Monday Open Thread

What's on your mind?

Comments

[AmosArch]

If you can switch your gender (which is treated for all intents and purposes as your biological sex regardless of the distinction the left claims it makes) at your leisure and everybody must proactively believe, actively support, and respect that. Why aren’t you allowed to switch any other characteristic like your age or your race or your species and force everybody to proactively believe, actively support and respect that as well? Seems kind of unfair and arbitrary. What makes gender/sex so special as opposed to all these other ones? Why can’t a man who really really really feels young at heart have the right to just decide that he’s still a kid and attend elementary school and play with the other kids and force everybody to go a long with it? Why can’t someone decide they are a Sumatran tiger and thus be allowed to hunt on a protected nature preserve, tear animals apart limb from limb alive with complete immunity from animal cruelty laws, and defecate in public in front of people?

[Stephen Lathrop]

AmosArch — Otherwise fair questions, tarnished by evident intent to use them in support of bigotry. Here is a less equivocal question: Why can't bigots understand that tendentious questions and assertions put a spotlight on bigotry, but do nothing to legitimize it?

[NvEric]

Whom is the bigot ?

[Brett Bellmore]

Whoever the leftist needs to be the bigot, obviously.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bellmore, I don't need anyone to be a bigot. It puzzles me how many volunteers keep showing up.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Stephen, you are the bigot.

[Nige]

Nobody's forcing you to be a bigot, Brett.

[Brett Bellmore]

Look, Nige, your deciding to call me a bigot doesn't make me a bigot. It's just a rhetorical tic the left has adopted: Nobody is allowed to disagree with you without being accused of being evil. "racist" "bigot" "homophobe"

You just shout these at people who disagree with you, like it was actually an argument.

[Nige]

Obviously me calling you a bigot wouldn't make you a bigot. The things you say and do would make you a bigot.

[Frank Drackman]

To Nige- Bot everything is 1’s and 0’s, wait till he learns about “Pi”

Frank

[CountmontyC]

Standard leftist response when faced with a question that they can't or don't dare answer. Accuse the other side of bigotry of some sort.

[Krychek_2]

It's a stupid question based on a flawed premise. You don't choose your gender at your leisure, like deciding that I'm going to wear red today but then tomorrow I'm going to wear black. That's not how it works.

Think of it this way: Gender, like one's religious preference, is an outward sign of what is going on inside the person. So even though I could theoretically change my religion every day -- today I'm Buddhist, tomorrow I'll be Hindu and Friday I'm going to be Catholic -- nobody ever actually does that, because conversion is a matter of the heart over which one exercises little volitional control. (The tenets of a religion either speak to someone or they don't. You can't by act of the will choose to believe something that you really don't believe.)

Likewise, gender is about one's inner feelings and emotions and self-identity. Choice has little to do with it. I ask any cis-hetero male here how easy you would find it to live your life as a woman. Not easy, I'll bet.

[Mr. Bumble]

What is "living your life as a woman"?

[Krychek_2]

Identifying as a woman. Wearing women's clothing. Introducing yourself as a woman. Bumble, I'm betting that if you tried that you'd last about ten minutes.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and neither do most of those "identifying" as women.

[Krychek_2]

And you know this how?

[Mr. Bumble]

Because I still have decent vision. Sorry you don't.

[Krychek_2]

Having decent vision was what made people once think the sun revolved around the earth. I mean, if you look at the sky you can see that the sun is in a different position than it was earlier, so obviously it's revolving around the earth, right?

There is a fairly lengthy list of things that are wrong that "decent vision" would nevertheless suggest to be true.

[Nige]

Blinkered vision and a fairly limited concept of femininity.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The Ford F-150 is popular with men -- and lesbians.

The lesbians I know dress like I do. 30 years ago Rush Limbough introduced the concept of "Male Lesbians" as a joke but if I were to identify as a lesbian, there is nothing different from what I am right now. I'd still wear the same clothes, do the same thing, and be attracted to cute girls.

[Magister]

You'd probably leave the toilet seat up, though. And still the cute girls would not want anything to do with you.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Introducing yourself as a woman."

Hi, I'm a woman! Something that doesn't happen.

[John F. Carr]

Walk across the room singing "Man! I Feel Like a Woman" or "I Enjoy Being a Girl" depending on your age.

[Nige]

Give it time. Soon enough red states will require women to announce themselves as such to satisfy the gender police that they aren't sneaky trans people.

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

It’s a stupid question based on a flawed premise. You don’t choose your gender at your leisure, like deciding that I’m going to wear red today but then tomorrow I’m going to wear black. That’s not how it works.

What exactly do you think it means to be "gender fluid"? Many of those "non-binary" type genders are people who decide on a day-to-day basis which gender they feel like "presenting as".

[Malika the Maiz]

Is that very common? The ones I've read about and met seem to be quite focused on their transition from X to Y, not back again, but perhaps the ones you've met vary.

[Mr. Bumble]

Curious as to how many you've met?

[Malika the Maiz]

About half a dozen that I know of.

[Mr. Bumble]

I don't want to start a long thread back and forth but prior to the last few years how many had you met?

[Krychek_2]

I don't recall ever meeting any but how large a percentage of the population are we talking about?

[Bwaaah]

The loudest percentage.

[Malika the Maiz]

I'm not sure what this question is getting at. I hadn't met any open gay persons before that became less stigmatized and criminalized. Heck, before I moved from my hometown to go to college I had met one Jewish person to my knowledge.

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

The ones I’ve read about and met seem to be quite focused on their transition from X to Y

Sounds like you are confused. I didn't say anything about transitioning. Trans people believe that their gender doesn't match their sex, and want to change their sex to match their gender. Gender-fluid/non-binary/etc change their gender to match their feelings, which may or may not at any given time match their sex.

[Mr. Bumble]

"...not back again,..."
They can't go "back" again after the surgeries.

[Malika the Maiz]

You don't think trans people are focused on...transitioning?

Yeah, I'm confused 🙂

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

Sounds like you are confused. I didn’t say anything about transitioning. It's really not all that difficult.

Scroll to "What does nonbinary mean?"

https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/article/understanding-gender-identities/?c_src=UMCOV240620250&c_src2=Nebo-Paid-Search&utm_medium=advertising&utm_source=sem-googleadwords1&utm_campaign=pride&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwvb-zBhCmARIsAAfUI2vreWziIFXAVdKZXR5AVZk1tuEXcPhknG9spj8IMxNSHzY8PPkvMuEaAoRnEALw_wcB

[Nige]

If you knew what they were, why did you ask?

[Krayt]

because conversion is a matter of the heart over which one exercises little volitional control

That may be the case for gender, but legion are the people who deliberately changed religion to match a spouse.

[Krychek_2]

And deep in their guts they remain the religion they started with.

Suppose I were to offer you a million dollars to believe in the Easter Bunny. You could not, by sheer force of will, make yourself believe in something you find nonsensical. You might say you believed in the Easter Bunny to get the money, but if you're honest, you'd still be an unbeliever.

Changing religion to match a spouse is like that too.

[Krayt]

This is not true. My mother took her new religion seriously, explaining things to me over the years, while my dad, who didn't even care, ot believe in god, was not around.

[Krychek_2]

The question then would be how seriously had she taken her previous religion.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You can't reason with bigotry, superstition, or belligerent ignorance.

Religion often involves all three.

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

The question then would be how seriously had she taken her previous religion.

Why do you think you can question religious conversion, but questioning gender confusion is verboten?

Do you believe that no religious people become atheist and no atheists find religion?

[Krychek_2]

I started off religious and became an atheist so no, I don't believe genuine conversions in either direction are impossible. They happen. But people convert for different reasons, and it's those different reasons that are under discussion.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

>And deep in their guts they remain the religion they started with.

How on Earth can you possibly know this?

[Krychek_2]

Because the given facts are that they converted to another religion to match a spouse. That's not a conversion based on an actual change of heart; it's essentially a conversion for utilitarian reasons.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

You’re in Mensa and you argue like that?

FYI, Your feelings aren't facts.

[Krychek_2]

I ran with the hypo as given, and as given the conversion was to match that of the spouse. And my feelings have nothing to do with it.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

But there are countless people who adopted a new religion out of exposure and not out of some fake posturing.

Your hypo doesn’t generalize. If you didn’t intend to and were talking about the specific precise case in your hypo, mea culpa. I misunderstood your comment. Of course you'd know the motivations of the character in your story, you are the story creator after all.

It surely appeared you were generalizing and not talking about a specific single case, though.

[Krychek_2]

OK, please try to keep up. The hypo to which I refer is the comment posted by Krayt earlier up the thread in which he said "That may be the case for gender, but legion are the people who deliberately changed religion to match a spouse." So, my response was directed toward those "who deliberately changed religion to catch a spouse." He didn't say they changed religion because of exposure or for some other reason. No, HIS hypo, to which I was responding, is that they changed religion explicitly to match a spouse.

And if your reason for converting is because it's what your spouse believes, that is a utilitarian conversion.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Mea culpa.

I was arguing outside of conversational context. That was a poor decision that ended up with egg on my face.

Will you forgive me?

[Krychek_2]

No worries, I occasionally don't read carefully and submit inapposite responses myself. It happens.

[Krychek_2]

Now, I suspect that for most people, they are whatever they are because that's what they were raised and they've never had reason to question it. And for such a person, one religion probably is as good as another. But that's not the type of person I had in mind for my original example.

I'm an atheist. If I were offered a million dollar a year job that required conversion to Catholicism, I would present myself for baptism in no time flat, and I would go through the motions of showing up for mass every week. During Europe's religious wars, a lot of royals did precisely that. But that would be a utilitarian conversion; I would no more believe Catholic dogma then than I do now.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I believe your second paragraph is best described as the "False Consensus Effect".

[Krychek_2]

No, it's a simple illustration. You've mastered the jargon without understanding it.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

My bad. I didn't take the time to understand the entire conversational context before commenting. That wasn't very smart of me.

My apologies.

[bernard11]

"Paris is worth a mass."

[David Nieporent]

If I were offered a million dollar a year job that required conversion to Catholicism, I would present myself for baptism in no time flat,

Say… how much does being Pope pay, anyway?

[Frank Drackman]

OTOH be sort of nice to have something men will kill to get (and can even serve as a holster for emergencies) No enlarged Prostrate to make your Senior years a constant Hop, Skip, and Jump to the Urinal, and if you decide to go the Gay way most men think it’s hot, and spend even more effort trying to convert you. I was ecstatic to have 2 Daughters, perfect excuse to have a multitude of their friends over to the house (that came out wrong). Biggest failure of my raising them is they stayed Hetero (still holding out hope) albeit with a realistic view of Men (We Suck)

Frank

[Dr. Ed 2]

Think of it this way: IT'S A MENTAL ILLNESS!!!

[Malika the Maiz]

Having read some of your comments this is some least-self aware person on earth stuff right here.

[Joe_dallas]

Its a mental illness.

You cant cure a mental illness by acting out the mental illness.

The bigotry is encouraging the mental ill to believe in their mental illness.

[Malika the Maiz]

How do you determine it is a mental illness?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

The scientific literature pre-1990s. Before the science got politicized.

[Joe_dallas]

the science hasnt changed - only the advocates have changed the plain meanings of words to hide their hatred of good medical and mental health treatment.

[Joe_dallas]

the science hasnt changed - only the advocates have changed the plain meanings of words to hide their hatred of good medical and mental health treatment. Its as if the woke enjoy the perpetual agony the mental ill have suffer through.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

They inverted the cause and effect. They said the suffering of homo's (in the 70s) and then the suffering of trannies wasn't from mental illness, because they asserted both those are perfectly normal and healthy, but from social stigma.

And somehow, not getting approval of your lifestyle choices from random strangers causing you to commit suicide was perfectly normal and mentally healthy. And treat this totally normal and mentally healthy state of mind society has to be inverted and uprooted.

In other words, they put the burden of homo mental health care and tranny mental health care onto all of us, instead of upon them and their therapists.

[Krychek_2]

It's not a matter of getting approval for one's lifestyle. It's a matter of your lifestyle being criminalized, rendering you unemployable at any but the most menial of jobs, and forcing you to spend your life pretending to be what you're not in order to avoid those results. If that happened to you, your mental health would probably suffer too.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

It had nothing to do with social stigma? And just the laws?

[Nige]

Understanding has changed.

[Malika the Maiz]

The science then wasn't politicized?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Are there equivalent statements to the APA’s on homosexuality and transgenderism that predate them that are explicit with the same sort of activism?

There was no new science that invalidated the long understood and acknowledged horrors of homosexuality when the APA removed it from the DSM.

Just like there was no new science that invalidated the long understood and acknowledged horrors of trannyism when the APA removed it from the DSM.

Both were activist, political stances. Not scientific ones. If you can find similar public pronouncements for their inclusion INTO the DSM in the first place like the ones that took them out, then I’ll be happy to acknowledge my ignorance and concede the point.

[Joe_dallas]

Are you operating under the delusion that gender confusion is not a mental illness or denying that it is a mental illness to justify medical treatment that cause severe long term problems or a medical treatment that prevents the ability for the mental ill to return to a normal life.
That is best termed hatred for the mentally ill - encouraging a perpetual lifetime of pain.

[Malika the Maiz]

Uh, I asked you a simple to answer question: How do you determine it is a mental illness?

And you (not answering!) see *delusion* in that asking?

Perhaps you tend to see “delusion” in more places than it can be reasonably said to exist (including the original claim)?

[Joe_dallas]

It was you shifting the topic -

Gender dysphoria (previously gender identity disorder), according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, is defined as a “marked incongruence between their experienced or expressed gender and the one they were assigned at birth.” People who experience this turmoil cannot correlate to their gender ...

describing most all the elements of a mental illness - though it was removed from called a mental illness for political reasons, though changing the meaning of words doesnt change the fact that gender confusion is a mental illness.

[Malika the Maiz]

"It was you shifting the topic"

Was it?

You claimed: "It's a mental illness."

I asked: "How do you determine it is a mental illness?"

How is that "shifting the topic" (we can get back to your original claim after you answer this)?

[Nige]

'describing most all the elements of a mental illness'

None of those things describe any mental illness. If anything it's closer to autism or adhd.

[Nige]

Medically speaking, it is not a mental illness.

Personally I think trying to inflict a false non-expert medically inaccurate diagnosis on a politically disfavoured group for the purposes of denying them health care and forcing them to conform to your personal worldview is definitely hatred.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

"Its a mental illness."

How could it differ from supernatural religious belief?

Fairy tales. Pure, childish nonsense.

[Joe_dallas]

believing its not a mental illness is a supernatural religious belief. Fairy tale, child nonsense.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Is belief in fairy tales a mental illness, Joe-Dallas?

By ostensible adults, I mean. Those 12 or under get a pass; most of their superstition derives from childhood indoctrination imposed by substandard parents.

[Nige]

Not a mental illness.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige 2 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Not a mental illness.

If its not a mental illness - they why is the mental health profession recommended to be involved ?

[Nige]

Because mental illness is a co-morbidity. You'll find the same with adhd and autism.

[CountmontyC]

So if my "inner feelings and emotions and self identity" tell me I am ony really ten years old who are you to deny my "inner feelings and emotions and self identity?"

[Nige]

The One Joke.

[bernard11]

If your "“inner feelings and emotions and self identity” " tell you you are ten years old are you prepared to live as a ten-year old?

I mean, hitting a lot of home runs in Little League might be fun, for a while, but are you willing to have others control your diet, your wardrobe, your sleep schedule, tell you what TV shows you can watch, who you can play with, etc.?

IOW, for all these "examples," I doubt the person proposing them would be willing to live them out. Sumatran tiger? Ready to hunt down prey and kill it with your teeth and hands, and eat it raw, while fighting off competitive predators?

I mean, these arguments are unbelievably ludicrous.

[Nige]

I think it might be the logical end-point of their progressing infantilisation under Trump.

[AmosArch]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It’s a stupid question based on a flawed premise. You don’t choose your gender at your leisure, like deciding that I’m going to wear red today but then tomorrow I’m going to wear black. That’s not how it works.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Theres the implied myth again that the LFIFLDJFLKDLKFDLFLDFD lobby loves to spread. That every transition is the result of a wise and mature person after lifelong mediation and debate going before a wizened panel of experts and discovering some deep undeniable truth about themselves in some regimented, rigorously scientifically formulated, controlled process.

Its a nice fantasy but the reality is the trans mania today is a chaotic mess where the vast majority of trans pretty much self diagnose and don’t really go through anything of the sort. Little kids that otherwise don’t have any concept of sexuality are transitioning. Leaks of the records of transitioning doctors are full of reports of kids coming in who clearly have no idea what they are doing. Who want to mix and match female and male characteristics like they are selecting from a drop down menu on Amazon. Kids who think they are animals or even weather phenomenon. Kids getting bathroom hormones in the mail. Kids changing their minds part of the way through

If you think I’m lying or exaggerating any of this do your own objective research and you’ll see whether my testimony or Krychek’s fantasy of most transgenders going through some rigorous Vulcan Science Academy like screening to robustly determine real dysphoria cases is closer to the truth.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Likewise, gender is about one’s inner feelings and emotions and self-identity. Choice has little to do with it. I ask any cis-hetero male here how easy you would find it to live your life as a woman. Not easy, I’ll bet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Also even if everything you say/imply happens to be true (it isn’t) you never even answered the question. There are certainly people who strongly feel they are a younger age than their assigned age or feel they are a race other than their assigned race to the same or an even greater degree of many trans yet unlike trans they are mocked and prevented from forcing others to recognize who they truly feel they are. How is that fair that a kid trapped in an adult man’s body has to live a lie when you cry so passionately over the same thing right here when it comes to gender/sex?

[Nige]

'Its a nice fantasy but the reality is the trans mania today is a chaotic mess where the vast majority of trans pretty much self diagnose and don’t really go through anything of the sort.'

This must be why Republicans are working so hard to prevent trans kids accessing the kind of health care they need to make informed decisions about their own lives.

'Little kids that otherwise don’t have any concept of sexuality are transitioning'

Little kids are not transitioning.

'Kids who think they are animals or even weather phenomenon.'

People who believe this shit are worse than the supposed kids.

'There are certainly people who strongly feel they are a younger age'

If you say so. Of course, they have nothing to do with trans people.

[AmosArch]

Little kids are not transitioning.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You know its pretty dumb to lie in a way that can anyone can debunk with a 3 second google search. Just type in ‘7 year old transition’ or ‘5 year old transition’. You’ve just outed yourself as either not very smart or an absurdly dishonest person who thinks the people he lies to will just swallow everything he says and not do the bare minimum to check on it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
‘Kids who think they are animals or even weather phenomenon.’

People who believe this shit are worse than the supposed kids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Again with the blatant obvious lies. Just look up 'otherkin'

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
‘There are certainly people who strongly feel they are a younger age’

If you say so. Of course, they have nothing to do with trans people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It has everything to do with trans people. The same people who give trans groups certain rights/privileges denies it to other groups when the same ‘logic’ applies to all of them. Blatant hypocrisy. If the government gave tons of award money to white people for achieving a certain score on their SATs but then declined to do so for blacks who did the same thing and didn’t even provide any reason for it you/your compatriots certainly wouldn’t keep their mouths shut about it.

[Sarcastr0]

I did some searching as you suggested for '7 year old transition' and I saw stories about a Texas custody disputes that specify the issue it is about social transitioning: "A trans child at age 7 does not make permanent changes to their body."

[Sarcastr0]

What special rights/privileges is the government giving trans groups?

[Nige]

‘You know its pretty dumb to lie in a way that can anyone can debunk with a 3 second google search.’

It’s still not true. I suppose you may be referring to social transitioning, but that seems highly unikely and frankly ludicrous for anyone under five, at least, and therefore constitute right-wing scare-stories. If a young girl prefers to dress as a boy or a young boy likes to wear girls' stuff, it's not social or any kind of transitioning, it's just kids being kids.

At one point the scare-story was that 'tom-boys' would get forced into transitioning because of the way they liked to dress and act. Now 'tom-boys' ARE young children being transitioned! The scare stories are infinitely adapatable to the whims and neuroses of the scaremongers.

‘Just look up ‘otherkin’’

You said children. I knew of a boy who went around like a train, moving his arm like the pistons, huffing and chuffing, all the way through school. We would recognise now that this was probably due to autism. Everyone just let him get on with it. No harm was done to anyone. I would suggest that equivalent behaviours of other children on the spectrum can always be accomodated, provided there is minimum disruption and some support. It's not difficult.

‘denies it to other groups when the same ‘logic’ applies to all of them’

There is no ‘logic’ here, there is just spurious cynical fantastical bad-faith equivalences designed to justify the denial of health care to trans people.

‘Blatant hypocrisy’

The purpose of this idiocy is to sneer at and bully trans people, demeaning and humiliating them simply because they are a vulnerable minority and therefore an easy target.

[Riva]

Given that your response is tendentious Stephen, I don’t understand your objection on that basis. What you really object to is that the question exposes the idiocy and illogic of the trans movement. And you’d prefer not to have that exposed. And being afraid to expose something also seems sort of ironic given the subject matter.

[FletcherReed]

I'm not sure AmosArch is a bigot, but he's definitely an asshole and a bad hang.

[Kazinski]

I'm not sure that's a question that matters much.

The question is why is gender being treated as equivalent to sex? Sex has a biological definition, and most federal laws on discrimination deal with discrimination based on sex, not gender.

My drivers license shows my sex not my gender.

[Brett Bellmore]

Sex/gender is just the left's chosen "how many fingers" at this point, nothing more. It could have been almost anything, but they are a bit obsessed with sexual perversions, so demanding people believe lies about sex was particularly attractive for this exercise in Orwellian social engineering.

[Malika the Maiz]

"obsessed with sexual perversions"

Sexual perversions or sexual freedoms?

[Sarcastr0]

Not an area of specialty but I think the issue is your assumption that gender is the same a sex.

A lot of laws are passed based on sex classifications and gender is really the better fit.

