The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by shekels » Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:46 am

Mall Santa 'replaced' for wearing a MAGA hat on his Facebook page.

When will people learn that the system wants to own you. You and Santa have NO RIGHT to act without approval.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/ingraham- ... a-maga-hat
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by dualstow » Tue Dec 24, 2019 7:53 am

Somebody found a good lawyer?

Muslim woman awarded $120,000 after police removed hijab for mugshot in 'humiliating' experience

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... experience
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Kriegsspiel » Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:52 pm

A talented head cook at a school in central Sweden has been told to stop baking fresh bread and to cut back on her wide-ranging veggie buffets because it was unfair that students at other schools didn't have access to the unusually tasty offerings.

The municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch since other schools do not receive the same calibre of food - and that is "unfair".
link
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by dualstow » Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:29 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:52 pm
A talented head cook at a school in central Sweden has been told to stop baking fresh bread and to cut back on her wide-ranging veggie buffets because it was unfair that students at other schools didn't have access to the unusually tasty offerings.

The municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch since other schools do not receive the same calibre of food - and that is "unfair".
link
Oh, good Lord.
I couldn’t get it to load, but I found other sources by googling
municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch
It’s from 2012.
I like the Churchill quote mentioned, Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Libertarian666 » Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:30 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:52 pm
A talented head cook at a school in central Sweden has been told to stop baking fresh bread and to cut back on her wide-ranging veggie buffets because it was unfair that students at other schools didn't have access to the unusually tasty offerings.

The municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch since other schools do not receive the same calibre of food - and that is "unfair".
link
https://archive.org/stream/HarrisonBerg ... n_djvu.txt
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Kriegsspiel » Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:14 am

dualstow wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:29 pm
It’s from 2012.
I like the Churchill quote mentioned, Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
Libertarian666 wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:30 pm
Harrison Bergeron
This report from the indoctrination facilities is on point with a new one: anti-ableism,
Anti-ableism activists assert that our society and institutions are structured in ways that privilege those without disabilities. They argue that our professional and public lives are easier to navigate if one is able-bodied and of sound mind. And that is undeniable: life is easier for able-bodied people. The anti-ableist reasoning says that the advantages of the able-bodied are unfair. Perhaps that is true: in some cosmic sense, it is unfair that one might be born with epilepsy or with a club foot. But it is here that the anti-ableist goes a step further. Many people would argue that life is harder for people with disabilities, and that is perhaps unfair, but they would also recognize that life is unfair and that there are limitations to the ways that society can ameliorate the difficulties faced by the disabled. In contrast, the anti-ableist argues that the parts of society that are still easier for the able-bodied person must be re-structured. They aren’t talking about installing ramps for wheelchairs to provide access to public buildings.

“Accessibility,” as defined by campus activists, is a consideration of the relative ease or difficulty of completing tasks and achieving goals. Thus, if one’s Attention Deficit Disorder ensures that a student misses critical information during lecture that will later appear on an exam, the professor must find alternate means of delivering that information. Otherwise, the course would be deemed “inaccessible,” which in the highly ideological prism of campus politics is tantamount to saying that the course is a form of oppression that accords “privilege” to the students without disabilities.
. . .
Accessibility, in the traditional sense, is a virtue to which a democratic, pluralistic society should aspire. But taken to an extreme—an explicit attempt to re-design institutional procedures and culture at large in such a way that a person with any limiting condition faces no additional challenge—accessibility represents an aggressive pursuit of a perfect equality of outcome. In this ideal world, not only can everyone succeed, everyone will succeed: any failure to meet a goal can conceivably be due to some unfair disadvantage (diagnosed or otherwise). The world imagined by anti-ableists is one in which everyone achieves excellence in all competitive pursuits. And of course, if everyone is excellent, then no one is.
. . .
Further, we were warned that if any assignments or course requirements could not be adapted to make them achievable and accessible for people with a(ny) disability, then the instructor should not have that requirement or give that assignment. As an example of how far-reaching these new guidelines would be if fully implemented, I am aware of an art instructor who tests students on their abilities to discern certain shades and tints of color. Obviously, this task can’t really be adapted for a person who is colorblind. Thus, such an assignment would now be evidence that the course is an inaccessible one—even if no one in the course is colorblind.
link
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Libertarian666 » Wed Jan 01, 2020 11:45 am

