Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

That is complete nonsense, as there are no communists or anarchists or even Democratic Socialists with any national influence at all. And if you want to call Bernie "hard left" he is not big on DEI at all.

Look up the percentages of progressives in academia, media, and govt. DC donated 84% to Harris last year.

The list of stats establishing that the left has held wildly disproportionate sway over almost every cultural institution for the past few decades would break this board.

No, because it was a convenient excuse to use law enforcement to control Black people and anyone who publicly sympathized with civil rights (and the antiwar movement). We didn't lock up whole generations of young Black men because some people didn't like weed.

That was an added bonus for the idiots who passed the anti-marijuana laws. Another was helping out the alcohol industry.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Look up the percentages of progressives in academia, media, and govt. DC donated 84% to Harris last year.

The list of stats establishing that the left has held wildly disproportionate sway over almost every cultural institution for the past few decades would break this board.

If you're counting Harris as "the left" there is probably nothing more to say here.

Even among academics, there are few actual communists or anarchists. Fuck, whatever Chmosky even is doesn't hold any sway with elected Dems or the voters.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

If you're counting Harris as "the left" there is probably nothing more to say here.

I saw her say she wants the government to pay for sex change operations for inmates. I bet I saw her say it 1000 times. It was a big part of why she lost Michigan.*


*And Arabs reaction to what was happening in Gaza, which is pretty crazy if you think about it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Look up the percentages of progressives in academia, media, and govt. DC donated 84% to Harris last year.

Do you think about what you type here, or do you outsource to a monkey at a typewriter? Your first claim was, "The hard left has sway over the cultural institutions and until recently, govt institutions." Which is ridiculous, unless you have been in a MAGA bubble and have become convinced that "the hard left" includes everyone to the left of Marco Rubio. I can't think of a single significant cultural institution where the hard left has sway.

So when you're challenged on this absurd statement, you point to "the percentages of progressives in academia, media, and government," as if an English professor at, say, the University of Iowa "holds sway" over it, or Ruth Marcus (not the hard left, but I don't think there is a single person recently on that editorial staff from the hard left) ran the WaPo instead of Jeff Bezos and the center-right morons he brought over from England, or you could name a single government institution anywhere outside of, maybe, Vermont under the control of the hard left. I live near Santa Cruz, and the hard left is on the outside looking at the city government there.

And then the idea that DC is Democratic is supposed to prove something? As if all Democrats are "the hard left," as if Kamala Harris herself was, or as if everybody here doesn't know that the people who live in DC are predominantly working- and middle-class blacks who do not have the right to run their own government. DC's residents are *not* "the hard left" -- please tell your monkey.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I saw her say she wants the government to pay for sex change operations for inmates. I bet I saw her say it 1000 times. It was a big part of why she lost Michigan.*


*And Arabs reaction to what was happening in Gaza, which is pretty crazy if you think about it.

I was talking to one of my college roommates about this, and he's a former Senate staffer who has stayed involved in Democratic politics in a way that earns him money, and I think his take on this was right. I don't think you saw Harris say that, exactly. In 2019, her campaign answered a questionnaire (and based on what I know about how campaigns work, I assume that a staffer did this in a way that was approved by the campaign, if not her personally). See the facts recounted here. My roommate suggests that what happened here is not that Harris particularly cared one way or the other, but that -- and this is a recurring problem for Democrats -- the party is a coalition, and the campaign basically acceded to the demands on this position made by the people within the the Democratic coalition who really care about this stuff. At the time, Harris did not want to have a fight with them, so she took what seemed like the expedient way out. When the issue blew up during the campaign, she tried -- unsuccessfully -- to defuse it by saying she was just following the law, as Trump had during his first term.

Do you really think Harris wanted to expend political capital on this issue? No. And if she were a better politician, she wouldn't have put herself in this box. Am I defending her here? Not at all, but I am trying to put my finger the actual problem, which is not that Harris really wanted the government to pay for sex change operations for inmates, but more about the problems Democrats can have in trying to manage a coalition. My understanding, from my roommate, is that she got that questionnaire from an organization that was more committed to pushing the Overton Window on trans issues than on winning elections for Democrats, and the lesson he and others take from it is that the Democrats need to more resistant to that kind of hijacking.

