The inherent problem with Rep. Jasmine Crockett statement is that the constitution allows the counting of non citizens in the census as part of the system of representation for Congress. This goes back to its slavery roots when the slave holding states used this principle to have slaves count as representative population without being able to vote. This is wrong. Of course it would take a hypocrite Liberal to fail to see this & weaponize this. The basic principle is wrong. Only citizens should vote & only citizens should count for Congressional representation. Anything else denies the basic rights & responsibilities of citizenship.
And also people vote for their representatives, they aren't actually allocated based on "race" like she seems to think. Also, Texas seems to be pretty keen on deportations so it's not like they see having those seats as an advantage if the costs is having millions of uninvited foreigners who can't vote or legally contribute to society.
It is also the case that the citizens who have those "black and brown bodies" do not necessarily vote for other "black and brown bodies," but rather for the candidates they think would be best for the jobs.
"Jasmine Crockett’s net worth has seen significant growth since her entry into politics. While estimates vary, her current net worth is believed to be between $3 million and $9 million as of 2024. This substantial increase from her earlier career as an attorney has raised interest in her financial portfolio."
That quote by Jemele Hill about it being no coincidence that Trump won both times against women. Is he implying that Trump couldn’t have won against men? Or that the US is just hopelessly misogynistic? Does he not realize that both elections were about rejecting the Democrat party priorities in their current form? Nah, just racism or misogyny.
Jemele's argument ignores the context of Clinton and Harris being tremendously unpopular apart from their gender, of running campaigns that emphasized their gender, and that Biden won in large part -- I'd argue -- because of the results of the pandemic.
It's a conundrum. Was it more important for the Democrats to have women as candidates than to win? Should they have run another white guy instead of this election was so important to prevent literally Hitler from getting elected? No matter how you slice it the Democrats come out looking bad. It's also possible that the Democrats could have run different women and won because it looks to me like the Nr. 1 priority is to have establishment candidates.
The Esquire article by the homeless man was heartbreaking, I nearly teared up. When he mentioned hearing the long list of employee names at one of the homeless services I felt a stab of familiarity. All the way on the other side of the country it's the same story. Where I live in Multnomah county Oregon (basically Portland) we have an agency for homeless services with a nearly half billion dollar budget but our homeless population keeps growing exponentially. Every quarter we find out they underspend on services to the homeless. But I can guarantee that they're not underspending on their payroll.
There is so much sympathy for the indigent, and it's staggering how much regular citizens are willing to give to help them. Where does it go? To fund "non-profits" that are every bit as much about maximalizing profits as Walmart is. I hope there's fiery, sulfurous pit in hell specifically for people who grift on the generosity we're desperate to give to the homeless.
Triple Yay for the return of Tay Tay. Two quotes and both are nuttier than squirrelshit.
“If saving Hunter was politically improper or reputationally risky, it was also done in accordance with the higher and fiercer laws of familial love.”
Considering how dysfunctional the Biden family seems that's a bit of a stretch, this might have been the first thing Joe has done for Hunter that's to Hunters benefit and not to Joes. Biden is also such a piece of shit that I would bet he would have let Hunter rot in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison if it meant another term as president.
“I think the greatest gift of my life is to have kids. And to have a transgender child has made me so much more interesting.”
Color me surprised, it's all about her. Imagine what it does to the other kids of one of the kids is "trans" and gets all the love and attention?
“Every medical treatment has risk. Even taking Aspirin.”
Precisely, Aspirin has been around for over a century though so most of the risks and benefits are well known.
I'm surprised to say I'm kinda with Yolanda on the UHC CEO shooting, I'm not sad, I think it's wrong to shoot people for the most part but a lot of these healthcare CEOs have been doing pure evil under the protection of the government for ages with impunity. But she probably doesn't want someone like RFK Jr. coming after the evil corporations either.
Re UHC. It's all over the news, but I haven't yet seen anybody suggest that, just maybe, the threat of assassination might encourage surviving CEOs to, I don't know, soften their policies a little bit?
Admittedly, it's terrorism, but it does work sometimes.
"While legally, a healthcare CEO's primary responsibility is typically considered to be towards their shareholders, as they are tasked with maximizing company profits, there is a strong ethical and professional obligation to prioritize patient well-being and safety, meaning they must balance the needs of both parties; this is often reflected in codes of ethics for healthcare executives which emphasize patient-centered decision making."
I think this execution was for ignoring the last six words. I guess maybe we'll find out. I certainly hope that this prompts lawmakers to emphasize and enforce those last six words. Presumably these companies can remain fiscally sound while saying tearful goodbyes to obscene profits.