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:14 am
dualstow wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:29 pm
It’s from 2012.
I like the Churchill quote mentioned, Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
Libertarian666 wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:30 pm
Harrison Bergeron
This report from the indoctrination facilities is on point with a new one: anti-ableism,
Anti-ableism activists assert that our society and institutions are structured in ways that privilege those without disabilities. They argue that our professional and public lives are easier to navigate if one is able-bodied and of sound mind. And that is undeniable: life is easier for able-bodied people. The anti-ableist reasoning says that the advantages of the able-bodied are unfair. Perhaps that is true: in some cosmic sense, it is unfair that one might be born with epilepsy or with a club foot. But it is here that the anti-ableist goes a step further. Many people would argue that life is harder for people with disabilities, and that is perhaps unfair, but they would also recognize that life is unfair and that there are limitations to the ways that society can ameliorate the difficulties faced by the disabled. In contrast, the anti-ableist argues that the parts of society that are still easier for the able-bodied person must be re-structured. They aren’t talking about installing ramps for wheelchairs to provide access to public buildings.

“Accessibility,” as defined by campus activists, is a consideration of the relative ease or difficulty of completing tasks and achieving goals. Thus, if one’s Attention Deficit Disorder ensures that a student misses critical information during lecture that will later appear on an exam, the professor must find alternate means of delivering that information. Otherwise, the course would be deemed “inaccessible,” which in the highly ideological prism of campus politics is tantamount to saying that the course is a form of oppression that accords “privilege” to the students without disabilities.
. . .
Accessibility, in the traditional sense, is a virtue to which a democratic, pluralistic society should aspire. But taken to an extreme—an explicit attempt to re-design institutional procedures and culture at large in such a way that a person with any limiting condition faces no additional challenge—accessibility represents an aggressive pursuit of a perfect equality of outcome. In this ideal world, not only can everyone succeed, everyone will succeed: any failure to meet a goal can conceivably be due to some unfair disadvantage (diagnosed or otherwise). The world imagined by anti-ableists is one in which everyone achieves excellence in all competitive pursuits. And of course, if everyone is excellent, then no one is.
. . .
Further, we were warned that if any assignments or course requirements could not be adapted to make them achievable and accessible for people with a(ny) disability, then the instructor should not have that requirement or give that assignment. As an example of how far-reaching these new guidelines would be if fully implemented, I am aware of an art instructor who tests students on their abilities to discern certain shades and tints of color. Obviously, this task can’t really be adapted for a person who is colorblind. Thus, such an assignment would now be evidence that the course is an inaccessible one—even if no one in the course is colorblind.
link
Obviously this also means that no course can require vision or hearing, or any type of mobility. I.e., if a deaf and blind person who is completely paralyzed can't complete the assignments as easily as anyone else, then the course is inaccessible.
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by sophie » Fri Jan 03, 2020 9:45 am

Seems that New York isn't the only state passing nonsensical laws:

https://reason.com/2019/12/31/californi ... postmates/
What's the difference between an independent Tupperware salesperson and a prolific freelance writer? OK, probably many things. But in California, we can add one more difference to the list: the former is legally allowed to exist, while the latter is not.

