defense of the DGB was to accuse the right of a bunch of hyperbolic parody ("MINITRUE!")- not to actually defend the board but to try and change the subject to Republicans Pounce. Everyone sees this for the cowardly dodge it is.
Now you are doing it again. You even insinuate a fake quote ("defend censorship") and demand that I defend it. No thank you.
“….*make decisions*…..”. You know when you see the * * Jeffys getting all selectively nuanced again. Lol.
Who do you think you are kidding with all your parsing? A government body that engages in the dictionary definition of censorship is meeting the definition of government censorship. And the fact that you feel the need to engage in this hairsplitting reveals quite a bit about you.
It says that I am interested in putting the issue into proper context with facts and reason and logic.
I note that the judge in this case only showed that reasonable people might plausibly conclude that the Disinformation Board was going to censor their speech. The judge made no decision one way or another on whether there was any legal censorship or violation of the First Amendment.
As opposed to the common practice around here, which is to ignore the details and look at the 'truthiness' of the matter - hey look, there's this Board that looks really bad and bears a passing resemblance to an 80-year-old dystopian book, so they must be exactly the same thing!
Overt: And the fact that you feel the need to engage in this hairsplitting reveals quite a bit about you.
Lying Jeffy: I note that the judge in this case only showed that reasonable people might plausibly conclude that the Disinformation Board was going to censor their speech.
Good job Lying Jeffy! Keep going!
Bottom line Overt:
Are you going to endorse the stupid binary thinking that goes on around here, where everything is reduced to ONLY TWO possible choices?
That the only two possible responses to this Disinformation Board are:
1. Fully support the Board and its desire to censor Americans
2. Fully oppose the Board, up to and including accusing the Board of purposefully targeting conservatives and creating a modern-day MINITRUE
that's it, those are the only two options.... yes or no, Overt?
stupid binary thinking that goes on around here, where everything is reduced to ONLY TWO possible choices?
That isn’t what Overt did. That’s what YOU did as a strawman, you're reducing it to a ludicrous binary and are pretending the fight is against that, because your actual position was immoral and untenable.
It just gobsmacks me how you think that people can only read the post you just posted and no others.
That isn’t what Overt did. That’s what YOU did as a strawman
I didn't say Overt did it. But that false dichotomy is absolutely not a strawman, it is thrown in my face by your team virtually every time I object to both the Team Blue and Team Red position on an issue, as demonstrated right here:
Team Blue: Let's set up a government disinformation board to 'stop misinformation! What a terrific idea!
Team Red: That's a horrible idea! It is literally 1984's MINITRUE come to life! Biden is targeting conservative speech! What a monster!
Me: No, the board is not a good idea, but it's also not MINITRUE either...
You and your girlfriends: LOOK AT CHEMJEFF, HE IS DEFENDING CENSORSHIP
You and your girlfriends: LOOK AT CHEMJEFF, HE IS DEFENDING CENSORSHIP
When you are far more outraged by the "Republicans pounce" aspect of the story than the overreach (to put it lightly) of the government, that's the reasonable conclusion.
That and the fact he has constantly defended censorship.
There are hundreds of Chemjeff comments under the Jankowicz articles from the time where he is explicitly doing that.
Usually adding the caveat to the effect of “I’m not defending censorship, but…” and then going on to do exactly that.
And yet you could not find a single example. Weird.
Hahahahahahahaha
Like we can’t read the links.
When you are far more outraged by the “Republicans pounce” aspect of the story than the overreach (to put it lightly) of the government, that’s the reasonable conclusion.
Only if you are stuck in idiotic black/white thinking mode. Here is a clue: I disapprove of both teams on this matter. No, I do not disapprove of both teams EQUALLY, and I explained why that is above.
Can you just pause for a moment and try to understand how someone might plausibly and honestly believe that this “Government Disinformation Board” was a bad idea, but not the liberty-destroying monstrosity that Team Red made it out to be? That if you get beyond the craptastically fascistic name of this board, if you look at what it was going to do, it didn’t really amount to much? That the overwhelming amount of criticism of this board that came from Team Red was not about the substance of this board, but was based on assumptions about the board based on its Orwellian name, and based on objecting to Jankowitz personally?
