When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
While it would not surprise me to see such a thing written by Jennifer Rubin, I'm not finding any citation for that screenshot. WaPo.com lists three articles from her on Jul 28; One saying that we're not in a recession, one asking if Supreme Court Justices are above the law, and "5 factors that give Dems a fighting chance in November".
DuckDuck produces three results for the search query "To save democracy, Biden must cancel the midterms." Two of them are the above image at iFunny.co, and the third is an article about an article in which Andrew Stein (NY Post) calls for Biden to resign prior to the midterms, in order to give the Democrats a fighting chance at retaining a majority in the Congress.
Basically the same results from Google.
The left typically do a good enough job at embarrassing themselves that there's really no need for the right to be fabricating false quotations and attributing them to lefties.
No more coal and crappy killer wind turbines: broken promises
We saw this wind farm on the Southernmost point of Hawaii, where the trade winds constantly blow. Turns out that not only was it a tax scam, they were poorly built, and ended up killing endangered flying critters. The best laid plans of mice and men. They think they can control the climate like a thermostat.
No more coal and crappy killer wind turbines: broken promises
We saw this wind farm on the Southernmost point of Hawaii, where the trade winds constantly blow. Turns out that not only was it a tax scam, they were poorly built, and ended up killing endangered flying critters. The best laid plans of mice and men. They think they can control the climate like a thermostat.
imagine discovering the ozone, then immediately determining we are the ones who put the holes in it.
Both also think noting of human sacrifice in order to stay in power.
There's a scene in the film Crimson Tide, in which the officers are waxing philosophical about their job.
One of them quotes Karl von Clausewitz, who observed that "War is a continuation of politics by other means."
Another asserts that while this is true, the whole truth is more complicated. Specifically that while the purpose of war is to serve a political end, the true nature of war is to serve itself.
Likewise, while the purpose of political power is to serve the people, the true nature of political power, whether gained by election of by administrative appointment, primarily enables those who have it to enrich themselves.
There's a scene in the film Crimson Tide, in which the officers are waxing philosophical about their job.
One of them quotes Karl von Clausewitz, who observed that "War is a continuation of politics by other means."
Another asserts that while this is true, the whole truth is more complicated. Specifically that while the purpose of war is to serve a political end, the true nature of war is to serve itself.
Likewise, while the purpose of political power is to serve the people, the true nature of political power, whether gained by election of by administrative appointment, primarily enables those who have it to enrich themselves.
DING DING DING!!!!!
“I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people,” Friedman once said. “The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office.”
While Milton Friedman is (of course) right, the MSM and Big Tech have made it impossible for the reality of what the politicians are doing to us become clear. You can't sway opinions when you don't know what's going on.
It's a grand shell game, and we're all the rubes losing our money on a game that can't be won.
While Milton Friedman is (of course) right, the MSM and Big Tech have made it impossible for the reality of what the politicians are doing to us become clear. You can't sway opinions when you don't know what's going on.
Serious question: Do you believe that Americans have less access to the truth about what their politicians are up to than at some point in the past?
I don't believe this.
The absolute quantity of true truth is about the same now as, say fifty years ago. And much greater than it was a hundred years ago, or two hundred.
But the ratio of bullshit to truth has changed.
There are simply more platforms today than at any point in the past. And as those new channels for communication have been created, they've been disproportionately filled with opinions, arguments, and lies.
Actual truth still exists, and if anything is more easily accessible now than at any other time in the past. But truth seems less desirable to us than arguments which either inflame our opinions, or else soothingly reinforce them.
Big Tech is no more to blame for people making poor decisions when it comes to information consumption than Kraft and McDonald's are for people making poor decisions when it comes to food consumption.
It is the politicians themselves who are most responsible for fabricating the intellectual junk-food which appears similar to news in the eyes of so many. Divisiveness and polarization are crucial to their retaining and expanding their power. No one profits more from an ill-informed electorate than the career politician.
Serious question: Do you believe that Americans have less access to the truth about what their politicians are up to than at some point in the past?
I don't believe this.
The absolute quantity of true truth is about the same now as, say fifty years ago. And much greater than it was a hundred years ago, or two hundred.
But the ratio of bullshit to truth has changed.
There are simply more platforms today than at any point in the past. And as those new channels for communication have been created, they've been disproportionately filled with opinions, arguments, and lies.
Actual truth still exists, and if anything is more easily accessible now than at any other time in the past. But truth seems less desirable to us than arguments which either inflame our opinions, or else soothingly reinforce them.
Big Tech is no more to blame for people making poor decisions when it comes to information consumption than Kraft and McDonald's are for people making poor decisions when it comes to food consumption.
It is the politicians themselves who are most responsible for fabricating the intellectual junk-food which appears similar to news in the eyes of so many. Divisiveness and polarization are crucial to their retaining and expanding their power. No one profits more from an ill-informed electorate than the career politician.
We had an elected president spied on by the FBI, CIA and the NSA at the direction of the DNC. No one is in jail. No one has been put up against a wall and shot. While we all know the FBI has been crooked since Hoover, it's never been this blatant.
And Covid--its origins, its cover-up, and the power grab we just experienced. The power's been grabbed, and money has shifted hands. Billions, trillions. No need to go into the dealings of "the big guy", but an honest media would have sought the truth.
How does the death of 100,000+ people per year by a single drug escape the news? Perhaps it's when the drug passes freely over the Southern border, which might be "embarrassing." Under Trump the number of deaths actually dropped, along with the fentanyl. Under Biden, not so much. Is he paying a political price? Not so much. Multiply this issue by 1,000x and see the power of the government in concert with Big Tech, Big Pharma & Wall Street. We've got radioactive waste in thin metal casks just feet from the ocean, just a few miles South in Camp Pendleton. Could it be taken care of tomorrow? Absolutely. All it takes is one ounce of political will. Otherwise it's just another way to stress out the electorate into thinking that if they elect the right person, their problems just might go away.
