One thing that makes me sound like a paranoid conservative is that I really think that communism and it's ideological offspring are morally and intellectually corrosive. It's a theological conspiracy theory that encourages nihilistic aversion to institutional stability and human advancement. Liberalism, as formulated by Rawls and his veil of ignorance, is so obviously correct by virtue of how boring it is. The need for more exciting and simplicistic political ideas is just a personality disorder.
Churchill could have shortened WW2 by years if he had just “done a deal” with Hitler. George Washington could have done a deal to end the American Revolution. Zelenskyy is in good company.
It looks like the "social experiment" of Wedgewood polls is just them trying to get ahead of the story.
It's insane that just a handful of liars can potentially alter the outcome of an election.
But it does kind of rub me the wrong way that the people complaining loudest about this causing McMorrow to lose, are the same people that insist that superdelegates consistently showing Bernie Sanders with an insurmountable deficit, and an entire media apparatus proclaiming he was unelectable, did not meaningfully affect the outcome of the 2016 primary.
One of the darkest and most reprehensible ideas of our time is the notion that those who do the right thing by helping a country under attack are somehow responsible for the war and the suffering it causes.
Too clever by half. He correctly notes that Ukraine cannot give up its fortress belt because that'd give the Russians a "straight shot into Kyiv." Yet he insists the war is just about 11% of territory. No, the lie is in his explanation: Putin wants the 11% at the negotiating table because he cannot take it on the battlefield; and he wants it because it gives him another opportunity to make a play for Kyiv at a later date. The Russians don't want to end the war, they want the U.S. to create the more amenable conditions for the continuation of the war in future. The tragedy of Rubio is that he's in better command of the facts than anyone else in this administration but he nonetheless ends up acting a mouthpiece for policies he knows are wrong.
Knowing anything about anything alienates you from leftists. The average leftist's worldview is that ontologically evil businessmen are destroying the world because they're too greedy and that we should fix it by passing the no more greed act.
So much of the liberal world order's crisis is simply the inability to enforce the rules. On crime, foreign influence, welfare - people at home and abroad found ways to exploit our well meaning systems for personal gain or public destruction, and we refuse to stop it
@JacobPerry Not too long ago, Jonah had Cooke on and called him his “expert on Florida politics”. Immediately, Cooke talks about how well the DeSantis administration is governing the state. Jonah’s first question was about the school vaccine policy and Cooke had no idea about it.
Okay, but to be clear, again, Charles being wrong about Hegseth is not the problem with his defense. The problem was it was obvious he was wrong *at the time*.
Smart people can arrive at wrong conclusions. Charles was sticking up for a green room pal and being a partisan.
@PiscoLitty@iamparasocial It seems like your position is: yes, maybe you can *say* things without data — but you can’t reasonably criticize or argue a politician is taking the wrong action and should behave differently without data.
@JonahDispatch@JacobPerry Can you not just call a spade a spade even when it’s your friend? It is impossible to have gotten Hegseth wrong unless you were a total partisan hack. It’s not just “being wrong”.
its funny when its libs believing fake stuff these guys are all "wow we need people to hold hands, and share facts" or some shit, but then when its conservatives believing fake stuff its "of course these evil monsters are lying devils, string them up from the lampposts"
@RadioCarpenter@MattWalshBlog I don’t know what point of mine you’re even addressing; I didn’t say any of these things. I said you should not pretend that you “paid into” the system and therefore have a moral claim to it continuing for your benefit when that mechanically isn’t how it works.
@RadioCarpenter@MattWalshBlog It’s understandable to not want a shock to the system at the exact moment you stand to benefit from it, but you can at least not repeat the lie that you paid into it when you apparently used to understand that you weren’t.