There was literally no reason for the board to be created.
That’s the libertarian stance.
Not getting your panties in a twist because Republicans were being hyperbolic about it.
But that false dichotomy is absolutely not a strawman
I very clearly said the strawman was your attribution of it to others.
I’m seeing a lot about this new “let’s call them weird!” campaign and how the dems are reveling in how effective it is…but I have not seen any meaningful responses to it from the other side. Has anyone responded in any real way to these attempted insults?
The most I am seeing are just responses with pictures of any number of crazy shit that members of Biden’s white house got into over the last few years.
Twitter has coopted it.
https://twitchy.com/fuzzychimp/2024/07/29/pot-meet-kettle-people-hilariously-mock-the-left-for-saying-jd-vance-is-weird-n2398981
We're not mocking them for saying (or even thinking) that he is weird.
We're mocking them because they suddenly all started saying the exact same thing at once, in unison.
Just posted this yesterday but always worth reposting:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ksb3KD6DfSI&pp=ygUjcmVwb3J0ZXJzIGFsbCBzYXlpbmcgdGhlIHNhbWUgdGhpbmc%3D
I think I saw that one a while back, too. It's freaky.
I like how the audio overlay makes them sound like the Borg.
Trump was just convicted of falsifying business records related to hush-money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels, with whom he had an affair.
There is something weird about this. What would be even more weird would be honest reporting on the novel legal theories and motivations that made it happen.
How it started:
...Republicans to express such blatant contempt for other people's life choices—particularly childless and single women...
How it is going:
It's time to stop the white-lady parenting
Some AWFLy weird takes from Liz.
"Weird" is not the right adjective. Weird is quirky and harmless. JD Vanice is not harmless. He is a major grifter who learned from his mentor that the crazier your statements the more political donors will throw at him. "Bizarre" is a better term.
I really don't care about humping a couch. Maybe it was all the cat hair that turned him on. Whatever. But his recent pronouncements following his complete about-face on Trump's godhood are not "weird" but dangerously bizarre. He has less going on upstairs than the current Somnambulist in Chief. His political opinions are whatever he thinks Trump wants to hear.
Hillary lost her election in large part to a single utterance about a "basket of deplorables", and thus alienating the vast middle. Yammering on about all white women being crazy cat ladies is going to lose his ticket the election as well.
The nomination is OVER, time to shift towards the center where all the voters are. The idea that you can alienate everyone but your donors won't earn you points. Just as every Hillary utterance gained Trump points, every Vance utterance are free points to Harris. All she needs it a semi-competent running mate and a whitewash to her California record and she will edge over the the fifty percent point.
This is Trump's election to lose, and Vance is losing it for him.
"...He is a major grifter who learned from his mentor that the crazier your statements the more political donors will throw at him. “Bizarre” is a better term..."
Claims absent evidence can be rejected out of hand, especially when they come from TDS-addle shit pile like this.
How is he a grifter?
Yammering on about all white women being crazy cat ladies is going to lose his ticket the election as well.
LOL
Best part is Brandy claiming he isnt a Democrat. It is hilarious.
The second best part is she says he’s changing just to make Trump happy then uses an example from years ago.
"The nomination is OVER, time to shift towards the center where all the voters are. The idea that you can alienate everyone but your donors won’t earn you points. "
This concern trolling just makes you look silly. Everyone knows there isn't a conservative-leaning person who could ever meet your approval. To suggest Vance doesn't understand tacking to the center because opponents are pulling up quotes from months and years ago just shows that you will choose whatever convenient talking point you can to criticize icky people on the right.
You misspelled "stupid".
Unless you're saying that all white women are Democrats, well, he didn't say that about all white women.
As I understand it the quote is from 2021. Don't know what mentor you are referring to. He was an anti Trumper back then. And considering the fact that he authored a best selling book and ran a successful business thereafter seems unlikely that he's hard up for cash and needs to grift. But yeah tragically he probably lost Trump the childless cat lady vote.