Similarly someone wanting to be called by different pronouns. I get why that’s important to them, sort of. That it’s vital to anyone else just seems odd to me.

[Kazinski]

The oddest thing is making up new pronouns and expecting people to care enough to remember them and use them.

I have a hard enough time remembering names.
Remembering pronouns is an not something I'm going to spend any effort on.

[Sarcastr0]

I don't think it's that odd at all? Feels very similar to when someone has some modality to their name they really don't like.

Have you ever had something like someone named Katie saying 'Never call me Kathy' or the like? Is that an insane ask because you and I aren't great with names?

And what does it mean if you keep calling that person Kathy because you've decided not to put in any effort?

[Kazinski]

Names are unique, or at least individualized.

Pronouns "I, you, he, she, it, they, we", are not individualized. In fact I was brutally indoctrinated into rigid rules for using this pronouns by state actors in forced schooling.

[Sarcastr0]

So you're saying that you're worse with pronouns than you are with names because of how you were trained in school?

I don't find most folks have much of an issue, but if this is an idiosyncratic challenge you have, then...that's a personal challenge you have.
Just like being bad with names or faces, people will hopefully give you forbearance but at some point it'll be on you.

[Kazinski]

It’s not a challenge for me at all, I use standard pronouns.

[Sarcastr0]

So yeah, you're the type of guy who calls Katheryn Katie all the time despite her saying she hates that name.

Because of your brutal schooling on pronouns.

You've really laid out a picture of you being an asshole, choosing to be a dick over and over.

I've gotten pretty good at the singular neuter 'they.'
Not because I personally think it's vital to English prose, but because I'm not a lazy asshole and care about other people's feelings.

[Malika the Maiz]

"I was brutally indoctrinated into rigid rules for using this pronouns by state actors in forced schooling."

A libertarian should, I would think, be very invested (or sympathetic) in rebelling against this state imposed BS.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Why do those who bitch the most about pronoun rules accept bending those rules to flatter superstition?

[Commenter_XY]

Pronouns do not change genetics. 🙂

[Sarcastr0]

They also do not follow genetics.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Gullibility does not make a fairy tale come true. Neither does childhood indoctrination. Really, really hoping a fairy tale is true does not work. Jamming it into a pledge is futile.

Many ostensible adults seem to struggle with these points. Those people seem prone to bigotry, too. Might be a wiring problem. Or a regrettable weakness.

[Nige]

‘The oddest thing is making up new pronouns’

How many new pronouns have been made up? Bearing in mind that actually, all pronouns are made up.

'Remembering pronouns is an not something I’m going to spend any effort on.'

Generally that's exactly the amount of effort it tends to take to remember peoples' pronouns.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Sarcastr0 — I disagree on the pronouns. If someone insists on a plural pronoun, that sets up instances in written communication where a meaning associated with plural antecedents is hopelessly ambiguous. The New Yorker just published one such instance a month or two ago. It defied resolution by logic, or by any means except cultural expectation that the plural pronoun must be interpreted by guess, referring in some instances to the antecedents, but in other instances to the apparently singular person referenced in the plural. Make plural pronouns customary, and that sort of thing will happen all the time, and create no end of trouble, including legal trouble.

[Malika the Maiz]

Isn't there some history and comparative linguistics about plural pronouns used for individuals?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

What do you think about using the wrong pronoun ("his" or, even dumber, "His") for a god (which is an "it")?

"Joe asked his god to disregard his customary preferences for once."

Using "his" when it should be "its" generates unnecessary confusion about whose preferences are relevant.

[Don Nico]

Yet in many contexts we are asked to specify what our gender is.
And I agree with you: “That it’s vital to anyone else just seems odd to me.”
My answer is "I don't do pronouns."

[Mr. Bumble]

Bigot!

[Sarcastr0]

in many contexts we are asked to specify what our gender is.
1) I do agree there's a liberal performative aspect to this.
2) Is this oppression to you?

Society is replete with silly social rituals from small talk to national secretary's day. It is a choice to loudly reject this particular one as where you draw the line.

[Don Nico]

Is is pervasive? No, but it is very frequent.
Is it oppression? No.
Is it annoying? Often
Is it a microagression? Sometimes.

[Sarcastr0]

Those are all subjective determinations.

Personally, I don't find it any more or less annoying than 'Happy Monday!'

That being said, I don't put pronouns in my bio unless it's part of a form.

[Don Nico]

You asked a subjective question "... to you."
Going around the room so that everyone can reveal their pronouns is not quite like saying Buon Giorno.

[Sarcastr0]

Sure, I think it’s a subjective realm. I’m offering an opinion same as you.

It does kind of suck that politics of the moment mean people will draw conclusions if this is your pet peeve of all the office rituals. But the more likely scenario may be that the politics of the moment aren’t driving the pet peeveness.

[Don Nico]

"your pet peeve of all the office rituals"
There you go again. A gross distortion based on no substance.
I don't complain when this is done; that is counterproductive.

“But the more likely scenario may be that the politics of the moment aren’t driving the pet peeveness.”
That is just your telepathy at work. It disguises an accusation so that you can deny it. That is simply dishonesty in action.

[Sarcastr0]

I mean, you said it was pervasive, annoying, and sometimes a microaggression, if that's not your pet peeve I'd hate to see what was!

My assessment of likelihood was the alignment of politics with your irritation. That's a pretty normal, human way to be. We are social creatures and allegiance matters.
Could be coincidence though, which is why it's only likely.

When I don't find a joke funny and it has a partisan slant, I presume it's my politics doing the talking and not that the joke is objectively unfunny.

[jb]

I always think it's weird when people say things like "I don't do pronouns". Must make speaking very awkward to always use proper nouns.

[Don Nico]

It is no more weird than saying my pronoun is we, they, and theirs.

But you are free to considered any speak that you wish as weird.

[Nige]

'...we...I...you...me...My....I... don’t do pronouns.”

[Riva]

What your assumption Sarcastr0, is that he is speaking about the application or interpretation of the constitution or civil rights laws where your gender/sex classification distinction has been applied. He’s referring to the realties of human biology. Sorry pal, men don’t have babies.

[Sarcastr0]

Not an assumption so much as reading, which I do know you hate:
"which is treated for all intents and purposes as your biological sex regardless of the distinction the left claims it makes."

If there's a law about having babies, I agree it's silly to apply it based on gender.

But if lots of other stuff is more about social perception than anything functional.
And even the functional stuff is really about past and present hormones not whether babies are in the cards.

And the pronoun battlefield is just performative dickery against an outgroup.

[Don Nico]

"Performative dickery" do you tell that to your LGBTQIA+ colleagues when they ask about or tell you their pronouns?

[Sarcastr0]

No one has ever asked me to tell them my pronouns, other than in on event registration forms.

[Don Nico]

You are more fortunate in your choice of meetings.
I have been in many meetings where the introductions around the room include pronouns.

[Sarcastr0]

Might just be academia versus the government.

[Don Nico]

I'll buy that.

[Don Nico]

Actually it is pretty pervasive in corporate settings

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Performative dickery is sticking an illusory god in the Pledge of Allegiance, on currency, and on public buildings.

[Riva]

There actually is a law on having babies Sarcastr0. The law of nature. Men can’t give birth. Period, paragraph, end of story.

[Sarcastr0]

...if a man gives birth will the gestation police come after them?

[Riva]

No, because a human male cannot give birth, by definition. Your parents probably should have told you.

[Sarcastr0]

Seems a silly law to have, then.

[Riva]

So you finally reject the trans insanity and concede that a man cannot give birth? Ok.

[Sarcastr0]

I'm more concerned you want to make it illegal for a man to give birth.

Seems inconsistent with your views.

[Riva]

I do not want to make it "illegal." That would be nonsensical. A man cannot give birth. The “law of nature” is not a legislative enactment. It is a biological reality.

[Sarcastr0]

No we're talking in circles.

If the law is in place, higher than any law man could make, problem solved.

Except you don't seem to think so.

[Riva]

Then I ask again, does this mean you reject the trans insanity and concede that a man cannot give birth?

[Sarcastr0]

This isn't about me, Riva, but above where I said sex and gender are different? That means there are 2 different meanings of 'man.'

But back to you, I don't see why you're posting since it seems you think there's not an issue - nature has taken care of everything.

[Riva]

It's about you because I asked you a question you are too cowardly and/or intellectually dishonest to answer. Do you reject the trans insanity and concede that a man cannot give birth?

[Sarcastr0]

Shockingly, you do want to make it about me. Well, it's quite clear your law of nature thing isn't flying well, so I see why you'd prefer a different avenue.

I made it quite clear right above that your question is ambiguous. What do you mean by man - are you talking gender or sex?

[Riva]

Not too shockingly, you are unable to honestly answer the question. Even more shockingly, I think we all know the answer, yeah, you do believe a man can have a baby. So much for truth.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The CDC might....

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

What is your position on a virgin birth . . . or the people who claim to believe it happened?

[Frank Drackman]

I’ve seen lots of them, now admittedly you weren’t there for any of the thousands of births I’ve delivered and provided Anesthesia for, but pretty sure every Baby was a Virgin

Frank

[darkknight9]

Since it happens today, I'd spot them some room for belief.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Bathrooms and locker rooms and sports are sex segregated, not gender segregated.

[Moderation4ever]

What make gender so special that it warrants the attention that some people want to spend on it. We are talking about a small number of people that live their life differently and will affect a small number of people. Does this issue really deserve the attention it gets? This is a libertarian site, and I would think that the libertarian position would be it doesn't affect me I don't care. If a person defecates on my lawn, it affects me. If a person walks around living their life as something other than their birth sex, it really doesn't affect me.

[Malika the Maiz]

I think it is because gender, unlike age, is seen as quite a bit of a "social construct." I think the race analogy is a thornier one. I mean, think of the movies and books where a "white child" gets adopted into or joins a Native American tribe and identifies as such.

[Don Nico]

Indeed external social and political constructs make denotations of race (or even worse, people of color) controversial. Why isn't a Sicilian a person of color, but a Tuscan not?
In Italy the usual comment was, those from regions south of mine (or Roma) are Africans, those from regions north of mine (or Firenze) are Germans.

[hobie]

Amos "Whatabout" Arch. When you finish with your ad absurdum fantasies of Namibian click tribe members identifying as electric forklifts, you could then work on the concept of grace for the very real people who suffer bigotry from those who - like yourself - are fixated with hate at their gender travails

[Mr. Bumble]

So unless I accept you as the flaming asshole you are, I am a bigot?

[hobie]

You know, Bumble, the odds are very, very high that either you or one of your family members are LGBTQ. How do you handle that?

[Mr. Bumble]

...and you know this because? Oh wait, because you are a flaming asshole.
Unless you mean the family of man (that is all humans) the odds are zero in my case.
Just to be clear, I don't really have a problem with homosexuality (male or female). Don't understand it, but live and let live.
Effeminate men and butch women are not the same as trying to make your body into something it is not and never will be. That is a mental illness which should be treated.

[Sarcastr0]

Not all trans people do surgery or hormones. You OK with those folks? Live and let live?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

In your hypo, am I free to treat them as they are in reality, and not what they think they are?

Meaning, do I also get to deference of living the way I want to? Or do I still have participate in their mental health treatments?

[Malika the Maiz]

"trying to make your body into something it is not and never will be. That is a mental illness which should be treated."

Is dying your hair included? Stomach stapling? Wearing lifts? Fake breasts?

[Mr. Bumble]

You left out cutting off your penis. Cutting off your breasts. Creating a never healing gash.

[Malika the Maiz]

Can you explain how you think this is responsive to my question?

[Nige]

What does your squeamishness and prudery have to do with anyone else?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

People who dye their hair, get their stomach stapled, wear lifts, or have fake tits, don't impose upon us to pretend they are brunettes, or were never-fat, or tall, or have real natural big luscious titties.

Those choices don't impose behavior requirements upon everyone else.

[Malika the Maiz]

That's a goal post change. I asked whether those people are mentally ill in your opinion.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

>Is dying your hair included? Stomach stapling? Wearing lifts? Fake breasts?

Dying your hair, stapling your stomach, wearing lifts, and fake tits is not equivalent to what trannies do, which undermines your argument.

Dying your hair, then demanding everyone say your a real authentic brunette or you’ll kill yourself would be directly analogous to transgenderism and yes, that most definitely would be a mental illness.

If you need the whole world to pretend you’re big fake tits are real, luscious milkers, or you’ll commit trannycide, then yes, that would be a mental illness too.

If Tom Cruise or Robert DeNiro threatened to kill themselves everytime someone acknowledged how they were really teeny tiny half-men and those lifts didn’t make them real, normal men, then yes they would have a mental illness.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

What is the bigoted, superstitious, disaffected right-wing perspective on whether Audie Murphy was a teeny-tiny half-man?

These bigoted, on-the-spectrum culture war rejects are your fans, Volokh Conspirators . . and the reason you should be wondering which of you will be the next to hand your keys to a law school dean who will be just as glad to be rid of a clinger as Michael Waterstone was?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Now you're using autism as a slur?

Are you proud of that? Those kids didn't know vaccines were so dangerous. They are victims and shouldn't be used as rhetorical weapons for your hate.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It's a descriptor that explains plenty of behavior and thinking in this context.

[Nige]

'That is a mental illness which should be treated.'

It's not a mental illness and you lot are trying to persecute them by denying them treatment.

[Frank Drackman]

Congrats Hobie, a whole week and you haven't insulted any of our Service Members/Veterans who made/make your/our freedom possible (Freedom to be a fucking idiot in your case)

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The service members who made our freedom possible last saw action about 75 years ago (the most recent time the United States military won a war). Vague draws with tag-tag irregulars don't count, except among losers who want to make themselves feel better.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Amen to that. It’s gotten even worse the more diverse and gay the military has become. Exponentially so if you look around the past 3 years.

How White, Male, Christian, and Heterosexual do you think those service members were that last made our freedom possible 75 years ago? As a percent? A clear majority, no?

Now imagine you’re an enemy of America, and you play a long game, on the order centuries. What would you attack in order to subjugate and control America, the last bastion of human freedom, flourishing, and liberty?

Whiteness. Maleness. Christianity. Hetero-normalcy.

What’s under constant attack by you and your Democrat globalist braintenders? Any ideas?

[Dr. Ed 2]

It's a mental illness.

[not guilty]

I am not a mental health professional, but I wonder whether the pecker checkers' obsession with other people's genitalia qualifies as a mental illness.

[Mr. Bumble]

Simple answer: no.
However parading your pecker in front of women and young girls is.

[Sarcastr0]

Absent consent, that will get you in trouble regardless of the gender of who you parade your pecker in front of.

So it feels like your objection may not be to that.

[Mr. Bumble]

Tell that to the girls forced to share a locker room with "Lia".

[Sarcastr0]

Your fan fiction is overdetermined - if you're parading your pecker in the locker room, it's an issue regardless of who it's in front of.

[Mr. Bumble]

Then why is it allowed and supported.

[Sarcastr0]

Haha no it's not.

Go swing your dick around in the men's locker room and see how that plays.

[Mr. Bumble]

WTF are you talking about?

[Sarcastr0]

You: 'parading your pecker in front of women and young girls is [a mental illness]'

Dunno if flashing is a mental illness, but certainly nonconsentual pecker parading is problematic no matter who it's in front of.

[Bob from Ohio]

"pecker parading "

He doesn't mean grabbing and swinging it around, just that it is visible. If the locker room has a shower facility, its going to be plenty visible.

[Malika the Maiz]

Visible=Parading?

Who's torturing usual word meanings now?

[Malika the Maiz]

I'm guessing you are referring to the swimmer. I myself don't think Lia should be allowed to compete in women's competitions, but do you have evidence of Lia "parading [their] pecker in front of women and young girls?"

[Mr. Bumble]

Yes, first hand. My grandson's girlfriend had to compete against him and put up with his presence in the locker room.
This boys can be girls fantasy led her to decide to forgo her final year of eligibility and concentrate on her studies.

[Malika the Maiz]

Ah, unverifiable anecdote. But it's worse!

"put up with his presence in the locker room."

Is a bit different than "“parading [their] pecker in front of women and young girls?”, no?

[Bob from Ohio]

"unverifiable anecdote.

A Sarcasto special!

[Sarcastr0]

It says a lot you try for that attack with Ed around, Bob.

[Drewski]

First hand? You are your grandson's girlfriend?

[Bob from Ohio]

“It says a lot you try for that attack with Ed around, Bob.”

I like Ed, he can be funny, but I admit no one here takes him seriously.

Some people do take you seriously so its a public service to point out your favorite trick.

[Dr. Ed 2]

There are women who fought on both sides of the Civil War -- we know because they got identified as such when they were being buried. Back then, the level of personal privacy was such that soldiers didn't know that some of them were female.

I want to go back to that. I really don't care what you are as long as I don't have to know.

[bernard11]

So you'd like to see women bind their breasts, wear their hair short, dress like men, stop using makeup and lipstick,etc.?

Or maybe men should do the opposite of all that.

Is that what you think would be ideal?

[Dr. Ed 2]

I don't care what you are as long as I don't have to know.

[Martinned2]

If you can switch your gender (...) at your leisure

Assumes facts not in evidence

[Mr. Bumble]

Love it when you talk lawyer talk.

[OtisAH]

This was the very first thing on AmosArch’s mind today. Of all the many things he could have been thinking about, this is what he thought about and is the hypothetical he dreamed up and wrote out before anyone else had even posted.

[Malika the Maiz]

It is amazing how much focus there is on topics like this as opposed to things that impact so many (tax, infrastructure, foreign, etc., policies).

[hobie]

He seethes from dawn to dusk

[DaveM]

It's not about logic, my friend.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

You're missing the purpose. Their attack is on normalcy. Those other things don't serve that goal so their principles do not apply where one might logically extend them too.

Eradicating Hetero-normalcy is the objective. It started with the homos and their redefinitions of universal concepts of marriage and family. Now their just broadening their battlefield to sex itself.

They created this false parse of "gender" and "sex" and once that gained ground with their redefining they starting merging the two back under the new model of anything can be a real man or a real authentic woman.

Normalcy is cultural property. So the Normals , therefore, are oppressing the degenerates. So in Marxist form, they have to eradicate Normalcy.

Western Civ has been the ideal, so "colonizing" is the Marxist movement to eradicate Normal.

Natural families produced from natural marriage is the ideal, so homo "families" is the Marxist movement to eradicate the oppression of Natural.

Whiteness and White cultural has been the greatest thing for humanity and is the ideal, so they have Critical Race Theory and miscegenation, BLM and every culture is unique and special while White is the original sin and evil is the Marxist movement to eradicate the oppression of Whiteness onto the non-Whites. They aim to eradicate Whiteness.

[Malika the Maiz]

"They created this false parse of “gender” and “sex” "

Really? "They" created this idea that vaginas mean you can't be a lawyer, serve on juries, vote, etc?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

How on Earth did you draw that conclusion? I mean for real:
"Really? “They” created this idea that vaginas mean you can’t be a lawyer, serve on juries, vote, etc?"

Wtf is that stupid comment even about?

They separated terms that used to be synonyms to carve out space for where trannies could be "real women".

[not guilty]

See Bradwell v. the State, 83 U.S. 130 (1872) (upholding Illinois policy prohibiting women from being licensed to practice law).

Until 1975, states could systematically exclude women from jury panels from which petit juries are drawn. Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (1975).

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Were those two cases about male women or female women or both male and female women?

I’m searching for relevance to my comment about how the definitions of “gender” and “sex” were separated.

Can you help me out there? How do those relate to "woman" these days being defined as a "cultural concept" and unmoored from biology?

[not guilty]

You asked what the comment by Malika the Maiz pointing out that having vaginas meant you can’t be a lawyer, serve on juries, vote, etc. was about.

I pointed out that it was not too long ago that those ideas about gender roles held sway.

FWIW, the appellant Billy J. Taylor was a male convicted of aggravated kidnapping and sentenced to death. His complaint that women were systematically excluded from the venire and that he would therefore be deprived of what he claimed to be his federal constitutional right to "a fair trial by jury of a representative segment of the community . . . ."

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I didn’t ask that. I was seeking relevance. I even clarified that, which you somehow missed. Granted I did leave off "Wtf is that stupid comment even about?" ... "with respect to my comment" because I had assumed the conversational context would follow.

However, I just made a similar error, so I won't fault you. In this format, it can be difficult to follow the context.

That aside, do you think those references were to gender roles or where they references to biological sex?

[Sarcastr0]

I do love how fringey antisemites hold forth about normalcy.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

This is straight from their material.

You're as ignorant as you are reactionary.

[Sarcastr0]

I don't know what's normal, really, yeah.

But my point is more about you in particular. You are utterly untethered from normalcy, and despite this you attempt to invoke it.

It's pretty funny.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I’m a White Christian patriarch in a biologically intact natural family. There are no homo’s or trannies, or middle-aged, incel DnD losers in my social circles. Historically speaking, is it normal to embrace Jews or to be skeptical of their conniving, undermining, and general Jewry? I mean how many communities have expelled White family men? That one Lesbos island from ancient times?

What’s more normal than that? And you definitely have no clue what normal is. You're some middle-aged, single, lifer DC bureaucrat, riding the backs of value creators and economic contributors like an anchor around our necks. That ain't normal. That's gross and disgusting.

[Sarcastr0]

I don't know anything about you.

I know you don't care about the truth. There is passion, but no sincerity in you.

Regardless of your demographics, you are in no way normal person.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

“I don’t know anything about you."

Immediately followed by:
"I know you don’t care about the truth."
” you are in no way normal person.”

Good one.

[Sarcastr0]

I do not know anything about *your life and identity* then.

I would be quite surprised if you were actually 'a White Christian patriarch in a biologically intact natural family.'

Anything's possible, but your posting frequency and general social attitude don't really suggest that.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Explain.

[David Nieporent]

Explain.

"You" — to the extent it isn't purely trolling — are badly overcompensating.

