from the so-you-say dept
This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is drew repeating an important point about how ICE keeps deporting people while blowing off court rulings:
Nothing will change
Until the courts charge some people with contempt and issue some prison time.
In second place, it’s MrWilson with thoughts on the assertion that calling someone a Nazi is not a verifiable statement of fact:
Ironically, I’d actually dispute this. There are indeed a lot of poorly chosen usages of the terms, but they’re not all imprecise and many are verifiable according to several academic definitions.
When I call Trump or Musk a fascist, I’m referencing my knowledge of Eco, Britt, and other standards covered in academia on the subject. We can check off the list of criteria easily. It’s not loose wording. It’s not a substitute for “people I don’t like” or “people I disagree with politically.” Not everyone I disagree with is a fascist. Every fascist is a person I disagree with. If the Hugo Boss fits, then it’s an accurate term.
Ironically people claiming that calling a fascist a fascist is defamation are twisting the meaning of the word defamation to mean “label I don’t like,” rather than “intentionally maliciously untrue label.” And more often, fascists are anti-intellectuals so they don’t even understand what fascism is academically speaking, so they’re not in a position to dispute if the definition is accurate.
Although I wouldn’t say that’s quite the same thing as a “verifiable fact” as distinct from a reasonable and well-supported opinion, it’s a good point and one that’s succinctly summed up by Thad in our first editor’s choice for insightful:
Motherfucker gonna sieg heil and endorse great replacement theory and then get mad when people call him a nazi.
Next, it’s Arianity with a comment about the notion that Rep. Haley Stevens filing articles of impeachment against RFK Jr. is just a way to raise her profile and build voter turnout:
Not only do I not care, this is a good thing and is how representative politics is supposed to work. Doing good things that voters want to raise your profile is literally how politics is supposed to align incentives!
Hopefully it pays off, both because she deserves it and as a reminder to others that actually doing your job comes with benefits. The most remarkable thing has been Dems complete lack of self interest in the face of their constituents begging them to use the limited tools they have.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is n00bdragon with a comment about Greg Abbott’s fears that the release of his communications with Elon Musk would reveal “intimate and embarrassing” exchanges:
Call me old fashioned but the sorts of people that I send “intimate and embarrassing” messages to are pretty much limited to my wife.
Is Mr. Abbott meaning to imply that he and Mr. Musk know each other in the biblical fashion?
In second place, it’s an anonymous comment even more succinctly summing up the points made by MrWilson and Thad about calling someone a Nazi:
If not Nazi, why Nazi shaped?
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out with a comment from BernardoVerda about a currently popular theory for explaining the state of our culture and the discourse:
Well… “Everyone is 12 now” would explain why more than half of Americans can’t read or write at the 6th grade level.
Finally, it’s an anonymous comment about the EU hitting ExTwitter with a massive fine:
Odds are that $140M is more that what Twitter actually worth right is now.
That’s all for this week, folks!