It's also possible to write a corporate charter that doesn't require profit maximization at the expense of the customer. And there is also mutual insurance where the insured are the shareholders. Of course neither protects against executives fleecing the company. The percentage cap on profit margins also incentives the insurers to make healthcare as expensive as possible - if you can't increase the profit margin you can broaden the base on which that margin is calculated.
It's similar to the government agencies who try to spend every dollar by years end so their budget doesn't get cut. There is no reason not to return the money instead and continue on a smaller budget, yet they often act like it's the only choice because morality doesn't even play into it.
I've had similar thoughts, it's a bit of a signal that even if you have the biggest, meanest bully (the government) on your side that doesn't mean you're 100% safe from consequences.
Rep. Crockett is apparently so mired in seeing people through the lens of race, she uses the social justice, oppressor/oppressed language of "bodies" to describe four million people. Because I guess she thinks that's how white Republicans see them?
And if I'm following her logic, that their elected representatives must also be people of color? Did Republicans just bypass elections and appoint two white people? Didn't realize that's how government works in Texas.
“The ‘guys, don’t joke about the CEO of a health insurance company getting assassinated’ people are why Trump won.” — Yale postdoctoral associate David Austin Walsh. I know these are out of context but he couldn't have really said this. What's his doctorate in, dumbness?
Wow, that's even more egregious. University degrees don't mean you have gathered any practical experience, have the ability to impart wisdom or guarantee common sense; they don't particularly make you smart. I'm not religious, but I've always liked this passage...
Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; at the head of the noisy streets she cries out; at the entrance of the city gates she speaks: “How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple Proverbs 1: 20-22. We keep passing by without listening.
Lacking the context of his other tweets, I'm trying to parse his statement, and one interpretation is 'People with normal human empathy are the ones who voted for Trump.'
Another might be 'People with normal human empathy are the ones who did not vote for Trump, and because they are outnumbered Trump won.'
I know considering grammar useful is an unpopular view, but sometimes it *is* important if you want to get your message across.
I actually kinda agreed with the Tweet, though perhaps I´m misunderstanding it. There should be more room in today´s society for humor, even humor that comes at somebody else´s expense and might offend. In some ways, the Democrats are the anti-humor party and perhaps that´s one reason -- though likely far from the only reason -- that they lost.
People who object to a little joking around, even about the death of health company CEOs, are likely to get some eye rolls from the pro-Trump crowd. Or am I reading this wrong?
“I don’t think it’s by any accident that both of Trump’s presidential victories have been against women.” — The Atlantic’s Jemele Hill
What the heck? The Atlantic has become this almost unreadable rag focused on absurd girl feelings. Why these people insist on perpetuating a political gender war when it clearly backfired... it seems their sickness.
I laughed about this quote. I'm sure there was some logical reasoning which was fully fleshed out in the Atlantic article explaining how "trump is bad" or how the "deplorable voters" hated women. In 2016 Trump masterfully orchestrated Hillary's nomination (no wait, that was the DNC stabbing Bernie). Trump purposely lost the 2020 election because he knew a woman was going to be the democratic nominee in 2024. Because, misogyny.
The Atlantic exists solely for Jeffrey Goldberg to have journalists write for other journos so they can remain in their little bubbles without consequences.
The statement about aspirin is meaningless without context. Taken IN context, her statement is butt stupid and moronic. Especially coming from a wise Latinx.
Wow .. I may be the most covid-careful of the unvaccinated, but this is insane. Taylor, your event was outdoors. Nothing more needed to be done.
“Planning a Covid safe book launch took months and THOUSANDS of my own dollars ensuring testing, outdoor space, far UV lights, and a litany of other precautions. Meanwhile u dumbfucks are out raw dogging the air and spewing ur disease laden breath all over ur elderly neighbors. We are not the same.” — Taylor Lorenz, former Washington Post tech and culture reporter
The inherent problem with Rep. Jasmine Crockett statement is that the constitution allows the counting of non citizens in the census as part of the system of representation for Congress. This goes back to its slavery roots when the slave holding states used this principle to have slaves count as representative population without being able to vote. This is wrong. Of course it would take a hypocrite Liberal to fail to see this & weaponize this. The basic principle is wrong. Only citizens should vote & only citizens should count for Congressional representation. Anything else denies the basic rights & responsibilities of citizenship.
And also people vote for their representatives, they aren't actually allocated based on "race" like she seems to think. Also, Texas seems to be pretty keen on deportations so it's not like they see having those seats as an advantage if the costs is having millions of uninvited foreigners who can't vote or legally contribute to society.
It is also the case that the citizens who have those "black and brown bodies" do not necessarily vote for other "black and brown bodies," but rather for the candidates they think would be best for the jobs.