[OtisAH]

You’re none of those things. You’re a lonely pathetic loser who is probably not nearly as closeted as you hope the world believes.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I like how you're using gay to try and insult me.

Insinuating someone is gay is definitely a slur.

[not guilty]

"I like how you’re using gay to try and insult me."

JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes, I have no idea what your sexual orientation is. But I suspect that the barb in OtisAH's suggestion that you’re a lonely pathetic loser who is probably not nearly as closeted as you hope the world believes is not the suggestion that you are gay, but rather that your hatemongering is a ruse to conceal your true nature. I read his comment as intimating you have a Ted Haggard problem.

If you are a self-proclaimed "White Christian patriarch in a biologically intact natural family" who gets hot monkey buttsex on the downlow, you are not the first of such vermin.

[Dr. Ed 2]

decide they are a Sumatran tiger and thus be allowed to hunt on a protected nature preserve

Kill with nothing other than your bare hands and teeth, rip the meat apart with the same, and eat it raw? Using absolutely no tools, not even Cave-Man tools like spears and stone knives?

Most animals will outrun you, the few you can catch will do a fairly good job of fighting back, and then what do you do once you manage to kill one?

[John F. Carr]

Have you read the Larry Niven short story "Table Manners", from the Draco Tavern collection?

[Nige]

'at your leisure'

You're not really interested in reality, are you?

'Seems kind of unfair and arbitrary.'

Lol it's The One Joke.

[wreckinball]

Rachel Dolezal.

She pretended to black. It was a big no-no!

[darkknight9]

Are... are we sure we want the presidential candidates to debate?
One on teleconference from the jail, the other one wandering around stage trying to find him...?

[Krayt]

Apparently “double haters” is a class of voter this election, who would prefer neither candidate, because it’s up to 25%.

Welcome to the club, but I don’t know what the point would be. The ideal candidate would disown the role politicians had in wrecking things with inflation, while continuing to aid Ukraine to stop tanks rolling through Europe.

The problem is I cannot see a Democratic candidate throwing their colleagues under the bus on inflation, no matter how much they richly deserve it, nor a Republican candidate straying from giving Ukraine the kiss of death because that’s part of Trump’s bizarre and seemingly successful formula.

People regurgitating party lines on those things need not reply about it. You’re wrong, and a nonsentient cog regurgitating your respective echo chamber control mechanisms like the good lil’ doggies your are.

Good boy!

[Don Nico]

Why "double haters"? Two highly flawed ancient ones. What's to love or even like?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I figure guys like you will lean toward Trump because of his embrace of the Bible.

You're just that gullible and dumb.

[Krayt]

They want to give up on Trump, and want to push them back into his warm embrace?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The commenting system may have swallowed a few words from that question.

[OtisAH]

Yes. I have zero concerns about Biden’s likely performance. And the only situation that would be worse for Convicted Felon Trump would be testifying under oath in court.

I’m still expecting Convicted Felon Trump to start trying to change already agreed upon details or adding new, unacceptable demands to scuttle it. But he hasn’t started yet, so maybe the debate will happen after all.

[Moderation4ever]

I think that Trump is already laying the framework for backing out. A few weeks ago, he called for drug testing. Last week he called for mental acuity testing. I would suggest he is getting his marks ready for when he pulls out of the debate. He'll have all the excuses preprogrammed for acceptance. The conservative pundits will say he had no other choice.

BTW - we know that Trumps mental acuity is all right because he could remember a list of words, he just couldn't remember the doctor that gave him the test.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Did you see the stupid rules CNN imposed?

[Moderation4ever]

What rules are stupid and why? Most seem pretty straight forward. Muted microphones seem reasonable to give speakers the opportunity to speak without interruption. No studio audience seems good. Canidates need to speak about what they know so no notes only a pad and pencil. What is the problem?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

These seem reasonable and good to you because CNN is doing it.

These aren't normal. This is just more Trump Law.

[Moderation4ever]

Again, please tell me what is wrong with the rules?

[David Nieporent]

Did you see the stupid rules CNN imposed?

No; I didn't see any "stupid rules." Main rules: no studio audience, mic on only when it's the candidate's turn to speak, no props or notes. Those seem pretty sensible, and what I have been suggesting for decades should be the rules.

[Dr. Ed 2]

He knew that it was *A* doctor, duly assigned by the USN, and what more does he need to know? This probably was in the course of a physical conducted by numerous doctors checking numerous things, probably even his vision, and how many of us would remember which of the doctors did what?

[Malika the Maiz]

I know my doctor's name. Heck, I know my kids' doctors' names.

[Dr. Ed 2]

If you have a team of a dozen, with a dozen more interns?

The POTUS goes to Bethesda Naval Hospital and is treated as a VIP with a TEAM of doctors.

[OtisAH]

Sometimes I feel a twinge of sadness that Convicted Felon Trump’s advocates are even stupider than he is. But then I realize they’d have to be and the moment passes.

Convicted Felon Trump didn’t say he couldn’t remember who among the team of doctors it was that admitted the test. Convicted Felon Trump specifically name-checked the doctor, he just couldn’t remember his name. Which is extra funny, dummy, because Jackson is a YUGE Trumpian lickspittle.

[Riva]

Did the corruptly conflicted hack enter a judgment of guilt in that banana republic disgrace? Don’t think so. So, right now, President Trump is not a “convicted felon,” just a victim of the Biden orchestrated lawfare abuses.

[OtisAH]

Convicted Felon Donald J. Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts on May 31, 2024, in a New York Court. Twelve jurors voted to convict him on all 34 charges due to a preponderance of the evidence and testimony presented during the two week trial.

“Stupider than he is,” just like I said.

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

34 "felony" counts that are really not even 1 single misdemeanor. FTFY

[OtisAH]

“Stupider than he is,” just like I said.

[Riva]

OtisAH, a jury verdict does not make one a convicted felon you monumental imbecile. One isn’t convicted unless the judge enters a judgment of guilt.

[OtisAH]

Dumb as a stump that’s dumber than a Convicted Felon Trump.

[Riva]

Also, not sure which law school you failed but you might want to re-check the burden of proof required in a criminal trial.

[Riva]

And OtisAH, I’ve given this advice before but you really should stop commenting give your really quite stunning ignorance. And that’s saying something on this site. But if you really enjoy making an ignorant ass out of yourself, then by all means keep posting.

[OtisAH]

Don’t nobody care what you got to say, dummy. Now hurry along, those toes aren’t gonna pick themselves.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The Scottsboro Boys were convicted as well...

[Riva]

And another shining example of democrat law enforcement.

[David Nieporent]

Which is extra funny, dummy, because Jackson is a YUGE Trumpian lickspittle.

Who's now a U.S. Congressman!

[Frank Drackman]

It hasn't been "Bethesda Naval" for awhile, it's now "Walter Reed National Military Medical Center', which is confusing, because there used to be a "Walter Reed Army Medical Center" a few miles way in Northwest DC (District of Colored Peoples) One of my alltime greatest moments was meeting then Senator Jesse Helms, I went to a room to start an IV, and they gave me the wrong room #, and there big as life was Jesse the H, along with Henry "Scoop'" Jackson, one of the best friends Israel ever had in DC, I got his autograph, and tried to talk about the then still in the Courts 2000 Presidential Erection, all he wanted to talk about was his stupid Neuropathy. Patients, Medicine would be much easier without them

Frank

[Magister]

Really rude of the code blue team making all that noise resuscitating the patient who needed the IV.

[Krayt]

It hasn’t been “Bethesda Naval” for awhile, it’s now “Walter Reed National Military Medical Center’, which is confusing, because there used to be a “Walter Reed Army Medical Center” a few miles way in Northwest DC

I often start reading comments without looking at the name. Just lazy I guess.

(District of Colored Peoples)

Time to look up. Ohhhh kay.
It started interesting anyway.

[Moderation4ever]

If I were going to flaunt my test results I make sure I knew the doctors name.

[bernard11]

It was his personal physician from his time in the White House, not just someone randomly assigned who only saw him once.

[Riva]

Way past doubling down on stupid OtisAH. You are permanently stuck. President Trump will not be convicted until that conflicted hack judge enters a judgment of guilt. As of now, President Trump is just a victim of this banana republic farce.

[Don Nico]

dk,
Are you referring to this video?
It does not look reassuring.

[Commenter_XY]

We will see for ourselves in less than two weeks. The latest G-7 meeting in Italy did not allay any fears about POTUS Biden's cognitive issues.

[Sarcastr0]

Didn't you say this about the State of the Union and then got kinda quiet when that went well?

Heck, didn't some folks on here say it about the debates in 2020?

I'm not quite so sanguine as OtisAH but that's me being irrational - I should be based on recent past performance.

[Don Nico]

The debate rules are "no notes, no prompts of any kind, and mikes off when the other speaks."
It will be very revealing no matter whom you support.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Does it include "no earpieces"?

[Both Sides]

I get the "mics muted when the other guy is talking" rule and think it's a good one. I could go either way on the "no live audience" rule. But I genuinely don't get the "no notes" rule. Even the best public speakers I've ever seen --- political and not political --- sometimes look down and check their notes. Especially given that the questions could be about a wide variety of topics, and answers might depend on some specific numbers, I think that's going too far.

Note, I'm not saying that rule will necessarily favor one candidate or the other, just that I don't favor that rule.

[Commenter_XY]

I don't get the 'no notes' rule either.

[OtisAH]

It was either the Convicted Felon Trump’s team who asked for that, thinking Biden will be lost without notes. Or it was the Convicted Felon Trump’s team’s ask because they know Convicted Felon Trump will not and/or cannot read the notes prepared for him so why give Biden an advantage. The former is more likely than the latter, but not by much.

[Both Sides]

Commenter: Yeah, I mean even Supreme Court oral advocates, who typically spend months prepping for oral arguments about a discrete legal issue or very specific and small set of related legal issues, get to use prepared notes.

[Commenter_XY]

It is a dumb rule; hopefully they lose that rule before the debate.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

As I understand the conditions, the candidates will be able to generate and use notes -- using pen and paper provided -- during the debate but are not to bring notes prepared earlier.

[Both Sides]

Otis and Arthur: I appreciate the explanation and the clarification. But FWIW (and I know the answer is "nothing"), I don't like the bar on previously-prepared notes.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I do not perceive either approach to be unreasonable, but in a world of preprogrammed electronic disco it seems refreshing and instructive to arrange an opportunity to observe people practicing their craft in a "you're on your own" context.

The classical records department of your local public library would have been a fitting venue. Bonus points for the first two cartwheels.

This is for everyone headed to those Stones shows next week. Don't miss that drum fill at 3:09.

[Don Nico]

I think that is a fair rule and both are taking a significant risk to agree to it. It was their idea.

It will show how quickly each thinks, how much each actually knows and how long each can hold their thoughts and focus together

[David Nieporent]

Well, let me try: a debate is not about announcing specific facts or policy positions; there's about 18 months' worth of campaigning where the candidates have the opportunity to do that. They can put forth press releases or campaign ads or put stuff in stump speeches. All that reflects is the candidate's ability to read.

A candidate debate allows us to assess the candidates in real time, unfiltered, without any staff assistance. Allowing them prewritten notes would circumvent that. That's certainly not the only skill set candidates need, but this is the only format that allows us that assessment.

[Both Sides]

David:

I'm generally a fan of your comments, so please take this as a friendly question.

Why, exactly, is "addressing serious and often complex issues without any use of notes to check" a skill that a candidate or even President needs?

[David Nieporent]

Fair question. It may not represent a specific task that a president is likely to undertake; other than impromptu press conferences, presidents don't normally have to speak extemporaneously without notes. But I think it's better for revealing things like what a candidate actually knows and can talk coherently about, rather than them being able to recite the talking points put in front of them by staffers. I just don't see what we learn about the candidates from the latter.

[bernard11]

I would also like to see a strict "mikes off when time limits are reached" rule.

[Don Nico]

That would also be good, bernard.

[Both Sides]

Wait, I thought that *was* a rule already. . . .

[Bwaaah]

It would appear that in matters of partisan concern, there are rules, strict rules, and rules that are enforced. This may be one that is of the first two types.

[Don Nico]

I missed adding the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqHxSVzOmNI

Fortunately he is rescued by Georgia Meloni.

[Magister]

Video edited in a misleading way by the New York Post? Nobody should be surprised. (Donald Trump bailing on debates? Nobody should be surprised if that happens, either.)

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-campaign-seizes-misleading-video-biden-g7-criticize/story?id=111133423

[Don Nico]

Magister,
Check out Youtube. There are many versions of this clip from foreign sources reporting on the G7. However, you are welcome to believe whatever you want.

[Magister]

YouTube contains many misleading edited versions of a given video? This is cool and totally new information.

Did you look at the link I provided? He was congratulating a skydiver in the video that's not misleadingly cropped. You can believe what your partisan dishonesty drives you to; I prefer to investigate claims and compare multiple sources. (I am willing to consider that some of Trump's incoherent blather may have been taken out of context.)

[Don Nico]

I am not be dishonest. You are by making unfounded accusations.

I not only looked at your link, but had seen the entire skydiving event on YouTube this past weekend. The item was NOT misleadingly cropped.
You claim of cropping is completely inaccurate. Biden's wandering toward the skydiver was not cropped by RW media; it was stopped by PM Meloni pulling him back into the group photo.

I have compared multiple sources of several G7 events. You ought to do the same. Then ask yourself whether for find our president's physical presence reassuring.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You are the target audience for these misleading videos. A gullible, superstition-addled, right-wing write-off.

I will celebrate your replacement.

[Don Nico]

"YouTube contains many misleading edited versions of a given video? "
No, there are NO misleading edits (excepts for "Funny moments from G7") that is "misleading edits" is your distortion driven by your political agenda. There are many video of many G7 events

[Magister]

Don Nico, all in on the cropped videos. Maybe he could have started by posting a video that shows who Biden is talking to and giving a thumbs up to. But that would demand honesty that Don Nico turns out to be incapable of.

[bernard11]

Here is a different version.

He didn't wander off, as the edited video suggests.

Of course the totally non-gullible XY believes it, but I'm surprised Don isn't a bit more skeptical.

The sad thing is that the conservative media is doing this over and over - remember "he couldn't find the chair" - and people fall for it over and over.

It's slimy.

[Don Nico]

Bernard,
It is not a different version of events. I am not as gullible as you imply
I have watch many videos from G7 out of general interest. Indeed Biden was walking toward the parachutist (seen even in the NYP clip), but in a vaguely distracted way when he was wanted for a group photo. He did have to get pulled back into the group by Meloni.
If you look at many G7 videos, you see that he was not having an easy time at the meeting. Biden frequently looked distracted and tired needing to get pulled back into the action.
He was showing his age badly. Compare his behavior other foreign heads of government.
Full disclosure: I do think that he and Trump are too old to lead this country

[Commenter_XY]

How did you like the Marine guard shepherding him along during his review? That was pretty funny (and sad). Then his boss (Pres Obama) leading him off the stage during a fundraiser.

Nah, no cognitive issues at all.

[Mr. Bumble]

It is not just a matter of “age”. Biden was a dope and gaffe machine at 30.
Is he allowed to drive the Corvette?

[Malika the Maiz]

Trump, on the other hand, has been long known as an intelligent truth machine!

[Dr. Ed 2]

He had a near fatal brain bleed at age 45 -- and likely has brain damage from that. He's lucky he's alive...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/14/biden-nearly-died-an-aneurysm-risky-surgery-changed-his-life/

[Noscitur a sociis]

They don’t call him Dr. for nothing!

[Michael P]

Don't make fun of him, the doctors had to take off the top of his head a few times to see if he had a brain.

[Malika the Maiz]

So during a long foreign junket he walked over and gave attention to a parachutist as a group photo was being organized?

Biden is too old, but this is one of the more pathetic attempts to demonstrate this.

[Bob from Ohio]

The Biden cult is very strong.

The nice Italian lady didn't go over to him for no reason, you dope.

[Malika the Maiz]

Uh, might have gone up to him while he was acknowledging a parachutist to say "ok, come here for the group photo?"

Clearly dementia at work there!

[Don Nico]

Did you watch that video? Really? What would you think if it were your dad wandering over like that?

[bernard11]

You know, some of the "wandering" impression probably comes from the fact that he walks slowly, or did at the G7 meeting, at least.

Guess what. Old people often walk slowly. It's not a measure of their mental competence.

And you know what, if Biden had done some of the stuff Trump has - confusing Pelosi and Haley, thinking he's running against Obama, freezing in the middle of a speech you guys would be jumping up and down over it.

[Nige]

Don Nico just waiting for his Dad to go over and acknowledge a parchutist so he can have him diagnosed as senile.

[Commenter_XY]

These people truly crack me up trying to 'splain away POTUS Bidens obvious cognitive issues.

[Nige]

If it was all that obvious you wouldn't need to rely on doctored video.

[Bob from Ohio]

"might"

Sure, sure.

The Biden cult is very strong.

[Nige]

Bob trying to make fetch happen.

[Don Nico]

Mallka, he walked feebly. Looked at the dude and gave a thumbs up and was pulled back by Ms. Meloni. The G7 is hardly a foreign junket. It is a meeting of seven heads of government which shows who is the dominant political figures are in the EU. It is a chance for the US President to shine as the leader of the free world.

Reporting photo ops is what news organization, right, left and center do. The videos are not feeble attempts; they are best efforts by the international press.

[David Nieporent]

It is literally a foreign junket.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

"I am not as gullible as you imply"

How many fairy tales do you believe to be true? Do you genuinely believe that nonsense, or do you just claim to for downscale partisan or social reasons?

You are every bit as gullible as you seem.

Carry on, clingers.

[BadLib]

The problem is not primarily that he wandered, it is that he looked aimless, his mouth was agape, he was walking like an very elderly person, and he didn't seem to be focusing on anything in particular. He looked rather like a patient in the hallway of a senior living facility who hasn't quite transitioned to the memory care unit yet.

Compare his expressions, reactions, and demeanor to those around them. One of these people is distinctly different - and it's President Biden.

Looking at videos of President Biden from ten years ago, the decline is very apparent.

Perhaps his physical decline is not a reflection on his intellectual capabilities (after all, judging the late Stephan Hawking by his physical capabilities would not have been wise), but it certainly is a perception problem for November.

When Trump stumbled a bit while walking down an inclined ramp at West Point four years ago in June of 2020 the New York Times headline was Trump’s Halting Walk Down Ramp Raises New Health Questions. Since the media thinks much less alarming exhibitions of possible health issues than those Biden demonstrated at G7 are relevant to a President's abilities, this is an issue for Biden.

[Don Nico]

"The problem is not primarily that he wandered, it is that he looked aimless, his mouth was agape, he was walking like an very elderly person, and he didn’t seem to be focusing on anything in particular. He looked rather like a patient in the hallway of a senior living facility who hasn’t quite transitioned to the memory care unit yet."

That is exactly the concern.

[darkknight9]

Father's Day was pretty nice this year. The boy brought over subs and diet dew and visited for a few hours. I hope all you Dad's out there had a kick ass day with your families!

[Brett Bellmore]

Spent it traveling back from the Philippines. Finally got home yesterday evening, and slept like a baby in my own bed. And the house sitter kept all the animals alive, though the garden is a bit of a jungle.

[Mr. Bumble]

Amazing how fast nature will reclaim things.

[Brett Bellmore]

In this case it was the sweet potatoes taking over. My wife went and planted all my hot peppers that I'd started in the sweet potato bed, assuring me after the fact that they'd grow above them. You can't even see the hot peppers any more!

Next year I'm going to have to put my foot down and demand that she let me grow my hot peppers in my own section of the garden, that she has no say over.

[Bwaaah]

You might want to start now with negotiations over the Partitioning of the Garden, and Garden Rights. Be aware that no matter how above-ground centric you two may be, there's a growing subterranean morass that knows nothing of your borders. Really, I think you're just a couple of colonialists trying to subordinate the vegetables.

It's not too late to surrender to a Leftist gardening ideology in which all of life boundlessly subsumes itself while justified by a complex rhetorical framework tied to the history of mistreatment of underground root vegetables, like radishes.

[Malika the Maiz]

Weren't you posing as a lifelong liberal Democrat reluctantly forced to question that movement a couple weeks ago?

[Bwaaah]

I was never a Democrat, nor a Republican. I always considered myself to be liberal, and still do.

Was it the phrase, "Leftist gardening ideology," that made you think I was talking about Democrats?

[Malika the Maiz]

Cool story!

[bernard11]

Well done, bwaaah.

[Bwaaah]

If you're at least laughing a little, then I thank you.

[Magister]

First paragraph was funnier than the second, but I did laugh.

The radishes are radical, the legumes just want you to give peas a chance, the succotash is suffering, the asparagus likes to disparage us, and the carrots don't care at all.

I am disappointed that presidential favorite foods have all been borderline unhealthy (or at least the sort of thing that would make many mothers frown) since Jimmy Carter's grits: jelly beans, pork rinds, cheeseburgers, cheeseburger pizza, nachos*, fast food, ice cream. Two votes for squirrel, and one vote for hard cider. I judge that Harding and Coolidge nailed the politics: chicken [in every] pot pie and apple pie.

* OK, depends on the nachos.

[bernard11]

Definitely laughed.

[BrotherMovesOn]

"A Radish will never stand in the way of victory."
- Marshall Focht

[Bwaaah]

The reality of a giant radish like this is enough to confirm my worst fears about an inevitable Garden Apocalypse. Imagine pulling that thing out of your garden. We think we know what’s going on because we’re “above ground.” But we’re just hiding our heads above the sand, pretending there can be no vegetable revenge from below.

And don’t buy Magister’s take on all this. He’s crazy to trust the legumes…a lot of them are NUTS!!! (But he’s right about the nachos…they give bad food a good name.)

[Magister]

Hey, I only reported what the legumes say they want, and while peace would always be good, I myself rarely give peas a chance -- too many bad experiences with ones of low quality. And legumes are not nuts; it's just that a few of them are widely considered to be nuts.

