Funny events in anti-woke world

[Absent]

That didn't in any way answer the question about you.

There is no question about them. Only your deflection. You're the one coming out with insane arguments whenever your Instrument of God is questioned. Your point is stupid (if bleach/disinfectant and drink/inject we're inverted in that story, you'd try the same argument) and as always blatantly hypocritical (you try to project manipulative meaning on this, all while gladly swallowing up any hate speech and dog whistling coming from Fox, DeSantis, Trump and such - yeah you're oh so much driven by concerns of truth and integrity). And of course, when your bias is pointed out, all you have is an attempt at "no, u !".

You're an absolute zero.

 

[Ag3ma]

That didn't in any way answer the question about you. Sure, we can shift from Trump to Republicans, that doesn't make it better that your standards for honesty in media change depending on who they are lying about.

I think we need to be quite careful about the differences between accidental error, incompetence and dishonesty. Given issues of intent and severity, I would hold that the latter merits a particularly strong case to support accusations... which you have not supplied in this case.

Trump

I enjoy the schadenfreude at his woes. But if I wrote that I laughed at the last season of Brooklyn 99, I don't think you'd be speculating about me being under the power of Andy Samberg.

 

[Silvanus]

I enjoy the schadenfreude at his woes. But if I wrote that I laughed at the last season of Brooklyn 99, I don't think you'd be speculating about me being under the power of Andy Samberg.

Andre Braugher, on the other hand...

 

[Ag3ma]

Something a little funny then. Today, one year ago, Liz Truss became the British PM

More importantly, how is the lettuce doing?

At least the lettuce has had the humility not to tour the world telling everyone it was right and what everyone should do about global affairs.

49 days as PM in the country's most shambolic administration ever, bab. I'm amazed anyone lets you onto a podium to say anything to anyone.

 

[meiam]

Surprised how little coverage this is getting.

Texas AG Ken Paxton pleads not guilty at impeachment trial and then leaves as arguments get underway

The impeachment trial of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton that could lead to his permanent removal from office is underway.

apnews.com

On one hand, its hopefully mean the GOP actually has a bare minimum amount of decency and will eventually stop blatant corruption. On the other hand, they only stepped in when he started taking their money, and everything was known well ahead of time.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Surprised how little coverage this is getting.

Texas AG Ken Paxton pleads not guilty at impeachment trial and then leaves as arguments get underway

The impeachment trial of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton that could lead to his permanent removal from office is underway.

apnews.com

On one hand, its hopefully mean the GOP actually has a bare minimum amount of decency and will eventually stop blatant corruption. On the other hand, they only stepped in when he started taking their money, and everything was known well ahead of time.

More accurately, it started when Paxton called out the head of the Texas house for showing up to work plastered drunk. This is entirely petty infighting with no actual conscience towards doing the right thing. But it is comedic, so we stan it.

In other Texas news.

Democrats on the State Board of Education pledge to fight efforts to introduce PragerU in Texas

The conservative media company and a Republican on the State Board of Education recently claimed its educational materials were now available in Texas even though PragerU is not a state-approved vendor.

www.kut.org

Someone wants to add PragerU to the curriculum, which is incredibly stupid. And then I find out they've already done this in Florida and Oklahoma.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Over 60 Stop Cop City protesters are brought up on RICO charges in Georgia, which they set the date of George Floyd's murder as the start point for their criminal enterprise, effectively indicting all protest against police as an actionable offense. Because, y'know, freedom.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

49 days as PM in the country's most shambolic administration ever, bab. I'm amazed anyone lets you onto a podium to say anything to anyone.

It seems to me like being utterly rejected by the people you (pretend to) serve and getting absolutely politically ruined is practically bona fides to the "shadowy world cabal" set.

 

[Ag3ma]

It seems to me like being utterly rejected by the people you (pretend to) serve and getting absolutely politically ruined is practically bona fides to the "shadowy world cabal" set.

She's certainly what happens when the Conservative Parliamentary Party forget that their membership these days are nuts, and their primary job in a leadership election is to make sure that the crazy fucktard membership can't pick someone like themselves as party leader.

 

[tstorm823]

You opined earlier that the media should avoid warning people about genuine dangers, if doing so could make the President look bad.