And there can be no question that the Democrat-majority House of Representin' is flexing, and dogpiling onto Bannon and the rest of Trump's inner sanctum as hard as they can before they get voted out of office.
That is an interesting opinion by you, that is of course, if you're not trolling. Solely because you have pointed out many times that the blue-pilled will vote Dem no matter what. That opinion I believe can be fact checked to be true. But if you are serious, I have so many questions.
I've been thinking about this a lot.
Is the reason you questioned whether I was trolling is that I suggested that many democrats are likely to get voted out of office this November, despite the fact that I have previously noted that the VoteBlueNoMatterWho crowd will always vote blue no matter who?
If so, let me clarify my thinking:
Those who vote blue no matter who will always vote blue, any time they vote.
The same goes for those who will always vote red, any time they vote.
But, a lot of people will not take the time to actually vote unless they are sufficiently outraged, and consider the outcome of the election in question to be of grave importance.
We have arrived at a point in electoral politics in the US in which the difference between a democrat-majority vs. a republican-majority outcome has nothing at all to do with who the candidates are, nor what their stated positions and policy intentions are. For all intents and purposes, the days of the issue-based "swing" voter are merely a memory.
The only thing which actually affects the outcome is which side's fanbase has been more outraged than the other, and by consequence, which half of the populace actually bothers to go out and vote in any given election.
None of this actually matters in the grand scheme, of course, since such a large majority of the populace have fully internalized the two-party dynamic as a fundamental norm.
Is the reason you questioned whether I was trolling is that I suggested that many democrats are likely to get voted out of office this November, despite the fact that I have previously noted that the VoteBlueNoMatterWho crowd will always vote blue no matter who?
If so, let me clarify my thinking:
Those who vote blue no matter who will always vote blue, any time they vote.
The same goes for those who will always vote red, any time they vote.
But, a lot of people will not take the time to actually vote unless they are sufficiently outraged, and consider the outcome of the election in question to be of grave importance.
We have arrived at a point in electoral politics in the US in which the difference between a democrat-majority vs. a republican-majority outcome has nothing at all to do with who the candidates are, nor what their stated positions and policy intentions are. For all intents and purposes, the days of the issue-based "swing" voter are merely a memory.
The only thing which actually affects the outcome is which side's fanbase has been more outraged than the other, and by consequence, which half of the populace actually bothers to go out and vote in any given election.
None of this actually matters in the grand scheme, of course, since such a large majority of the populace have fully internalized the two-party dynamic as a fundamental norm.
This election cycle I'm actively campaigning AGAINST two sitting Republicans (endorsed by the Orange County GOP), and three R's that are running for the local city council. I'm Conservative. I'm a values voter, and these people have none. The Hispanics that you see going over to the R's generally are values voters. They care about their kids, their jobs, and the drugs pouring over the border and they've seen that the Democrats don't care. Your mayor Lightfoot would be a joke, if so many people didn't die because of her incompetence. Unfortunately Chicago will NEVER change.
We had an elected president spied on by the FBI, CIA and the NSA at the direction of the DNC. No one is in jail. No one has been put up against a wall and shot. While we all know the FBI has been crooked since Hoover, it's never been this blatant..
Lol, I rarely read this thread. It seems to be Brain's method to rehost images so he can see them at work.
You do understand that when you agree to access certain information, you sign a lot of your rights away? It's not forced on you, the former president made a choice.
EVERY president/Clearance holder is constantly being investigated. It has always been this blatant.
He wasn't being investigated -- he was being illegally spied on.
Also, he must have the cleanest record of any citizen of the US ever at this point. Then there's the Big Guy...
I'm a clearance holder in the IC community, weirdly, the FBI didn't lie on FISA warrants in order to wiretap my phones...
Even accidentally surveilling an American citizen is a HUGE deal here. What an incredibly stupid and naive thing to say.
Originally Posted by Braineack
Please keep this is good humor.
Lighten up, Francis.
I'm well aware of the way that part of the usgov operates.
Sources? I'm actually curious, not being an ***. I'm also well aware that people make bad decisions.
Yes, it's because vote blue no matter who is something you know to be true. So your thinking is that they would still vote blue but won't bother to because they are being properly represented in politics. But wouldn't you think that the party of invented oppression will stir their fanbase right before the elections to get them voting? Especially when they can do so from their home with mail in ballots?
None of this actually matters in the grand scheme, of course, since such a large majority of the populace have fully internalized the two-party dynamic as a fundamental norm.
I'm fairly certain that anyone that gets into politics and wants to succeed fairly quickly is thinking there are but two parties that win and that they should pick one or the other. It is their job to represent the public that elected them and not the party they are affiliated with. I vote R since they seem to want to keep the 1st and 2nd as it is and they have a better chance of winning against the D's than some I, or T, or G or whatever, that is basically selling the same thing anyhow. Needless to say, R's will vote with D's to keep chipping away at the 1st and 2nd if they see it will profit them in any way and conversely, and vice versa.
I do not claim to know what the solution is to fix our gov't but claiming the two-party system is responsible for all of it isn't exactly fair either considering there is nothing making our public servants vote straight down partisan lines. Honestly, it could be a one party system or a no party system. It certainly seems to be that way when primaries come around. All these guys and gals from the same party slugging it out with each other just so they could be the only R or D or whatever on the ticket.
08-01-2022, 12:22 PM
3