(Note to Sebby: When the hard left actually holds sway, it doesn't to try to influence to discourse by sending people questionnaires -- it just sends dissenters to the gulags and re-education camps we don't have in this country.)

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I was talking to one of my college roommates about this, and he's a former Senate staffer who has stayed involved in Democratic politics in a way that earns him money, and I think his take on this was right. I don't think you saw Harris say that, exactly. In 2019, her campaign answered a questionnaire (and based on what I know about how campaigns work, I assume that a staffer did this in a way that was approved by the campaign, if not her personally). See the facts recounted here. My roommate suggests that what happened here is not that Harris particularly cared one way or the other, but that -- and this is a recurring problem for Democrats -- the party is a coalition, and the campaign basically acceded to the demands on this position made by the people within the the Democratic coalition who really care about this stuff. At the time, Harris did not want to have a fight with them, so she took what seemed like the expedient way out. When the issue blew up during the campaign, she tried -- unsuccessfully -- to defuse it by saying she was just following the law, as Trump had during his first term.

Do you really think Harris wanted to expend political capital on this issue? No. And if she were a better politician, she wouldn't have put herself in this box. Am I defending her here? Not at all, but I am trying to put my finger the actual problem, which is not that Harris really wanted the government to pay for sex change operations for inmates, but more about the problems Democrats can have in trying to manage a coalition. My understanding, from my roommate, is that she got that questionnaire from an organization that was more committed to pushing the Overton Window on trans issues than on winning elections for Democrats, and the lesson he and others take from it is that the Democrats need to more resistant to that kind of hijacking.

(Note to Sebby: When the hard left actually holds sway, it doesn't to try to influence to discourse by sending people questionnaires -- it just sends dissenters to the gulags and re-education camps we don't have in this country.)

There was a commercial with film of her at something called Transnation speaking to a trans woman and promising the payments. I assume while she held some office in Cali?

The commercial then went to a radio show with two young black men complaining about government money being for that. Then an image of a girls middle school school basketball team with you or me on it.

Just saying whatever she meant when she said the gov would pay, and it was film, ain’t no way back from that.


EDIT This has the film of her saying it. I can't find the commercial that played in Michigan but it was pretty devastating, worse than this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xzybGKwIGk

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

There was a commercial with film of her at something called Transnation speaking to a trans woman and promising the payments. I assume while she held some office in Cali?

The commercial then went to a radio show with two young black men complaining about government money being for that. Then an image of a girls middle school school basketball team with you or me on it.

Just saying whatever she meant when she said the gov would pay, and it was film, ain’t no way back from that.


EDIT This has the film of her saying it. I can't find the commercial that played in Michigan but it was pretty devastating, worse than this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xzybGKwIGk

It's hard to tell what she was saying in the interview in that YouTube because it has been edited down so much. I kinda doubt that she was actually saying what the ad said she said, because they would have run more of it. But it doesn't really matter, because she was stuck with the response to the questionnaire.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Do you think about what you type here, or do you outsource to a monkey at a typewriter? Your first claim was, "The hard left has sway over the cultural institutions and until recently, govt institutions." Which is ridiculous, unless you have been in a MAGA bubble and have become convinced that "the hard left" includes everyone to the left of Marco Rubio. I can't think of a single significant cultural institution where the hard left has sway.

Then you're in fucking fantasyland. I'm not going to dignify this comment, as its delusional.

So when you're challenged on this absurd statement, you point to "the percentages of progressives in academia, media, and government," as if an English professor at, say, the University of Iowa "holds sway" over it, or Ruth Marcus (not the hard left, but I don't think there is a single person recently on that editorial staff from the hard left) ran the WaPo instead of Jeff Bezos and the center-right morons he brought over from England, or you could name a single government institution anywhere outside of, maybe, Vermont under the control of the hard left. I live near Santa Cruz, and the hard left is on the outside looking at the city government there.

