Crazy or Not?

Are people who write shit like 

video of Trump admitting to a string of sexual assaults appeared last October

genuinely that crazy or do they know they are bulshiting but simply don’t care? 


54 thoughts on “Crazy or Not?”

  1. OT: On Twitter in the Netherlands, four of the trends are all about the Paris Accord. Apparently, Amsterdam is worried since it’s below sea level.


    1. I saw on Tv at the gym that Trump will be pulling out of the Paris accords. This means I have to avoid the news for the next couple of weeks because the apocalyptic ranting will be out of control.


      1. Do you think US withdrawing from the Paris accords is a good thing?

        Your incessant focus on the tone of pro-environment rhetoric is confusing to me. From what I’ve read from you about this subject, you seem to believe that there are a lot of people sitting on the fence as to whether global warming is real, etc., and issuing apocalyptic warnings will only turn them away.

        I disagree. Much like the ‘moderate voter’ this seems to be a myth. By now, people have made up their minds. Look at how smoothly many conservatives transitioned from ‘Global warming isn’t real, drill baby drill’ to ‘So what if it’s real, there’s nothing we can do about it now, too late. So let’s drill anyway’.

        This is what this administration is going and we’re worried about the tone of its criticism?

        Your climate change posts and your anti-anti-smoking posts, I’ve been unable to understand. Just don’t get it.


              1. What do you actually want scientists to produce when you say you want transparency? It’s spelled out pretty clearly at the level of a layperson at the above link posted by Stringer Bell, for instance. There are other similar sites. On the other hand, there is a lot of peer-reviewed literature by people who work in the atmospheric and oceanic sciences; do you want to read the primary peer-reviewed literature?

                I never know what people seem to want, but it’s always somehow the scientists’ fault — not understandable enough, too boring, too much jargon. Then you have sites for laypersons and it’s still not enough. The truth is that actual climate science requires the knowledge of lots and lots of science — e.g., chemistry, biology, nonlinear partial differential equations/fluid mechanics, statistics, scientific computing. Unless you are willing to learn it or at least tolerate the lingo, then hopefully you will be satisfied with information for laypeople.


              2. I would rather read this scientific jargon than freaks like David Suzuki, Naomi Klein, Steven Guilbeault (a theologist) or any Greenpeace spokesperson.


        1. And I don’t think smoking should be state-banned in any “adult only” private property. Liberals should stop policing civil liberties. (Although conservatives are worse)


        2. This administration or that administration are doing what it’s doing because it’s in demand. There is no all-consuming public appetite for climate action. The only possibility that any administration will do any serious climate action is if it’s a number 1 issue for the majority. But it won’t be an issue for the majority until it stops being perceived as an issue of weird, freaky people.

          Words are everything because they make the reality we inhabit. It was demonstrated very clearly in the last election. Whoever has the best rhetorical devices wins. Climate needs to be sold to people. Workable sales strategies should be used.

          And it’s the same with anti-Trump initiatives. Right now, it’s as if everything were being done to keep Trump in power until 2025. It’s beyond frustrating to watch.


          1. Do you really think the reason people ignore the threat of climate change is because of weird freaky people? I totally understand that it needs better marketing, but I was always under the impression that people don’t care about climate change because it’s precisely the type of threat people are bad at assessing: broad semi-unpredictable problems that happen at some unspecified point in the future. In which case, trying to induce acute panic (and thus be weird and freaky) might be exactly what the doctor ordered… but evidently not or else it would be working. I wonder what marketing techniques would make people care more about climate change?


  2. “After video of Trump admitting to a string of sexual assaults”

    I agree, anyone who would seriously describe the tape in those terms is seriously, and possibly dangerolusly, detached from reality. But I doubt it they really believe that because…. imagining someone believing that is just a litle too scary.


    1. His ex-wife testified in a sworn deposition that he raped her. Yeah, it’s so hard to imagine Trump committing sexual assault.

      I wish we were all as grounded in reality as you are. Perhaps we should start getting our news from Breitbart, too.


        1. “We talk about the “grab by the pussy” video, not anything else”

          Quite. And, correct me if I’m mistaken, but there is no video of him saying those words, the video is of a bus with audio from a hot mic.

          “Admit” is also the wrong word (as it implies guilty confession or a response to charges). He said some sleazy things (that sounded like a 13 year old bullshit-bragging that were caught on a hot mic….


          1. Bragging about what?

            All that’s missing from your explanation is ‘locker room’. That would be perfect.


          2. The idea that hyping up the pussy video would win an election has already lost an election. It didn’t work. We need to stop and do something else.

            Either people are truly crazy and think this will work when it already failed spectacularly or they have talked themselves into believing their own story by repeating it so many times.


        2. The comments were tasteless, it’s true. But I was out with 3 female colleagues a couple of years younger than Trump and they made even more off color jokes. So what?

          And then Trump goes on TV and rants about PC police and it rings true to many people. Because it is true.


        1. I also thought this strategy was going to win. I was wrong. I’m ready to move on to a new strategy. Is anybody else ready? We still have the same old Hillary going around telling how she lost the election because if sexism and the Russians. I hate sexism and the Russians but enough already. Enough. Let’s move on.