You know I never did anything remotely close to this. After accusing me of lying, this is what you come up with?

all while gladly swallowing up any hate speech and dog whistling coming from Fox, DeSantis, Trump

Where did you get any of this?

I think we need to be quite careful about the differences between accidental error, incompetence and dishonesty. Given issues of intent and severity, I would hold that the latter merits a particularly strong case to support accusations... which you have not supplied in this case.

As I have demonstrated that they reported untrue things, and also demonstrated they had access to the actual facts at the time they were writing, the only evidence I can imagine making a stronger case for dishonesty is if the authors themselves said "yup, we were lying." Then we're only allowed to call the news liars if they actively admit they lied, which I'd say is a more dangerous position then being overly critical. Giving such absolute benefit of the doubt to the media incentivizes them to lie whenever it suits them and just never ever admit to it. We have to be able to call out lies without the liars' permission.

 

[Ag3ma]

As I have demonstrated that they reported untrue things, and also demonstrated they had access to the actual facts at the time they were writing, the only evidence I can imagine making a stronger case for dishonesty is if the authors themselves said "yup, we were lying." Then we're only allowed to call the news liars if they actively admit they lied, which I'd say is a more dangerous position then being overly critical. Giving such absolute benefit of the doubt to the media incentivizes them to lie whenever it suits them and just never ever admit to it. We have to be able to call out lies without the liars' permission.

No, let's be clear here - you reported that one journalist wrote an article based on monthly figures rather than the daily he could have, and yet even still that article didn't accuse Trump of the supposed lies you're complaining about. This is a serious flaw in your reasoning that you refuse to recognise.

Having identified this one article, you're casually turning this into collective criticism of "the media", as a collective. As pointed out to you, just like that one article didn't say what you accuse the media of saying, the media response overall was not what you said it was, and that's a big problem for your claim about media malfeasance. Not only that, but you specifically (albeit implausibly) rejected conspiracy, which might at least go some way to bridge that gap.

Thus at core, there is a massive hole in your reasoning that you are using an individual claim of fault to argue collective blame. It isn't enough.

 

[Silvanus]

You know I never did anything remotely close to this. After accusing me of lying, this is what you come up with?

You complained that the media produced an article warning people against the danger of drinking bleach, at a time when people were drinking bleach.

You want the media to shy away from accurate reporting ("the President suggested X") and warning of genuine dangers ("Don't do Y"), if the combination of the two could lead to an impression that the President is to blame.

 

[Kwak]

I don't understand why this organisation is allowed to exist and continue its work rather than declared an enemy of the state and eradicated completely.

This is literally a manual for establishing a fascist coup over the country's democratic institutions.

-

Much of the new president’s agenda would be accomplished by reinstating what’s called Schedule F — a Trump-era executive order that would reclassify tens of thousands of the 2 million federal employees as essentially at-will workers who could more easily be fired.

Biden had rescinded the executive order upon taking office in 2021, but Trump — and other presidential hopefuls — now vow to reinstate it.

...

The goal is to avoid the pitfalls of Trump’s first years in office, when the Republican president’s team was ill-prepared, his Cabinet nominees had trouble winning Senate confirmation and policies were met with resistance — by lawmakers, government workers and even Trump’s own appointees who refused to bend or break protocol, or in some cases violate laws, to achieve his goals.

While many of the Project 2025 proposals are inspired by Trump, they are being echoed by GOP rivals Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy and are gaining prominence among other Republicans.

And if Trump wins a second term, the work from the Heritage coalition ensures the president will have the personnel to carry forward his unfinished White House business.

“The president Day One will be a wrecking ball for the administrative state,” said Russ Vought, a former Trump administration official involved in the effort who is now president at the conservative Center for Renewing America.

...

Authored by some of today’s most prominent thinkers in the conservative movement, it’s often sprinkled with apocalyptic language.

A chapter written by Trump’s former acting deputy secretary of Homeland Security calls for bolstering the number of political appointees, and redeploying office personnel with law enforcement ability into the field “to maximize law enforcement capacity.”

...

The Heritage coalition is taking its recruitment efforts on the road, crisscrossing America to fill the federal jobs. They staffed the Iowa State Fair this month and signed up hundreds of people, and they’re building out a database of potential employees, inviting them to be trained in government operations.

“It’s counterintuitive,” Dans acknowledged — the idea of joining government to shrink it — but he said that’s the lesson learned from the Trump days about what’s needed to “regain control.”