Do you know anyone in the media? In academia? In most of the influential think tanks?

How do you think we wound up with absurd cultural fixations on things like gender theory, "intersectionality," wokeness, etc. All this bullshit starts among hard left screwballs in cultural and academic institutions, migrates outward into govt and society more broadly, gets picked up by MAGA nuts, and gets turned into cultural wedge issues. Tango of fucking idiots, started by hard heft nuts who think about dipshit concepts such as one's sex being an entirely social construction.

How else but via hard-left lunatic thinking do we get an academe that reacts to the murder of Israelis with the response that it is their own fault?

And then the idea that DC is Democratic is supposed to prove something? As if all Democrats are "the hard left," as if Kamala Harris herself was, or as if everybody here doesn't know that the people who live in DC are predominantly working- and middle-class blacks who do not have the right to run their own government. DC's residents are *not* "the hard left" -- please tell your monkey.

My bad. It's govt worker donations to Ds.

"Federal employees donated at least $4.2 million to the major candidates for presidents in 2024, with nearly 84% of that total going to Vice President Kamala Harris."

https://www.govexec.com/workforce/20...harris/400760/

Now, go ahead and write, as you will, "She's not hard left. You said hard left." Okay. That's fair. She wasn't. But now ask yourself, "Is it normal to have 84% of donations going to one party?" And now add to that the well-known fact that over 90% of college professors today are on the left (liberal and progressive).

That's not skewed? Get fucking real.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Then you're in fucking fantasyland. I'm not going to dignify this comment, as its delusional.

Name one. What's an example of a significant cultural institution under the control of the hard left?

Do you know anyone in the media? In academia?

Yes and yes. But you are moving the goalposts -- we were talking about who is running things, not what some employees think.

In most of the influential think tanks?

Is there even such a thing on the left?

How do you think we wound up with absurd cultural fixations on things like gender theory, "intersectionality," wokeness, etc. All this bullshit starts among hard left screwballs in cultural and academic institutions, migrates outward into govt and society more broadly, gets picked up by MAGA nuts, and gets turned into cultural wedge issues. Tango of fucking idiots, started by hard heft nuts who think about dipshit concepts such as one's sex being an entirely social construction.

The existence and discussion of ideas with which you disagree is not evidence that the country's institutions are under the control of the hard left.

We wound up with discussions about gender and race because of the lived experiences of many, many people. The term woke comes out of black culture, not the academy. At the risk of stating the obvious, many people think American culture and society tend to systematically disadvantage people who are not white men. These views get discussed because they are material to ordinary people's lives, not because a cabal of leftists highjacked some institutions. I think the same is true of gender issues. I know many people, family and friends, whose children identify as something other than their gender at birth. These children haven't been reading academic papers on intersectionality. The causal relationship runs the other way: Academics are trying to understand things that are happening in the world.

But none of this has anything to do with the idea that the hard left has taken over the country's institutions.

How else but via hard-left lunatic thinking do we get an academe that reacts to the murder of Israelis with the response that it is their own fault?

There is not a single educational institution in this country of which I am aware where the dominant view is that October 7 was Israeli's fault, and the number of people who say such things is quite small, but they receive attention out of proportion to their number because agitating people is good for engagement, which makes money for media companies and platforms.

My bad. It's govt worker donations to Ds.

"Federal employees donated at least $4.2 million to the major candidates for presidents in 2024, with nearly 84% of that total going to Vice President Kamala Harris."

https://www.govexec.com/workforce/20...harris/400760/

Now, go ahead and write, as you will, "She's not hard left. You said hard left." Okay. That's fair. She wasn't. But now ask yourself, "Is it normal to have 84% of donations going to one party?" And now add to that the well-known fact that over 90% of college professors today are on the left (liberal and progressive).

That's not skewed? Get fucking real.

I agree with you that federal workers and college professors tend to support Democrats. With what Trump and Musk are trying to do to both of them, are you surprised? But that's a different subject from whether the hard left (as opposed to Democrats generally) controls major institutions.