[Armchair]

Spent it camping with the kids. Pretty nice, overall.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Was fed and housed by my daughter/son-in-law and watched my grandkid busily arranging toys, then came home yesterday and was fed by the couple downstairs with their extended family as they partied out in the back. O.K. . . . .TODAY I start my diet!

[Don Nico]

"TODAY I start my diet!"
I've heard that one before. From my own lips even!

[Armchair]

Taral Patel, a Democratic candidate for Fort Bend, Texas, precinct commissioner and a Biden administration appointee, is accused of using fake online accounts to post racist messages about himself and then publicly accusing Republicans of being responsible for it.

Patel was arrested last week for the third-degree felony of online impersonation and the misdemeanor of misrepresenting his identity, court records show. He posted $22,500 in total for two bonds – one on each of the charges – and he surrendered his passport.

https://justthenews.com/government/local/democratic-candidate-biden-appointee-accused-creating-fake-racist-attacks-against

[Kazinski]

When there isn't enough racism out there to suit you then sometimes you've got to create your own.

[Mr. Bumble]

Cue "Juicy".

[Krayt]

Is pretending to be someone who doesn’t exist “impersonating” someone?
Someone real, sure, there is harm to someone else. A marionette? No.

It mentioned he scraped real and probably random pictutes from somewhere, but that seems small to hang such a charge on.

[Michael P]

He was pretending to be Republicans in order to corrupt and subvert an election. It's sad that you are cool with that -- I thought most Americans opposed politicians doing that kind of thing.

[Longtobefree]

And how long before the feds file election interference charges?

Oh, wait. (D)

[Bwaaah]

Now, now. It's not a D/R thing. It's a justice thing. And that's [D]ifferent.

[Nige]

Jesus Christ.

[David Nieporent]

And how long before the feds file election interference charges?

What federal statute do you think his actions violated?

[Magister]

OK, felon running for office: bad. Report back if he gets convicted. But does that rule only apply to county commissioner candidates?

[Malika the Maiz]

This reminds me of the reports of Trump referring to Milwaukee as awful. His "defense" was, I didn't say it was awful, I said it was crime ridden and full of voter fraud. Well, in response to the crime ridden part some city official replied something like "I know some people with criminal records in this city, but few who have been convicted of 34 felonies."

[bernard11]

Armchair gives us one of his semi-weekly reports from the RW media swamp.

[Kazinski]

USA today did an interesting 2 state poll of only Black voters, 500 in MI, and 500 in PA. Usually the margin of errors in the racial cross tabs of the polls can make relying on the results a lot riskier. Here the sample size of blacks makes it much more reliable.

"In both states, Biden sees his support decline from 2020. In Pennsylvania, 56.2 percent of surveyed Black voters say they would vote for Biden today, down 20 percentage points from those who say they voted for him in 2020. In Michigan, 54.4 percent of surveyed Black voters say they support Biden, down 22 percentage points from those who say they voted for him in 2020."

https://thehill.com/elections/4724965-just-over-half-of-black-voters-back-biden-in-two-swing-states-poll/

There isn't much doubt that Biden will win the Black vote in those two states, but if Trump cuts Biden's margin of the Black vote significantly from 2020, it could swing the results.

Trump campaigned in inner city Detroit last week.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/15/trump-rallies-maga-base-courts-black-voters-in-detroit-00163597

[Mr. Bumble]

Obviously those not supporting Biden are not black. Biden has said so. Also, they are fetishists who like being in chains.

[Malika the Maiz]

"Obviously those not supporting Biden are not black. Biden has said so."

Haven't heard this, could you provide a citation?

[Mr. Bumble]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/22/politics/biden-charlamagne-tha-god-you-aint-black/index.html

You need to wake up and pay attention.

[Malika the Maiz]

Not a regular CNN viewer so I hadn't heard of this. You think I should watch much more CNN? Anyways, thanks, (btw it's a pretty goofy quote imo).

[Michael P]

Were you paying attention to any news media at all in 2020?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52773555
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/biden-tells-african-americans-you-ain-t-black-if-they-n1212911

[myself]

It's hilarious the things Trump says that no one ever takes seriously, but Biden or Obama have a bit of a gaffe and no one ever forgets.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1802105333147750704

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

Please enlighten us, oh great douchebag, what exactly is wrong with this? Let me guess, only black people should have been allowed? Sorry to inform you Jason, but black and white people mixing at a social event for a shared cause is totally allowed nowadays. Jim Crow is no more, no thanks to racists like you.

[Sarcastr0]

I do think it says something in a rally to show how much support from black folks you have there's a ton of white people wearing MAGA hats inside in church.

Maybe not about actual baseline black support, but about where you're coming from.

[Riva]

And if it's one thing democrats know it's exploiting blacks and race issues. Their party is built on it.

[Sarcastr0]

It’s funny how the people angry about this are largely white.

[Riva]

That isn’t an angry comment. It’s the sad reality. And to prove my point you make my assumed race an issue. Not too bright.

[Sarcastr0]

I didn't say anything about your race, Riva.

But regardless, you should probably be angry about all that exploitation not sad.
Why are you so complacent about black exploitation?

[Riva]

You probably shouldn’t try gaslighting on your own bullshit within the same comment chain that contains your bullshit. Just some friendly advice.

[Sarcastr0]

God you're funny. Do you know what largely means in this context?

I actually begin to wonder if English is your first language. Would explain a lot of the nuance you miss.

[Riva]

Well I tried to help, but there's no helping some gaslighting clowns.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

I'm not going to un-mute him to check, but I surmise from your response that our precious knucklehead completely missed the point.

[Sarcastr0]

I mean that's why I keep him around.

When he's not on insult-jags, he specializes in running way ahead of his skis.

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

Don't worry slowpoke, you wouldn't have had anything worth saying anyway.

[Malika the Maiz]

I'm guessing he's referring to the exciting pronouncements that he appeared at, or to, a "black church."

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Since your response appears to be on-track and offered in good faith, I will elaborate:

Proudly advertising that he went to a 'black church' in order to suggest he deserves their vote (while simultaneously trying to whitewash his decades of racism) is wildly deceitful as the video evidence demonstrates.

[Malika the Maiz]

Yes, that's my point.

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

Jason’s slow.

Hillary completely ignored the “deplorables” in “flyover country”. Trump actually went to campaign in Detroit. Yes, of course non-black Trump supporters went. Was the church or campaign supposed to say “NO WHITE PEOPLE ALLOWED”? Have you ever been to Detroit? You think only poor black people live there? Apparently, all of the black people who support him are just Uncle Toms and such. Like I said, Jason’s ignorance and racism is showing.

Y'all are making my point for me.

[Kazinski]

Decades of support for the Black Community. Trump had decades of interactions with prominent blacks in NYC, like Spike Lee, Al Sharpton, and nobody accused him of racism until he became a GOP Candidate.

And don't forget David Hilliard, the former Black Panther leaders endorsement:
https://x.com/JayVTheGreat/status/1798152997463073032?t=5G9bUPXVFsegMKCaWetMFQ&s=19

And yes I know one grandson has disavowed the endorsement, but here is the full 3 minute video, and Hilliard is obviously competent, and while he doesn't actually use the word endorsement, it is clearly a testimonial for Trump.

[Malika the Maiz]

Even The Liberal Al Sharpton!

[Malika the Maiz]

No one accused Trump of racism for his advocacy regarding the Central Park Five prior to his GOP candidacy?

[jb]

"Decades of support for the Black Community. Trump had decades of interactions with prominent blacks in NYC, like Spike Lee, Al Sharpton, and nobody accused him of racism until he became a GOP Candidate."

First, are you really doing the "but I have black friends" thing?

Second, LOTS of people accused Trump of racism before he became a GOP candidate. He was accused by the federal government of being racist in the 70s. People said he was racist when he took out the ad railroading the Central Park Five. Al Sharpton (who you mention) organized a protest outside Trump Tower at the time! When it turned out the Central Park Five were innocent, people accused him racist again. And his promotion of birtherism was called racist at the time as well.

You can think he's racist or not, but let's not fictionalize history as part of the discussion.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

"Decades of support for the Black Community. Trump had decades of interactions with prominent blacks in NYC, like Spike Lee, Al Sharpton, and nobody accused him of racism until he became a GOP Candidate."

Only an autistic, disaffected, antisocial, delusional clinger -- so alienated from modern America that he would build an off-the-grid hermit shack to hole up in with his mail order bride and a Ted Kaczynski-inspired screen name at a white, male blog -- would write this.

A better person would write something far different.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

As usual, you're full of shit Kazinski and repeating debunked lies because your head is up your ass.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-trump-racism-election-obama-018824651613

[David Nieporent]

Decades of support for the Black Community. Trump had decades of interactions with prominent blacks in NYC, like Spike Lee, Al Sharpton, and nobody accused him of racism until he became a GOP Candidate.

Not only did lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of people accuse Donald Trump of racism before he became a GOP candidate, but he was actually sued for racial discrimination by the DOJ in running his real estate businesses, and ended up paying a large fine (after trying and failing to countersue the government for suing him!)

[Sarcastr0]

There were similar rumblings in 2020 about the black vote around here. And even in 2018 some, though maybe not around here.

Nothing came of it.

Now the Latino vote....that's the one to watch, IMO.

[Mr. Bumble]

Of course runaway "transitional" inflation and a wide open border hadn't happened yet.

[Frank Drackman]

“45” got the largest % of the Afro-Amurican vote since Richard Milhouse in 1960, back when the only Blacks who got to vote were White Peoples with the last name “Black”
And he doesn’t need to win, just improve a few % points over 0-20, and you’re looking at a 35-40 State Clinton-Style Electrical Landslide

Frank

[Malika the Maiz]

Was that in 2016? Because according to reports Biden won a higher percent of the black vote in 2020 than Bill Clinton did in both his wins.

https://www.washingtoninformer.com/black-vote-key-in-presidential-races/

[Krayt]

I didn't rumble any of that in 2020, but the African American mail lady who delivered daily had a little radio on blabbering positively about Trump several times. I thought if such were looking positively on him, there were probably tons more, and he was going to win.

Hmmm...theory disconfirmed.

[Armchair]

That's to be expected as the Democrats swing away from working class policies, and more towards professional grade politics

[Commenter_XY]

Polls this far out are trash; Bob from Ohio Rule.

The election will come down to AZ, GA and WI.

[Don Nico]

S_0,
You were right. I mistook Bob from Ohio for you.

[Sarcastr0]

That's a new one, but fair enough.

[Commenter_XY]

Wow, you mistook me for Sarcastr0. That hurt, Don Nico. 😛

[Don Nico]

Not you, Bob.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Think of how he must have felt.

[Joe_dallas]

Also worth noting is shift in support among hispanics to the republican side. The cycling community in north Texas has a very large hispanic presences. While politics is rarely discussed, what little that is discussed has a moderate to strong republican tilt.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Does Sonja_T also represent herself as living in Texas, or just this sock puppet account?

[Malika the Maiz]

Hispanics in North Texas like to ride in bicycle clubs?

[John F. Carr]

Since black and white votes are counted equally such a narrow poll is better for sociology than prediction.

[Stephen Lathrop]

If Trump finds himself imprisoned during the campaign, including either a jail, or house arrest, or some other cobbled-together contrivance to constrain him, should we expect Trump to suffer the same restrictions on communication which other incarcerated felons suffer, or will Trump get special privileges?

[Frank Drackman]

That's a stupid question even for you, let's see, well he'll be the only Prisoner with Secret Service Protection. I'm thinking their may be other "special privileges".

[Riva]

President Trump is afforded lifetime secret service protection, notwithstanding the gross injustice of this sickening abuse of the law and constitution at play in NY. So yeah, Clarence Darrow, President Trump would be treated differently.

[DaveM]

Jailing Trump would be the single greatest thing the Left could do to ensure a Trump victory, obviously. But apparently some on the Left want him in office. Go figure. I don't for a minute think they're unaware. It's intentional.

[Armchair]

There's been a lot of talk about the economy and inflation lately, and how it's hurting people. Other commenters have said "nothing to see here, everything is basically great".

One of the issues at hand may by the bifurcated economy we're seeing. Where if you're wealthy and well off, you're doing pretty well, and don't see any issues in the economy. (Google "bifurcated economy")

But if you're not as well off, there are significant struggles and the economy is much poorer, with less money.

I believe this is for several reasons.
1. Inflation hits the less well off harder.

2. Housing and rent prices hit the less well off far harder. If you own your home, and bought before 2020, you have a nice low mortgage rate locked in. Or if you sold your home for a high price, you didn't need an expensive mortgage. But if you're renting (especially in low rent areas in the outskirts), rents have skyrocketed. Not so much in NYC or SF. But in little suburbs in Wisconsin, absolutely. Rent is up by like 25% or more in the last few years. Or if you're looking to buy a place, a combination of high prices and high mortgage rates make it almost impossible.

3. High interest rates on things like car loans, credit card loans, and more hit the poor harder. Richer people can just...pay it all (or pay every month). But the less well off need loans. And the high interest rates hit them harder. Again, not included in the standard CPI model.

4. Higher regulations, and higher minimum wages are driving the hourly wage jobs down. In response to many of these, companies don't hire, or limit people to part time work or less hours. They just can't afford the "full benefits" that was typical of a 40 hour a week part time job. So, they're cut to 29 hours a week. But that makes it harder for workers in hourly jobs. Meanwhile high salaried jobs in recession proof industries don't have these issues.

[Malika the Maiz]

There's also a tendency for people to focus less on things that benefit them, like higher wages or plentiful jobs, and focus more on things that ding them, like higher prices. Iirc behavioral economists have studied this a bit.

[Armchair]

People focus on the overall situation. And for many, they're hurting. One big sign is, they expect to spend less on things they don't have to.

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/consumer-packaged-goods/our-insights/the-state-of-the-us-consumer

[Malika the Maiz]

I don't think your source supports your position, rather it supports mine.

For example, from it: "These concerns left consumers somewhat conflicted: on one hand, they continued to splurge on food and apparel, but they pared back spending in other areas. This contradictory behavior "

Also, the heading is about "the cusp." The inflationary situation was, by all objective measures I can think of, worse years ago under Biden. If people are only now on "the cusp" then that fits with the behavioral economics view that they are often irrational in noticing the good along with the bad in the overall economy.

Of course, none of this matters politically. If humans are irrational this way Biden ignores it to his political peril.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Malika, bad gamblers typically disadvantage themselves by fearful tactical choices. Losses suffered by too-cautious treatment of favorable opportunities are just as real as losses suffered for any other reason. But the former often go unnoticed, while the others inflict immediately perceptible pain. Whether you are playing poker or Jeopardy, that principle applies.

[Sarcastr0]

Come on, man.
The ‘Biden inflation’ carping went on well beyond when inflation was an issue, and now the plan is to say inflation is bad but don’t check the standard CPI check housing in suburban Wisconsin???

I’m all for clear-eyed economic analysis or even some sociology about people's general feeling. But this is just partisanship fueling some vibes-based wanking.

[Armchair]

I see you're in the "nothing to see here, everything is basically great” category.

[Sarcastr0]

As I said, I'm all for clear-eyed economic or sociological analysis.
This isn't that.
This is 'ignore the baseline numbers and look at my ipse dixit and Wisconsin suburbs real estate.'

And you have a history of cherry picking stats to talk down the economy around here.

You're so very clearly narrative first numbers as required. And you don't have a lot of numbers.

There are interesting economic stories. The Buy America Act, or tipping post-Covid, or any number of other things. But you're an obligate partisan so none of those are for you.

[Don Nico]

Individual votes "cherry-pick' their own economics statistics as being the relevant ones. Happens all the time.

[Sarcastr0]

Armchair isn't talking about voter perception, he's trying to talk actual numbers. And not doing a great job.

[Bwaaah]

As a matter of fact, Armchair does a pretty good job of pointing out some of the drivers of the lousy economy sentiments in people with less money, especially putting a simplistic view of inflation aside.

You do seem to take a “nothing to see here,” or “they’re deluded by misunderstandings” conclusion about it.

Do you believe that poorer people have a negative view of the economy? Do you have a theory of why that is? If so, what is your theory? (Please focus on producing a coherent statement if what's going on, if you have one.)

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, Bwaah, I am aware of your vibes over statistics position on events economical or criminal.

[Bwaaah]

Do you believe that poorer people have a negative view of the economy? Do you have a theory of why that is? If so, what is your theory? (Please focus on producing a coherent statement if what’s going on, if you have one.)

[Sarcastr0]

Armchair isn't talking about perception, he's talking about 'the bifurcated economy we’re seeing.'

You want to talk about perception over facts. Fine. But I won't engage you on that new thesis because there's a huge partisan divide in that opinion so it's actually not very interesting.

[Malika the Maiz]

"Do you believe that poorer people have a negative view of the economy?"

Uh, of course. You don't really need any theory for this, do you? I mean, I think people who aren't attracting many dates probably have a poorer view of the dating scene too...

[Commenter_XY]

He doesn't have a coherent statement of what is going on, Bwaaah.

[Sarcastr0]

What I see is Armchair cherry picking to shit on the economy.

Beyond that, even the scope of the question 'what's going on' is not clear.

[Bwaaah]

"But you [blah] [blah] [blah], and he [blah] [blah] [blah], and I [blah] [blah] [blah]"

Apparently, he does not.

[Armchair]

When asked about the economy, a plurality of Americans consistently think it's doing poorly. When asked about their own finances, a plurality think they are not as good today, as they were 3-4 years ago.

https://www.newsweek.com/economy-america-outlook-biden-1896902

You can either accept their views, and ask what's different, and what aren't general statistics capturing.

Or you can gaslight them and say "Everything is fine according to these numbers." But, you are called Gaslightro for a reason, so we know what you'll choose.

https://www.newsweek.com/economy-america-outlook-biden-1896902

Their widespread pessimism is reflected in the results of a Redfield & Wilton Strategies poll conducted on behalf of Newsweek on April 11. According to the survey, some 50 percent of Americans believe that the U.S. economy is heading in the wrong direction, while only 25 percent said it is going in the right direction

Americans are also negative about their own financial situation. Some 42 percent of respondents said their financial situation has worsened in the last year. Only 26 percent said it has improved, while 32 percent said it has stayed the same.

Some 47 percent of Americans said they were now financially worse off than they were three years before, against 26 percent who said they were better off and 27 percent who said they were about the same. Some 45 percent said they were now worse off than before the pandemic, while 28 percent said they were better off and 27 percent were about the same.

[Sarcastr0]

No new goalposts.

You claim an actual bifurcated economy. Now you’re on about opinion polling.

You’re backpeddaling. After having been called out by a number of people.
Because in actual numbers you need to go to Wisconsin suburbs or ignore 2023.

You are, as DMN put it, a broken record.

[Armchair]

I'll note you
1) Can't follow the argument
2) Resort to childish insults because you can't
3) Can't provide any links to support any of your points...just about ever.

So...continue

[Sarcastr0]

I read your OP. Others did too.

You switched theses. This is evident to everyone.

I do not need links to point out your backpedaling, nor to note what it means about your arguments about the economy.

[Armchair]

No… I explained why there’s an issue.

"You can either accept their views, and ask what’s different, and what aren’t general statistics capturing." (—This is the original post, attempting to explain what is missing from a general aggregated statistic)

"Or you can gaslight them and say “Everything is fine according to these numbers.”" (Which is what you do)

[Sarcastr0]

Wait so you are saying your appeal to the vibes of the populous was to support your thesis that the economy is bad??

That’s not how proving works. Ad popularum is a fallacy.

Saying ‘I didn’t backpedal I just switch my argument to purestrain fallacy’ is not just saying I gave you too much credit earlier.

I will accept fault on that front. You are dumber than I believed. I should have learned by now.

[Krayt]

It's the spirit of the thing. Precious few politicians admit to guilt in inflation. Is your argument it's over now, let the fox keep guarding the henhouse?

[Sarcastr0]

My issue is Armchair is making up numbers to pretend the economy is still bad.

As to voting against Biden for inflation,
1) that is economically ignorant. Inflation was worldwide and it's timescale points to it being largely caused by supply chain issues. And in as much as you can talk domestic policy, monetary levers are the go-to for inflation, not fiscal policy.
2) But people do vote based on their pocketbook regardless. However, that's *current* pocketbook; past issues fall by the wayside to our goldfish electorate.
3) Your question is not in good faith, at least with respect to you. You are not motivated by blaming Biden for past inflation; you don't like Biden for ideological and ideologically-based personal narrative reasons.

[Martinned2]

I don't entirely agree. The IRA was the number 1 flagship policy of the Biden administration, so it makes sense to reflect your view of that policy in your vote.

A voter who wants to skip over the details can think of the IRA as two policies:
- A fiscal impulse in the economy at a time when the US probably needed it (2022), but also at a time when the economy was already running pretty hot (H2 2023 onwards). As such, it has definitely been pushing up inflation in recent quarters, compared to a scenario with less government spending.
- An investment in addressing climate change and energy security. Those seem like sensible things to invest in to me, but a Trump voter probably won't support the former.

[Don Nico]

"addressing climate change"
I suspect that to some degree it depends on what kind of "addressing" one is speaking about. There are plenty of "no regrets" opportunities for investing in adaptation to established trends (sea level rise in specific areas, for example). Those might be saleable even to some MAGAs

[Martinned2]

That's fair. That $4bn of drought resilience funding would fit that description, for example.

[Don Nico]

Exactly.

[Nige]

'Those might be saleable even to some MAGAs'

When the water's up to their knees they'll get mad that an evil conspiracy is messing with the weather to make everyone think climate change is real.

[Sarcastr0]

I think that's a fine thing to talk about. But neither Armchair nor Krayt were talking about the substance of the IRA's investments.

[bernard11]

And the IRA, plus the Cares Act were successful in that they helped produce the strong economy we have. Without the stimulus we would be much worse off.

Of course, nobody notices the job they didn't lose, or the higher revenues than they would have had otherwise.