"Grifter" has been coopted by the online left to mean basically anyone who calls out their bullshit and they dont like what they are saying.
Subreddits are filled to the brink with anything based being called a "grifter", its the new hotness to disarm your opposition.
Yeah, Trump is a "grifter" who came out of the presidency poorer than when he went in.
Biden isn't a "grifter", but somehow became a billionaire on government salaries.
Brandyshit is a TDS-addled asshole.
A lot of assertions here. Not a single one supported. But it’s not weird because it’s brandyshit.
Bald assertions seem to be a requirement for the flailing dems of reason cosplaying as libertarians.
" all white women being crazy cat ladies "
Not all white women. But the leadership of the Democrat party.
Specifically...
...referring to Vice President Kamala Harris, now the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, as one of the “childless cat ladies” running the nation who “want to make the rest of the country miserable too."
“Obviously, it was a sarcastic comment. I’ve got nothing against cats" and then blamed the media for "focusing so much on the sarcasm and not on the substance of what I actually said.”
"If you look at Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, AOC [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez], the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children.”
Vance told Kelly in Friday's interview, “It’s not a criticism of people who don’t have children. I explicitly said in my remarks ... this is not about criticizing people who for various reasons don’t have kids. This is about criticizing the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-child.”
He should have just said: See Michael Malice on AWFLs to understand what I mean.
Meanwhile, from the WSJ:
Biden Renews Push for Student-Debt Relief With Emails to Millions of Borrowers
The administration is finalizing rules for its new program, while other debt relief has been temporarily halted by legal challenges
"New Secret Service director ‘ashamed,’ ‘cannot defend’ Trump shooting"
[...]
"Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe struck a different tone from his predecessor Tuesday, telling a meeting of dual Senate committees he was “ashamed” by the attempted assassination of former President Trump and was prepared to be candid with lawmakers.
In his opening statement before the Senate’s Judiciary Committee and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Rowe said he visited the site of the July 13 rally where the shooting occurred and lay on the roof Thomas Matthew Crooks fired from.
“I laid in a prone position to evaluate his line of sight. What I saw made me ashamed. As a career law enforcement officer and a 25-year veteran with the Secret Service, I cannot defend why that roof was not better secured to prevent similar lapses from occurring in the future,” he told lawmakers...."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/new-secret-service-director-ashamed-cannot-defend-trump-shooting/ar-BB1qUTeq?ocid=BingNewsVerp
A lot better than the excuses from the past director. And it appears she got a new job overseeing security of the French RR.
Donald Trump is potentially going to end constitutional liberties...I believe all those things are a real possibility, but it gives him way too much power," Walz said
Then you are too stupid to be VP, too stupid to be governor of Minnesota, and too stupid to be dog catcher in Grand Marais. They are not a real possibility. When it comes to actually violating the Constitution, feel free to review the Biden-Harris attempts that have been either ignored or slapped down by the courts.
Yep. Make up shit that you "think" Trump might possibly do, without evidence or factual basis (esp. he didn't do any of these things in his first term) and 100% ignore the beat down after beat down in the courts Biden suffers.
As someone who is/has been frequently called weird, I take weird to be a complement!
Same. I've just been wondering why everyone thinks it's an insult.
When they called us Deplorables we took it and made shirts and mugs claiming our deplorability when will I see I'm weird mugs and shirts take what they dish and claim it. like you say some times its good to be weird.
Same when they said Trump supporters were stupid Trump ran with it and said i love my stupid people. embrace their insults since that only hurts them
Walk it back there, Zeb.
Fuck off, Sevo. Trump is weird and I've been saying so since he started running for president. The Democrats' new "weird" strategy is also fucking retarded. I have been quite consistent on this. If you really think I'm repeating Democrat talking points, you really need to get your head examined.
It’s a very hollow insult, especially when the people using it as an insult have spent the last decade trying to normalize being weird or even embraced the label (like Austin,TX).
"When the going get weird, the weird turn pro." HS Thompson
>Does the "weird" line make any sense? Admittedly, it is a little weird for Vance and some of his fellow Republicans to express such blatant contempt for other people's life choices—particularly childless and single women, not their male counterparts who are surely also to blame (unless they're busy with the couches, in which case: ride on).
