satire.

or what could have passed as satire. in the present, it's more observational.

So how far did making women ghostbusters get us, newt?

This is possibly stupid and uniformed fun, it might even be slightly malicious fun, but there is present an element of making fun of ideology that goes too far.

I know it's mentioned at the end of the vid, but I want to do a quick PSA for Nebula. Don't mean to sound too much like an ad, but if you like edutainment-type videos there really is a lot there for your money.

I will say Nebula's platform tech is a bit rough at present. So far as I know there's just the web version and iOS / Android apps. I really want a Roku app, which should exist eventually. I'll note that for some reason the web version is limited to the most recent 100 videos on each channel, while the mobile versions don't have that limit (a bug of which the service is aware).

I tend to watch quite a few of what had been my favorite YT channels on Nebula now, to get the ad-free / slightly longer versions (I think they show up slightly earlier too). This channel, Legal Eagle, Wendover... discovered a few others I'd not have run into as well. So yeah - unpaid endorsement over.

(Edit - I didn't realize he mentioned Logistics of D Day at the end of the video - it's damned excellent if you're into WW2 stuff.)

"What on earth are you talking about?"
-newt

The rules for property and income when one or both parties decide they no longer want to be in the relationship.




"not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives"
-newt

Incorrect. If you are on birth certificate, you have the same rights and obligations.
The only pitfalls are that :
- Child support is calculated from the income of the parent with less custody (rather than from the true cost of raising a child).
- Women almost always get custody if the choice is between two parents (like when they live far apart and child can only be at one or the other).



"and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first"
-newt

Negative. Co-parenting does not conflate property.

Shared assets when not married are divided either by percentage of purchase price contribution, or by percentage stated in a contract.




"My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas"
-newt

"My brother won."
-newt

Won by your own definition. Hence I congratulate.




"You assume women take off time to raise the kids"
-newt

No assumptions. Although afaik they still do it more often.




"You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. "
-newt

Top result from a zero effort google of "men working hours vs women working hours"

https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041




"Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that"
-newt

I admit that women [as a group] under 35 out earn men under 35 because of preferential admittance (such as to higher education) and preferential hiring (such as to managerial positions).

I did not say that women earn more in the same position for the same hours worked. Young men are simply getting shut out of opportunities, so their incomes are lower. As by design.

It does however highlight how affirmative action is being poorly controlled.
The target statistic is based on overall population at all ages.
The adjustment is skewed to younger ages (school admission is typically for younger people).
So the system is trying to balance out incomes of older men by trimming up incomes of younger women, with no accounting for the effects on younger men or consequences of older men retiring.
The situation is doomed to overshoot with time.

A natural result is the popularity of people like Jordan Peterson, with messages like : "Young men, nobody will help you, stop waiting for someone to help you, stop lamenting your situation, you gotta pull yourself up by your boot straps. Start by cleaning your room, then go make something of yourself".






"Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk[etc]" -scheherazade "
-newt

Straw man argument.

You know I stated that those marriageability criteria exist specifically due to risk of consequences of divorce.

I never stated that I have personal issues with those attributes.
I have dated women on that list. I didn't /marry/ them.

My only criteria for a relationship that I am happy being in is :
- We are mutually attracted
- We like each other
- We are nice to each other
I don't care what your religion is, your politics, your family status, whatever. It's all just noise to me.





" And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are?"
-newt

Prenups can be negated by these simple words :

"I did not understand what I was signing"
or
"My lawyer was not present".

Poof. Prenup thrown out.




"their husbands are more likely to break their vows first"
-newt

A woman to cheat needs a willing man (easy)
A man to cheat needs a willing woman (hard)

Times have changed. Online dating made chatting someone up in person and make an impression uncommon, and even considered creepy/unusual. Now people are picked on their online profile based on looks/height/social-media-game.

Dating apps and sites publish their statistics. Nowadays, around 20% of men match with around 80% of women.
Most men aren't having sex. Most men can't find a match to cheat with if they wanted to.

The tall cute photogenic guys are cleaning up.
The 20% of men that match the bulk of women are going through women like a mill. They will smash whatever bored housewife crosses their path.

A 2 second google result :
https://usustatesman.com/economics-of-dating-2-the-brutal-reality-of-dating-apps/




"Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches"
-newt

Agreed.

Fortunately, I never say that about women.






" you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks"
-newt

False equivalence.

Cohabitation and Partnership are mutually independent.
Meaning both can exist at the same time.


-scheherazade

My first impulse is to give mama time rather than present a threat to her babies.

*ponders a bit. Visualizes mama ripping my heart out to set an example for other bystanders.*

Yeah... I'm sticking with that.

So now it’s one hour. Consistency, bob. You lack it.

Yes...but 5 second clips out of context are all you’ve been fed for the last 5 years....just as your statement about Biden tripping suggests, because it is a non story on real news, mentioned but not dissected to imply he’s on deaths door. Trump made his ramp crawl a story by denying it and claiming he ran down the ramp unassisted, without the denial it would have been a nothing burger....Thanks to Trump's dumb denial it became a story about his health AND his lack of honesty.

Don’t make up lies, Bob. I’ve never “secretly agreed” Biden isn’t presidential, I’ve said he’s not the best Democrats had to offer. You are the one who is consistently inconsistent between your private conversations and public ones, that’s why I won’t talk to you in private anymore. In private, you can occasionally be rational and honest, but then publicly you are bat shit crazy and contradict your private positions. That’s not me, it’s you, buddy.

