Well, so far, they’re right.
8 Likes
10 Likes
You know, of course, that lemmings do not naturally run off of cliffs, right? That they were forced to do so for a Disney “true-to-nature” film, right?
So, there needs to be someone up on the cliff getting the lemmings to jump; two guesses as to who the artist should’ve rendered, lol.
10 Likes
9 Likes
5 Likes
Safe in its natural habitat in the forests of Finland, the wild Roomba quietly does its important work clearing the undergrowth.
14 Likes
Extra burn for using an American robot vacuum.
8 Likes
ISWYDT.
Yes, system, it is technically a complete sentence. Stop policing my communications.
8 Likes
Oops. That was totally subconscious.
7 Likes
4 Likes
Let’s see…
9 Likes
Me too.
4 Likes
I’m surprised that it says I’m closest to Iglesias rather than Obama or Macron; I’m much farther left than either of the latter, but counting hexes, it seems like my non-populism rating should put me slightly closer to them than to Iglesias.
4 Likes
I used to respectfully disagree with @ChickieD 's proposal that Trump had dementia, but stuff like this is bringing me around. I mean, he’s not even trying to take protocol into account anymore (thread):
3 Likes
I am furthest from Donald Trump (thank God) and closest to (right on top of) Bernie Sanders.
That being said, this quiz is bullshit. The authors of this quiz want people to identify as populist. Political quizzes like this are almost always very biased
7 Likes
Yeah, I’m not really buying the “populist left” thing. “We are the 99%” sure, but that’s not really populist…
6 Likes
9 Likes
From one of my very old posts in the other place (2016 seems SO long ago) about Trump’s “first 100 days” plan’s “requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated”:
This is one of those things that only sounds good to people who have been suckered into the “there are too many regulations and they are killing business” line of thinking, and who aren’t smart enough think about the obvious results.
There are basically only three logical conclusions if that were an actual rule (and if it didn’t get overruled by some actual adults):
- We gradually trend towards having only one “regulation”, which doesn’t cover anything useful. Some bright spark comes up with something that ought to be regulated but can’t be, and a whole lot of people die/lose everything/etc.
- We gradually trend towards having only one “regulation”, which covers everything . It’s impossible to actually understand what’s in it… and some bright spark comes up with something that ought to be regulated but can’t be (because it’s impossible to reach a consensus on modifying the monstrosity), and a whole lot of people die/lose everything/etc.
- No more regulations go into effect, ever . No matter how horrible a situation is, it’s impossible to create a new law to regulate it without deregulating something important. Some bright spark comes up with something that ought to be regulated but can’t be, and a whole lot of people die/lose everything/etc.
One could only hope that, upon reaching one of those conclusions, enough people would wake up and say “You know what? This rule is stupid! Who wrote it, a five-year-old?”
10 Likes
Let’s summarize the arguments here.
- Right now it’s US-Europe-Sunnis vs. Russia-China-Shiites. If we alienate the House of Saud, then we’ll push the Sunnis into the other camp!
- If we piss off Saudi Arabia, gas prices might go up!
- It might hurt Israel! The Saudis are their only allies in the region, and they act as a voice of reason!
- This is a direct quote: “U.S. acceptance of heinous behaviour by allies and enemies alike is consistent with long-standing practice. […] the West has taken no meaningful action at all against [Turkey, Russia, or China] for their murders of journalists.”
- The House of Saud is Stalin to Russia/China/Iran’s Hitler that we face!
My response:
- If you really think it’s that easy to fix centuries of war between Sunni and Shia Islam, I think it’s worth a shot. I somehow doubt all those grudges will be dropped because the US grows a backbone and demands an accounting for blatant murder, but hey, it’s worth a shot. Also: if they’re joining this totally-not-made-up military alliance between Russia, China, and Iran, why are they then buying weapons from Russia and China to defend themselves against Iran?
- Yes, this is the Financial Post, so no surprise that maintaining the economy is put as a higher priority than not destroying the planet. Even so, you’d think they’d be thrilled, on Alberta’s behalf, that oil prices would rebound.
- Would they be willing to annoy the US by driving oil prices up? Maybe. Would they declare outright war with the US by attacking Israel? Doubtful.
- What kind of shit argument is, “We didn’t do the right thing then, so we obviously can’t start doing the right thing now?”
- … And there’s the Godwin.
8 Likes
NYT is doing similar:
Apparently the Saudis have sent the word out to their obedient media servants.
9 Likes