These women are childless, not sexless. They just don't offer anything to keep a man around when the post-nut clarity hits.
Also, what happened to 'a woman's choice'? She chooses to live alone because she don't need no man - but its a man's fault?
>when they're not exactly the party of normal, well-adjusted people like Walz.
The primary Democrat tactic is 'projection' - they accuse you of doing the thing they are doing.
Also, didn't the Democrats spend a half decade whining about 'mean tweets' and 'our sacred norms' - yet they're out their doing what they decried MAGA doing.
So . . . its ok when they do it, but when people start using their tactics against them (canceling) that's wrong because we're supposed to be better than that?
No, politics is not a suicide pact.
"So . . . its ok when they do it, but when people start using their tactics against them (canceling) that’s wrong because we’re supposed to be better than that?"
Now you're learning the true meaning of "that's (D)ifferent", young Padawan.
yet they’re out their doing what they decried MAGA doing.
Didn't Michelle Obama say something about going high when they go low?
blatant contempt for other people’s life choices—particularly childless and single women, not their male counterparts who are surely also to blame
The male counterparts of white liberal cat ladies are there thanks to inferior genetics rather than choice. The childless and single women got there politically instead.
>Just as thrice-married Trump, who pays lip service to the idea of the church but barely attends, is representative of the social values of a portion of the country, Vance appears to be representative of another chunk: Those who are upwardly mobile, who care about providing for their young families.
And Kamala (rhymes with Pamela!) Harris has a weird family (no children of her own, two step-children, one of whom is weird) and the DNC is the home of weird people with weird families.
Speaking of schoolyard taunts...
I see Deadass Ismail took the one way allah train to paradise. Hope it is toasty. All those sad-assed hamas homies are crying today. They can all go fuck themselves and join deadmail.
Cnn was mourning the loss of the Iranian moderate.
CNN can go fuck themselves, too. Utterly useless CIA mouthpiece is what they are.
That Karen in the pink blouse ... I saw a few seconds of it yesterday, watched the whole thing just now, and I am not convinced it is not a parody. The only thing making me doubt it's a parody is lasting for 80 seconds in a single take. How anyone could talk like that for so long without busting a gut is beyond me.
The heavily condescending "don't be scared!" attitude leads me to believe it is genuine since that was one of the many tactics they used during covid to try and get people to get the vax.
Yeppers! If anything's weird, it's that Karen.
Another blow against state Chemjeffery:
Judge dumps suit by former ‘Disinformation Czar,’ and says she really was a government censor
Nina Jankowicz, the Department of Homeland Security’s “Disinformation Governance Board,” filed suit against Fox News last year claiming it “built a narrative calculated to lead consumers to believe that Jankowicz intended to censor Americans’ speech”
The judge has just tossed the suit, writing that, in essence, that that was the truth.
The judge wrote in his order to dismiss that, “Fox contends, and I agree, that Jankowicz has not pleaded facts from which it could plausibly be inferred that the challenged statements regarding intended censorship by Jankowicz are not substantially true,”
“On the contrary, as noted above, censorship is commonly understood to encompass efforts to scrutinize and examine speech in order to suppress certain communications. The Disinformation Governance Board was formed precisely to examine citizens’ speech and, in coordination with the private sector, identify ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation,” and ‘malinformation.'”
Just more misinformation. If she'd been in office, this would not be allowed.
Also, the Dems express blatant contempt for the lives of anyone who *isn't* 'weird' - be a normal person, be a liberal Christian (not even a crazy Evangelical type), *work* for a living - these things are all contemptuous to these people.
But its a bad thing to do to them?
express such blatant contempt for other people’s life choices—particularly childless and single women, not their male counterparts who are surely also to blame
Fertility rates in every country on Earth have dropped through the floor for the last 50+ years. Longer than that for every country that urbanized earlier. The world average is now below ‘replacement’ level. Africa is the only continent that is higher and Africa is hardly the world’s aspirational model and doesn't in fact aspire to the high fertility rates it currently has.
