Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/05/2020 in Blog Comments

  1. 2 points
    I think you're right, in the long run. (POTUS has already made clear he'll intervene if the mayor and governor don't step up, and since they're flipped him off in response, he most likely will.) But I admit that I personally can't just casually dismiss the short-term threats, if the reports are true about businesses being "shaken down", the property damage, etc. I'm also thinking about how it's affecting people psychologically, having to witness this, especially the potentially innocent people caught in the cross-fire. (And now, there's someone acting as "warlord" already edging out Antifa?) The O'ist conception of government's legitimate function is to protect people from the initiation of force, and in Seattle, government has not only abdicated that function, it's aiding and abetting in that initiation. This headline says it all: "Antifa Deserves a Military Response" https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2020/06/11/the-morning-briefing-antifa-deserves-a-military-response-n516040 And yes, I know Trump is letting the leftists state leaders expose themselves before he steps in, to "show" the people, and maybe that's necessary. But for HOW long? How long do people have to watch and endure other's suffering before it crosses the line from strategy to sadism? When is it enough? "Trust the plan", I hear. Still, it chafes against the O'ist impulse in me to stop the initiation of force. (Yes, maybe those people aren't so innocent, ideologically speaking, etc. Or, regarding the innocent, the Q explanation "you can't just tell the people, they have to be shown." Perhaps. Still isn't easy to watch. Like the Taggert Tunnel disaster scene. Even Dagny had to be told, upon leaving New York to the darkness, "don't look down!", lest she turn into a pillar of salt...)
  2. 1 point
    All Polls are Wrong. I don't see why any present poll or polling average should give comfort to the Democratic campaign, because it seems like the real campaign hasn't started. About the only areas that might be of concern to the GOP campaign are seemingly 'iffy' contests for the Senate. I will put down a marker here of so-called swing state polls, and return once all the votes are counted in these (maybe) key races. Arizona -- today Real Clear Politics aggregate of surveys suggests that Democrat Mark Kelly is ~11% in front of the incumbent GOP senator McSally. Colorado -- RCP's page suggests (on very very scant data) that the incumbent Corey Gardner is ~10% behind challenger John Hickenlooper. Iowa -- GOP senator Jody Ernst won over her 2014 Democratic opponent by 8.5%. RCP has no information on the present race, but a mid-June Iowa Register survey suggested a three-point advantage to the Democratic candidate Theresa Greenfield. Maine -- up for re-election is Susan Collins, who won her 2014 contest by 14 points. RCP currently shows a slight lead for her 2020 opponent Sarah Gideon. Montana -- RCP has no data to present on the race here between Steve Daines and Steve Bullock. But I include this one to test the mettle of the Cook Political Report, who has put the race in the 'toss-up' column. North Carolina -- the incumbent is Thom Tillis of the GOP. He faces Cal Cunningham. RCP rates this contest a 'toss-up' on scant data. So, if Arizona, Maine and Colorado are lost by the GOP on November 3, then the Senate will be even-steven, 50 to 50.
  3. 1 point
    One other thought about "war" in this context that crossed my mind: the blurred distinction between civilian and combatant, in the sense that the civilians are not mentally prepared as the soldier is. If combat gives even seasoned warriors PTSD, what of the civilians watching their streets being taken over in a scene they've ever only seen in movies? Watching their business get looted and burned down. The economic hardship that came with the unemployment of the shutdowns was bad enough to cause "suicides of desperation". They weren't psychologically prepared for this. Hence, my concerns about strategy crossing over into sadism. I know, life isn't "fair". And far worse happens overseas in middle eastern countries to civilians. Still, for most of these people, they've been sheltered from that kind of "life during wartime", and I worry about those "suicides of despair" among people unprepared for this. (It can be said that they SHOULD have been prepared. But still...I'll make moral allowances for the uphill battle most probably faced in this culture to do so. ) That's the most heartbreaking thing to me of all. (It also angers me that this infliction of despair is the goal of these terrorists in response to injustices experienced by others, out of a perverted sense of justice.)
  4. 1 point
    TG, I agree. Sometimes reality is a bitch to swallow. But swallow it we must. Nature to be commanded must be obeyed. And one reality is that a war is far more important to win than any single battle for solidifying a system of government. In our system, a crime must be committed before it can be punished. The people who voted for their local governments in the current trouble spots in America elected assholes who crapped all over the police. No wonder they are walking off the job or doing things half-assed. The only way to fix that is let the crimes be committed, make all due appropriate legal cases and paperwork, then go in and clean it up without mercy. Then make sure everybody knows what the rules are for there on out, and make sure they know bad things will happen to them if they try to infringe those rules to harm others. You and I, for as much as we feel for the innocent victims in these situations, are not the ones who commit the crimes. The criminals are. So feel bad, if you must. I certainly do when I see distress signals of the innocent. I think I have an oxytocin overload inside me. I can turn into mush on a dime. But never guilty. Never feel guilty for something wrong you did not do. Accept the reality that in a situation like Seattle, you did nothing wrong. If you accept that frame, and you believe in law and order based on individual rights, you will opt for permanent solutions, not temporary appeasements and gestures that are easily undone just to stop the suffering of someone you did not attack, but someone else did. Michael
  5. 1 point
    Watching your Pantyfa scum friends get severely mistreated by order of my President is going to be so, so sweet.
  6. 1 point
    Not much longer. And it will be particularly amusing to watch the Free Seattle Zone twerps scream like little girls when they are beaten and taken away in unmarked cars.