Completely foreign concept, why would anyone vote for a person that doesn't have similar same skin tone or genitals?
Yeah she missed that part. Unless there is something special about these districts, their representatives are elected to the office.
I confess not listening to her statement, but gerrymandering plays a role here. Both parties are rabid gerrymandering aficionados.
"Jasmine Crockett’s net worth has seen significant growth since her entry into politics. While estimates vary, her current net worth is believed to be between $3 million and $9 million as of 2024. This substantial increase from her earlier career as an attorney has raised interest in her financial portfolio."
Pretty good for someone whose prior career was a public defender doing pro bono work for BLM.
Must be the Pelosi-Midas touch.
That quote by Jemele Hill about it being no coincidence that Trump won both times against women. Is he implying that Trump couldn’t have won against men? Or that the US is just hopelessly misogynistic? Does he not realize that both elections were about rejecting the Democrat party priorities in their current form? Nah, just racism or misogyny.
Jemele's argument ignores the context of Clinton and Harris being tremendously unpopular apart from their gender, of running campaigns that emphasized their gender, and that Biden won in large part -- I'd argue -- because of the results of the pandemic.
It's a conundrum. Was it more important for the Democrats to have women as candidates than to win? Should they have run another white guy instead of this election was so important to prevent literally Hitler from getting elected? No matter how you slice it the Democrats come out looking bad. It's also possible that the Democrats could have run different women and won because it looks to me like the Nr. 1 priority is to have establishment candidates.
Also, both elections were about rejecting intensely disliked candidates who were essentially foisted on the electorate, and who happened to be women.
Jemele Hill is, no surprise, a woman. She started as a sports analyst on ESPN. Even then she used the platform to spout her far left ideology.
Seriously? Honestly thought she was a guy all these years. Just from the name.
Jemele Hill was woke before it was cool. She exists only to call literally everything racist and sexist. She's incapable of saying anything else.
......"saving Hunter......was also done in accordance with the higher and fiercer laws of familial love"........hahahahaha
"Meanwhile u dumbfucks are out raw dogging the air and spewing ur disease laden breath all over ur elderly neighbors."
Nothing as sweet as a little Cray-Cray Tay-Tay tears in my morning coffee.
Is she one of those elderly neighbors? I know I still do a monthly happy hour with my elderly neighbors.
Taylor Lorenz has officially become a caricature of a human being.
The Esquire article by the homeless man was heartbreaking, I nearly teared up. When he mentioned hearing the long list of employee names at one of the homeless services I felt a stab of familiarity. All the way on the other side of the country it's the same story. Where I live in Multnomah county Oregon (basically Portland) we have an agency for homeless services with a nearly half billion dollar budget but our homeless population keeps growing exponentially. Every quarter we find out they underspend on services to the homeless. But I can guarantee that they're not underspending on their payroll.
There is so much sympathy for the indigent, and it's staggering how much regular citizens are willing to give to help them. Where does it go? To fund "non-profits" that are every bit as much about maximalizing profits as Walmart is. I hope there's fiery, sulfurous pit in hell specifically for people who grift on the generosity we're desperate to give to the homeless.
Triple Yay for the return of Tay Tay. Two quotes and both are nuttier than squirrelshit.
“If saving Hunter was politically improper or reputationally risky, it was also done in accordance with the higher and fiercer laws of familial love.”
Considering how dysfunctional the Biden family seems that's a bit of a stretch, this might have been the first thing Joe has done for Hunter that's to Hunters benefit and not to Joes. Biden is also such a piece of shit that I would bet he would have let Hunter rot in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison if it meant another term as president.
“I think the greatest gift of my life is to have kids. And to have a transgender child has made me so much more interesting.”
Color me surprised, it's all about her. Imagine what it does to the other kids of one of the kids is "trans" and gets all the love and attention?
“Every medical treatment has risk. Even taking Aspirin.”
Precisely, Aspirin has been around for over a century though so most of the risks and benefits are well known.
I'm surprised to say I'm kinda with Yolanda on the UHC CEO shooting, I'm not sad, I think it's wrong to shoot people for the most part but a lot of these healthcare CEOs have been doing pure evil under the protection of the government for ages with impunity. But she probably doesn't want someone like RFK Jr. coming after the evil corporations either.
Re UHC. It's all over the news, but I haven't yet seen anybody suggest that, just maybe, the threat of assassination might encourage surviving CEOs to, I don't know, soften their policies a little bit?
Admittedly, it's terrorism, but it does work sometimes.
"While legally, a healthcare CEO's primary responsibility is typically considered to be towards their shareholders, as they are tasked with maximizing company profits, there is a strong ethical and professional obligation to prioritize patient well-being and safety, meaning they must balance the needs of both parties; this is often reflected in codes of ethics for healthcare executives which emphasize patient-centered decision making."