Conservative groups draw up plan to dismantle the US government and replace it with Trump’s vision

With more than a year to go before the 2024 election, a constellation of conservative organizations is preparing for a possible second White House term for Donald Trump.

apnews.com

And of course, they are committed to destroy the rest of the world as much as possible for everyone else.

A Republican 2024 Climate Strategy: More Drilling, Less Clean Energy (Published 2023)

Project 2025, a conservative “battle plan” for the next Republican president, would stop attempts to cut the pollution that is heating the planet and encourage more emissions.

www.nytimes.com

 

[tstorm823]

You complained that the media produced an article warning people against the danger of drinking bleach, at a time when people were drinking bleach.

You want the media to shy away from accurate reporting and warning of genuine dangers, if the combination of the two could lead to an impression that the President is to blame.

Here's the thing: they didn't write articles about people drinking bleach within the context of covid. They wrote articles about Donald Trump. I'll pull this back up:

Why It’s Important Not to Drink Bleach

Doctors and nurses are risking their lives and dying. People are out of work and struggling to make rent. The president of the United States is suggesting injecting disinfectant.

www.theatlantic.com

Give it a read. At no point in that article do they say anything about the heightened rate of accidental poisonings. The article is about Trump, start to finish.

As pointed out to you, just like that one article didn't say what you accuse the media of saying, the media response overall was not what you said it was, and that's a big problem for your claim about media malfeasance.

I've posted many, many things supporting my claims. You've just dismissed them. So, you know, whatever.

 

[Ag3ma]

Give it a read. At no point in that article do they say anything about the heightened rate of accidental poisonings. The article is about Trump, start to finish.

That's just a blatant lie. It has at least three whole paragraphs contextualising the current and historical misuse of cleaning products.

But you are in a sense right that it is basically about Trump, which the last paragraph ties up. And this is a perfectly standard journalistic practice. Take a specific issue, discuss it a bit, and then use it to illustrate a broader point. Essentially, that Trump's disinfectant injection waffle is representative of the way Trump undermines the public health efforts of his own government.

And this is all about you.

Firstly, you are cherry-picking articles. This is a basic cognitive bias - weighing more more heavily data that conforms to your assumptions than data that does not.

Secondly, you want to see a problem with articles and are assessing them through the lens of the conclusion you've already decided, and that hopelessly warps your ability to assess them in any other way. You have eroded your own ability to critically assess articles and think about why they may be valid or constructed for reasons other than the one you've decided. (This is akin to "data dredging" in science, or other issues in design of setting investigations in a way likely to bias the answer.)

This is the basis of the points around posts #11,568 and #11,599: you're all but demanding the media should have artificially firewalled discussion of bleach injestion and Trump just to protect Trump, and that they didn't is therefore proof that they were just out to get Trump. Everyone else sees how unrealistic, unreasonable and ridiculous that is.

I've posted many, many things supporting my claims. You've just dismissed them. So, you know, whatever.

No, we haven't "dismissed" them. We've explained why we simply don't agree.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I don't understand why this organisation is allowed to exist and continue its work rather than declared an enemy of the state and eradicated completely.

This is literally a manual for establishing a fascist coup over the country's democratic institutions.

Well, I'd say because the state is full of enemies of the state.

Less flippantly, I'd also ask how did it get that way, could it have been stopped, could it happen elsewhere. Complex questions, but just because the US is a write off doesn't mean other countries have to be as well.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I don't understand why this organisation is allowed to exist and continue its work rather than declared an enemy of the state and eradicated completely.

This is literally a manual for establishing a fascist coup over the country's democratic institutions.

-

Much of the new president’s agenda would be accomplished by reinstating what’s called Schedule F — a Trump-era executive order that would reclassify tens of thousands of the 2 million federal employees as essentially at-will workers who could more easily be fired.

Biden had rescinded the executive order upon taking office in 2021, but Trump — and other presidential hopefuls — now vow to reinstate it.

...

The goal is to avoid the pitfalls of Trump’s first years in office, when the Republican president’s team was ill-prepared, his Cabinet nominees had trouble winning Senate confirmation and policies were met with resistance — by lawmakers, government workers and even Trump’s own appointees who refused to bend or break protocol, or in some cases violate laws, to achieve his goals.

