The Red Green Show

Easy-going comedy with minimal plot, mostly there to tie together an episode of shorter skits. Some Boomer humor, but not too cringe, I think.

One of the Big Lies that they repeated over and over throughout the election season was the one about the “border crisis,” where allegedly criminals and rapists were flooding into the country across the southern border by the millions. They promised to round up and deport all of them, literally millions of people. You can see where the problem arose: Lies collided head-on with reality. There simply are not millions of migrants for ICE to round up. They don’t exist. They never existed. It was all a lie.

Now, the regime has to appear like it’s Doing Something™ by actually deporting people. Stephen Miller has even given ICE a quota of 3,000 deportations a day, and it’s struggling. They have to make the numbers somehow, and the low-hanging fruit are the immigrants that they already have records on, and know about. ICE can just comb the immigration records, and go pick up people whom they know exactly where to find. Morality and logic have nothing to do with it, it’s all about throwing the red meat of performative cruelty to their base, and intimidation to their political enemies.

Yeah, FAFO. What does Microsoft have to do with it? Unless this is war propaganda, mentioning Microsoft to make Americans feel under attack when they recognize a familiar, American name.

But, CNN doing war propaganda? No way!

(/s)

How is this wrong? If the monitoring equipment was removed, it had to have been there at some point. Thus, Iran had been doing enrichment under IAEA supervision, which is what the JCPOA was all about until TACO tanked it.

My guess was cave exploration. He said he was going to a remote area where pooping was an option, but he didn’t want to, which makes sense when you know you’ve gotta carry that shit out with you in your cave pack. There are only a handful of scientific cave expeditions that go into caves for three days, so I figured that if he said so, he would unequivocally dox himself.

Indeed, I agree. I phrased that sentence with great care, to point out that there are plenty of legitimate, non-weapons reasons for Iran to have a nuclear materials enrichment program, and it is well-documented that it has been using its program for exactly that. That’s the important point, here: Iran has a right to enrich uranium for domestic use, and had been doing so under the supervision of IAEA inspectors who verified that it was for domestic use, but the U.S. regime is deploying propaganda to bury that fact.

Maybe the government also had a secondary aim of maintaining a “breakout capability” to be able to produce material for weapons in a relatively short time. I wouldn’t be surprised, because… that’s exactly what I think I would do were I in their shoes, facing a genocidal, revanchist enemy enabled by a superpower that spends stunning amounts of money on invading and destroying other nations.

That’s why I point it out. The Mind Trick is working, and they’re successfully shaping the story so that folks who aren’t paying close attention (that is, the majority of us) start imagining silos with ICBMs.

Iran was enriching nuclear material, which it has been using for civilian nuclear power generation. This is an important distinction. The American regime is “flooding the zone” with bullshit, so that when we hear “nuclear,” your mind sort of auto-completes the phrase with “weapons.” But Iran has (had?) a nuclear enrichment program that was verified by the IAEA to be used for things like radiation therapy to treat cancer, and power generation.

The idea that it has to be “weapons” is implanted in your mind with propaganda techniques, like Goebbels’ big lie.

What silos? If you’re envisioning nuclear-armed missiles, the Fascist Mind Trick is working on you.

“War is peace.” — MAGA right about now

Very true, but even without reading the article, I know which political party is the impetus behind this idea. And, for them, the cruelty is the point. They’ve never cared about crime victims, but rather enacting their unhinged punishment rituals to affirm in their minds that there are worse people in the world than themselves.

Well, why would somebody not want to get better? Would somebody decide that of their own free will for no reason at all?

Who set those rules? Is there standards body that promulgates them? I remember that social media emerged as a term to describe media on which the users provided the content, rather than traditional gatekeepers like newspapers and TV networks. Wikipedia agrees, using special jargon, distinguishing between monologic and dialogic media models.

Reddit is quintessential social media.

Seriously, though, what do CEOs actually do? How can one person (totally hypothetically) be the CEO of a car company and a rocket company at the same time, but spend all his time doing drugs, gaming, and destroying democratic institutions? What value does that add to the company? Or, say Walmart fired its CEO and didn’t replace him? How long would it take customers to notice, and what would they notice, versus firing store employees with an equivalent amount of compensation?

Sir Terry Pratchett tweeted his own meeting with Death.

I don’t think that that was the claim. We have car terrorism now, and since the 1980’s according to the Wikipedia list of incidents, and bollards can help protect potential victims. It’s not a new technology, they knew about them in 1931, so what’s our excuse for not installing them?

If it’s free will, why would somebody not do it if it would make their life better? All of the reasons that I can think of are either in-born traits (e.g. anxiety, ego, getting more pleasure out of drugs than other people), or external influences.

Anyway, LLMs can learn from past mistakes, too.

I find it easy to switch back and forth between the two color combinations: If I assume that the scene is in full sun, then the dress looks blue and black. If I assume that it’s in the shade, but with a brightly-lit background, then it looks white and gold.

It feels like 5 years ago, but it was only back in January that a man used a truck to kill 14 people in a ramming attack on Bourbon Street in New Orleans, LA. The city had been warned, and knew of the need to have bollards installed, but cheaped out on temporary bollards, which were apparently malfunctioning at the time of the attack. There had been a vehicle-ramming attack at the Christmas market in Magdeburg in December, and an attack in Munich following in February.

I’d say that the title is right on. Car terrorism is a thing.