I think this execution was for ignoring the last six words. I guess maybe we'll find out. I certainly hope that this prompts lawmakers to emphasize and enforce those last six words. Presumably these companies can remain fiscally sound while saying tearful goodbyes to obscene profits.
It's also possible to write a corporate charter that doesn't require profit maximization at the expense of the customer. And there is also mutual insurance where the insured are the shareholders. Of course neither protects against executives fleecing the company. The percentage cap on profit margins also incentives the insurers to make healthcare as expensive as possible - if you can't increase the profit margin you can broaden the base on which that margin is calculated.
It's similar to the government agencies who try to spend every dollar by years end so their budget doesn't get cut. There is no reason not to return the money instead and continue on a smaller budget, yet they often act like it's the only choice because morality doesn't even play into it.
I've had similar thoughts, it's a bit of a signal that even if you have the biggest, meanest bully (the government) on your side that doesn't mean you're 100% safe from consequences.
Rep. Crockett is apparently so mired in seeing people through the lens of race, she uses the social justice, oppressor/oppressed language of "bodies" to describe four million people. Because I guess she thinks that's how white Republicans see them?
And if I'm following her logic, that their elected representatives must also be people of color? Did Republicans just bypass elections and appoint two white people? Didn't realize that's how government works in Texas.
The whole concept that votes have to be earned seems lost on her.
Well she's barely three fifths of a thinker.
“The ‘guys, don’t joke about the CEO of a health insurance company getting assassinated’ people are why Trump won.” — Yale postdoctoral associate David Austin Walsh. I know these are out of context but he couldn't have really said this. What's his doctorate in, dumbness?
That's a standalone tweet and pretty much aligns with his overall timeline 🤷
Wow, that's even more egregious. University degrees don't mean you have gathered any practical experience, have the ability to impart wisdom or guarantee common sense; they don't particularly make you smart. I'm not religious, but I've always liked this passage...
Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; at the head of the noisy streets she cries out; at the entrance of the city gates she speaks: “How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple Proverbs 1: 20-22. We keep passing by without listening.
Lacking the context of his other tweets, I'm trying to parse his statement, and one interpretation is 'People with normal human empathy are the ones who voted for Trump.'
Another might be 'People with normal human empathy are the ones who did not vote for Trump, and because they are outnumbered Trump won.'
I know considering grammar useful is an unpopular view, but sometimes it *is* important if you want to get your message across.
I actually kinda agreed with the Tweet, though perhaps I´m misunderstanding it. There should be more room in today´s society for humor, even humor that comes at somebody else´s expense and might offend. In some ways, the Democrats are the anti-humor party and perhaps that´s one reason -- though likely far from the only reason -- that they lost.
People who object to a little joking around, even about the death of health company CEOs, are likely to get some eye rolls from the pro-Trump crowd. Or am I reading this wrong?
Humor is important, even in bad taste. Who wants to live in a world without humor?
I have no idea if you're reading it wrong. As I said, the tweet was ambiguous.
“I don’t think it’s by any accident that both of Trump’s presidential victories have been against women.” — The Atlantic’s Jemele Hill
What the heck? The Atlantic has become this almost unreadable rag focused on absurd girl feelings. Why these people insist on perpetuating a political gender war when it clearly backfired... it seems their sickness.
I laughed about this quote. I'm sure there was some logical reasoning which was fully fleshed out in the Atlantic article explaining how "trump is bad" or how the "deplorable voters" hated women. In 2016 Trump masterfully orchestrated Hillary's nomination (no wait, that was the DNC stabbing Bernie). Trump purposely lost the 2020 election because he knew a woman was going to be the democratic nominee in 2024. Because, misogyny.
The Atlantic exists solely for Jeffrey Goldberg to have journalists write for other journos so they can remain in their little bubbles without consequences.
Sotomayor is The Wise Latinx
She's not wrong about aspirin, but in terms of logic, her statement is stupid.
The statement about aspirin is meaningless without context. Taken IN context, her statement is butt stupid and moronic. Especially coming from a wise Latinx.
Wow .. I may be the most covid-careful of the unvaccinated, but this is insane. Taylor, your event was outdoors. Nothing more needed to be done.
“Planning a Covid safe book launch took months and THOUSANDS of my own dollars ensuring testing, outdoor space, far UV lights, and a litany of other precautions. Meanwhile u dumbfucks are out raw dogging the air and spewing ur disease laden breath all over ur elderly neighbors. We are not the same.” — Taylor Lorenz, former Washington Post tech and culture reporter
The collapse of MSNBC is sad. Perhaps the Comedy Channel will buy it.