I spoke with Scottie yesterday. He wants me to do a ‘daily thought’ thing. Well, I don’t really have time for daily thoughts (lol) but here goes.
I recently watched a Pierce Morgan episode where he confronted Neil DeGrasse Tyson for having the temerity to disagree with “the greatest mind” of the generation, his hero Elon Musk.
Mr. Tyson commented that the idea of going to Mars is not practical. Not that he didn’t support it, but that something that costly, that reaching, that highly technological and requiring new technology, would not be good business – and if it isn’t an issue of religion or war, the idea was unlikely to be fulfilled. Pierce went on to ignore most of what Mr. Tyson said in order to Rah!Rah! Musk.
What was worse, in my mind, is that he couldn’t seem to find his way out of his prepared argument in order to really listen to Mr. Tyson. The result was that he spouted the very arguments that Tyson had already refuted without bothering to address those refuted points.
Shortly after that I watched a clip of ABC News speaking on an unidentified object in the sky. It was Venus, you know – the planet? Identified centuries ago, it’s orbit mapped and described and is available at the stroke of a few keys or on a handy free phone ap that shows the stars and planets in the night sky. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bv8f7KHnz5Q
So What? Right? Well, my point is not that I’m so smart, because I am surely not. It’s not that I have this issue well in hand, because I surely don’t.
It is quite simply that we are bound to spiral and fail in any endeavor not for, as Pierce Morgan believes, the doubting of Elon’s great dream, but because the dream is nothing without the facts! We find our entertainment in make believe and our news in hypocrisy and innuendo. Don’t get me wrong, I never really liked school and I prefer my entertainment to be fantastic and unreal, but I want my news to be real and factual, and that is near impossible in our current dissemination of what is called “news”. We spend millions on debating the validity of transgender in NCAA sports when come to find out there are less than 10 in the 510,000 athletes. We have chosen to excuse our political leaders for their crimes yet seek to lock up children because “they should have known better”. We have allowed our children to be poorly educated and malnourished while the super wealthy demand tax breaks. We have chosen to believe the lies and made him president, and the first things he has chosen to do are the eradication of of the departments of Education, Energy, Environment and the National Academy of Science.
The use of fear and fabrication is not new to politics, to news pundits, to religious leaders, and of course, the downplaying of anything enlightening and thought encouraging is the true mark of a great propagandist and conman. I mean, “who are you going to believe: Me or your lying eyes?”
I am glad the Rev. made this post. Nothing made me angrier over the years than Christians thinking this time of year that their celebrations were the start of it all. How ignorant of history. To them the world started and ended with their religion. Every year in our park of homes I saw and still do see lawn signs with “Put Christ back in Christmas”, followed by Christ is the reason why we have Christmas. I lost many fellow neighbors as friends when I pointed out to them that most of the season’s traditions were pagan ones and that people celebrated the season long before their religion started. Blasphemous they would yell at me, why the holiday has his name in it, they would yell. No matter the true history they wouldn’t listen and then would try to spread hate behind my back. Very Christian of them. Early maga before tRump came on the scene, but his type of people. They are sure they are correct as it has always been that way in their life or for them. Hugs. Love.
And how long is this ‘masculinity crisis’ going to last?Read on Substack
by Rebecca Schoenkopf
Last week, I watched Girls Gone Wild: The Untold Story on Peacock, which, unsurprisingly, was fairly disturbing on a number of levels, starting with the fact that most people at the time thought “getting young women extremely drunk and then convincing them to take their tops off on camera” was a fairly normal, “boys will be boys!” thing to do.
The thing that really struck me, though, was the fact that it remained “normal” until about 2011, when creator Joe Francis was arrested for false imprisonment and assault, after he brought three women home after a night out and refused to let them leave, ultimately attacking one of them and bashing her head into the floor. Francis had long been Public Enemy #1 for feminists (along with, on the other end of the spectrum, the Christian patriarchs who fake-married their daughters at Purity Balls), but at that point, no one was really paying any attention to us.
The reason I bring this up, the reason it struck me, is because I don’t think I really realized until just then what an incredibly short time period it was between the end of that era — this era where bro culture was celebrated, where rape culture was celebrated, where women’s sexuality was a thing within their control whichever way they chose to control it, in which beautiful female celebrities were excoriated for being a size four in public — and the era we are now in.
Because we hear a lot about it from their end, right? The story, as they tell it, is that there were all these ostensibly “liberal” men who “voted for Obama,” but then the Left “just went too far” and drove them into the loving, misogynistic arms of Andrew Tate and Donald Trump. And now they’re lonely and they don’t know how to be men and it is a full-on crisis! A crisis I tell you! And an epidemic!