  7. 1 point
    Some readers may not go to a Twitter thread off the OL site, so I'll add this in as an example of what you are missing.
  8. 1 point
    I know that there are more than one guy with 'you disgusting scumbag' in his mouth reading here. I think 'yds,' and I and invisible readers are all dealing with some relatively straightforward questions, questions that should be amenable to reason of the Randian stripe. Which explanation of of the Twitter Card image behaviour is the more reasonable, makes least assumptions, is the fruit of investigation and inquiry? Which stands up to close scrutiny? Which accounts for all the evidence (including such items as the Q cut and paste from a dev blog)? There would be plenty more questions in play, maybe, if we had a bigger quorum of active members. "Did Obama.org (or Obama race riot sorrows machine) organize a ritual murder of George Floyd?" "Some folk may claim that Q 'warned off' Obama in drops 4436 & 4437*. Does the evidence brought forth from rational inquiry support that claim?" "How would you explain in your own words the three Q drops that caused much discussion and explanatory hypothesizing?" My question to myself is 'what explains why and how some people's beliefs survive a reasonable debunking?' "Let a hundred flowers bloom," said Deng, before he realized how that would probably work out for one-party rule in China and shut it all down. 'Let your freedom of conscience ring. Don't be afraid of devils conjured up to incite prejudice and rage. If evil there is, beware of making The Fundamental Attribution Error.' I paraphrase. As might be apparent, I am not of the Gibbet Enthusiast Party.
  9. 1 point
    Here is an article from Jemima Kelly at the Financial Times. I will stretch the criteria for fair-use as much as I can:
  10. 1 point
    To return to this question ... The basic issue is that Obama.org's initial "landing page" is updated throughout the year -- with the Twitter Card code in the <head> area of the HTML document being updated from time to time. When a coder changes the Twitter Card code in the <head>, to replace the image address, (<meta name="twitter:image" content="IMAGE_URL.jpeg">), previously posted tweets from the page return the current image from Twitter servers. Someone in the QAnon world noted that a Tweet from Obama.org from before Floyd's death showed a depiction of Floyd's image: How could a tweet from May 17th contain an image depicting Floyd when Floyd did not die until May 25th? How could my tweet from June 9th contain a screenshot image that wasn't published until today, June 10th? Now, if anyone says "The Obama website got caught testing the image prior to Floyd's ritual murder," they do not know what they are talking about.
  11. 1 point
    As anyone can see, my tweet from yesterday -- the same exact tweet, WSS_Memorial/status/1270423908131323904 -- the tweet from June 9th now shows an embedded screen-capture image of an OL comment published today, June 10th. https://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/blogs/entry/756-in-the-matter-of-q/?do=findComment&comment=3999 "Reconcile."
  12. 1 point
    This is a screenshot of the above tweet: I will change the <meta> information to update the image and text in the Twitter Card. What will happen to the body of the tweet just capped? <meta name="twitter:card" content="summary_large_image"> <meta name="twitter:site" content="@DarleneViewer"> <meta name="twitter:title" content="This is an example of a Twitter Card with a Summary and Large Image"> <meta name="twitter:description" content="&quot;Tweet this page&quot; -- A simple set of <meta> tags in the head of an HTML document allows Twitter to insert an image, video, audio or an app within the body of the tweet."> <meta name="twitter:image" content="https://wsscherk.com/VIDEOCASTS/A47KF/images/IntheMatterOfQ_JL-cap.png">
  13. 1 point
    Oh, so Q doesn't understand how that works? The Obama website got caught testing the image prior to Floyd's ritual murder. Q is trolling. Just letting the inept scum idiots know he caught them doing that.
  14. 1 point
    Q and QAnon having a bit of a ruckus over Obama.org and modern Twitter-enabled website coding. Q-Watcher Feminist Proper Gander wraps up the story in a series of tweets: The kerfuffle started with this Q drop (screen cap from the site Qanon.pub) : "Reconcile" ... Next came drop 4437 ... Some QAnon folks were critical, some were gyrating wildly to explain away the error. The kerfuffle rests on a misunderstanding of how Twitter Cards work their magic in a few lines of HTML code in the 'head' portion of a website. <meta name="twitter:card" content="summary_large_image"> <meta name="twitter:site" content="@DarleneViewer"> <meta name="twitter:title" content="This is an example of a Twitter Card with a Summary and Large Image"> <meta name="twitter:description" content="&quot;Tweet this page&quot; -- A simple set of <meta> tags in the head of an HTML document allows Twitter to insert an image, video, audio or an app within the body of the tweet."> <meta name="twitter:image" content="https://wsscherk.com/VIDEOCASTS/Q3/q4436.png"> These lines in the <head> of an HTML document "fill in" a tweet from the particular page: The <meta> code on the web page can of course be changed, especially if the body of page itself is updated. If you change the code to insert a new Summary Card with Large Image, then the change will propagate on Twitter's servers. The next time you tweet from the same page, the image may be different than it was at an earlier point. So ... what does this have to do with the kerfuffle ongoing in Q-World? Well, because Twitter itself delivers the image from its own servers (rather than merely 'passing through' the URL of the image file on your server), previously posted Tweets are themselves updated. This can appear to show some kind of chicanery -- if the image rendered in an old tweet shows a 'new' image.
  15. 0 points
    The OL illuminated, who is that? You? You have freaked out here before, calling me an Otherer of others, a persecutor or somesuch after I simply mentioned that Q has mentioned Masons and posted about Masons at school and many other mass shootings. That seemed to really, really upset you. Are you a Mason, Billy? A seeker of The Light?