Discussion in 'Los Angeles DODGERS' started by CapnTreee, Aug 12, 2016.
celebrities are not real people
Got uranium ?
Liars are not real people then so long as they are celebrities?
Except that they are
Though apparently not to apologists
Who worship fake celebrities
Well 25% less
According to the same sources now libeled as Fake News
Also one might notice that uranium = money and money = real people according to Citizens United
Unless either Uranium or Money are now termed celebrities
National Review has - IMO - become a NeoCon dump. A few writers there are OK, but since they fired Joe Sobran and once Buckley was dead, I failed to see what NR still had to offer a PaleoCon like me ...
Then I read this piece ... it is superb. Y'all can have at it as you like. I'll paste it below...
Got to hand it to Mona. She has been the best political journalist in America at any given moment for 20 years. I don't say that she's the best WOMAN journalist, anymore than I would say Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell are the best in their class because both are Black men. All three of these are the best in America on any given day because they are masters of rhetoric and honest OP-Ed reporting.
The stats in this piece are astounding. Brava, Mona Charen. This lady brings fire, even when I disagree with her.
Twitter Ain’t America
By MONA CHAREN
April 12, 2019 6:30 AM
An appropriately Twitteresque meme circulated recently on that platform: Write a sad story in just three words. This was an homage to Ernest Hemingway, who, challenged to write a sad story in only six words, grabbed the nearest blank paper and scrawled, “For sale: baby shoes. Never worn.” Or so the story goes. It’s too good to check. Responses to the three-word challenge ran the gamut from “People trust CNN,” to “Trump elected again.” I suggested “Twitter represents America.”
It would be a sad story if it were true, but there are many reasons to doubt that Twitter represents anything other than a cacophony of curmudgeons.
Consider the Biden touching imbroglio. For days and days, Twitter and other social media were alight with Biden hashtags and hot takes. The phrase “creepy Joe Biden” generated half a million Google searches. In part in response to this, cable commentators speculated about whether Biden’s MeToo moment (which it really wasn’t) would prove fatal to his potential presidential run.
Or not. A number of surveys this week show that voters in general are in a different world from social media. The key constituency for a Biden bid — Democratic primary voters — are untroubled by reports of his excessive touching. A Quinnipiac poll of California Democrats (California has an early primary next year) found that 71 percent did not regard the touching as a serious issue. That included 67 percent of women. A Morning Consult poll found that Biden is a double-digit favorite among Democrats for the nomination and enjoys a 14-point lead in early-voting states. A separate poll of Iowa Democrats also put Biden at the top of the list.
Hidden Tribes project has found, the Democrats who post to social media like Twitter are markedly to the left of Democrats as a whole. As Nate Cohn and Kevin Quealy break it down in the New York Times, 53 percent of Democrats, but only 29 percent of Democrats who sound off on social media, describe themselves as moderate or conservative. Seventy percent of Democrats at large, but only 48 percent of social-media Democrats, say political correctness is a problem in America. Fifty-three percent of Democratic social-media posters say they have become more liberal over time, versus only 30 percent of other Democrats.
The social-media Democrats are not only more “woke” than typical Democrats, they are also more educated (47 percent have a college degree, compared with 33 percent of non-posters) and more white (71 percent versus 55 percent). Forty-five percent of those who are active on social media have contributed to a political cause in the past year, compared with only 14 percent of other Democrats.
Candidates who mistake the Twitterverse for the Democratic electorate may be in for a rude shock.
The domination of social media by hyper-partisans is probably one reason why Americans have so many misconceptions about one another. Also, websites like YouTube and cable-TV programmers have figured out how to monetize our political preferences by feeding us exactly what they think we want to hear. This leads to intensified polarization.
We’re all familiar with surveys showing that more Americans would be upset if their child brought home a potential spouse of the other party than would object to a fiancé of another race. That’s an arresting finding, suggesting that we’ve made huge progress on one prejudice only to substitute a new one.
Partisans have also misled us. FiveThirtyEight reported on poll results showing what the parties think of one another. Asked to estimate how many Democrats were atheists or agnostics, Republicans guessed 36 percent. The true number is nine percent. Democrats thought 44 percent of Republicans were 65 or older. The correct figure is 21 percent. Republicans thought 46 percent of Democrats were black. The actual number: 24 percent. And Democrats believed that 44 percent of Republicans earn $250K or above. The true share: 2 percent.
There is money and fame to be had for the partisan shriekers — and there is no shortage of those feeding at that trough. But most Americans, 77 percent, remain in what the Hidden Tribes survey dubbed “the exhausted majority.” They still believe that “our differences are not so great that we cannot come together.” Candidates who hope to lead us out of our current slough will keep that in mind.
I used to like the NR growing up but for years now the only political thing I subscribe to is the FEE.org.
I like FEE.org too.
Most of the politicians in the US preach to economic illiterates....
So nice to hear someone else share this.
We all share so much in common and yet I remain firmly of the belief that it is those in DC, on BOTH sides of the aisle that intend our eternal subjugation through their devotion to nothing but $$$.
I've opined on DSP on various topics and learned that the vast majority here identify as Republicans praising those who bear precious little to those ideals I held dear for 30+ years as voting Republican. Paleo-Con might be a fitting description, or not since I've learned first hand that the current crop lie deftly and serve no one but $$$.
Likewise I have many well read, educated, kind hearted friends who espouse more caring ideals about humanity. Alas, to a man, they also would give away nearly everything to anyone for the flimsiest of reasons. While caring for humanity, over corporate welfare, is admirable it is hardly a virtue for those of us willing to sweat to earn their keep atop the wretched lazy masses.
As you've noticed previously my intent to see more than one perspective has placed me in a position of shallow hatred from either far side. Fuck'em, I couldn't give a shit about being attacked by insipid loons from either far end of the spectrum neither of whom can defend. Listening to naive AOC spout nonsense about paying those who cannot be bothered to work is lunacy. Likewise listening to GOP 'devouts' defending such a wretched and immoral liar such as Trump is greater lunacy. Blaming the 'other' side for ones own fears is just weakness.
So is DSP twitter? Not so much.. or is it?
"Cacophony of curmudgeons" is priceless...can " nattering nabobs" be far off ?
...with orange hair...
Spiro T. Agnew likes this
you say bloviating and i say loquacious
you say loquacious and i say bloviating
bloviating, blahviating, loquacious, laquacious
let's call the whole thing off
George and Ira Gershwin like this.
Not a fan of Trump, nor of Bible classes in public education but this is still funny, particularly since Trump doesn't give a shit about the Bible or adultery.
... or anything else not named Donald J Trump
Not how it works
As if "it" works at all
OTOH it is exactly how Trump works, if one could call his vile and tepid efforts "work"
Easy to state as most Americans are economic illiterates
Curious your take on this fee.org article, whether Ray Dalio's perspective or McCullough's poorly defensed rebuttal
I think Dalio has a point AND McCollough's rebuttal is simultaneously valid because Dalio's observation is one of people's irrational behavior--although I doubt he understands that.
Capitalism faces an existential threat because people *think* it is failing. They are wrong, but because people think that, it matters.
See post earlier today about economic illiteracy.
See post from a few weeks ago about everyone doing better, but being pissed off because income inequality is increasing.
See historical evidence of universal suffrage being doomed to failure--The Republic, Plato.
So yeah, capitalism does face an existential threat, even though it has done more than anything, ever, to improve the lives of billions of people. But because those people are stupid, petty, and irrationally jealous, they will dismantle it and reap the misery, suffering, and death they deserve for doing so.
Separate names with a comma.