The way they talk, you would think that they had been forced to live in this horrible matriarchal world for years, during where they weren’t allowed any free speech, were constantly accused of rapes they didn’t commit, were told constantly by everyone that they were garbage and that they had to apologize for being born male.
But let’s piece together this timeline, shall we?
2011: Joe Francis arrested, “Entourage” ends.
2012: During a stand-up set, comedian Daniel Tosh starts talking about how rape jokes are “always” funny — causing a woman in the audience to yell, “Actually, rape jokes are never funny!”, to which he responds, “Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, five guys right now? Like right now? What if a bunch of guys just raped her?”
— Also, Tucker Max, who was celebrated for having written a book called I Hope They Serve Beer In Hell, in which he tells multiple stories of having sex with extremely intoxicated women, “retires” from being Tucker Max.
2013: We have the rape joke discourse, led by then-Jezebel writer Lindy West. On the one hand, you have feminists saying “This shit isn’t actually funny,” and on the other, approximately 87 million op-eds about how we must protect the sanctity of rape jokes.
— The campus rape discourse begins. Women who have been raped on campus discuss both the problem of rape on campus and the tendency of school officials to do nothing about it, asking people to take it more seriously and criticizing men who have sex with women when they are too intoxicated to consent. This is followed by years of people complaining that we can’t take these women seriously, because what if they are just having day-after regrets because the man didn’t send them flowers or call them back or something?
2014: In May, incel Elliot Rodger kills six people because he is angry that women won’t have sex with him.
— In August, Gamergate begins — starting out as a rage against progressive videogame developer Zoë Quinn from gamers who believe that she only got good reviews for a game she made that they didn’t like because she had a sexual relationship with a video game reviewer (who never actually reviewed her game). It turns into unfettered rage and harassment against women who dare to criticize games for being misogynistic, and then against all “Social Justice Warriors” in general.
— We have the street harassment discourse, started by Black women on social media, in which women publicly discussed the general unpleasantness of not being able to walk to the grocery store without some guy yelling “Nice tits!” at us. This is quickly followed by approximately 87 million “How are men even supposed to talk to women if they can’t yell at them while they walk down the street?” and “But it’s a compliment!” and “I’m a woman and it makes me feel pretty when men I don’t know compliment my ass!” op-eds.
— The height of the affirmative consent discourse, in which people discuss why it’s important to have affirmative and enthusiastic consent at each stage of sexual activity. Some states implement “Yes Means Yes” laws — so that, instead of asking campus rape victims whether they were clear enough that they did not want to have sex with someone, accused rapists will be asked how they obtained consent, This was, naturally, followed by lots of complaining that it will ruin sex.
2015: Donald Trump begins his presidential campaign, ultimately winning in part due to a backlash to “social justice” activism — feminist activism and rape culture discourse in particular.
So let’s just stop there for now. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, because I know we had a few more discourses and we certainly had a lot more incel mass murders. But it doesn’t need to be, because the main thing I want to point out is that, at the very most, we had a few years of public discussions of things women had grown real fucking sick of, each of which was swiftly followed by an inevitable “Has feminism gone too far?!?” backlash from those who thought everything was fine the way it was and had been — mostly from those with bigger platforms and more power than we ever had.
This, frankly, has been the case for all social justice movements that have occurred over the last few years — not just feminism and rape culture, but also racism, police brutality and trans rights. You see a groundswell of actual people talking about their experiences and how best to change things so that other people don’t have to go through them, and a swift and terrible backlash from those who say they would like those other people to shut up, please.
Donald Trump was elected again this year, and again we were all told “This is all because you all just went too far! They just couldn’t take it anymore!”
But like, in the end, what did they have to take? People talking publicly on social media? People making art, movies, television shows, music, video games, etc. that they don’t like? Or publicly criticizing things they do like or behavior they enjoy engaging in?
That’s nothing. Especially when compared to everything that everyone else was expected to go through and shut up about. I’d like to point out that, quite notably, taking rape more seriously did not lead to any epidemic of men being sent to prison for not sending flowers or calling the day after.
One of the most jarring points of the “Girls Gone Wild” documentary is one in which a girl recounts how she ended up in a video when she was 17 years old (making it, legally, child pornography), and one of the male teachers at her high school responded by asking her to autograph a copy for him. That’s just one moment, one small snapshot of what was meant to be acceptable back then.
And, you know, at no point did anyone back then publicly wonder or wring their hands about “Is the patriarchy going too far?” Rather, then, as now, most public discussion was about what was wrong with the girls who were doing this, not the men who produced it.