[Don Nico]

S_0,
I guess that 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs has nothing to do with people's perception of inflation.
"Screw statistics; it's how the economy affects me!"

[Martinned2]

I'm not sure how many Trump voters will be affected by Biden's tariff on Chinese EVs.

I think it's bad policy, but it might be good politics as part of the wider trade war with China and/or getting car/EV manufacturers to invest in swing states.

[Sarcastr0]

Tariffs on EVs will raise the price of EVs. I'm not too concerned about that as a particularly salient force in the election nor in the economy generally.

I do think it's a bad policy, though. I'm all for national-security based tariffs, but this is not that.

[bernard11]

Don,

I guess that 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs has nothing to do with people’s perception of inflation.

Trump seems to be promising more inflation with his tariffs, and a bigger deficit with his tax cuts, yet the so-disant inflation hawks - 0% in May, BTW - are all over Biden.

Putting millions in concentration camps and deporting them isn't going to help either, though the humanitarian concerns around that ought to outweigh the economic effects.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Taxes cause inflation?

[Malika the Maiz]

Making things more expensive might?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Taxes have historically been a tool to curb inflation.

Which, of course, will be wiped away from the history books if Trump increases taxes and everyone will pretend that was never the case. Until Trump is no longer President, then you'll go back to the previous belief.

[bernard11]

What I said was that tax cuts increase the deficit.

I said nothing about taxes causing inflation.

You're back on mute.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Hello "I said nothing about taxes causing inflation.", I would like you to meet "Trump seems to be promising more inflation with his tariffs,".

You should be a grown up and acknowledge your mistake instead of being a toddler and pulling your nappy over your head and sticking your fingers in your ears.

[Sarcastr0]

Did you know what all tariffs are taxes, BUT not all taxes are tariffs!

[Don Nico]

"Trump seems to be promising more inflation with his tariffs"
And that is bad in my view.

"Putting millions in concentration camps"
C'mon, such comments are patently dishonest.

[Nige]

It's what he's promising to do. It's also why nobody actually refers in detail to Trump's policy proposals as part of their critiques of Biden. They're indefensible.

[David Nieporent]

It’s what he’s promising to do.

Trump benefits from the fact that he is so insane, so beyond the pale, that when you describe the positions he espouses people just cannot believe that it's real.

[Armchair]

"Making up numbers"

i.e., Armchair provides links, evidence and data.

Sarcastr0, well the best he can do is link to a blogger who likes to draw his own lines in crayon on graphs.

[Sarcastr0]

You provide *irrelevant* links and data.

And when this is pointed out by multiple parties you try for an A for effort?

No. You did not back up your assertions and then abandoned your thesis. No one else meeds to do anything in order for you to be wrong you did it all by yourself.

[Riva]

Whatever rate inflation may be impacting purchases now doesn’t mean the damages done by this corrupt reptile’s incompetence have been undone. Prices rising at a lower rate doesn’t mean that the price are falling. But you run with your Bidenomonics angle. I hope the corrupt child sniffing creep takes your advice.

[Martinned2]

You don't want prices falling. That is terrible for the economy.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/030915/why-deflation-bad-economy.asp

[Sarcastr0]

More and more of the dumber MAGA folks (and Brett, who I don't consider dumb) are into deflation.

Wild.

[bernard11]

Their theory seems to be that every price in the economy will fall, except the price of their own labor, and maybe the price of the goods their employer sells.

[Frank Drackman]

I’m in the “Wealthy and Well off Category” (I made $900,000 guy practicing Medicine last year (wait till I learn how), how much you make?) I spend more on First Class Air Travel than the average Amurican gets in wages/welfare/disability.
But, back in La-La land for a week, get 6 Crunchy Taco’s at Del Taco, nothing special, the basic Taco, shell, beef, cheese, lettuce, No Drink, No Nachos, (Did get the extra hot sauce)
$14.95 !
Or a little over 2 Gallons of the Southern California Blend Gas (they’re going all Erectic by 2035? gonna be alot of cars to junk)
Sure, I can afford it, but what about a family of Ill-legals, back’s still literally wet from crossing the Rio Grande???

Frank

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Hey, can you leave me some of your Jew gold in your will? Are you allowed to do that for us goyim?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Profs. Bernstein and Blackman, and former professor Volokh, will issue a pass to this guy with respect to the antisemitism, because they object solely (and vehemently) to antisemitism (real or perceived) they figure they can pin on a lefty.

#Partisan
#Hacks

Carry on, clingers.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

It's a fucking joke from South Park, you ignorant dunce.

SFW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtrsAAVpsek

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You figure that would have stopped the clingers who operate this blog if they figured they could disparage liberals with a charge of antisemitism? If so, the record figures you're full of shit.

[Malika the Maiz]

How pretty is your Canadian girlfriend?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

All that claimed cash, yet illiterate, bigoted, antisocial, and deplorable.

[MoreCurious]

He argues like a stupid middle-schooler, he writes like a stupid middle-schooler, and his sense of humor is about as sophisticated as a stupid middle-schooler. And yet he continues to pretend to be a high-earning doctor and seems to expect the rest of us to believe him. Thanks for the laughs, Drackman. And just so we’re clear — we’re laughing at you, not with you.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

That guy is the Volokh Conspiracy's target audience . . . and the most ardent defender of former professor Volokh.

[David Nieporent]

One of the issues at hand may by the bifurcated economy we’re seeing. Where if you’re wealthy and well off, you’re doing pretty well, and don’t see any issues in the economy. (Google “bifurcated economy”)

But if you’re not as well off, there are significant struggles and the economy is much poorer, with less money.

I see you're just going to keep repeating the same thing over and over, even though the economic data is that the bottom percentiles have done relatively better than upper percentiles in recent years.

[Armchair]

You have not provided any evidence to back your assertions. I have continuously provided facts, you have provided nothing.

Provide this data over the last 5 years to prove your point. Links required, official government sources.

Or just assert blindly again.

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

I see you’re just going to keep repeating the same thing over and over, even though the economic data is that the bottom percentiles have done relatively better than upper percentiles in recent years.

Citation needed.

"Relatively better" means that the bottom percentiles have been less screwed than the upper percentiles? How can you even put that argument forth with a straight face? The upper percentiles have no issues absorbing the higher costs of gas and groceries. The bottom don't.

[David Nieporent]

How can you even put that argument forth with a straight face?

Relatively better as in their wages have grown relatively faster.

[Bwaaah]

Are you ignoring repeated requests to cite the basis of your statistical claim, or do you not have one worthy of citing?

[Mr. Bumble]

David is doing better so everyone else must be too.

[Sarcastr0]

https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/the-purchasing-power-of-american-households

Look at Figure 1.

[Mr. Bumble]

December 14, 2023

[Sarcastr0]

"the economic data is that the bottom percentiles have done relatively better than upper percentiles in recent years."

[Bwaaah]

Bwaaah: "David Nieporent: Please cite the basis for your statistical claim."

Elmer J. Fudd: "Here's one of my URLs."

[Sarcastr0]

Are you saying you don't care about facts if they come from the wrong commenter?

[Bwaaah]

I'm just trying to determine if David was speaking from his ass. It would appear, from his response below, that he was.

As he replied, when asked repeatedly to cite the basis of his assertion:

Whatever. I guess I just have this weird notion that if we want to talk about how the Biden administration’s policies affect people, we should consider 2020 -> 2024, rather than 2019 -> 2022 or, even sillier, 1984 -> 2022.

That's neither a citation nor data. It's [blah] [blah] [blah]. You may have trouble recognizing it as such.

[Armchair]

I like how you bitch about cherry picked data, then pick data from a blog that is supporting "President Biden’s economic agenda"

You know that's cherry picked right....?

[Sarcastr0]

Look up what cherry picking means, then what ad hominem means, and then come back and try again.

[Armchair]

I do. See below, for real data. All time points, not just "selected" points.

Biden's officials are cherry picking data to make him look good. Very specific-like.

[Bwaaah]

Elmer J Fudd: "I don't cherry pick economic data. That's why I get my economic explanations from Joe Biden's Secretary of the Treasury, and call it 'data.' Learn how to do real research, Mr. Armchair."

[Armchair]

The Cherry picked figures? How about one better.

Here's the income of the 0 to 20% percentile in the US, from 1984 to 2022. At every single year. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CXU900000LB0102M

[Armchair]

And here's the income of the 80th to 100th percentile in the US, from 1984 to 2022. At every single year.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CXU900000LB0106M

Do the match however you want. Then tell me how much better the poor are doing.

[David Nieporent]

Whatever. I guess I just have this weird notion that if we want to talk about how the Biden administration’s policies affect people, we should consider 2020 -> 2024, rather than 2019 -> 2022 or, even sillier, 1984 -> 2022.

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

Weird how you don't present that data either.

Not like anything strange happened in 2020. Great place to start. No cherry picking at all. Nope. None.

[Bwaaah]

"No cherry picking at all. Nope. None."

Nope. None. 2020 is a good baseline to use. (Elmer J. Fudd must be his Chief Data Scientist.)

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

Right. Noticeably absent citation.

[Dr. Ed 2]

They cut to 29 hours a week, but want 168 hour availability. As does every other employer, which creates the impossibility of working two jobs and remaining sane.

[Malika the Maiz]

"Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) will be issuing a mass pardon for more than 175,000 marijuana convictions on Monday. The pardons will be one of the country’s biggest acts of clemency involving the drug that’s now widely used recreationally."

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4725070-moore-to-pardon-175000-marijuana-convictions-in-maryland/

An innovative thing about this it seems is that it will also pardon paraphernalia offenses.

[hobie]

"An innovative thing about this it seems is that it will also pardon paraphernalia offenses."

Indeed. Couldn't come soon enough to be repeated nationwide. Feds should do it too, which would help Tommy Chong with his conviction for selling bongs

[Frank Drackman]

Wow, you've only had almost 12 years of Barry Osama and Parkinsonian Joe in the Oval Orifice, what's taking them so long?

[Malika the Maiz]

Um, they can't change state convictions.

Also, Obama granted more commutations than the previous Presidents before him did before him combined, so it's weird to criticize him on this.

[ThePublius]

Caitlin Clark is being hammered by other players in the WNBA, with little notice and action on the part of officials. No fouls called, or called late, or only upgraded late.

This is the black, lesbian, WNBA hate machine beating up the straight, white phenom, indeed, against their own interests. Clark is driving record attendance and notice to a league that very few cared about previously.

Have you watched any of the videos of the obvious, flagrant, brutal hits? Including when the ball wasn't even in play? And other players cheering when she's hit?

These stupid asses are going to blow a chance to gain notoriety, fans, box office, and the perks associated with those (like flying charter instead of commercial), and permanently relegate themselves into a little corner of obscurity. Let them.

Clark should get out before she's seriously injured.

https://masha184.substack.com/p/just-walk-away-caitlin-while-you?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR0D18YrlippO17p47RNUYZap_I_Fm3eWex7eHpmUXRGYlaD4cabXz8ouyI_aem_ZmFrZWR1bW15MTZieXRlcw

[hobie]

"This is the black, lesbian, WNBA hate machine"

Hate. Oh the irony!

[Frank Drackman]

Almost as Ironic as the only President ever recorded using the N-word is our only N-Word (1/2 anyway) POTUS. And don't give me that shit about Nixon using the N-word, 3,000 hours of Private Oval Orifice Tapes, and not a single Utterance. Unlike Barry Osama Hussein who uses it twice in one sentence in his Auto-Erotic Oral Biography, "Wet Dreams of my Father"

Frank

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Let's let Republicans Reagan and Nixon speak for themselves on racism.

(A white, male, right-wing blog that habitually publishes racial slurs and features an everyday day stream of bigoted content is, of course, the perfect forum for conservatives' opinions on bigotry.)

[Sarcastr0]

I'm not inclined to believe any factual allegation by a woman who writes 'the black, lesbian, WNBA hate machine beating.'

Any stats to offer? Or just some racial fearmongering by the usual suspects?

[Frank Drackman]

Its just your run-of-the-mill Black on White Crime, quite a few Statistics on the Subject, just ones you won't like. Like how there are more "Black People who Kill White People" than "White People who Kill Black People" with So many million more White Peoples than Blacks, shouldn't there be more WPWKBP than BPWKWP??

Frank

[Dr. Ed 2]

Frank, there soon will be....

[Don Nico]

S_0,
Before disregarding a comment do a tiny bit of research. I found this in less that 1 minute on NBC news:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/sports/caitlin-clark-wnba-indiana-fever-fouls-rcna155212

[Sarcastr0]

No, Don. I will disregard a comment based on it being clearly racial resentment clickbait. Even if your linked story supported the narrative, I would have no regrets spending no time checking up on such nonsense.

But of course the actual facts are nowhere near that story. From your link:
With nearly one-third of the WNBA season done, Clark has been fouled 46 times, the third-most in the league. None was more impactful than Saturday's when Carter leveled the Fever guard with a shoulder block in the third quarter.

This is not sufficient to support the racial targeting narrative in the OP.

Clark has chirped back at referees at times, especially after noncalls, and has already picked up three technical fouls through 11 games. A seventh tech would be an automatic one-game suspension.

Clark isn't only being fouled, though. She's doing it a ton herself.

The WNBA Rookie of the Month for May has been whistled for 32 personal fouls, fourth in the league. Those 78 total whistles, for and against, are the most of any player.

Her quotes seem quite gracious, though. She's not publicly playing into these racial games, at least.

[Don Nico]

"She’s not publicly playing into these racial games, at least."
That is smart of her.

[Bwaaah]

Since NBC News "expired" its video, take a look here: https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/40256386

[NOVA Lawyer]

You guys clearly know nothing about basketball or women’s basketball.

Here’s a clip of fellow rookie Angel Reese. It’s worth watching to see all the times she was beat up before the flagrant foul for which Alyssa Thomas was rightly ejected.

Hard fouls happen. The only people who think this is a Caitlin Clark thing are people who never watched women’s basketball before and think other players should defer to her because…..well, we can guess why.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggd0F93uDW4

[Malika the Maiz]

"The only people who think this is a Caitlin Clark thing are people who never watched women’s basketball "

Or any basketball.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Just the usual fear mongering.

Caitlin Clark had been fouled the third most of any WNBA player as of June 3.

Of course, Caitlin Clark had fouled other players the fourth most of any WNBA player as of that same date. (From what I can see, those numbers have no changed.)

Look, if you think Caitlin having a hard time is weird, you weren't alive in the 1980s when Michael Jordan entered the NBA. Or pretty much any other high profile rookie, at least during the late 1980s and 1990s. It's welcome to the league. And, again, it's not clear that Caitlin is being especially attacked as compared to others rather than she also does a disproportionate amount of fouling.

What's weird and probably racist is that this is maybe the first WNBA post on this site and it's about a good, but struggling, rookie who happens to be white. Did anyone here talk about far better players with far better debuts? I wonder why......

[ThePublius]

Have you watched the videos? These are not normal basketball fouls they are attacks. Indeed, one of the most brutal was when the ball wasn't even in play. It was an assault!

[NOVA Lawyer]

You clearly weren't alive in the 1990s. Clark is not the only player to receive a hard foul. She's not the only one to be fouled while the ball was out of play. It was an ugly moment, but it's not evidence of what you think it's evidence of.

Brash young rookies getting undue hype typically find it tough going from people who have accomplished more but gotten less attention for it. In fact, even those who deserve the hype get a tough welcome. See Jordan, Michael.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Also, go look at the hard fouls on fellow rookie Angel Reese. This is you looking for a racial angle. Don't pretend you ever cared about women's basketball before.

[Malika the Maiz]

The cherry-picked videos?

You've watched all the videos on all the WNBA players this year?

This is a really bad take.

[NOVA Lawyer]

"This is a really bad take."

From ThePublius? When has that ever happened?

[NOVA Lawyer]

By the way, she leads the entire league in turnovers at an eye-popping 5.5 per game. The next closest, Alyssa Thomas, only has 4.2, but also has 8.2 assists per game compared to Clark's 6.2. In other words, Clark gets way more hype than she deserves. If you really want to see someone with amazing range, scoring ability, and basketball skills, go look for clips of Arike Ogunbowale.

[Don Nico]

"Clark gets way more hype than she deserves"
I suspect that is true due to sports writers.
What is amazing is how poorly she is paid compared with NBA rookies (way down on the draft list).
Having said that, I follow theNBA not tha WNBA.

[NOVA Lawyer]

What is amazing is how poorly she is paid compared with NBA rookies (way down on the draft list).

Look, I'm all for gender pay equity in sports. But WNBA versus NBA is a terrible comparison. There is absolutely no reason Caitlin Clark should make the same as an NBA rookie. The WNBA Finals in 2021 averaged 548,000 viewers. The same year, the NBA averaged 12.4 million. A roughly 24 times greater rate. They also play more games that are attended by far more people. They sell more merchandise.

The NBA generated over $10 billion dollars this year while the WNBA generated around $200 million last season...and had a net loss of about $50 million.

So, yes, NBA players average a $10 million salary while WNBA players average a $113,000 (or so) salary. Now, if you want to talk about professional tennis, where more people watch women's tennis, or women's soccer where, in the U.S., more people tend to watch women's pro soccer, that's a reasonable discussion. But no one should be surprised that a bottom rung NBA rookie makes far more than Caitlin Clark. That is a perhaps the most unsurprising fact I have heard this month.

Maybe slightly more surprising, in a good way, is, as I suspected, things are a little different in gymnastics. Women make more than men. It should be the same in figure skating, though I don't care to look any further.

(We can argue whether non-profit athletes, like for the Olympics, should be paid the same, but for-profit professional sports leagues? Equity for equity's sake is dumb. Different leagues, different audiences, different financial dynamics, the leagues should pay according to value.)

[Bob from Ohio]

All the more reason why WNBA players should be happy to have her, not jealous and stupid.

They are welcome to go back to flying coach and playing before empty seats.

[Don Nico]

NoVA,
I don't disagree with your argument, but I was nonetheless surprised by how low that pay is.
I don't watch the WNBA; so that confirms your argument. But Clark made such a splash (my guess is because she is white), I would be interested if there is any systematic change in attendance for WNBA games this season.

[NOVA Lawyer]

It does appear that attendance has more than doubled this year. Though I wouldn't attribute that all to Caitlin, several other high-profile players from the much watched college women's NCAA tournament also came over including Angel Reese and Aliyah Boston (who, incidentally, on the same team, shoots better from 2 and 3, rebounds more, and has a better assist-to-turnover ratio).

But Clark does have a lot to do with that and, frankly, does get compensated quite nicely for her popularity, if not directly from the WNBA. Her main earnings come from endorsement money. (She's reportedly already worth $3.1 million and has a new $28 million Nike deal.)

[Bob from Ohio]

“Though I wouldn’t attribute that all to Caitlin, ”

Really? That’s certainly a minority view, to be charitable. Her team has quadrupled its attendance. Think Reese did that?

“The Mystics set major attendance marks in their game against the Fever
Last Friday, 20,333 people attended the game, which was the most attended regular season game since 1999.” SB Nation

Does Reese play for either team?

[NOVA Lawyer]

Does Reese play for either team?

No, but Aliyah Boston does.

The attendance of every team went up. The average attendance at Phoenix Mercury games went from 7,800 to 9,100. And they haven’t played the Indiana Fever.

You might forget that the NCAA women’s tournaments the last two years were more heavily watched than ever. The 2022 Championship Game had 4.8M viewers and the 2023 NCAA Championship Game had 9.9M viewers, and Iowa wasn’t in that game. Yes, the next year nearly doubled again to 18.8M viewers, but it was also a repeat by the popular South Carolina Gamecocks coached by Hall of Famer Dawn Staley and including Aliyah Boston. The 2024 Final Four game involving Iowa (the “late semifinal”) was up 156% in viewers over 2023. The 2024 Final Four game not involving Iowa (Clark) was up 108% in viewers from 2024.

You are defending the point that Caitlin Clark and only Caitlin Clark is responsible for increased attendance at games in which Caitlin Clark did not play. You claim that’s the majority view, but, if it is, the majority are idiots.

She has been a major factor, but only an idiot thinks she is the only factor. But you need it to be true, so you believe it.

This conversation has been revealing of the bias of people like ThePublius and Bob in a conversation that has nothing to do with politics, except they are trying to make it about race and politics. But they blather on confidently with moronic talking points, unwilling to admit of any nuance, so defending “their side” to the most extreme degree possible.

Here’s a WNBA release:

From preseason through the end of May, the 2024 rookie class contributed meaningfully on the court and continued to drive fan engagement. Throughout Tip-off Week, four of the five moments that drove the most engagement on social channels featured highlights of Indiana Fever’s Caitlin Clark, Chicago Sky’s Angel Reese, Los Angeles Sparks’s Cameron Brink or Las Vegas Aces’ Kate Martin. WNBA merchandise sales are seeing a 236% increase year-over-year, with Clark, Reese and Brink ranking in the top five for jersey sales during the first week of the season.

No, Bob. Caitlin Clark is not singularly responsible for the continued growth of the WNBA even in cities in which she has yet to play.

[NOVA Lawyer]

And mea culpa, I rechecked the attendance at WNBA games. Attendance at Phoenix Mercury games has not gone up. I took the wrong stat from 2023.

The Dallas Wings, who also have not played the Fever, went form 4,600 average attendance in 2023 to 6,000 in 2024. Again, it wasn’t to see Caitlin Clark. (I can't find game by game numbers or I would show that there are lots of games not involving Caitlin Clark and Aliyah Boston in which crowds are bigger.)

I’ll also reiterate, the point you are defending, Bob, is that Caitlin Clark and only Caitlin Clark is responsible for the increased viewership and attendance at games in which she does not play. It’s a bizarre hill to die on.

[Bob from Ohio]

" It’s a bizarre hill to die on."

No, its the most likely conclusion. You seem to have an irrational dislike of admitting the obvious.

"But you need it to be true, so you believe it."

Every accusation is a confession. Supporting players like Reese and Boston are just that, supporting players. Clark is the draw.

