cpanza.bsky.social
Dad | Hubby | Friend | Philosophy Professor | Marathon Runner | Awful Fortnite Player | Temporary Manifestation of Dao.
I (co)wrote "Ethics for Dummies" and "Existentialism for Dummies". In today's whacko world both have become essential reads
1,346 posts
557 followers
46 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
It doesn't really matter what the consequences are, right? The POTUS is directly threatening a US citizen to not exercise his Constitutional rights.
comment in response to
post
What is most ironic about this is that the main demographic for Trump is the "nobody tells me what to do" guy. Yet, here that guy is, being told what to do (and think) and he sheepishly complies.
comment in response to
post
Not core of the plan. Both sides cld use collapse of critical thinking to their own benefit. Plan helps GOP b/c they are also committed to collapsing *shame* in individuals. Dems not in sync with this, so the dummification of the population doesn't serve them b/c they're not as wiling to exploit it.
comment in response to
post
Since Musk has already deleted the post and hoisted the white flag, I'd say that the fallout is nil.
comment in response to
post
Musk has already deleted the Epstein post. Dems missed their 27 second window to form a long lasting alliance, it seems.
comment in response to
post
Musk has already deleted the post. He has been read the riot act that includes how much money he will lose if he doesn't fall into line.
comment in response to
post
Of course Trump is winning. 95% of Musk's own fan base are MAGA nuts. They're not going to choose Musk over Trump. Even the Ayn Randian libertarian crazies will just continue to silently love Musk, but not publicly defend him against Trump. It's a no brainer.
comment in response to
post
I keep forgetting, so daily I have to keep reminding myself that the collapse of the greatest democracy in history is worth it, because we can now (a) keep our gas stoves, (b) not worry about trans women on swimming teams, (c) have less regulations, and (d) get rid of the brown(er) people. 🙄
comment in response to
post
Dems do realize they will make up in the next few days, right?
comment in response to
post
AI only knows what we tell it, and it reaches conclusions based on the data from the past, which itself reflects whatever biases we engaged in to reach those past conclusions. AI is just us, just as biased, but faster at prejudice and more efficient with it than we are or can be.
comment in response to
post
Since the truth of a proposition is determined in MAGA by the use to which it can be put in a situation to achieve Trumpian aims, the value of both these contradictory claims is "TRUE".
comment in response to
post
Certainly a big part of what Trump seeks to accomplish. But, this always existed. What's new is use technology/media to connect ignorant people together into a coalition of tribal resentment. This motivates the eternally ignorant to now feel righteous, and to come out from under their rocks.
comment in response to
post
Listening to Rogan interview Ka$h Patel yesterday was revealing. Rogan, never one to shy away from a "some say" pretext to engage in conspiracy, quickly decided that the Epstein-Trump one was nonsense. "Elon needs to put his phone down" was his analysis. Says a lot about how "the wind" is blowing.
comment in response to
post
I see no divide coming. MAGAs aren't loyal to Musk. There's a long standing libertarian Musk cult, and most of them are Trumpers. They'll just be silent, and quietly continue to embrace both. The rest will toss Musk under the bus so fast it will make your head spin. He was useful, not he's not.
comment in response to
post
Thank goodness Joe and Mika are on their toes and they were ready to push back aggressively against this total bullshit spewing from Kennedy. They really showed him you don't come on Morning Joe unprepared!
comment in response to
post
He's got one: he regrets resigning.
comment in response to
post
As they say, he (Ono) did not think the leopards would eat his face.
comment in response to
post
Most of the theater is for internal MAGA consumption. They don't even know what tariffs are. So in their view, what does it matter if in the end they gain nothing substantive? Trump will say they kicked asses and took names, and MAGA will believe it. That's it.
comment in response to
post
Autopen: 593
comment in response to
post
Autopen: 350
comment in response to
post
Jeffries and Schumer are both peace time consigliere, not wartime consigliere.
comment in response to
post
No show jobs seem to fit perfectly into the Trump mob narrative. Isn't this a plus in Long's column?
comment in response to
post
Did this only occur to you after Trump decided he was no longer interested in FedSoc picks for judges? It was clear that he never cared about conservative anything - he just thought FedSoc judges would always back him. Now he sees that's not true, so he has no need for FedSoc. No breaking news here.
comment in response to
post
Host: "Do you have any evidence"
Guest: "It's indisputable"
Host moves on.
Which is why these interviews do damage to public discourse.
comment in response to
post
Democrats - at least at this point in time - aren't so wedded to wins that they'll believe anything. The GOP is, and Johnson knows it. He can just lie and it will cost him nothing, because his base isn't looking for truth, they're looking for wins.
comment in response to
post
In Makary's view, he is going with data - the data of what the crowd thinks!
comment in response to
post
That "If" at the start of Comer's sentence must be an Olympian powerlifter given all the weight it's carrying in that sentence.
comment in response to
post
They're voting in line with their cultural interests. All the other interests have taken the back seat.
comment in response to
post
I don't doubt that he did. When he's not bullying weak people, he's got nothing. Hollow inside.
comment in response to
post
What a deep-dive story from the NYT. Now I can really be in the know about how Elon Musk "feels" about what he did to the US government.
comment in response to
post
Duffy isn't in charge of the Dept. of Transportation. He's in charge of Sec. of Transportation theater, for MAGAs.
comment in response to
post
The Trump administration has no ability to stay on target because there is no target.
comment in response to
post
Yet: his voters swear he is cleaning up the corruption in DC.
comment in response to
post
Yet: Trump's approval rating remains at 45%, which is plenty high for him to continue on, without hesitancy.
comment in response to
post
What amazes me is that these people don't realize that they are being patronized by the right (MAGA elites), which repeatedly tells them that they are victims deserving of this and that and that their resentment is grounded in injustice. All of which is bullshit, but politically advantageous.
comment in response to
post
People also seem to see it as a "zero-sum" - someone has to get that 3B. No, you could give both of them 3B. Budgets are statements of value. If you value trade schools, fund them better.
comment in response to
post
I thought they were all about meritocracy. Are they saying that universities should have quotas for Americans even when foreign students have better qualifications?
comment in response to
post
DHS was pitching a "survivor" type tv show where immigrants battled for citizenship. Why not gladiatorial games?
comment in response to
post
Yep - I remember. Clearly it didn't get enough views. "Maybe Harvard Should Burn Down" probably elicits more curiosity. :)
comment in response to
post
This is like when administrators looking to chop up the humanities ask its supporters for data on its ROI and when they go out and find it the administrators huff, and say the humanities will be cut anyway for some other list of reasons.
comment in response to
post
Every morning at 4am I get up, make coffee, and then I read the NYT op-eds. From 4am to late in the day, I see the headlines for the op-eds change numerous times, and each time they are in real-time testing to see which one gets more clicks. That's the only guideline the changes seem to follow.
comment in response to
post
I'm pretty sure that in 100 days, she has been on TV more than any former AG in an entire presidential term.
comment in response to
post
Meaning: if/when they don't budge, we'll lower the tariffs, point to some bespoke deal we made, and declare it all a huge success.
comment in response to
post
Well, in a backhanded defense of Noem, she probably doesn't know what the Constitution says.
comment in response to
post
Strategic uncertainty makes sense if you have a strategy. The Trump administration has no strategy. It's just uncertainty.