          1. Man, this was just one article in a random blog. It’s not like the DNC is reviving the pussy tape for 2018 midterm elections. There are so many more lines of attack here. I’m not sure why you think this article is The Resistance.


            1. I have a news feed that now stands at almost 2,000 sources. The American portion of it is overwhelmingly like this.

              The news feed also contains a plethora of sources from Ukraine, of people who successfully toppled a corrupt government propped by Russia. Their provenly effective method is the exact opposite. Every day I observe the contrast and it kills me. Because here are people who made it work.

              Or even in Russia. There’s Navalny who, in spite of living in a real authoritarian dictatorship, is managing to attract a huge following. I read every post he writes and I understand why he’s so electrifying. That’s real resistance.


  3. I don’t understand this weird investment in attacking the dude linked in the OP and parsing Trump’s words to defend him.


    1. We won’t lose anything if we at least try something other than this prissy tone of moral outrage over trivial things. There’s not that much left to lose because the Congress, the White House, etc are already lost.

      Why not at least try something different? Just to see what happens.

      The moment I see that this kind of thing works, I’ll shut up about it, I promise.


  4. I read Shakti’s link and wanted to ask for clarification:

    \ Though the changes are happening in the most remote part of the planet, they’re being felt thousands of miles away as ice turns to water and starts to lap against increasingly beleaguered coastal communities around the world. And the impacts will only grow more severe unless carbon pollution is reined in.

    Is almost the entire Israel a coastal community?


    1. I don’t know. How close to sea level are the most populous cities in Israel? Are the most populous cities in Israel on the coast?


        1. \ I think overabundance of water is the last thing the region should worry about.

          You may be right about fresh water 😦 , but not about the salt one, unfortunately.

          Regarding Tel Aviv, Elevation above sea level: 15 m = 49 ft

          I have no idea what it means.


  5. “They are, opposition gives their lives meaning.”

    lol. Look who’s talking. Pissing off ‘latte liberals’ is literally the only platform your party runs on. The modern republican is devoid of policy discourse. Nothing matters anymore.

    Incidentally, this is why it’s so easy to maintain popularity in the republican party base. If the base doesn’t care one bit about policy or legislating, all you have to do is say the n-word, or call mexicans rapists, or physically assault a reporter from time to time. That keeps them happy.

    Legislating is hard.


  6. \ The idea that hyping up the pussy video would win an election has already lost an election.

    \ I also thought this strategy was going to win. I was wrong.

    Did you think focusing on the pussy video would work?

    Personally, I do not care if a politician cheats on his wife (Bill Clinton), has mistresses or makes vulgar jokes as long as I agree with the policies he will enact. And as long as it doesn’t put him into the risk of being blackmailed, possibly by foreign interests.

    My preferred solution to the latter is to agree to ignore politicians’ private lives as long as everything is legal, and concentrate on how they serve the people. I do not care if a politician is X inside, if s/he votes in the correct (from my pov) way.

    Funny how some criticized Bernie for not being feminist enough. Look at what president those Americans got instead.


    1. Gosh, I’d take anything, anything that would have won that election.

      Yes, I thought it would work. There is a powerful puritanical legacy in this country, I thought it would kick in. I was wrong . We were all wrong. Time to try something else and bury the pussy video forever and ever.


      1. \ Yes, I thought it would work. There is a powerful puritanical legacy in this country, I thought it would kick in. I was wrong

        I have a feeling it would kick in for a Democratic candidate. And will probably do it one day in the future yet.

        That’s why I think using “anything” to win an election could have been either a defeat for Democrats or very likely a Pyrrhic victory in the long term.


  7. \ Their provenly effective method is the exact opposite. Every day I observe the contrast and it kills me.

    Could you state directly what is the difference? What exactly should American liberals begin doing to attract people?


    1. They should adopt the rhetoric of winners. A healthy human psyche is repelled by the message of doom and gloom and negativity.

      Navalny talks like he’s already won the election. He radiates strength and joy of winning. I hate him, he’s a neo Nazi but his strategy is impeccable. The fellow almost lost an eye but was posting optimistic joyful messages from the doctor’s office.


  8. Have you seen this?

    \ CNN fires Kathy Griffin over Trump video as backlash builds

    CNN sacks comedian Kathy Griffin, as endorsers decide to follow suit, after the comic appeared in a brief video Tuesday holding what looked like US President Donald Trump’s bloody, severed head; she later apologized, saying that the brief video was ‘too disturbing’ and not funny,7340,L-4969655,00.html

    Reminded me of ISIS:


  9. For xykademiqz:


  10. Sure, human-caused climate change is a scientifically documented reality (although how apocalytic it will be, and how quickly those doomsday predictions will occur, is open to question). But the idea that it can be controlled to any meaningful degree without drastic changes to modern industrialized societies,and without halting industrialization in developing countries, is wishful thinking.

    The Paris Climate Agreement is a feel-good pact for treehuggers that mildly penalizes industrial nations like the U.S. while giving a free pass to the biggest coal-burning countries on this planet — in other words, it isn’t going to accomplish much of anything, whether Trump dumps it or not.

    Second-hand smoking is a bigger treat to most people than global warming, and most of us have survived that reasonably well.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.