"Attendance at Phoenix Mercury games has not gone up." "4,600 average attendance in 2023 to 6,000 in 2024"

No increase and a modest increase. Not quadruple like the Fever? Not the "most attended regular season game since 1999"? Even your stats support my view.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Bob,

You don’t realize that what you are arguing isn't that Caitlin Clark (like Wembanyama) is a huge draw. I don’t dispute that. Never did.

What you took issue with is that I said she wasn’t the only factor in the increased attention to women’s basketball. You ignore that games in the NCAA tournament in which she didn’t play were far more highly watched, year over year, too. With a similar bump to the ones she played in.

She isn’t the only reason viewership has gone up. All of the hype surrounding her has contributed substantially to increased interest, but the numbers were going up without her.

I don’t have individual game numbers, but we can make some surmises from the data that is readily available:

New York Liberty Avg Attendance
2022: 5,327
2023: 7,777
2024: 12,586

They don’t have Caitlin, but they have played Caitlin. You might think all their increased fans came to see Caitlin bringing up their average, but increased attendance was the year-over-year trend already AND, although their highest attendance this year was against the Fever (17,735), their lowest attended game (9,182) still had more fans than their average game last year.

The defending champ Aces show a similar trend:
2022: 5,607
2023: 9,551
2024: 10,378 (their arena holds 12,000, with attendance ranging from 10,286 to 10,424)

The Aces were filling most of their seats last year, almost doubling from 2022, and have increased it more this year with no noticeable bump from the one Fever home game they played (and won by 19 points. They have their own star player Finals MVP and two-time regular season MVP A'ja Wilson).

It’s just dumb to argue Caitlin is solely responsible for the increased attendance which follows a trend (but with a noticeable bump coinciding with her rivalry with Angel Reese as well as the dominance of Aliyah Boston’s South Carolina Gamecocks under legend Dawn Staley). There are multiple factors, with the hype of Caitlin Clark being the most obvious, but it isn’t the only one.

I’ll repeat. It is stupid to say that Caitlin Clark is the only factor driving increased attendance. My stats support my view and obliterate yours.

[Bob from Ohio]

"she leads the entire league in turnovers"

Oh noes.

Luka Doncic led the NBA in turnovers, rookie of the war Victor W. was second, LaBron was third.

All suck!

[NOVA Lawyer]

Luka Doncic led the NBA in turnovers, rookie of the war Victor W. was second, LaBron was third.

Some made up stats.

Luka was first. Victor Wembanyama was third, LeBron was sixth.

Clark's assists per turnover: 1.13
Luka: 2.43
Victor (a center): 1.05
LeBron: 2.40

But that's NBA to WNBA comparisons.

Among starting guards in the WNBA, only D. Cummings (who averages only 1.1 TOs, i.e., handles the ball much less or much more carefully), and K. Copper have a worse assist-to-turnover ratio. Caitlin Clark is 22nd out of 24. And among point guards, she was 12th of 12.

All of which to say, she isn't a bad player. But she is far from one of the best in the league. Of course, she's a rookie, so it would be crazy if she was one of the best. She has potential, but she is overhyped (another not shocker, talented rookies are often overhyped, just rarely to the extent of Caitlin). She may get to all-star level one day. She may not. There are a lot of faster, stronger, better-shooting guards in the league. Again, go look at Arike Ogunbowale clips and consider whether Clark has the speed and ability to create that Arike does.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Some made up stats."

I got it from a site called "Team Rankings". I'm not going to break down every game to confirm it.

NBA Basketball Player Stats - Turnovers
Rank Player Team Pos Value
1 Luka Doncic Dallas Mavericks SF 4.01
2 Victor Wembanyama San Antonio Spurs PF 3.66
3 LeBron James Los Angeles Lakers SF 3.49

That is just turnovers, not "assist-to-turnover ratio".

So maybe don't accuse me of lying.

LeBron is the NBA all time leader in turnovers. Must mean he sucks!

[NOVA Lawyer]

On average turnovers, they were 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, respectively. The stats you saw may have been limited to over 70 games, as Trey Young led and only played 50 games.

But the point remains, her assist-to-turnover is low, is the 22nd of 24th starting WNBA guards and way lower than the NBA players to whom you are attempting to compare her. It is not a good stat.

(LeBron has played more minutes than anyone else.)

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

LeBron James had much better statistics than Caitlin Clark, across the board.

It is too early to label Caitlin Clark the Pat Boone of basketball, but it also is too early to conclude she is a top-tier professional talent.

[bernard11]

Caitlin Clark had been fouled the third most of any WNBA player as of June

Is it possible to know the ratio of fouls to minutes played?

I mean, I know it's just a bunch of lawyers here, so I won't ask too much in the way of numbers, but that seems worth mentioning.

Is she a particularly aggressive player who would foul/be fouled a lot regardless?

College stats would be interesting also.

[NOVA Lawyer]

She is one of the players who gets the most technical fouls too.

But, currently, she is ninth in committing fouls. And she plays a lot of minutes, so her per minute numbers are lower. They don't make it easy to find fouls against, so no updated numbers on that.

But, yes, she plays a lot of minutes, is fairly aggressive on both ends (has a lot of steals and blocks for her position too), and, like Angel Reese, is a high-profile rookie. They probably do get fouled more.

Again, anyone familiar with 80's/90's NBA is familiar with the "welcome to the league" mentality, especially in regard to high-profile rookies.

And for all those who like videos of rookies being treated roughly, I'll post this one of Angel Reese again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggd0F93uDW4

[Bob from Ohio]

" I wonder why……"

The race card, don't leave home without it.

You never posted on it either. I wonder why……

"far better players with far better debuts"

She's a unicorn. Its not racial either, white players have been WNBA stars, Sue Bird for instance. She just caught the imagination of the broad public.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It is difficult to conclude there is no racial component to Caitlin Clark's popularity (although it would be unfair to call her a Pat Boone this early).

[NOVA Lawyer]

You never posted on it either.

I didn’t post on it here, either. I responded to some idiocy. I don’t believe I’ve ever posted on an NBA game either.

But, guess what, I have attended multiple women’s college basketball games, including an epic triple overtime involving Dawn Staley and Andrea Stinson back in the 1990s, as well as multiple WNBA games, but haven’t seen Caitlin Clark once. So, no, Caitlin Clark is not solely responsible for the increase, but she has gotten unique coverage and did set records, so, yes, has been an important contributor to that in that she “caught the imagination of the broad public”. That part is true. But, what Arthur said.

Making it all about her is ridiculous.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Any stats to offer?"

"Currently, amongst the 12 teams, there are 42 out and proud LGBTQ+ players in the WNBA for the 2024 season. In fact, all but one team features openly queer players – an impressive feat in the sporting world!" Pink News

That's 30%. Could be higher if they are not "out".

Blacks are about 2/3.

[Malika the Maiz]

Which claim is this supporting?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Bob from Ohio is a conservative bigot who doesn't like uppity Blacks, uppity gays, uppity Muslims, anything transgender, etc.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Race riots happen.

[hobie]

Like Tulsa, yeah?

[Malika the Maiz]

He wished.

[Malika the Maiz]

Good lord, you're crazy. I watch WNBA somewhat regularly. I watched yesterday's game. If anything Clark, like most big stars in basketball, get's *favorable* treatment from the refs. Yesterday's "big deal" was Reese's Flagrant One foul. Reese was *clearly* going for the ball (watch her eyes and arm).

This is the tell of a non-fan being worked up by politics and/or political coverage.

[NOVA Lawyer]

+1000

[Don Nico]

" like most big stars in basketball, get’s *favorable* treatment"
That is not the case for Steph Curry. He gets quite banged up without fouls being called. And as for Draymond Green, his stardom has a negative "benefit" for him. (Not that he does not deserve it.)

[jb]

It's pretty remarkable how many people who have never watched a WNBA game before this season (or, in most cases, still likely have not) suddenly have super strong opinions about the league. Hopefully the right wing rage machine will actually result in a few more fans.

But you know who is not super upset about the fouls she is receiving in the WNBA? Caitlin Clark! Here's what she said in response to a foul that was called a Flagrant 1 by the refs a couple of days ago:

"It's just part of basketball. It is what it is. Trying to make a play on the ball, get the block. I mean, it happens."

Asked specifically if she was mad about the Clark foul that is about half of that substack nonsense:

"No. I mean, basketball is competitive, I get it. Sometimes your emotions get the best of you. Happened to me multiple times throughout the course of my career... She's having a tremendous season. She's played great basketball. In my eyes, probably in first place for Sixth Player of the Year...That's just not where my focus is."

She's a grown woman. She doesn't need random Internet hot take specialists looking out for her.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

How do you know Caitlin Clark is straight, you bigoted Republican loser?

That "phenom" is 17th in the league in scoring average, 36th in shooting percentage, 25th in rebounding, fourth in assists, 28th in steals, and first in turnovers.

Clark is sixth in three-point shooting percentage -- but that's Alysha Clark, of Las Vegas. Caitlin Clark, of Indiana, is 27th.

Other than that, though, great comment!

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I doubt I ran into ThePublius -- or any of the others championing Caitlin Clark for political purposes -- much in the press boxes when I was working as a professional sports writer (covering mostly basketball and football).

If I am wrong about anyone's credentials in this context, please correct the record.

[Dr. Ed 2]

This is going to get very nasty: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/16/us/politics/trump-2025-democratic-resistance.html?sgrp=c-cb&unlocked_article_code=1.0E0.-t3y.INdGRNr06wEW

[Sarcastr0]

"An emerging coalition that views Donald J. Trump’s agenda as a threat to democracy is laying the groundwork to push back if he wins in November, taking extraordinary pre-emptive actions."
By Charlie Savage, Reid J. Epstein, Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan

I'll believe it when I see it. This seems a story chasing some sources to me. To be fair, it's a story tailored to get a ton of clicks.

The resistance was always silly; the loudest of them have joined the post-left and the rest didn't do anything.

But for Ed it's always blood in the streets. Maybe the truckers will even have to get involved!

[Dr. Ed 2]

Wholesale impeachment of Federal Judges...

[Sarcastr0]

Shameful lack of radicalism. Accept nothing less than machine guns, I say!

[Dr. Ed 2]

Impeachment and elimination of civil service will suffice.

[Malika the Maiz]

More nepotism and spoils will surely drain the swamp!

[Krayt]

Some of the described behaviors seem as during his presidency, lawsuits to block implementation of immigration things.

Stockpiling the mifepristone in case of federal blocking of it.

Fears he will use the IRS to investigate Democrats. This last one falls under the heading of “Oh, no! He will do to us what we’ve been doing to him!” Neither side should be doing this. Now lie that it isn’t this way, as the reams of paper investigating him because he is an opponent are filling the Indiana Jones warehouse. Those of you who are not on such a tight leash by your echo chamber, and speak this fear of reprisal aloud would be right to fear it, even if it is wrong to do so, but at least you recognize it as reprisal, tit for tat which started in politics long before the great terra cotta army was fired in kilns.

Mostly though, if he wins, fight him to a standstill through normal political means.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And if he goes Andrew Jackson?

[Sarcastr0]

I'll show up for big block of cheese day.

[Dr. Ed 2]

That was Ronald Reagan.
And it was good cheese -- some of the best I've ever eaten.

[David Nieporent]

No, it was Andrew Jackson, as anyone who watched The West Wing knows.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, you're the kind of sucker this is meant to bait into clicking.

There is no surer sign of a narratives mindset than taking a stance as the apex of free thinkers urging others to get out of their echo chambers and join you.

[not guilty]

Some cogent commentary from Garry Trudeau:
https://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/2024/06/16

[Dan Schiavetta]

I’m old enough to remember The Amazing Criswell.

[Moderation4ever]

Garry still got it.

[Dan Schiavetta]

My sister, who was career Army, said his depiction of military life was very true.

[DaveM]

Sorry, but Trudeau has been phoning it in for 30 years. Red states will need reeducation camps to recover from a Trump loss! Dur. What an original concept :eyeroll:

[Moderation4ever]

Sorry but Trudeau is more on point than you may think. Las Vegas June 9th Trump says MAGA supporter would choose suicide over Biden. Sounds like Trumps supporter going to need something either reeducation or lots of Bud light.

[hobie]

In response to the Cargill decision, our favorite soyboy Kyle Rittenhouse tweeted:

"Time to go celebrate and buy a bump stock!"
https://x.com/ThisIsKyleR/status/1801629279622484228

Seems the young hero has been on a nonstop grift these past few years. Even has yet another new book out

[Mr. Bumble]

Hardly a soyboy.

[hobie]

Imagine how much more 2nd Amendment exercising Kyle could have done with a bump stock. I consider it a lost opportunity

[Dr. Ed 2]

He has what -- 20 or 30 rounds.
He's far better off aiming for each round.

[ThePublius]

So, what if I devise an electric stimulation system that causes my trigger finger to twitch at, say, 12 or 13 twitches per second, and I can control it with another finger, or even with a smartphone app using facial recognition, and the result is that I can fire my AR15 at 800 rounds per minute, which is the fire rate of the M16A4. Does that constitute a machine gun?

Or, what if I built an AR15-like rifle that has four triggers, and I can rest all four of my fingers on them, and learn to manipulate them as one would play a fast tremelo on classical or flamenco guitar, resulting in a rate of fire of around 120 to 140 rounds per minute. Is that a machine gun?

[Sarcastr0]

1) It does not follow that line drawing is hard because you can make some edge-case hypotheticals with little relations to the real world.

2) It does not follow that line drawing is hard so there should be no line at all. Hard line drawing is where courts live a lot of the time.

[ThePublius]

I really don't understand that.

The point I was trying to make is that the law is pretty clear, and it's easy to design around it. Ergo, the bump stock. Why is a machine gun not allowed, but a Gatling gun is? Why can't I put a full auto sear in my AR15, but I can put a crank into the trigger guard? And so on.

Another hypothetical: what if I devise a mechanism that delays the effect of a trigger pull, such that I pull the trigger three times, but the rounds don't come out until the last pull? Is that a machine gun?

[Sarcastr0]

You argument did not seem to be about consistency, but rather about distinction.

But it comes down similarly. Laws and polices are human endeavors. They meet many goals - pleasing constituencies, rationality, predictability, sustainability. Consistency is one among many.
Thus, a law that has some inconsistent applications is not much more than an opportunity for improvement.

I'm not up on bump stock laws or this case. I get the impression this case was about a statutory interpretation reversal by an agency. I used to know the standard of review there, but it's been a while. But as to the reasonableness of the new interpretation vs. the old I leave that to the courts, who seem to have decided.

[Voize]

The machine gun definition is inherited from the National Firearms Act of 1934 that targeted the short barreled shotguns and hand-held Thompson submachine guns that had become weapons of choice of the gangsters of that era. Gatling guns weren't included because Al Capone wasn't carting one around.

[Don Nico]

Build it, report your invention to the ATF and find out.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Technically, I believe you can write to the ATFE first and ask for a letter ruling, like you can with the IRS.

Now they may start asking questions, but I believe you have the right to ask for an interpretation of the regs.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The M16A4 does not fire 800 rounds a minute, instead it fires 20 or 30 rounds in whatever number of seconds that would correspond to 800 in sixty seconds.

I'd like to see someone actually fire 800 rounds on full automatic.
My guess is that -- between the heat buildup and everything else -- you wouldn't get all 800 fired inside of the minute.

Could you fire 800 in lots of 20 at a time -- probably although that's 40 clips and you'd be dealing with heat issues. But all 800 at once -- the gun's not designed to deal with that kind of heat.

[Longtobefree]

To hell with rate of fire, what about actually hitting the target?
Back in pre-history, the British Army could get off 35 - 39 hits in a minute on a four foot target at 300 yards. (no close quarter combat for these lads)
And that is starting with only half a magazine, and reloading with 5 round stripper clips.

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

[Longtobefree]

Oh, yeah; minor detail. Using a bolt action rifle.

[Bob from Ohio]

"soyboy"

Two KIA!

[VinniUSMC (Banana Republic Day 5/30/24)]

hobie’s projecting. It’s like mtrueman or misek or martin calling someone else a Nazi.

[Nige]

How can he be a soyboy when he makes Bob hard?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Does Rittenhouse have a college degree? Does he have a job, or was getting fired as a lifeguard the apex of his professional career? Did he graduate from high school yet? Is he married? Has he ever been touched a girl who wasn't giving him a haircut? Has he learned a useful trade? Has anyone in his family ever earned a college degree?

He's a poster child for red state dysfunction. It is surprising he hasn't died of an overdose, filed a bankruptcy petition, or been hospitalized after a bar fight yet.

[Noscitur a sociis]

He’s a poster child for red state dysfunction.

Isn’t he from outside of Chicago?

[apedad]

Texas Supreme Court Declines to Classify Embryos as Children

The Texas Supreme Court on Friday declined to take up an in vitro fertilization case that argues embryos should be treated as children under the state’s near total abortion ban.

The denial means non-implanted embryos in Texas can continue to be destroyed without legal consequences.

The case is a divorce between a man and woman that was pending when Texas banned abortions in 2022 following the US Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. The storage of three embryos in a Dallas clinic are subject to a contract that says that in the event of a divorce they go to the man, Gaby Antoun.

The woman, Caroline Antoun, argued an unborn child in Texas is now a person. An appeals court disagreed. She urged the Supreme Court to reclassify embryos from property to unborn children, and to address what rights those unborn children and their parents have.

Texas’ justices didn’t give a reason for not reviewing a lower court’s ruling that frozen embryos aren’t children. The court typically doesn’t say why it doesn’t accept a case that it declines.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/texas-supreme-court-declines-to-classify-embryos-as-children

Hmmm...seems a little odd but OK.

[Moderation4ever]

I left wondering why people going through IVF would be thinking about what to do during a divorce? It seems like divorce was a little too high in their thoughts when they were going into something as involved as IVF. But a contract is a contract and should be honored.

[Magister]

It might be something that IVF clinics include in their contracts as boilerplate to disentangle themselves from potential divorce disputes.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Or something that a competent attorney would think of adding.

"But we're not going to get divorced" -- fine, trust me, it's good to have this in there...

[not guilty]

A significant percentage of fertilized ova naturally fail to implant and are washed away with the menstrual flow.

Do the blastocystophiles give their feminine hygiene products Christian burials on the chance that one may contain a microscopic human being?

[DaveM]

Why yes, a significant percentage of humans (100%) naturally fail to live forever. Length of days is not what makes one human or not.

[NOVA Lawyer]

So you and your wife/significant other do give a Christian burial to her feminine hygiene products?

[DaveM]

Do you give a burial to your wife's feminine hygiene products? Whatever you're drinking, pal, time to stop.

[NOVA Lawyer]

That was the question not guilty asked and you, apparently, refuse to answer.

How about this: Do you think IVF involves murder?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Sounds like you're drunk on superstitious nonsense, DaveM.

Competent adults neither advance nor accept supernatural arguments in reasoned debate among adults, especially with respect to legitimate education, science (including medicine), and public affairs.

[Malika the Maiz]

"Length of days is not what makes one human or not."

Having ever had some measure of brain activity might though, no?

[NOVA Lawyer]

This

[DaveM]

The problem is with your formulation. Your question assumes there’s some magic part of a human being that makes them persons. Oops, you just went down the path labeled “unpersons”. Many have gone before you, but it’s not company you want to keep.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Many have gone before you, but it’s not company you want to keep.

Are you unfamiliar with the term “quickening”? Aristotle is, generally, company one wants to keep.

The term quickening comes from the root word quick, an archaic synonym for “living.” (Think “the quick and the dead.”) The concept goes back at least to Aristotle, who believed that male fetuses take on human characteristics after 40 days in the womb, and female fetuses after about 80 days. For Aristotle, the quickening represented the moment when those fetuses became “animated.” At that point, the fetus becomes its own being—it achieves “ensoulment,” to invoke another archaic term.

The debate over when an unformed human becomes a person really, however, only began when people first understood the scientific basics of how that happened in the late 1800s. It was only then that people even knew the concept of fertilization of an egg so that there were the full set of chromosomes. And none of the ideas you are fear-mongering about had anything to do with that debate and are not analogous to that debate.

But, if you really think a person exists from conception, I am sure you are against IVF as necessarily involving murder.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Brain activity can be detected around weeks 6 or 7.

[David Nieporent]

Having ever had some measure of brain activity might though, no?

Why are you dehumanizing MAGA?

[Dr. Ed 2]

This raises an interesting question -- should this result in a living child, what rights do the biological parents (and child) have?

I'm just waiting for some anonymous sperm donor to get identified and then hit with child support obligations...

[Don Nico]

Interesting survey result:
3 in 10 pro-Palestine student activists had a job offer rescinded in the last six months.
https://www.intelligent.com/3-in-10-pro-palestine-student-activists-had-a-job-offer-rescinded-in-the-last-six-months/

[Sarcastr0]

Such is the free market, and I'm fine with people living with the private consequences of their speech. But I don't think the survey is very strong.

"In June, we surveyed 672 recent or current college or graduate-level students who have participated in this type of activism and engaged in a job search within the past six months to find out.

Key findings:

29% of activists had a job offer rescinded in the last six months
55% believe there is bias against pro-Palestine activists in the hiring process
7 in 10 pro-Palestine activists say interviewers have asked about their protest history"

Without a baseline of job offer churn this is not very useful, except for the last point re: asking about protest history.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Gaslighto raises a good point -- what IS the job churn this spring?

The last time I heard about large numbers of job offers being rescinded was in 2008 when the economy imploded. So if this is happening in general, Brandon's economy is far worse than anyone realizes. Way worse because these essentially are layoffs.

OTOH, companies usually don't offer jobs to people they don't intend to hire, and don't rescind them without a reason. And Joe Sixpack has a very different perspective of Team Hamas now than he did last November...

[Moderation4ever]

Is this surprising? I was taught that when you go looking for a job you want to look your best. Most employers don't want to take on baggage. We can argue if it is right or wrong for an employer to do this, but reality is they do.