"There is no rhyme or reason to these nonsensical exemptions, and some are so ill-defined or entirely undefined that it is impossible to discern what they include or exclude. For example, some types of workers are excluded (e.g., a delivery truck driver delivering milk) while others performing substantively identical work are not excluded (e.g., a delivery truck driver delivering juice)."
Why should California care about whether you choose to be a full time employee or a part time independent contractor? A lot of people prefer the latter, and here's the thing: if they don't want to work that way THEY DON'T HAVE TO. It's pretty clear that this law was aimed at selectively wiping out the flagships of the emerging gig economy such as Uber. For reasons that entirely escape me, except that they obviously have taken business away from city cabs.
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by sophie » Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:56 pm

I don't suppose the California state legislature are aware of the pass-through deduction, which is a major win for independent contractors?
They must be the only group of Americans out there who think it's a treat to work full time as an employee. Gee, that explains the million or so people in the FIRE movement who want nothing more than to quit those full time jobs.

In one of his books, Harry Browne talked about how he "fired" all his employees and made them all independent contractors. The reason is that it was a better deal for both the employees and for him: less overhead, less taxes, more opportunities for deductions etc. And that's without the 20% pass through bonus.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Kriegsspiel » Fri Jan 03, 2020 9:52 pm

sophie wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:56 pm
In one of his books, Harry Browne talked about how he "fired" all his employees and made them all independent contractors. The reason is that it was a better deal for both the employees and for him: less overhead, less taxes, more opportunities for deductions etc. And that's without the 20% pass through bonus.
That was my situation for a time. All of us workers were essentially working as contractors for a temp agency that contracted for large companies. We probably should have been categorized as employees, since we weren't setting our own hours or work conditions or anything like that, but overall it was ok, outside of having to deal with stupidly expensive health insurance. I got to put more money into my IRA and deduct business expenses. I thought of myself as a dependent contractor, as opposed to an independent contractor.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
boglerdude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1313
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 1:40 am
Contact:

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by boglerdude » Fri Jan 03, 2020 9:57 pm

> For reasons that entirely escape me

State wants more in taxes, and/or this is what the public wants. Its being cheered on Reddit, as sticking it to the greedy Uber executives. Democracy sucks.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by dualstow » Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:13 pm

Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by moda0306 » Sun Jan 05, 2020 10:57 pm

dualstow wrote:
Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:13 pm
Ricky Gervais eating the Left:

https://twitter.com/RitaPanahi/status/1 ... 89632?s=20
This and everything else he did was fantastic.
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by shekels » Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:56 am

Antifa group is joining the pro-gun rally along with the usual subversives.
Now let me guess,
How much violence is there when the state Government has the Rally in a "Cage" and you mix many different points of view together.
I will Hope and Pray for the best outcome.
I will Hold Gov.Ralph Northam and his staff responsible for any injuries inside the fence, as this looks like it was put together to cause a Riot.
It will make for a Propaganda field day.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wash ... ch-over-us
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Mountaineer » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:03 pm

Nice! Of course Biden's lap dogs (or Vinny's lap cats ;) ) won't care.

https://nypost.com/2020/01/18/how-five- ... nnections/
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by vnatale » Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:06 pm

Mountaineer wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:03 pm
Nice! Of course Biden's lap dogs (or Vinny's lap cats ;) ) won't care.

https://nypost.com/2020/01/18/how-five- ... nnections/
Au contraire!

Me and my three cats are solidly AGAINST Biden!

If it came down to him against Trump, if they could vote, they'd be joining me in voting third party!

VInny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Kriegsspiel » Tue Jan 28, 2020 5:56 pm

Project Veritas Part 1
PV Part 2

PV: Another Bernie Field Organizer

PV: TWO MORE Bernie 2020 Field Organizers in South Carolina

Tim Pool
Tim Pool on newest Project Veritas release
“We Don’t Want to Scare People Off, So You Kinda Have to Feel it Out Before You Get into the Crazy Stuff…More, More Extreme Organizations and Stuff Like Antifa, You Know You Were Talking About Yellow Vests and All That; But, You Know We’re Kinda Keeping That, Keeping That on the Back-Burner for Right Now.”
Whoops!
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Kriegsspiel » Tue Jan 28, 2020 6:17 pm

LOL, I missed the part where Bernie's SC office called the police on Project Veritas when they asked them to comment on the situation ;D
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by dualstow » Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:38 am

‘American Dirt’ is an important novel about the Mexican immigrant experience.
Oops, it was written by a white person.
What are they going to do next, make their own tacos?! 🌮
The horror.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by shekels » Sat Feb 01, 2020 10:41 am

Wow, Let's get Woke.