It’s not at all surprising to me that men living in that social environment felt “safe” voting for Barack Obama, or felt like they were totally liberal because they wanted to legalize weed and didn’t care if people were gay or not. Because they could vote for Obama and feel like a good liberal while chanting “Iron my shirt!” at Hillary Clinton. Everything was going really well for them and no one was really challenging the status quo, at least not anyone they were paying any attention to. This is part of what they mean when they say “the Left left me!”
(And, again, that’s just the feminist side of it. They were also “totally fine” with Black people until Black people started bringing up police brutality and racism, and fine with LGBTQ+ people when they thought that civil rights push would end with marriage.)
We’re being punished right now for a feminist utopia we never even had. We went straight from the Girls Gone Wild Era to the Gamergate/Incel mass murder era to the the Trump era. And while a whole lot has changed in terms of what we are willing to put up with or be quiet about, the only thing that has actually changed about the patriarchy has been the flavor it takes on.
12.9.2024 Xiajing Zhu and Cornelia (Connie) Pechmann
Many top Republicans, including Donald Trump and Senators Tim Scott (South Carolina), Marco Rubio (Florida), and Ted Cruz (Texas), refuse to accept the 2020 election results. Many other Republicans falsely assert the 2020 election was rigged and have stated that they stood ready to fight if Trump was not declared the 2024 winner.
In a new Journal of Marketing study, we explain what underlies these Republicans’ thought processes and behaviors and how the majority of news media and social media contribute to this problem.
The Lethal Combination: Polarization and Misinformation
Our team finds that political polarization triggers Republicans, but not Democrats, to spread misinformation that is objectively false. Although Republicans may understand the content is very likely false, they are willing to spread it. We also discover the reason why Republicans respond to political polarization by conveying misinformation, while Democrats do not: Republicans strongly value their party winning over the competition. Democrats do not value winning nearly as strongly; they place more value on equity and inclusion, seeing the world in a fundamentally different way than Republicans.
In other words, whenever there is political polarization—that is, fierce competition between political parties—Republicans feel their backs are against the wall and come out swinging. They are willing to convey misinformation that is likely untrue, but not definitively false, to help their fellow Republicans win and Democrats lose. Democrats are less triggered by political polarization—they do not value their party winning over other values, so they do not respond this way.
We conducted six studies that demonstrate this. Our first study examines fact-checked statements in the news media and on social media by public figures over 10 years (2007–2016). Our second study extends this analysis to 16 years (2007–2022). We find that when there was political polarization in the news cycle, Republicans conveyed significantly more misinformation than Democrats.
We verify our findings in three online studies where we surveyed U.S. adults who identified as either Republican or Democrat. We put these individuals in politically polarized situations—for instance, we showed them Senate Republican and Democratic leaders arguing. We then showed them misinformation from current social media. For example, Republicans saw news such as “Democratic Senators are secretly pro-Russia” and “Democratic Senators are purposely manipulating gas prices,” while Democrats saw news such as “Republican Senators are secretly pro-Russia” and “Republican Senators are purposely manipulating gas prices.” In politically polarized situations, Republicans were significantly more willing to convey misinformation than Democrats to gain an advantage over the opposing party.
Our last study examines the speeches of U.S. presidents over 94 years (1929–2023), spanning the 31st president Herbert Hoover to the 46th president Joseph Biden. We find that in political polarized situations, such as during election periods, Republican presidents talked more about “we” and “us” than Democratic presidents, indicating they were more focused on their own party and partisanship.
To summarize, Republicans react to political polarization by putting out partisan misinformation. This can have a deleterious effect on the state of democratic institutions and processes. For instance, in the year following the 2020 U.S. presidential election and accompanying misinformation about election fraud, 400 restrictive voting bills were introduced in 47 U.S. state legislatures. Additionally, 14 states passed restrictive voting bills that, for instance, shortened the mail-in voting period, eliminated election day registration, and/or reduced ballot drop box access. These changes have decreased voter turnout and engagement, particularly among minority voters. (snip-MORE; it gets more interesting as it goes along, to me)
Notice that while claiming the debt is too high tRump and crew are still trying to make permanent the huge tax cut to the wealthy give during tRump’s first term that added nearly 8 trillion in debt. Plus these people claim there is no money yet always find more for the military, increasing the profit of the defense contractors / companies that not only give them large donations but that the congress people have stocks in. They also never talk of why there is not enough money … the constant push to cut all the government’s revenue from those with the most money, the wealthy and large corporations. The greatest times of property for the public and the country was when taxes were high on the wealthiest people and corporations, why because they have all the money and can afford the tax.
