🚨 WOW: 🚨
I asked neocon Liz Cheney a question about her dad’s (Dick Cheney’s) lies that led us into the bloody Iraq War, and she proceeded to mischaracterize my question and prattle on for 4 minutes about Donald Trump and the 2020 election. (Clip 1/3) 🧵
Regardless of what you think of him, this will always be one of the most powerful speeches in the history of the Senate.
Back in 2018 when this happened, friends of mine who were not political teared up after watching this.
I obviously have no idea if Mitch McConnell is braindead, but the fact that it’s a plausible scenario is a ridiculous indictment of our gerontocracy. People generally shouldn’t be leaving office in body bags. I do not understand the obsession with clinging to power until death.
I'm not even joking, this is how charts are presented in the climate science literature to show the attribution of CO2 concentrations. I pointed out why this is misleading one time and even a friendly guy on the inside thought I was nitpicking.
The Declaration of Independence is the greatest document ever produced by man. It’s no coincidence that it was the founding document of our nation and we went on to be the most prosperous civilization in human history. Any country founded on that document is worth loving and fighting to save.
It is also, undeniably, a radically libertarian document that clearly states the validity of natural God given rights and that the only legitimate role for government is the protection of liberty.
We have serious problems in our country today and we will be much better off if we follow the spirit of our founding document than the brain dead varying socialisms being promoted by both political parties.
Charlie Kirk loved this nation. He understood what was at stake and fought for it. It’s worth revisiting the conversation we had a year ago this month. Happy 250.
When I was a child, my grandfather would sometimes solemnly intone at the dinner table: "The purpose of socialism is to organize scarcity."
As a kid it sort-of didn't register in my brain as meaning anything beyond "socialism bad", but eventually when I was 12 or something, I did ask what he meant by those specific words.
And he said: socialists establish control of valuable resources and then create an artificial scarcity of these resources, so that they can then use them as a tool of control by deciding who gets and doesn't get those resources.
And I thought that was wrong. I mean, are socialists misguided? Sure. But to claim that they deliberately create scarcity as a means of political control? That seemed far-fetched.
But, of course, he was entirely correct.
Hope everyone in the media is happy. Yall could’ve just sat and appreciated one of the best basketball duo’s of the 21st century but instead every single media outlet had to fucking desperately try and pry them apart until the Celtics organization finally gave in.
Unbelievable.
10 years
5x All-Star
2x All-NBA Second Team
2024 ECF MVP, Finals MVP, Champ
7 will be in the rafters. 💚
From the bottom of our hearts, thank you for everything Jaylen Brown.
If you want to see if someone really opposes “blood and soil nationalism” ask them if that means the U.S. should ban financial or military assistance to any countries practicing “blood and soil nationalism.”
Given Hasan Piker's takeover of the Democrat party, and the primaries the anti-Israel crowd are sweeping (see last night for the latest), you'd think that the blood and soil nationalists for Israel would refrain from insulting Americans. You would, of course, think wrong.
Birthright citizenship tale... Our social circle in Maskachusetts included a guy married to a Honduran. Every time one of his wife's relatives is pregnant she comes to stay with them. When it is time to deliver the baby, the relative Ubers to one of the most expensive hospitals in the world, e.g., Beth Israel. She gives birth, says the magic words to avoid ever receiving a bill ("I'm undocumented"), and, after a few weeks, heads back to Honduras with baby, birth certificate, and U.S. passport. This one family has likely cost taxpayers at least $300,000 in payments to the hospital for "uncompensated care" and more than 10 U.S. citizens have been minted. When the kids are adults they have an automatic right to sponsor their parents for green cards, so eventually this one family will be responsible for perhaps 40 or 50 legal immigrants from Honduras to the U.S.
Today's birthright citizenship ruling by the Supreme Court is the most egregious, lawless violation of our most crucial sovereign power as American citizens:
To determine who becomes one of us.
There is no chance in hell we fought a civil war and enacted the 14th amendment to give birthright citizenship to the kids of birth tourists, terrorists, human traffickers, temporary visitors, and other illegals.
After today's abomination of a ruling, Chinese birth tourists can simply give birth to their kids in America, immediately return to China, never step foot in America again, mail in from China their kids' ballots into American elections when they turn 18, and collect social security and other benefits of American citizenship the rest of their lives.
Ask this dispositive question:
If American Indians didn't have birthright citizenship under the 14th amendment, how the hell do Chinese birth tourists?
They simply don't.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who auditioned as the next Scalia, shamefully put their vanity over our country.
This is the ultimate betrayal.
I've been thinking about this off-and-on all morning and day. A piece of "writing" hasn't stuck with me like this for a while. It had the opposite effect as intended. It was anti-persuasion. It's actually enraging that we "have" to pay for every gas tank in Liberia.
I really don't think politicians want to live in a world where we take their legislative or regulatory actions, pass them through an Excel sheet with assumptions, and then convict them of whatever number of murders our "scientific model" determines they are responsible for.
Part of what’s ultimately so unsatisfying about bland neoliberalism is that we’re supposed to look at plainly immoral actions and prove that they’re bad because they have some secondary undesirable effect. It’s like arguing with a bike thief about which of you deserves the bike.
The 17th Amendment was sold as a "one man, one vote" populist initiative. But it was bogus progressivism that led to average tenure skyrocketing into careerism, greater control and efficiency for rent seekers (special interest).
@ToddZywicki did incredible work on this topic long before I touched it, specifically on how it made it dramatically more difficult to overturn bad legislation.
It's a disaster and we should abolish it.
Guy who enthusiastically cheers on the government making it functionally impossible to be a small, mom-and-pop landlord but then complains when Blackrock buys up housing as a result
Most often it’s much easier to steal from the future, which is abstract, not yet instantiated, and at a disadvantage in defending itself, than it is from an extant party in the present that has more ability to fight back.
With the rent freeze and kicking the can on pensions, Mamdani is stealing from the future. Whether he recognizes this (given his bottomless entitlement) or not is unclear, but it does seem that one key feature of DSA politics is an ideological vision overdependent on immediate gratification and lacking the capacity to imagine the future in even the most basic way.
@ScottMGreer Hey Scott, loving the book so far, and was nice seeing you again on Tuesday. Just a heads up since DMs are closed that your chapter 4/5 endnotes are messed up