Vive la France!
The ongoing comedramedary that is electoral politics has entered its next season, as the French presidential elections have completed their first round of combat. As expected, right-wing hate fear fascist nazi Hitler Trump white privilege patriarch poopyhead Marine Le Pen has made it to the second round, as has "centrist" Emmanuel Macron, an international banker and former member of the Socialist Party. No points for guessing which one George Soros is paying college students to riot for. Further research: what does "antifascistes" mean in French? It is a mystery!
Macron is expected to mop the floor with Le Pen in the runoff, and this is not predicted to be anything like the way Hillary Clinton mopped the floor with Donald Trump, nor the way "remain" mopped the floor with "leave" in the British EU vote I still refuse to call "Brexit" because honestly that’s hideous. We all know that the two things that are always and everywhere honest and correct are elections and electoral polls, so I’m sure that will remain the case.
Of course, I was hoping that outright communist Jean-Luc Melanchon would outplay Macron for the establishment spot. This is partly because Macron honestly isn’t any less commie at heart, and partly because a Le Pen / Melanchon vote would mean a choice between two candidates who’ve both pledged withdrawal from the EU, which would be hilarious. I really, really wanted to see the lapdog press try to cope with that. Of course, as any fule kno, it’s important to keep the EU together as a bulwark against Russia, which has apparently now begun hacking French elections, too:
Macron takes a tougher stance on Russia than his main election rivals and has seen his campaign hit by multiple cyber attacks in recent weeks. He has called on the French government to take action.
"These attacks are coming from the Russian border," Ferrand said. "We want a strong Europe. That’s why we’re subject to attacks on our information system from the Russian state."
Hey, if they liked it once, they’ll love it twice! Look out, everybody! The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!
Wait, what’s that you say, Angela Merkel?
The role social networks Facebook and Twitter play in spreading false and malicious information has shot up Merkel’s agenda after the shock election of U.S. Republican candidate Donald Trump as president…
The head of the domestic intelligence agency raised concern last week about potential Russian interference in Germany’s election through the use of misleading media stories.
Listen. Listen! It’s not comrade Merkel’s fault that she’s destroyed Germany. It’s those dastardly Russians! Blame them! They stole all our elections, and our Hillary, and everything!
After all, as comrade Merkel has told us before, if it weren’t for that darned printing press, the lesser people never would have learned all these wrong ideas.
I suppose while we’re on the topic of Germany and how ruined it is, we really ought to talk about rape. Here’s the thing. When will you troglodytes learn that there’s no possible way that any of the "refugees" being resettled into Europe could be rapists? It’s actually metaphysically impossible, as a German court has recently concluded.
A German judge has acquitted a Turkish man of rape, despite the fact that he forced a woman to have sex with him, and left her incapacitated. The judge argued that in "the mentality of the Turkish cultural circle," what the woman "had experienced as rape" might be considered merely “wild sex.” …
In other words, the judge acquitted a rapist — whom the court had "no doubt" forced the victim to have sex with him — on the grounds that his culture might not have considered the sex — which left the girl unable to run for two weeks — to be rape. [Emphasis original]
"Unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will." That’s what I see here in front of a pile of weirdo verbiage meant to socially justicate things more. Nowhere in that defintion (nor in the pile of mash I elided) is there a single word even suggestive of this "unless the aggressor thinks it’s okay" rider. It’s almost incomprehensible to me that I’m actually arguing on the side of the definition of rape being too narrow — Merriam-Webster includes rubbish like "incapable of valid consent because of… intoxication," which is obviously nothing but an excuse to empower amoral chicks to destroy dudes who jilt them the next morning — but the social justice warlords have apparently decided that the attempt to ruin men has to take a backseat to the attempt to ruin Europe. Have fun, you crazy kids!
She blinded me with botox
It is with deep sadness that your humble narrator is compelled to point out that the honorable Nancy Pelosi appears to have lost her fragile little mind.
— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) April 23, 2017
Now, I’m not saying I’m in favor of the goofy border wall idea. I’m not. But the reason certainly isn’t because "the president… is expressing a sign of weakness. He’s saying ‘I can’t control our borders. I have to build a wall.’" What could that even mean? What is building a wall except an expression of the president’s power to control the borders? Does poor, clueless old Mrs. Pelosi believe that the president can extend his pineal gland and control the borders with the awesome power of his chi?
Dear Mrs. Pelosi: next time you can’t get a bill passed, I suggest you shout "kaio-ken" at the top of your lungs before calling for a vote. I think it’ll work.
The Matrix has you
Last month, Bill Gates demonstrated before God and everybody that, while he certainly knows how to run a tech startup, he’s a complete economic ignoramus. By which I mean: he said that robots should pay income tax, which will save the poor peasant workers of the British countryside from losing their textile jobs. Everybody else just kind of floated a thin little smile in Gates’ direction and went back to ignoring him. Or so I thought.
When Bill Gates recently suggested robots should pay income tax like any other employee, I didn’t immediately disagree. I applaud Gates’ bold thinking to help solve one of society’s biggest upcoming challenges: embracing automation in a way that "lifts all boats" instead of leaving large swaths of society behind.
A robot tax would help offset the reduced revenues flowing into public coffers as machines take some jobs previously held by humans.
I hope you’re happy, Horace Mann. This is what your actions have wrought. You have reduced humanity to this level of stupid.