[Commenter_XY]

Only 30%; a pity it is not 95%.

[Malika the Maiz]

Cancel culture is cool when it's on my side!

[Bob from Ohio]

"Cancel culture is cool"

It is!

CC is always going to hit libs harder. Its a good thing.

[Nige]

Fascists are definitely better at it.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I think you are severely mistaken about who the casualties are, have been, and will continue to be in the modern American culture war.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Also interesting: "28% of activists say they always (10%) or often (18%) disclose their participation in pro-Palestine activism to potential employers, while 25% say they sometimes share their involvement...."

That could well be your 33% and it's not bias against Palestinians but bias against CRIMINAL THUGGERY.

If you won't follow the college's rules, will you follow those of the employer?

[Don Nico]

Another item in the news:
Surgeon General Calls for Warning Labels on Social Media Platforms; Dr. Vivek Murthy said he would urge Congress to require a warning that social media use can harm teenagers’ mental health.

[DaveM]

*sigh*

[Nelson]

The nanny state, the cockroach of the political world.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Is there anything grosser than what the Democrats are doing to that journalist who published that tranny "murder all White Christian children" manifesto?

Well besides the fact that the FBI was hellbent on keeping it from the public to "Save our Sacred Democracy" or some dumb lib shit.

I'm surprised they didn't open a forever investigation so they can use that to shield against any transparency or accountability like they do everything else.

[Malika the Maiz]

What, exactly, is your antipathy to providing any citations for your claims?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

https://twitter.com/BradenBoucek/status/1801996791849628121

Expand your bubble, being low-information is a terrible risk these days.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Screw citations, a few facts would help.

WHAT tranny? WHAT manifesto?

WTF???

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Where that totally not mentally ill and perfectly normal tranny murdered all those White Christian children in Nashville. The FBI immediately swooped in to cover up and protect the trannies and deny justice to the White Christians.

[ReaderY]

In an article entitled “War Unbound” in the May/June issue of Foreign Affairs, Professor Oona Hathaway lamented what she described as the United States’ and other Western countries consistent dilution of what she considers appropriate interpretations of treaty obligations for protection of civilians in war. She laments the United States’ interpretation of “proportionality” in a way that makes most important military objectives proportionate; she argues that countries should simply be forbidden to engage the enemy if doing so would result in too many civilian casualities. She laments the United States’ interpretation of “civilian” in a way that makes civilians lose their civilian status if they actively aid a military; she argues they should lose this status only during the time they are actually actively aiding and not at other times.

She points out, and laments, that Israel’s interpretation of these provisions in its Gaza war has consistently been exactly that of the United States and other major Western countries in their own recent wars, and laments that the outcome of both this war and other recent Western wars has been what she considers excessive civilian casualities.

She proposes that the United Stares crack down, repudiate its former waywardness, and adapt what she believes to be the correct interpretation of these provisions, and demonstrate its newfound seriousness by cracking down on Israel, withholding aid from it unless it conforms.

Might I make a modest suggestion? If the United States really wants to adapt Professor Hathaway’s interpretation of the Geneva Protocols and wants to show that it is serious in doing so, perhaps it might consider doing so when the lives of its own soldiers aand civilians are on the lime, rather than those of some other small, expendable, scapegoatable country?

Just a thought.

[Malika the Maiz]

This is a weird attempt to find anti-Semitism given, as you say, she explicitly criticizes countries other than Israel.

[ReaderY]

Suggest addressing what I said.

And since you certainly haven’t criticized anyone else in your commentary on this blog, what does your comment suggest about you? Bit of a Freudian slip there I must say.

[Malika the Maiz]

I'm addressing this: "If the United States really wants to adapt Professor Hathaway’s interpretation of the Geneva Protocols and wants to show that it is serious in doing so, perhaps it might consider doing so when the lives of its own soldiers aand civilians are on the lime, rather than those of some other small, expendable, scapegoatable country?"

Did you not say this, or did a hacker in you name say it?

Note the *double down* on anti-Semitism claims by this guy.

[ReaderY]

Professor Hathaway has at least forthrightly acknowledged that no Western country has ever followed the interpretations she espouses in any war it has ever actualky conducted, rather than, as many commentators on this blog have, presenting these academic ivory-tower interpretations as settled law and presenting Israel as supposedly unique among nations and supposedly committing genoicide by following what Professor Hathaway laments, but acknowledges, are the standard interpretations every other Western country follows when it fights wars.

[grb]

ReaderY : “….presenting these academic ivory-tower interpretations as settled law and presenting Israel as supposedly unique among nations….”

A few weeks back I saw an oped from the Jerusalem Post with a lede saying the U.S. was hypocritical on civillian deaths. Thinking that would be an interesting case to make, it got my click.

The columnist quoted a Guardian article saying the U.S. was responsible for 28,000 civillian deaths since 9-11. That was his proof. Of course Israel had equalled that American number from plus-twenty years in just a handful of months.

You see, ReaderY, nobody denies war causes collatoral damage and the innocent die. Everyone knows and acknowledges that. The issue isn’t Israel has killed civillians. The issue is they’ve done so at a rate only matched in recent history by Assad’s bloody carnage in the Syrian Civil War or Russia’s butchery in Chechnya. I’ve seen people try to match Israel’s war tactics with the U.S. in Fallujah, but the numbers don’t even remotely match-up.

Try dealing with a plain simple fact : Israel has killed innocent men, women and children at a much higher rate than almost all combatants in the recent past. Many people openly face that, going back to WWII and firebombing cities as their go-to standard. I don’t agree with them, but at least they are not pretending this is all some disconnected ivory-tower debate by people who think war is icky. At least they’re being honest.

[ReaderY]

It’s worth pointing out that in counts of US-caused civilian deaths, neither fighters opposing the US nor civilians killed by opposing forces get attributed to the US, whereas in the Hamas’ counts of Israeli-caused civilian deaths that everyone seems to accept without question, they are.

This makes comparison difficult.

An additional issue is that in the US’ wars, it tended to control the cities while its enemies controlled the countryside. It’s by no means clear that in comparable fighting, e.g. fighting where the US attempted to take or make make extractive rescues from comparatively highly built-up cities infiltrated by enemy fighters using tunnel networks etc., US-caused civilian casualties were actually any lower.

[ReaderY]

The people opposing forces deliberately execute, including members of the enemies’ own forces, don’t get counted towards US-caused civilian deaths either. But everyone Hamas has killed since October 7 in its extensive and bloody reign of terror within Gaza has been attributed to Israel. And yes, it’s been counted towards Israeli genocide.

[jb]

The US definitely had to fight in cities to take them over in the first place in many cases.

I haven't really seen good neutral-looking analysis on this question, only people that seem to go in knowing the answer already and then looking for data to support their position. You're right that we shouldn't take the Hamas figures at face value, but we probably shouldn't trust Israel that every military-aged male that they kill is a Hamas fighter either. But it does seem like Israel is killing a lot more civilians than the US does in comparable-ish situations at first glance.

[jb]

Wrong place

[Bob from Ohio]

"plain simple fact"

You are delusional Or just a Jew hater, swallowing Hamas propaganda.

[Commenter_XY]

Sure, if you believe Hamas propaganda = Israel has killed innocent men, women and children at a much higher rate than almost all combatants in the recent past.

[Drewski]

"Of course Israel had equalled that American number from plus-twenty years in just a handful of months."

Only if you use Hamas's propaganda numbers. The US's estimates of civilian casualties are much lower.

[jb]

It looks like Israel itself says it’s responsible for about 16k civilian deaths:

https://www.voanews.com/a/israel-publishes-new-civilian-death-toll-in-gaza/7622032.html

So that’s less than the US total since 2001, but well above any single year and killing only 60% of the civilians in eight months that the US killed in two decades doesn’t seem to be a good argument that the Israelis are being particularly careful.

[Bob from Ohio]

Were the residents of Iraq cities stopped from fleeing from the fighting?

Because Egypt blocked most emigration, except for a few with enough cash.

[jb]

Israel controls a lot more of the border with Gaza than Egypt does if we think that's the problem...

[zztop8970]

As of today? Maybe.
Between 2005 and May of this year? Not even remotely true,

[Nige]

Yes, people passed between Gaza and Israel all the time, no problem, and Gazan fisherman never had any difficulties head out for their hauls.

[zztop8970]

Israel controls its own border with Gaza, just like any other state. and it has a border crossing policy, just like any other state.

People from gaza did pass into Israel, subject to Israeli policies - https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-quietly-lets-in-gaza-workers-in-bid-to-ease-tensions/

But Egypt controls the Gaza-Egypt border, not Israel

[zztop8970]

I suggest you take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, and specifically the 9 months between August 2007 and May 2008. Come back and tell the class what you learned.

[jb]

That count includes a lot more than civilians directly killed by the US military:

The count includes civilian deaths caused by coalition military action and by military or paramilitary responses to the coalition presence (e.g. insurgent and terrorist attacks). It also includes excess civilian deaths caused by criminal action resulting from the breakdown in law and order which followed the coalition invasion.

So not a very useful comparison for this discussion.

[zztop8970]

It's exactly the same as the numbers released by the Hamas Health Ministry - it includes everyone killed in Gaza, and does not differentiate between those killed in Israeli attacks, those killed by errant Hamas rockets, and also include those executed by Hamas for alleged collaboration with Israel or those trampled to death as mobs steal humanitarian aid.

In fact, there's no evidence that the Hamas count excludes "normal" civilian deaths.

[Bob from Ohio]

I read her bio, didn't see any military service or training.

She would make terrorism effectively legal but anti-terror operations almost always illegal.

[ReaderY]

Her view definitely criminalizes, among other things, any attempt at surprise. Since terrorists are only non-civilians while actually in flagranto delecti, unless they’re actively on alert and cradling weapons, terrorists are fully protected civilians. Any attempt to attack them while they’re asleep or something is genocide and a war crime.

Yes, I noticed that.

The Hamas position actually goes further than her. The way Hamas counts things, Hamas fighters are ALWAYS civilians no matter what. Ever notice that Hamas never acknowledges that Israeli forces ever killed a single non-civilian? They all go in the civilian column and all become the subject of war crimes and genocide claims. For that matter, everyone Hamas kills, whether in cross-fire or by deliberate execution, also gets attributed to Israel and gets countrd towards Israeli genocide.

[David Nieporent]

Setting aside the predictable immediate turn of this to Israel-Hamas, the larger point is worth addressing: the anti-war left has, for years, tried to redefine "international law" so as to essentially make all war fighting illegal. The various treaties (Geneva conventions, etc.) create rules that are supposed to minimize unnecessary civilian deaths. But they do not make military tactics illegal just because civilians may/will be killed, and nobody elected Human Rights Watch or its fellow travelers to adjudicate these treaties according to their own wishes. These treaties were agreed to by governments that always intended to preserve their ability to wage war when necessary.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

https://www.dailyfetched.com/attorney-who-prosecuted-praying-grandma-drops-charges-against-carjacker-that-killed-elderly-woman/

This shows you how vile and evil the subhumans of Washington DC are.

Sick sick sick.

If you're black, you can kill a White grandma and face no charges.
If you're a White grandma, you can't pray in public for some black to not murder their unborn without serving 2 years in prison.

Is there anything more vile and loathsome in this hemisphere than the Deep State?

[Malika the Maiz]

1. Harlow was not convicted for praying, in fact her own lawyer says that is not right.

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/paulette-harlow-convicted-blocking-abortion-clinic-not-praying-2024-06-11/

[Malika the Maiz]

2. In fact, Harlow was reportedly involved in the following: "making a fake patient appointment to ensure the group’s entry into the clinic, using chains and locks to barricade the facility and passively resisting their anticipated arrests to prolong the blockade. The clinic invasion was advertised on social media as a “historic” event that was live-streamed on Facebook. The defendants’ forced entry into the clinic at the outset of the invasion resulted in injury to a clinic nurse. During the blockade, one patient had to climb through a receptionist window to access the clinic, while another laid in the hallway outside of the clinic in physical distress, unable to gain access to the clinic."

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/final-defendant-sentenced-federal-conspiracy-against-rights-and-freedom-access-clinic

[Nige]

I guess all this would be bad if they were protesting against a war.

[Malika the Maiz]

3. According to local reports as to the carjacker, "Murder and kidnapping charges against a woman accused of carjacking and then crashing a car with a passenger inside were dropped, in part because the medical examiner has not ruled on the manner of the passenger’s death, prosecutors said."

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/prosecutors-drop-murder-kidnapping-charges-in-dc-carjacking-case/3636354/

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Wouldn't it be prudent to wait for the medical examination before dropping the charges?

Or did you chug down that State Propaganda like you did the other? Uncritically and without skepticism?

[Malika the Maiz]

No, troll, let's talk first about your first two misrepresentations. What do you say?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I say you can't command me to speak like I'm your fucking dog or your wife.

I love your first comment, you say "Even her lawyer says so..." then you don't link to her lawyer, but to some Reuters fact check, which those of us who aren't Statist bootlickers and ball ticklers know is hot garbage.

Think about the smartest person you know in real life and the dumbest person you know in real life. Which one of those two would do what you just did? In your opinion? The smart one? Or the dumb one?

[grb]

The Nazi child throws a snit!

(a diversion, I'm sure, to avoid dealing with his exposed lies)

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Who are you and why do you think you can go toe to toe intellectually with an Internet Champ? Is it the smooth brain? Or the sloped forehead? Maybe the mouthbreathing?

[David Nieporent]

I love your first comment, you say “Even her lawyer says so…” then you don’t link to her lawyer, but to some Reuters fact check, which those of us who aren’t Statist bootlickers and ball ticklers know is hot garbage.

Pro tip: Reuters is a real news outlet, whereas "The Daily Fetched" is not.

[not guilty]

"Wouldn’t it be prudent to wait for the medical examination before dropping the charges?"

I get the impression that this was a preliminary hearing where the magistrate found probable cause as to some charges but not others. The accused is being held without bond on the unarmed carjacking charge while the investigation, I surmise, continues. The more serious charges could be revived later.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Your “impressions” are always partisan and goal seeking.

Save them for your blog or someone else who thinks your opinion is relevant like your mom or something.

[not guilty]

Has the grand jury acted yet, JHBHBE?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Does the grand jury act on charges that were dropped?

[not guilty]

Sometimes a grand jury does act on charges that have been dropped in preliminary proceedings. Especially when further evidence is developed. The initial charging decision is not set in stone.

Even after indictment additional charges can be added in a superseding indictment before jeopardy attaches.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

So you're hanging your hat on a "sometimes a grand jury does act" in order to refute my argument?

[loki13]

True satisfaction-

Having an issue that seems so simple, yet is so simple ... there are no cases on it. Kind of like finding support for, um, "water is wet." It's so obvious, that no cases have actually dealt with it.

And you have looked, and looked, and looked. And then, right when you're about to give up, you find it. THE CASE. Which is not only on point, but completely supports what you already knew.

Moreover, the case is practically identical from a factual standpoint with what you are dealing with.

That is a great feeling.

[NOVA Lawyer]

One of the best feelings.

[KenveeB]

Oh, the satisfaction is very real. I use the "water is wet" case analogy frequently when people ask me "is there a case that says..."

[David Nieporent]

Having an issue that seems so simple, yet is so simple … there are no cases on it. Kind of like finding support for, um, “water is wet.” It’s so obvious, that no cases have actually dealt with it.

Um, everyone knows the proper citation in that situation is See Orin Kerr, A Theory of Law, 16 Green Bag 2d 111 (2012).

[loki13]

I live for the day when I cite that article!

[Both Sides]

A genuine timeless classic!

[apedad]

DOJ Won’t Prosecute Garland for Contempt of Congress

“The department has determined that the responses by Attorney General Garland to the subpoenas issued by the (House Judiciary and Oversight & Accountability) committees did not constitute a crime, and accordingly the department will not bring the congressional contempt citation before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute the Attorney General,” the department said in a letter Friday to House Speaker Mike Johnson.

Johnson, in a statement released by his office on Friday evening, sharply disagreed “with the assertions in the letter from the Department of Justice” and said he’d go to court to enforce congressional subpoena.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/doj-wont-prosecute-garland-for-contempt-of-congress

Can one branch sue another for non-action?

Seems like whether to investigate/prosecute is wholly an executive function.

And yes, Congress can impeach if necessary.

[Commenter_XY]

This is what I thought. The only move Congress has is impeachment, which they have shown they are quite willing to do.

[Longtobefree]

Congress has one other move; remove the DOJ from the next budget.

[jb]

LOL, yes. Johnson should definitely try to go that. I think the public would like it a lot.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

The DOJ has elevated itself above Congress. Which, as we've found out, has been the case for a long time. Since they (and the IC) clearly own many of the Congressmen.

[apedad]

Did you chug down that Anti-State Propaganda like you did the other? Uncritically and without skepticism?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

You think the DOJ gets to decide what's a legitimate Congressional interest?

And if I don't, it's somehow "Anti-State"?

I love the implied acknowledgement in your statement. The DOJ is the State and not Congress.

To that I agree. The permanent Administrative State is our government. Not Congress, not even SCOTUS. Nor the President.

The unelected, unaccountable, bureaucrats are the real actual government. The rest is just kabuki.

[John F. Carr]

There is not the supermajority of votes required to remove Garland. I doubt there is even the simple majority of the House required to order him locked up for contempt under Congress' inherent power. Nothing will come of this while a Democrat is President.

[jb]

Absent a significant change in DOJ policy, nothing will happen under a Republican President either since (as was the case with Bill Barr but noticeably not with Navarro or Bannon) the President supported Garland's claim of executive privilege.

AFAIK, the DOJ has never prosecuted an official for contempt of Congress when the President supported a claim of executive privilege.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Why are you wasting time on Garland, John F. Carr. Don't you recognize that Steve Bannon is facing incarceration in a real prison -- not the "camp" he thought he would draw -- within the next two weeks.

And, although his lawyers are pointing out (in documents submitted to a court, believe it or not) that incarcerating Bannon would (1) deprive him of the opportunity to spread more lies and bigotry concerning the upcoming election and (2) prevent his half-educated, disaffected, worthless fans from enjoying Bannon's falsehoods and ignorance as they approach the election, it seems unlikely the court will credit those arguments and excuse Bannon from going straight to fucking jail.

Guys like you should be focused on Bannon, not Garland. Garland is just a Deep State functionary. Bannon is a patriotic inspiration to clingers everywhere and an indispensable source of insight for uneducated, deplorable right-wing culture war casualties.

[not guilty]

"Can one branch sue another for non-action?"

Yes, Congress can seek a federal court’s civil judgment saying the recipient is legally obligated to comply with the subpoena. The process may move slowly in the courts, though.

[Mr. Bumble]

OK, it's from the Daily Mail but...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13481849/democrat-plot-biden-replacement-clinton-obama-pelosi-schumer.html

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

THE VOLOKH CONSPIRACY
RACIAL SLUR SCOREBOARD

This white, male, conservative blog
with a thin, misappropriated academic
veneer — dedicated to creating and
preserving safe spaces for America’s
vestigial bigots — has operated for
no more than

ZERO (0)

days without publishing at least
one explicit racial slur; it has
published racial slurs on at least

TWENTY-NINE (29)

occasions (so far) during 2024
(that’s at least 29 exchanges
that have included a racial slur,
not just 29 racial slurs; many
Volokh Conspiracy discussions
feature multiple racial slurs.)

This blog is outrunning its
remarkable pace of 2023,
when the Volokh Conspiracy
published racial slurs in at least

FORTY-FOUR (44)

different discussions.

These numbers likely miss
some of the racial slurs this
blog regularly publishes; it
would be unreasonable to expect
anyone to catch all of them.

This assessment does not address
the broader, everyday stream of
antisemitic, gay-bashing, misogynistic,
immigrant-hating, Palestinian-hating,
transphobic, Islamophobic, racist,
and other bigoted content published
at this faux libertarian blog, which
is presented from the disaffected,
receding right-wing fringe of
American legal thought by members
of the Federalist Society
for Law and Public Policy Studies.

Amid this blog's stale, ugly thinking, here is something worthwhile, prompted by a visit to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame -- because it is so striking that those guys have not been inducted. (For elaboration, point your Google-compatible device toward "Professor of Rock Association." The link limit prevents an easier path.)

This one, another vivid snub at the rock hall, is good, too.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Today's Rolling GemStones:

The Stones were magnificent in Cleveland. Fans (allegedly) voted for Heartbreaker, which evokes a period during which Billy Preston was a prominent part of the Stones' sound. Preston's wah-wah and clavinet made Heartbreaker a standout.

The Stones brought back this one for Cleveland -- again, with a Billy Preston connection. Bill Wyman is said to have developed the distinctive, inventive bass guitar from some of Preston's octave-based work on the keyboards.

Still time to get tickets for Denver, Chicago, and the West Coast!

[Commenter_XY]

Arthur, serious question. Is 250/ticket a good price to see the Stones? Seats in orchestral area.

That catch is I have to pay my own travel, but the tix are gratis. Not a huge Stones fan. Is that a good price?

[Frank Drackman]

With Inflation? that's about what a Front Row seat for the Oakland A's goes for. Actually the Stones could probably beat the A's on a good day.

Frank

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It is difficult, although not necessarily impossible to get a good seat at a Stones show for $250 these days. I am not sure where the "orchestral area" would be in a football stadium.

Every seat at a Stones concert is worthwhile. I have been in the front row and toward the back of the house this tour, still don't know where I will be for the first Chicago show (Lucky Dips). I enjoy 'em all. One of my more memorable concert experiences involved the last row of the upper deck at the Carrier Dome, which may have been the largest indoor venue in the United States, for a Springsteen show. No one was farther from the stage than I was that night (this was before I started getting tickets from the band), yet it was a great time. That show was so special he ended with this one . . . in late January!

[Don Nico]

That sounds like a reasonable price. My daughter, husband and son saw the Stones a couple of weeks ago. They thought the show was fabulous.