While many of the Project 2025 proposals are inspired by Trump, they are being echoed by GOP rivals Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy and are gaining prominence among other Republicans.

And if Trump wins a second term, the work from the Heritage coalition ensures the president will have the personnel to carry forward his unfinished White House business.

“The president Day One will be a wrecking ball for the administrative state,” said Russ Vought, a former Trump administration official involved in the effort who is now president at the conservative Center for Renewing America.

...

Authored by some of today’s most prominent thinkers in the conservative movement, it’s often sprinkled with apocalyptic language.

A chapter written by Trump’s former acting deputy secretary of Homeland Security calls for bolstering the number of political appointees, and redeploying office personnel with law enforcement ability into the field “to maximize law enforcement capacity.”

...

The Heritage coalition is taking its recruitment efforts on the road, crisscrossing America to fill the federal jobs. They staffed the Iowa State Fair this month and signed up hundreds of people, and they’re building out a database of potential employees, inviting them to be trained in government operations.

“It’s counterintuitive,” Dans acknowledged — the idea of joining government to shrink it — but he said that’s the lesson learned from the Trump days about what’s needed to “regain control.”

Conservative groups draw up plan to dismantle the US government and replace it with Trump’s vision

With more than a year to go before the 2024 election, a constellation of conservative organizations is preparing for a possible second White House term for Donald Trump.

apnews.com

And of course, they are committed to destroy the rest of the world as much as possible for everyone else.

A Republican 2024 Climate Strategy: More Drilling, Less Clean Energy (Published 2023)

Project 2025, a conservative “battle plan” for the next Republican president, would stop attempts to cut the pollution that is heating the planet and encourage more emissions.

www.nytimes.com

They want to give Trump all the power that, were Biden to try to exercise 1% of it, would have them firebombing the White House by lunchtime.

 

[Silvanus]

Here's the thing: they didn't write articles about people drinking bleach within the context of covid. They wrote articles about Donald Trump. I'll pull this back up:

Why It’s Important Not to Drink Bleach

Doctors and nurses are risking their lives and dying. People are out of work and struggling to make rent. The president of the United States is suggesting injecting disinfectant.

www.theatlantic.com

Give it a read. At no point in that article do they say anything about the heightened rate of accidental poisonings. The article is about Trump, start to finish.

No: that article is about people taking dangerous non-cures in general: bleach, the broader family of disinfectants, isopropyl alcohol. And whether you like it or not, what the President said is a relevant and valid part of that story, because he suggested a dangerous non-cure. There is nothing dishonest there.

Let's say we have an article about... financial crimes. The article broadly talks about a range of crimes, from fraud to insider trading to tax evasion. And because its a famous and current example, the article mentions Bernie Madoff several times, specifying that he's responsible for fraud. It doesn't say anything about him being responsible for the other crimes the broader article covers.

This would be 100% normal, and not dishonest. Regular practice common to any outlet. Articles can talk about broad categories of connected topics, such as financial crimes or dangerous false cures; and articles can also use examples for individual parts.

What you're doing is the equivalent of accusing that financial crime article of dishonesty because you think it gives the "impression" that Madoff is also guilty of those other crimes. Just because it... talked about them as well, as part of a broader piece, without ever linking him to them.

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/the-media/2023/09/06/project-veritas-james-okeefe-audit-spending-volatile/

It's grifts all the way down, all the way up, and as far beyond the horizon as one could begin to even imagine.

 

[tstorm823]

That's just a blatant lie. It has at least three whole paragraphs contextualising the current and historical misuse of cleaning products.

In what world does "the historical misuse of cleaning products" equate to "heightened rates of accidental poisoning"?

you're all but demanding the media should have artificially firewalled discussion of bleach injestion and Trump just to protect Trump, and that they didn't is therefore proof that they were just out to get Trump.

The equivalence drawn between what Trump said and ingesting bleach is artificial in the first place. Distinction between the concepts is not an artificial firewall, it's the natural state if you don't connect them.

You complained that the media produced an article warning people against the danger of drinking bleach, at a time when people were drinking bleach.

No: that article is about people taking dangerous non-cures in general: bleach, the broader family of disinfectants, isopropyl alcohol. And whether you like it or not, what the President said is a relevant and valid part of that story, because he suggested a dangerous non-cure. There is nothing dishonest there.

Which is it?