At least it’s nice that these people aren’t even trying to hide the fact that they’re communists anymore. I mean, that’s cold comfort when their juvenile obsession with fairness is on-track to destroy the prosperity of the entire world, but, hey, at least they’re openly flaunting their commie slogans. Also, come on. When the richest man in the world is the source for your ideas about how to make the social justice more socially fair and socially balanced, perhaps your social brains have leaked out of your social ears.
To his credit, commie idiot Steve Cousins appears to recognize that it makes absolutely no sense to force robots to pay income tax — though, oddly, the fact that robots do not earn an income to tax appears to have escaped his gelatinous intellect — but this isn’t good for much when his suggested solution is… well, let’s see.
Shouldn’t our government support companies that embrace innovation in an effort to improve productivity and boost revenues? That’s what will make the US economy strong and competitive on a global scale.
Perhaps a better way to ensure that automation improves the lives of all citizens — instead of becoming a wedge that creates a bigger and bigger divide between the haves and have-nots — is to ensure corporations pay tax on their profits.
I elided nothing. He honest-to-God runs those two ideas right into one another as though they’re not completely contradictory. Apparently the solution to the non-problem of "inequality" is to "support companies that embrace innovation in an effort to improve productivity and boost revenues" by taking away the boosted revenues. Horace Mann, these people no longer even understand what words mean, and this is all your fault.
In case you think I’m being unfair, Steve’s happy to make my point for me:
The more profitable a company becomes due to automation and increased productivity, the more income taxes it should pay into the collective system.
This, in the bizarre world of Steve Cousins, counts as "support." Dear Steve: robots will not "steal our jobs." That is something idiots have been believing for two hundred years, and it isn’t getting any more true. Also dear Steve: a universal basic income will steal all of our workers, which anybody who hasn’t had his brains Marxed away can clearly see. You are a knave and a fool.
Fair and balanced
I shouldn’t be so hard on poor, clueless Steve Cousins. He’s just out there fighting the good fight, trying to keep the world safe from the existential threat of people providing other people with goods and services they value. It’s not his fault that his envy has blinded him to the massive theft and fraud his beloved government engages in on a daily basis!
The New York governor [Andrew Cuomo], whose memoir was published by the News Corp.-owned HarperCollins in 2014, saw his gross income more than double last year, to $417,748 for 2016 (from $196,243 the year before), the Buffalo News reported Tuesday.
Cuomo attributed $218,100 of that increase to sales of his memoir, "All Things Possible: Setbacks and Successes in Politics and Life."
Ooo, I should shut my mouth. A politician has actually earned money honestly, in the marketplace, and I’m insulting him? For shame, me!
In 2015, the governor reportedly earned zero income from book sales and in the nearly three years that it’s been on the market, it has sold just 3,200 copies. But Cuomo, the Buffalo News found, reported that he received a total of $783,000 from HarperCollins in book sales over the past three years, a number that would translate to royalty payments of nearly $244.69 per copy.
Wait, what? Cuomo has sold 3200 books, and been paid $244.69 in royalties per copy? Is this one of those academic press deals where the college bookstore makes you buy the book for like six hundred dollars? Not so much. Turns out you can get the hardcover for eight bucks, and, of your eight bucks, two-hundred fifty will go to Cuomo. That seems reasonable!
Government documents reviewed by IBTimes show that News Corp. and its subsidiary Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc., through the law firm Greenberg Traurig, put tens of thousands of dollars behind efforts related to state legislation from the executive branch that affected the media industry, while paying Cuomo book royalties. In 2014, for example, those measures included the Fair Broadcast Employment Act, which would "authorize the use of certain contract provisions for the employment of key employees in the broadcast industry." News Corp.’s lobbying efforts that year also included an Assembly bill and its State Senate version that required "awarding of costs and attorney fees in frivolous action involving public petition and participation," which tend to involve reporters, and broadened "application of actions involving public petition and participation."
Why yes, Steve Cousins, let’s have more of that. Andrew Cuomo’s boat is lifting in anticipation already!
Somewhere, Herbert Marcuse is laughing
Presented without comment, a badly-written petition sent by a bunch of spoiled college kids to the president of Pomona College. I mean, no more comments after that one and this one about how, maybe if they spent more time studying and less time behaving like snot-nosed brats, they wouldn’t write like nincompoops.
Free speech, a right many freedom movements have fought for, has recently become a tool appropriated by hegemonic institutions. It has not just empowered students from marginalized backgrounds to voice their qualms and criticize aspects of the institution, but it has given those who seek to perpetuate systems of domination a platform to project their bigotry. Thus, if "our mission is founded upon the discovery of truth," how does free speech uphold that value? …
Your statement contains unnuanced views surrounding the academy and a belief in searching for some venerated truth. Historically, white supremacy has venerated the idea of objectivity, and wielded a dichotomy of ‘subjectivity vs. objectivity’ as a means of silencing oppressed peoples. The idea that there is a single truth–’the Truth’–is a construct of the Euro-West that is deeply rooted in the Enlightenment, which was a movement that also described Black and Brown people as both subhuman and impervious to pain. This construction is a myth and white supremacy, imperialism, colonization, capitalism, and the United States of America are all of its progeny. The idea that the truth is an entity for which we must search, in matters that endanger our abilities to exist in open spaces, is an attempt to silence oppressed peoples.