Then Reagan began the shifting the tax burden from those most able to pay to the poorest members of society, those with no ability to pay. Suddenly the country went from a boom in infrastructure and ways to increase financially upward mobility for the middle class to a system of oppression and drudgery for the lower incomes while the upper incomes lived in untold luxury.
The republicans pushing for European countries to pay more for NATO was recently explained on a Sunday news show as the Senator said that by forcing the European governments to pay more for defense it would lower what they would be able to do for social welfare programs for the public. Why do the republicans in the US want the rest of the developed nations to lower the spending on their people? Because the people in the US constantly can see now that other countries can do it, that other countries take care of their public, the people living there. The US gives billions to Israel which has free healthcare, something these same politicians say we can not afford in the US. Profit is king in the US, people are expendable. Hug
“We all agree this is an unsustainable area that we’re in right now — almost $36 trillion in debt and we are spending more on the interest on our debt than we are going to spend on the National Defense Authorization Act this year. Over a trillion dollars.
“And so we’ve got to right the ship and it’s going to mean cuts. It’s going to mean cuts to the 24% of the discretionary spending that we have and it’s also going to mean looking long-term at the front end of some programs like Social Security and Medicare.
“Not taking anyone off of what they paid into so far. But there is some waste, abuse and fraud in Medicare that we can take those numbers back and add to our general coffers and our treasury.
“And on the front end on Social Security, I think there’s a way, when people are living longer, they’re retiring later, then on the front end we can move that retirement age back a little bit.” – GOP Rep. Mark Alford, today on Fox.
Alford appeared here last week when he called for impeaching “full of slime” Biden. Alford, a freshman and former TV reporter, appeared here in December 2023 when he introduced a bill seeking to defund the Pentagon’s investigation into white supremacist service members.
Rep. Mark Alford: "It's gonna mean cuts to the 24 percent of the discretionary spending that we have. And it's also going to mean looking long term at the front end of some programs like Social Security and Medicare … we can move the retirement age back a little bit."
and forcing congress to fund all of the I.O.U.s they put into the social security trust fund when they took money from it to fun the budget instead of raising taxes. A one time surcharge on billionaires should take care of it.
Do Republicans REALLY wanna dance on that third rail, given how they barely control the House already? Y’all wanna test your whole “but we have a mandate” bullshit?
But don’t forget decades ago bothsides of the isle in congress took large amounts of money from the Trust Fund so they didn’t have to raise taxes. It was Gore in 1999 when he was campaigning that he promised to put the Trust Fund in a ‘locked box” to protect it. But , too little, too late.
“But we still need to give millionaires, billionaires, and soon-to-be trillionaires more tax cuts because they need it, and cutting SS and Medicare is how we’ll pay for it.”
This is something that a lot of people get wrong because the US debt is never explained. The US debt is held in bonds which anyone can invest in. Yes, it’s technically borrowing, but it’s borrowing like one lends money when they invest in even a 401k or savings account. That money earns interest. And the money “borrowed” from social security is really that the social security fund is held in interest-bearing bonds. What republicans want to do is cut medicare and social security so they don’t have to make good on those bonds.
How about taking away the pensions, tax benefits, security, and health insurance benefits of retired Congresscritters? They’re typically all wealthy, and are a drain on the budget. Hey, if we are all expected to tighten our belts, these fuckers should lead the way.
The questions went further than just affirming allegiance to the incoming administration. The interviewers asked which candidate the applicants had supported in the three most recent elections, what they thought about the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and whether they believed the 2020 election was stolen. The sense they got was that there was only one right answer to each question.
Applicants who said they gave what they intuited to be the wrong answer — either decrying the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 or saying that President Biden won in 2020 – were met with silence and the taking of notes. They didn’t get the jobs.
Charlie Kirk, the right-wing activist and pro-MAGA podcaster, is among those conducting the loyalty tests, along with members of the personnel team. The more policy-focused interviews have been conducted by members of the transition staff and by potential agency heads, such as Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard.
An important video to watch and try to understand. Sensitive times. I have encrypted mail and encrypted text on both computers. Plus my computers have VPN’s of high quality that do not have any tracking, along with good security programs. I have what I can also on my phone. You might ask why I have such things. I talk to people who have been abused. I also have been abused. All mainstream programs scan such communications with computers, AIs, and they don’t differentiate from this happened to me from I am doing this to a child now. In the past I have known people who had police or other agencies target them thinking they were part of an abuse network when they were only talking to fellow survivors.
Having said that it is going to get worse. We know from Snowden the US government was illegally spying on all texts, calls, and other phone / computer activities of the public, now we must worry about foreign governments doing it also. Please listen to the video and protect yourself. Oh, for clarity I use NordVPN, no possible tracking, and I use Teleguard, Sessions, and Proton mail. Hugs