Gotta be a real dumbass to think this has anything to do with domestic politics or is going to be ‘solved’ by domestic politics.
We ain’t going back to the farm where every child becomes free labor long before child labor becomes legal.
We ain’t going back to the pre-pill days when women had no choice about new babies.
We ain’t going back to the days where education stops at puberty – unless you’re the Taliban.
Maybe there is a real societal problem where the average age level rises too high – or population drops too fast – or other stuff. But demonizing childless cat ladies or incels or any of this stuff that has become ‘culture war’ is proof that America is profoundly unserious about any of that.
We ain’t going back to the farm where every child becomes free labor long before child labor becomes legal.
We ain’t going back to the pre-pill days when women had no choice about new babies.
We ain’t going back to the days where education stops at puberty – unless you’re the Taliban.
Oh look. J(ew)Free is pretending that the choice is binary and the only other solution is some sort of Handmaid's Tale fantasy dystopia.
I there a bigger bien-pensant than him?
Im assuming he's going to parlay this point into "this is why the only way to get the work done in America is to open the border wide and let all the cheap labor in"
Like anyone thinks you are the source of serious thinking.
"Africa is hardly the world’s aspirational model and doesn’t in fact aspire to the high fertility rates it currently has."
That's gotta be racist somehow.
All the Democrats need to do if they want to win the White House is nominate a decent human being, who's not a total moron. Don't they have any?
-jcr
Unfortunately for them, those are two boxes Harris actually doesnt check
But how many people have not checked Harris' box?
No, actually, they don't.
"There's a reason why we call it the nanny state, folks"
It's not just the talking down to people like they're idiot 5-year-olds, or the annoying vocal tone / affectations. It's the blatant gaslighting and complete dismissal of very valid concerns.
"They don't want to take your gas stove, they just want to put a sticker on it."
They do, in fact, want to take your gas stove. And have tried / succeeded in many local areas.
"California has been using chemicals to warn people about chemicals for years."
California isn't an example to be followed. They put a sticker on my charcoal telling me not to burn indoors due to the potential cancer risks for carbon monoxide.
"They do, in fact, want to take your gas stove. And have tried / succeeded in many local areas."
To the point they have already had to anoint an upper tier of elites who get to flout the rules, ala SOP for communists...
"Palo Alto Exempts Celebrity Chef Jose Andres Restaurant From Gas Stove Ban"
Weird he had to get a special celebrity exemption, if there is no ban happening. I dont think Joe Schmoe opening his first shop would find the same favor from Newsome and his cronies
California puts the labels on so many things that they are a joke that few people pay any attention to.
Hamas Leader Ismail Haniyeh Falls Down After Loud Popping Noises
LOL
https://babylonbee.com/news/hamas-leader-ismail-haniyeh-falls-down-after-loud-popping-noises
Also on their front page
https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-continue-long-standing-tradition-of-white-male-only-gatherings
Picture has White Dudes for Harris screenshot on one side and some KKKlansmen in full robes and masks on the other.
"What kind of Democrats would we be if we didn't have white-guys-only meetings?" asked actor Mark Hamill. "Dividing the country into different groups based on skin color has been the hallmark of the Democratic Party since its inception. We're proud to carry on the tradition of other whites-only Democrat groups."
At publishing time, the "White Dudes for Harris" group announced plans to issue new uniforms to its members, featuring easily identifiable white robes, masks, and pointy hats.
Ouch. Just like all those Druze kids he helped fall down when they were playing soccer on Saturday.
You think laughing at children being killed due to military action is on the same level as taking satisfaction that a brutal terrorist leader was killed?
I mean, if cringe edgy is your thing, you do you
On March 16, 1968, US Army soldiers, led by Lt Calley, gunned down hundreds of unarmed Vietnamese civilians, children and babies in the remote hamlet of My Lai in South Vietnam. Republican President Richard Nixon intervened in the case and ordered Calley’s sentence to be reduced to house arrest.
Really got all the Nixon supporters here with that one Hank.
You think laughing at children being killed due to military action is on the same level as taking satisfaction that a brutal terrorist leader was killed?