"I don't care what kind of nice, little, legal, Constitutional defenses that they came up with.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1223355164158984192
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by sophie » Sat Feb 01, 2020 10:51 am

Here's something fun to spend your tax money on:

https://freebeacon.com/issues/usda-sugg ... t-healthy/

Although technically this USDA is in the Trump administration, this sort of thing is a lot more "left" than "right".

Incidentally, I'm enjoying the articles on why denying food stamps to people who might be considered "unwilling to work" will result in the demise of urban groceries. Just one flaw in the logic: people won't stop buying groceries. What they won't buy are things like cell phone data plans and movie tickets. Although, I doubt urban mobile phone stores are going to go out of business because of this, either.
boglerdude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1313
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 1:40 am
Contact:

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by boglerdude » Sun Feb 02, 2020 1:08 am

Just automatically pull tax returns and give the poor rice and beans. No need to pay a bureaucracy to decide if an addict is either unwilling or unable to work.
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by sophie » Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:42 am

I've wondered that too. They could limit the cards to unprocessed foods, and ban them from being used for desserts, sodas etc. People could still buy them just with their own money.

But, MangoMan's larger point is correct: whether it's SNAP limitations or talking grocery carts, why is the government in the business of telling us what to eat anyway? For millions of years, humans got by just fine without official dietary guidelines - and that was true for most of the industrial age as well. It's only since the US government started doing that (1977) that people started getting fat and sick - and there's plenty of evidence that it was exactly this intervention that led to the diabetes epidemic we're currently faced with.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:12 am

sophie wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:42 am
I've wondered that too. They could limit the cards to unprocessed foods, and ban them from being used for desserts, sodas etc. People could still buy them just with their own money.

But, MangoMan's larger point is correct: whether it's SNAP limitations or talking grocery carts, why is the government in the business of telling us what to eat anyway? For millions of years, humans got by just fine without official dietary guidelines - and that was true for most of the industrial age as well. It's only since the US government started doing that (1977) that people started getting fat and sick - and there's plenty of evidence that it was exactly this intervention that led to the diabetes epidemic we're currently faced with.
I think the argument goes like this, "I don't care what food you buy with your own money, but when you're taking my money I get a say in the matter."

Don't we all remember that (awesome) video of the California surfer dude using his EBT card to buy lobster and sushi?
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4393
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: The Left is Eating Itself Pt. II

Post by Xan » Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:23 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:12 am
sophie wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:42 am
I've wondered that too. They could limit the cards to unprocessed foods, and ban them from being used for desserts, sodas etc. People could still buy them just with their own money.

But, MangoMan's larger point is correct: whether it's SNAP limitations or talking grocery carts, why is the government in the business of telling us what to eat anyway? For millions of years, humans got by just fine without official dietary guidelines - and that was true for most of the industrial age as well. It's only since the US government started doing that (1977) that people started getting fat and sick - and there's plenty of evidence that it was exactly this intervention that led to the diabetes epidemic we're currently faced with.
I think the argument goes like this, "I don't care what food you buy with your own money, but when you're taking my money I get a say in the matter."
I largely agree with your point, but there's still a slippery slope there. And some perverse incentives. For example, the way the feds mandated the national 55MPH speed limit and the drinking age of 21. It was through highway grants. Basically, the feds took a bunch of money from people which states could have taken, then offered it back to the states in the form of grants with all these strings attached. An end-around around the Constitution, really.

I guess the extreme in this example would be more and more people being considered poor and eligible for food stamps, and thus more and more people under the government's micromanaging. Unlikely, perhaps.... But if we really do turn into a society with a small upper crust and a large underclass, it amounts to the elites telling the plebs exactly what they may and may not eat.
Post Reply