Cannon

Reverence for the Absurd
🙏
Reformed Creative
🥁
Geology
🌍
Law
⚖️

[Andrew Fleischman @ASFleischman]

A quick 1a guide for y'all:

"I will kill you." True threat.

"Kill that guy." Incitement.

"Someone should kill that guy." Not a crime.

[Forever Trill🇳🇬 🇰🇪 🇧🇸 @mccauley318]

Jay Z on Pimp C verse

[Cristóbal Valenzuela @c_valenzuelab]

In 1859, Charles Baudelaire, perhaps one of the greatest artist of his time, said that photography was “art’s most mortal enemy,” arguing that it was a mechanical, soulless tool that should be restricted and was not meant for creating art. He believed true art required human imagination and creativity, whereas photography merely copied reality. He claimed it appealed to the “blindness and imbecility” of the public and to the “petty bourgeoisie,” who were just dumb to understand the true nature of art that comes from God.

[Sterling Crispin 🕊️ @sterlingcrispin]

The source of the myth is @_KarenHao she wrote a book called Empire of AI claiming a data center would use over 1,000x more water than a nearby city because she misunderstood the units of measurement.

It made international headlines and the mistake / lie has been unstoppable.

[Kristi Yamaguccimane @TheWapplehouse]

Don’t like those videos where famous musicians pretend to have never heard a song before but if it’s something obscure, whatever…but THIS?? THIS MOTHERFUCKER?? YOU PLAY IN DREAM THEATRE AND ARE GONNA PRETEND YOU’VE NEVER HEARD OF THUNDERSTRUCK YOU STUPID ASSHOLE

[Terri Green @TerriGreenUSA]

This video demonstrates the absurdity of contemporary Christian music today, that is the same tune, different words, and its meaningless messages like Bethel and Hillsong. It’s all about feelings.

[Jeremy @jeremylevick]

conservative lecturer DESTROYS sjw college student

[Sarah Isgur @whignewtons]

“There are no maverick molecules in the universe.”

Haven’t seen a conversation like this—intellectual, philosophical, big picture—on tv in decades. It’s incredible.

[Damin Toell @damintoell]

By "got swept under the rug," she means that he's being actively prosecuted by Trump's DOJ for assaulting a member of Congress pursuant to 18 USC § 111. 5 days ago, the court was advised that he's taking a plea deal, and the court set a hearing for May 7th.

[Kelly Towerss 💫 @KellyAfterDarkk]

El personaje de la serpiente en la pelicula de 'El Principito' (1974), interpretado por Bob Fusse, fue una de las principales inspiraciones de Michael Jackson para crear sus pasos de baile.

[Steven Pinker @sapinker]

And I’m often called an optimist, although I tend to move away from that label because what I see my message is, is not so much we should look on the bright side, but rather just be aware of facts, such as that life expectancy has more than doubled, extreme poverty has been reduced from 90% of humanity to 10% of humanity, and deaths in wars are down. The fact that things have gotten better, though not perfect, does lead to some optimism—namely, if our ancestors did it and it kind of worked, sort of, better than not, then it’s not romantic, it’s not foolish, it’s not utopian to try to make things better still.

(From @singforscience with José González. Link below.)

[cinesthetic. @TheCinesthetic]

The best 20 minutes you’ll spend today.

David Lynch on living more by doing less. https://t.co/XP2IZRw5qd

[James Blunt @JBlunt1018]

Go with me for a second on the birthright citizenship scenario — simple version.

You’re saying citizenship should depend on whether someone is here “legally.”

Okay. Who defines “legal”?

Congress.

And Congress can change that definition anytime.

Now fast forward 25–30 years.

A different political wave takes over, not your side. Let’s say a very aggressive left-wing government. They decide certain groups are a “problem” or “historically harmful” or “overrepresented.”

So they pass a law redefining “legal presence.”

Not by geography. Not by birth.

By criteria like:
— ideology
— ancestry
— demographic quotas
— “equity” frameworks

Sounds crazy but we’ve literally done versions of this before, go see the Chinese Exclusion Act.

Now under YOUR framework:
Only people who meet this new definition of “legal” are considered fully “subject to jurisdiction.”

Everyone else are not legal therefore not covered so their kids don’t get citizenship.

So you now have:
A child born in the U.S.
Grew up here
Never left
Knows no other country

But not a citizen… because Congress changed a definition of what legal means.

Nothing about the child changed.
Only politics did.

That’s the entire problem with your argument.

You’re turning citizenship from a constitutional guarantee into a policy lever. And policy levers get pulled.

The 14th Amendment was written specifically to stop that, to make citizenship automatic at birth so it couldn’t be manipulated by whoever happens to be in power.

Because once you let Congress define “who counts,” you’re not protecting citizenship anymore even for yourself.

[Conservative @Conservative2TX]

It Was Just a Halftime Show. The Meltdown Reveals How Dumb We’ve Become.

The most revealing thing about the Super Bowl halftime show was not Bad Bunny, Kid Rock, or even Donald Trump deciding that this was a useful place to weigh in. It was how quickly millions of people volunteered to be furious on cue, as if anger were a civic duty rather than an emotional habit that has gotten wildly out of hand.

https://t.co/qnE5nnITIg

[Scott Lincicome @scottlincicome]

OMG he did it. He really did it! (Turn captions on)

[grace spelman @GraceSpelman]

bad bunny marked ✅ SAFE ✅ from super bowl stabs

[Tolkien World @TolkienWorldG]

Sir Ian McKellen at 86 expertly reciting Shakespeare last night!

[Cris ✨ @lionesspike]

the thing with losing catherine o’hara is that there are few actors unafraid to make the zany, whacky, over the top comedic choices she’d make. there’s just no one like her

[🇨🇭🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿InLucysHead🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇨🇭© @InsideLucysHead]

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump...

I said, "Don't do it!" He said,

"Nobody loves me."

I said, "God loves you.

Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes."

I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?"

He said, "A Christian."

I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?"

He said, "Protestant."

I said, "Me, too! What franchise?"

He said, "Baptist."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Baptist."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912."

I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.

[Gene Epstein @GeneSohoForum]

Posted again from 19th century French thinker Bastiat for @NickJFuentes to read: Since the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to allow them liberty, how comes it to pass that the tendencies of organizers are always good?

Do not the legislators and their agents form a part of the human race? Do they consider that they are composed of different materials from the rest of mankind?

They say that society, when left to itself, rushes to inevitable destruction, because its instincts are perverse. They presume to stop it in its downward course, and to give it a better direction. They have, therefore, received from heaven, intelligence and virtues that place them beyond and above mankind: let them show their title to this superiority.

They would be our shepherds, and we are to be their flock. This arrangement presupposes in them a natural superiority, the right to which we are fully justified in calling upon them to prove.

You must observe that I am not contending against their right to invent social combinations, to propagate them, to recommend them, and to try them upon themselves, at their own expense and risk; but I do dispute their right to impose them upon us through the medium of the law, that is, by force and by public taxes. I would not insist upon the Cabetists, the Fourierists, the Proudhonians, the Academics, and the Protectionists renouncing their own particular ideas; I would only have them renounce the idea that is common to them all—viz., that of subjecting us by force to their own categories and rankings to their social laboratories,