No.
I mean, if cringe edgy is your thing, you do you
Reread what I actually wrote, Mike.
That is fucking hilarious.
Axis Sally the Lizard is far and away the weirdest girl-bullying mystical Quisling ever to attach itself to Reason. Job One is therefore to scour the web to find temperature-illiterate econazis and warmunistas whose sharknado ravings are so off-the-charts as to make even this specimen seem almost hinged by comparison. Its entire ordure-splattering rant says: hate the Dems, forgive God's Own Prohibitionists and ignore libertarian candidates.
Not exactly sure what crazy old Hank is trying to say, but did he just call Liz a "quisling"?
whose sharknado ravings are so off-the-charts as to make even this specimen seem almost hinged by comparison.
Did Hank just do a self-own?
I can’t tell if the video of that woman explaining that nobody is going to take your gas stove is parody or not. Kind of like the Vegan Teacher.
Its pretty hard to watch, honestly does appear to be self parody and if someone was trying to mock her I dont think they could do a better job than just reposting her video...no wonder LibofTikTok has such a successful thing going.
And of course like every other 'conspiracy' we were told...
"However, the rule does direct state agencies to draft a potential total gas appliance ban that does cover gas cooking for a vote in 2025. "
...
"The California Air Resource Board (CARB) unanimously passed the outlaw of new natural gas heaters by 2030."
...
"Note, however, that Los Angeles recently voted a gas appliance ban for new construction, requiring electric stoves, water heaters, furnaces, and clothes dryers."
...
"Berkeley enacted a gas stove ban in 2019, the first city in the country to do so, which survived a lawsuit from the California Restaurant Association."
"New York becomes the first state to ban natural gas stoves and furnaces in most new buildings"
...
The law bans gas-powered stoves, furnaces and propane heating and effectively encourages the use of climate-friendly appliances such as heat pumps and induction stoves in most new residential buildings across the state."
Yeah, I'm not sure what to make of a video that's telling us the Twin Towers are still standing in New York. Is it a joke? Is it parody? Or is it soul-crushing retardation?
So when the grid fails along with the battery back ups, the NY and California politicians will be keeping toasty and well fed in gas heated hotels and restaurants.
Surprise! Gas pressure is supplied by electric pumps.
Electric car chargers are supplied by gas generators!
I think they think the schoolyard taunts are hitting home because 124% of the press thinks they're hitting home.
I'll let you do the math on that polling.
I just don’t get the hype about Vance’s cat lady comment. It was somewhat graceless, but his point was fairly obvious and not without merit, although he probably took it a bit far for political purposes. “Cat lady” isn’t even a weird phrase or idea, it’s a common stereotype about what used to be called spinsters. He wasn’t even insulting all old unmarried cat ladies, just the ones who want to exert undue influence over the rest of society and/or are miserable and taking it out on others. And for that matter he didn’t even restrict it to women. I didn’t marry until 33 and had (still have) a cat, and I can’t imagine being offended by this even then. It seems like such a pointless thing to work up a huff about.
"I just don’t get the hype about Vance’s cat lady comment...his point was fairly obvious and not without merit"
They are pissed because they know its true. Just like they are very taken aback by calling Harris "Madam Hawk Tuah".
They get really twitchy when you are right over the target.
Tim Walz is "Weird"!
He campaigned first a governor as a rural common sense and has progressively become more progressive in a deep blue state that known for it's progressive progressiveness. Tim Walz is was not the worst, but was one of the worst governors on covid lock-downs. He continued a "state of emergency" will beyond the 30 days and along with the DFL party blocked attempts of the legislative branch of Minnesota to vote on the "state of emergency".
It is interesting that the word "Weird" is being parroted throughout the corporate media in their sycophantic propaganda providing unearned campaign donations of media time. It's also interesting how quickly the narrative switched from an attempted assassination to an all out media love fest for an democratically appointed candidate who is going to save democracy and effectively burying the attempted assassination.
The Republican ticket of Weirdo & Weirder is certainly leading in weirdness quotient. The combination of Fat Old White Guy with Sofanova provides endless amusement.