[John F. Carr]

US government outed by Reuters as anti-vax.

The U.S. military launched a clandestine program amid the COVID crisis to discredit China’s Sinovac inoculation – payback for Beijing’s efforts to blame Washington for the pandemic. One target: the Filipino public. Health experts say the gambit was indefensible and put innocent lives at risk. [...]
“COVID came from China and the VACCINE also came from China, don’t trust China!” one typical tweet from July 2020 read in Tagalog.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah, that's awful and counterproductive.

[Nige]

People better be yelling about this in the run-up to the election, it's atrocious.

[jb]

Not really anti-vax so much as anti-Sinovac, but still pretty bad and hopefully there's some negative consequences for people who decided that was a good idea.

[Nige]

'The military program started under former President Donald Trump and continued months into Joe Biden’s presidency,'

One supposes it might have ended sooner if, say, Trump had co-operated with the transition and McConnell hadn't kept blocking Biden's cabinet picks.

[Bob from Ohio]

"McConnell hadn’t kept blocking Biden’s cabinet picks"

DOD Secy. Austin took office January 22. Some block!

[Nige]

Are you trying to tell me McConnell didn't do his utmost to block Biden's cabinet picks?

But even so, this was a Trump policy.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Are you trying to tell me McConnell didn’t do his utmost to block Biden’s cabinet picks?"

Yes, because it is not true

[Nige]

Liar.

[Nige]

Honestly that's evil, why the fuck.

[Bob from Ohio]

"The Pentagon’s anti-vax propaganda came in response to China’s own efforts to spread false information about the origins of COVID. The virus first emerged in China in late 2019. But in March 2020, Chinese government officials claimed without evidence that the virus may have been first brought to China by an American service member who participated in an international military sports competition in Wuhan the previous year. Chinese officials also suggested that the virus may have originated in a U.S. Army research facility at Fort Detrick, Maryland. There’s no evidence for that assertion.

Mirroring Beijing’s public statements, Chinese intelligence operatives set up networks of fake social media accounts to promote the Fort Detrick conspiracy, according to a U.S. Justice Department complaint."

Every Chinese accusation is a confession.

[Nige]

Trump was never an original thinker.

[Bob from Ohio]

Did he approve it?

[Nige]

Must have.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Must have."

Seems solid!

US government does plenty of things that the President knows nothing about.

[Nige]

So, Trump Is Not Responsible.

[Commenter_XY]

The question to me is why the Philippines were targeted by the US, specifically.

[grb]

It wasn’t directed against the Philippines per se. The country was using the Chinese vaccine and that was the target.

And it was a contemptible exercise in pointless ugly cynicism. Bob is a few comments up making the usual excuses for his Great Orange God. That said, he might well be right. Plenty of things happen in the recesses of the government a president doesn’t know – even ones who don’t need their daily security briefing repackaged in cartoon form as Trump did.

But it sounds like his kind of puerile thinking, doesn’t it?

[Commenter_XY]

That is not how I read the OP; the Filipino public was a target of the propaganda. The question is, why the Philippines and not Vietnam (as an alternative target)?

[Nige]

You'd have to ask the evil shits who thought this would be fun.

[Frank Drackman]

So if "Common Sense" Gun Control is so popular, why are "Assault Rifles"(I know they're not actual Assault Rifles, but watta ya gonna do?) selling like the proverbial hot cakes? And it's not just gun nuts buying them, alot of peoples get them for a rainy day, you know, that rainy day when a bunch of Rag Head Ham-Ass Terrorists paraglide into your Music Concert...

Frank "Machine gun? thats my finger"

[John F. Carr]

Axios reports that the 1980s was the most integrated time for American schools. It took 20 years for post-Brown court intervention to reach its peak and another 20 years for white flight to do its work.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Hmmm... I wonder what caused the Whites to flee?

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, my parents fled a suburb bordering on Detroit because the Detroit riots stopped a block from our house, and my parents weren't sure the next riot wouldn't get further. I can't speak for others.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

So they weren't racist, but observed harmful effects of integration and chose to leave for their own safety?

That's pretty weird. The Democrats seem to deny that as a possibility.

[Brett Bellmore]

I wouldn't call that the harmful effects of integration. The harmful effects of rioting, maybe.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

RNC is suing MI SOS, they claim:

- Of the 83 counties in MI, at least 53 have more active registered voters than adult citizens over 18, and 23 have registrations exceeding 90% of adult citizens over 18.

While Michigan Fair Elections found 320,000 ghost voter registrations in the 2024 Qualified Voter Files.

Put on your thinking cap for these two hypotheticals:

1.) Assume the claims are adjudicated and found true. What should happen? Now consider, what do you think actually would happen, given the Democrat dominance over the process?

2.) These claims haven't been adjudicated yet. What do you think will happen with these claims?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I'll go first:

1.)If found true, I think the voter rolls should be cleaned up and made to closer represent that actual population of voters within some reasonable margin of error. However, I don't think anything would get done because then they couldn't steal Michigan again. And with Trump running, they have to go full bore to steal 2024 and they will outright criminalize anyone who criticizes the steal or wants to stop the steal.

2.) What I think is going to happen: Nothing will be done. These will get ignored, delayed to beyond 2024, memory holed, "procedured out" or some other tactic to bury this.

[Sarcastr0]

It's voter registration, nobody cares but the rubes.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I’m sure you’d get super care-y if it was Republicans doing the vote counting in secret instead of Democrats.

[Sarcastr0]

Dang it, foiled by counterfactual hypocricy again!

[hobie]

SarcastrO, should I bring up the fraudulent electors schemes of illegal voting in secret, or just let the poor bastard marinate in his fantasies?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Fantasy? It's irrefutable that the Democrat vote counters in Wayne County kicked out all the Republican poll watchers, boarded up the room and then proceeded to count the ballots in secret.

How on Earth did you not know this? You should be ashamed of yourself. You should be, but I'm sure you arent.

[grb]

The Nazi child is lying once again. There were over 220 Republican challengers inside when Wayne County authorities stopped allowing anyone else in, Democrat or Republican. The maximum number was supposed to be 134 for both.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/10/fact-check-videos-crowd-locked-out-detroit-center-lack-context/6195038002/

(The Nazi child even bungles at lying. He’s sooooo very easy to expose)

[Brett Bellmore]

I easily believe it. My brother moved out of state as soon as he graduated from college. My dad died. My mother moved to Florida. For years, I'd vote, I'd glance at the registration book in my rural precinct, and there they were, three people still registered to vote, right there in the book next to me. Each time I'd point it out, and they never did anything about it.

For all I know, I'm still registered to vote in Michigan, and I haven't lived there for 15 years now.

[jb]

BUT! We are assured this problem is one of Democratic Secretary of State malfeasance! How can it be that you knew about this problem years ago given that Republicans held that office from the mid-90s until 2018?

[Don Nico]

BUT, are you a mind reader?

[jb]

No, but I can read our local White Nationalist's messages fine. You could do it too by scrolling up a little. (To be clear: not talking about Brett.)

[hobie]

What was the majority political party affiliation in that county of yours (R or D)?

[OtisAH]

And for all those years, how many times did you see they’d been marked as having actually voted despite not voting in Michigan during those years?

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

A recent audit showed alot, that's why MI SOS is hiding it.

[David Nieporent]

I don't understand the expressed indignation in your anecdote. Do you think poll workers, trying to help people cast votes on election day, are simultaneously sidelining as administrators in the county or state elections offices? Why would you expect that pointing out this to them would cause them to "do anything about it"?

[Commenter_XY]

What US 4-star general today would have this level of forthrightness and hold themselves accountable for their failure?

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/391327

The Afghanistan withdrawal is a case in point. So were the readiness issues discovered during inspections of nuclear missile silos.

October 7th (or 9/11, or 12/7) happens when the prevailing mindset is the avoidance of accountability.

[Moderation4ever]

I cannot tell you a 4 star but Dwight Eisenhower a 5 Star was ready to take the blame had D-Day failed. When the Marine barrack was bombed in Lebanon and over 100 young American service people died President Ronald Reagan took the blame. While I like President Reagan, I thought he did this to provide cover for the military people's failure and that it was a mistake. President Kennedy's fame was in part made by the loss of his ship the PT109. Most navy people will tell you that losing your ship is an unforgivable offense in the navy.

I think this Israeli general is a brave and rare person.

[Commenter_XY]

That is true about Ike, Kennedy and Reagan.

I do wish we had more rare and brave people like Avi Rosenfeld.

[Don Nico]

I agree with you.

[Kazinski]

Most navy people won’t tell you losing a ship is unforgivable, especially in WWII. That would encourage risk adverse behavior, and captains need to be ready to put their ship at risk even at long odds when the objective justifies it.

A destroyer has virtually no chance against a battleship, but in WW2 destroyers often took on battleships when circumstances made it necessary.

[Gernonen]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/17/politics/steve-bannon-danbury-prison-contempt-of-congress/index.html

Merrick Garfinkel's weaponized DOJ will not stop at any breaking of norms.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

From your own source:

"But Bannon isn’t eligible for the lowest-level prison setup because he still has a pending criminal case against him in New York, where he is fighting the charges and set to go to trial in September. That case accuses him of defrauding donors in a fundraising effort branded the “We Build the Wall” campaign for a border wall between the US and Mexico."

Now GTFO out of here with your partisan bullshit about the 'weaponized' DOJ. A DOJ that happens to be prosecuting a few Congressional Democrats and just finished prosecuting - let me check this here...the President's own son.

[Gernonen]

He wouldn't have even been prosecuted had he been a Democrat .

No doubt Garkikel will decline to prosecute the ATF agents who murdered the man in Arkansas.

[Nige]

If he'd been a Democrat he wouldn't have defrauded WallGAs.

[Sarcastr0]

Another boring right-wing antisemite.

Better ignore them and keep a look out for the growing antisemitism on the left.

[Bwaaah]

Elmer J Fudd, always vigilantly on the "look out for the growing antisemitism on the left," demonstrating his laser focus.

[jb]

Sorry, what norm are you talking about?

[Gernonen]

Of not prosecuting political opponents on bullshit charges?

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Bannon is a 'political opponent?' Are you high or just your run-of-the-mill right-wing dipshit?

Bannon defied a lawful subpoena, claiming executive privilege when he was never a member of the executive branch and Trump did not claim privilege on Bannon's behalf.

Fact-free bullshit is not welcome here.

[jb]

Contempt of Congress has been a thing since the 1790s.

[David Nieporent]

Merrick Garfinkel’s weaponized DOJ will not stop at any breaking of norms.

Oh, look, one of the couple of neo-Nazi regulars here has updated his username.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

A Secret Service Agent on Biden’s team was just robbed at gunpoint in California.

lmao, how f’n pathetic are Deep Stater’s and Democrat communities?

Isn’t that just perfect? Democrat Secret Service are a bunch diverse cowards, losers, and affirmative action hires while Democrat communities are crime-ridden 3rd world shit holes whose criminals are so empowered that they feel they can rob the President's detail at gunpoint. lol

https://twitter.com/ImMeme0/status/1802828917633319288

- Give $80B in advanced weaponry to stone age cave dwellers and boy rapers... Check!
- Spend $500M on a pier that last one delivery... Check!
- Have an entire aircraft carrier battlegroup get steamrolled by spear chucking camel jockeys... Check!
- Cover up Chinese military spying so the CCP doesn't look bad to the American public... Check!
- Spend over $100B "defending" Ukraine just to prop up a dictator whose now drafting children and senior citizens... Check!
- President that has now shit his pants twice while overseas... Check!
- Arrest White grannies for praying for minorities to not abort their babies... Check!
- "Create" 2M "new" jobs and give them all to illegals... Check!
- President's detail gets robbed at gun point in a California 3rd-world shit hole... Check!

lol

[Sarcastr0]

Man, dude musta spent the better part of an hour on this shit when he could have been spending quality time with his heterosexual white wife and cis family.

[jb]

Remember what happens when we actually look at crime data and realize that it's worse in red states?

https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-two-decade-red-state-murder-problem

Similar to how the Trump crime spike was much worse in red states. Seems like a very bad issue for Republicans to try to run on.

[Sarcastr0]

Thing is it’s not a bad issue. Because this is not an issues election.
Populism is about vibes not numbers.

The truth isn’t useless but it is more like the wind as the pendulum swings.

And of course the truth is good to know for its own sake.

I’m more excited about how well funded and organized the Dems are compared to the GOP on a state by state basis.

[Gernonen]

The single best indicator of violent crime is the percentage of population that is black, not whether it's red or blue. Both New Hampshire and Iowa are safe. There's a reason for that

[Jason Cavanaugh]

It's odd that the racist shit-stains such as yourself seem to never use their real names. It's almost like you're just a bunch of keyboard cowards the world would be better off without.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Science denier.

[wreckinball]

Yep and statewide is too broad. In Western PA you'd be an absolute moron to think you'd be safer walking thru the hood in deep blue Pittsburgh versus anywhere in deep red Greensburg 30 miles east.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Weird how skewed crime stats look when Democrat shitholes refuse to report crime data. It's too racist! Just like grades in school and shit.

[David Nieporent]

This is the new MAGA lie. The data was reported.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

It may take you an hour to write a simple comment given how many layers of approval and script checks your comments need, but it doesn't take a Normal that long. Maybe two or three minutes? 5 tops with an edit or two.

[Gernonen]

Ha! I love it.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Most mothers give birth via their vagina. Yours shit you out into the toilet after a bad sushi dinner and never looked back.

Let's address your bullet-point claims, shall we?

1) False
2) False
3) False
4) False
5) False
6) False
7) False
8) False
9) Partially true.

No wonder your parents abandoned you.

[NvEric]

Here's a diehard trapped in her own gas light.

HYSTERIA REDUX: GASLIGHTING IN THE AGE OF COVID
Jane Campbell Moriarty

ssrn 4857257.pdf

[F.D. Wolf]

Fences have gone up at Supreme Court. The only time this has happened during the Roberts Court was before Dodds was announced.

Perhaps a signal that immunity decision is coming tomorrow, and the Left is not going to like it.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

There are conflicting reports on that one.

[David Nieporent]

Perhaps a signal that immunity decision is coming tomorrow,

Well, definitely not, since it's a federal holiday.

[Intelligent Mr Toad]

On my mind:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6UUUlBs87g

[Bwaaah]

What a pleasurable departure from the moment.

I don't understand Italian. I don't think it would be any better if I did.

Thanks.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I heard today that the. $40B Biden Bill to expand broadband back in 2021 hasn't yielded a single new home connected to the internet. That plus the on-character $7B/EV Charger is just so representative of Big Government Sarcastr0ism its hilarious.

No wonder you people prop up bills passing as major accomplishments. You can't point to any actual, material, accomplishments.

[apedad]

First the program was finally authorized in 2023 (like as in last year), then there's a process (yeah it's govt).

But results are coming in; Biden-Harris Administration Approves Kansas, Nevada, and West Virginia’s “Internet for All” Initial Proposal (April 2024).

https://www.internetforall.gov/bead-initial-proposal-progress-dashboard

[Brett Bellmore]

The bit where they cheated Starlink of most of their money on account of not having yet achieved goals that weren't due for a couple years yet was pretty dodgy.

FCC issues final denial of $885M Starlink subsidy

It's been all out bureaucratic war against Musk ever since he departed the left's tech plantation. If the DOJ and NASA weren't so dependent on his rockets, it would be even worse.

[Bwaaah]

I think you meant "DOD and NASA" (not "DOJ and NASA"). DOJ has been energetically attacking Musk and his businesses.

[Nige]

You mean, ever since it turned out he was dodgy and engages in dodgy business practices - but if you can paint yourself as 'leaving the left plantation' the right will automatically throw themselves in the path of hars criticism and enforcement of regulations.

[Nige]

I don't even think there is a lefty tech plantation, if there ever was. They've all gone weird and feral and are making the most useless shit imaginable. Building bunkers and worrying about the population of white people and how they can spread their genes around and live forever while accelerating all the things that might make bunkers necessary and living forever unpleasant and have detrimental effects on the population.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Capitalize White, you f'n bigot.

[apedad]

Brett, JHBHBE was specifically addressing the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD), program under National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), under the Department of Commerce, which the Starlink thing is not a part of.

JHBHBE (and I) would appreciate if you could stay on target.

Mucho beaucoup.

[Nige]

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/12/14/republicans-are-mad-the-fcc-rejected-elon-musks-attempt-to-get-a-billion-dollars-in-subsidies-to-deliver-pricey-satellite-broadband-to-some-traffic-medians/

[NOVA Lawyer]

This is crazy. People who would ordinarily be livid about wasteful spending are suddenly livid about not spending money. I same this among the same sorts of people during the pandemic. Profligate spending is the end of the world when Party A does it and any and all means are fair to try to stop it (costly, ineffective government shutdowns, for example), but blocking profligate spending is evil when Party B is the one doing the spending.

There is a complete lack of rationality. The first question some people ask is which "side" is my team on. After that, it's rationalization all the way down. (ThePublius and Bob and their sudden interest in the WNBA with an extreme "one factor explains everything" approach is in the same vein.)

Their approach:

Bridge to nowhere? Broadband for parking lots? Fast rail? Tell me who asked for it and then I'll tell you if it's outrageous to fund it or outrageous to defund it.

It's weird asf.

[Nige]

All that taxpayers' money rightfully belongs to billionaires.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Good point.

[Brett Bellmore]

The complaint is that he'd formally met the criteria for the award, and they took it away on the basis of his not yet having met goals he wasn't supposed to meet for several years yet.

While companies doing much less were still on the gravy train.

You can object to the existence of the gravy train, and still notice that the conductor isn't honoring somebody's ticket...

[Bwaaah]

You missed their point. He’s a billionaire. And he’s a right-winger. And he platforms people who say things like you do. And he’s tapping into programs which are intended for people who believe in programs (*and* support Democrats).

He also happens to have made more substantive contributions to our economy, our technology, our culture, and even the Democrat climate agenda, than all of them together could ever imagine doing themselves.

Fuck Elon Musk. He’s no Democrat. And fuck merit. Show some fealty.

[Nige]

And you GET IT, don't you? Elon Musk is a poor refugee from the left (he was never on the left) and must be protected at all costs despite evidence that he's a complete bullshitter. That the program was a typical Trump mess designed to enrich the rich with little or no results is irrelevant, he's approved of tweets posted by Nazis and ranted about the woke mind virus, therefore a poor cancellation victim.

[Nige]

And you can notice who gets mad if someone is denied the gravy, and who they pretend is the only one being denied. Fact is, they had no confidence they could meet the targets and were absolutely certain it wouldn't be worth it. They put the actual needs of the people first for a change. It was a Trump scheme, it was a complete mess, a borderline if not an actual scam, Biden's FCC is cleaning it up.

[NOVA Lawyer]

No, the complaint was they didn't meet the criteria for the award. Nothing was "taken away".

The Bureau has determined that, based on the totality of the long-form applications, the expansive service areas reflected in their winning bids, and their inadequate responses to the Bureau’s follow-up questions, LTD and Starlink are not reasonably capable of complying with the Commission’s requirements. The Commission has an obligation to protect our limited Universal Service Funds and to avoid extensive delays in providing needed service to rural areas, including by avoiding subsidizing risky proposals that promise faster speeds than they can deliver, and/or propose deployment plans that are not realistic or that are predicated on aggressive assumptions and predictions. We observe that Ookla data reported as of July 31, 2022 indicate that Starlink’s speeds have been declining from the last quarter of 2021 to the second quarter of 2022, including upload speeds that are falling well below 20 Mbps. Accordingly, we deny LTD’s and Starlink’s long-form applications, and both are in default on all winning bids not already announced as defaulted.

But, I'll say again, it's quite funny how "fiscal conservatives" are up in arms that their favorite billionaire can't guzzle at the federal trough a little more.

As to Elon Musk, it's obviously easier to fight for one's principles on Twitter (on government subsidies: "Just delete them all."), than to live up to them.

To be fair, he evidence is that it is not a principle of Musk's, as someone wise once pointed out: "It's not a principle until it costs you money."

For the Elon Musk apologists, what's your excuse? Do you actually think it was a good idea to bring satellite broadband to traffic medians? You disagree with consumer groups that it was a colossal waste of taxpayer money? You think Musk's billion dollar plan to bring broadband to rural communities (and traffic medians and airport parking lots!) with the need to purchase a $600 dish and pay a $100 monthly fee was the best way to get internet to poor, underserved rural communities? Or you're just upset that your favorite government-teat-suckling narcissist didn't get more billions? What are your principles? Do you have any?

Shoot me if I ever complain about a billionaire getting something "taken away" from the government. He has lawyers. If he actually had the contract and it was unfairly taken away, he has a great cause of action.

The rest of you can, as Lindsay Graham urged with regard to Donald Trump, search your couch cushions for spare change to send anything you can scrounge up to Elon Musk to help with his legal bills.

This shit isn't even funny anymore.

[John F. Carr]

A different Larry Niven story is in my head today, "Cloak of Anarchy". I have three notices in the last 20 minutes telling me that 911 services are down throughout Massachusetts. In Niven's story, set centuries in the future, the police drone system went down and anarchy quickly took over. He wrote the story to explain why he is not a libertarian. So far, no mobs of feral humans around my place. Time will tell.

In yesterday's story mentioned above, "Table Manners", a human is invited by aliens to hunt game the way nature intended him to.

[Brett Bellmore]

I read that story, too. Of course if you have a pseudo-anarchy with a protective system in place to keep things from going bad, an anarchy theme park, really, and you remove the protective system, things will get ugly.

Anarchy doesn't mean no organization, it just means no government. It would absolutely need organization of some sort, and you'd have to ease your way into having one, not just drop a bunch of people into a situation.

I don't personally think anarchy is stable under most circumstances, but expecting to get a stable anarchy that way would be like dropping a yardstick from a plane, and expecting it to land on end and stand there steady. Even if you could carefully balance a yardstick on end, it's not going to happen by accident.

[Bwaaah]

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]