No sir, Trump and right wing media are far more likely to be outright lying to you than telling the truth, something like 90% lies 5% misdirection and 5% truth...main stream media is closer to 90% truth, 5% misdirection and 5% lies or mistakes they retract when caught. It’s nothing similar. Right wing media excuses this by saying they are 90% opinion and only 5-10% news, and they have no obligation to tell the truth on their opinion programs. Indeed, they've successfully argued in court that no reasonable person could possibly think they were ever telling the truth so they aren't responsible for their lies. Main stream media doesn’t do that, they are maybe 20% opinion shows that actually do care if they’re correct and voluntarily correct themselves often and 80% actual news that follow ethical guidelines absolutely missing on right wing media.

For instance, you don’t see footage from clan rallies presented as Trump rallies on CNN, but Fox OANN and Newsmax all replayed year old riots in the Midwest labeled as Portland burning all summer, photoshopping armed ANTIFA into the fake pictures to scare you into voting out of fear of the terrifying black man, and lied to you claiming ANTIFA, the anarchist movement, is somehow part of the Democratic Party of big government and also in cahoots with BLM so much your ilk use ANTIFA and BLM as interchangeable terms....and you believe every word without question.
You don't see main stream media pretending there was massive election fraud based on nothing but the word of consummate liars, actually accusing American companies of being foreign entities run by America's long dead enemies in efforts to invalidate an election. You don't see them pretending a DOJ rule that denies a prosecutor the ability to press charges against the president explained as proof and official verification of his innocence on main stream media.
The right spread the absolute lies about vote fraud for so long they are being sued for billions and have convinced their viewers a dictator dead for a decade personally stole the election from their guy (who received 8 million fewer votes, and who’s never won an election by getting more votes).
If right wing media were held to the same standards as real news media not one right wing outlet would still exist.

This is so much better than I'd anticipated. Go Conchy!

Also, I really like how the information was presented. It was clear, concise, and weird as hell.

I approve of all the amazing beauty that is Iceland *promote glaciers in all their majesty, past, present and future.

Every time this guy lays down an assertion, he's presenting questionable supposition as fact. He's building all of his points from a shaky foundation of paranoia presented as reality.

There are definitely problems with the way that 24 hour news media is formatted and it is causing social issues. But the problem is a lot more complex than "a conspiracy of rich people controlling you". Any solution is going to require real objective, unbiased and clear-eyed analysis of how the news business works today. This video isn't that.

What struck me in the landing commentary was this tendency to present this like some dumb exotic adventure with lots of teambuilding slogans (also "insane" engineering?). I guess it has to be like that for reasons but it is icky.

This is just engineering on a field trip. We have been there before, we are trying to make it safe to go there again. Things are expected to work.

A lot of white bald men at the monitors but the presentation is diverse :-) NASA is doing its best.

But that’s the thing....they don’t have to prove his thoughts, nor his intent, only the results....because this isn’t a criminal trial and there are very different standards, they only have to show he didn’t preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, violating his oath and duty, because the only possible sentence is for him to be bared from office. His lack of action during the attack alone far exceeded that bar.

It’s becoming more likely (but still unlikely) they could get the votes because he’s barely putting up a defense. To me it seemed like a mockery of the senate, like they were just proving the point that his defense could be someone standing at the podium shouting “Bababoui, Bababoui, Howard Stern’s penis!” and still he would not be convicted...and I think that’s pissing off some Republican senators....but there are also many who are reading books and unrelated documents among other distractions and clearly not paying attention at all, proving the defense correct, they could say anything and still get him off without presenting any defense. A sad state.
On the contrary, the prosecution’s case is straight forward with video evidence and records of what Trump tweeted and did (or didn’t do like not calling in the national guard) during the attack on top of the horrific personal experiences of the same senators hearing the case....hard to forget a lynch mob looking for you and your family to hang less than a month ago.

Remember, there is no possible prison term here, no fine, nothing but baring him from office, that’s it. There should be a criminal trial for treason IMO, but it wouldn’t be a slam dunk. I think the standard isn’t what he meant, it’s what a reasonable person would think he meant. That’s not prosecuting thought crime, it’s prosecuting speech and actions that it’s plainly foreseeable will incite real crimes.

I barely remember the inauguration riots, the million pussy hat march made more news....Trump’s “biggest crowd ever” nonsense got more airtime, and damages and injuries were fairly minimal so, especially when faced with the fresh scars from 2020, they’re easy to forget. That said, I don’t disagree....by 2022 new scandals and a desire to forget will erase this from many people’s memories.

point of clarification

"lack of standing, meaning the campaign failed to show that it had suffered an 'injury in fact'"

Or in these circumstances, if there WERE a handful of people lets say 100, lets say they legit found 100 votes that were 100% fraudulent. In a space where they lost the vote by 20,000, 100 votes would not have caused injury or would not have changed anything.

Still if you look at even the numbers that they are claiming are frauds
(see below)
-----------------------
-----------------------
Here’s the breakdown of the ones they could verify and have been provided to the public.

42,000 people voted more than once
1,500 dead voters cast ballots
19,000 non-Nevada residents voted (number doesn’t include students and military)
8,000 people voted using non-existent addresses
15,000 votes were cast from commercial addresses or vacant houses
4,000 ineligible foreign nationals voted


that brings you to 89,500 votes

STILL you'd have to chop that 42,000 in half, because 1 of their votes would still count, so 89-21= 68,500 that they are even CLAIMING are fraudulent

Here's the problem
https://abcnews.go.com/Elections/2020-us-presidential-election-results-live-map/

even if u shift the 68,500 away - you can't assume that all of those votes that they're claiming are fraudulent are FOR biden - it's likely a mixed bag. HENCE the no injury-in-fact.


------------

But that's also assuming that the evidence they present is actually substantial and holds up to scrutiny

"[The judge] summarily dismissed its claims of voter fraud and request for an overturn of election results in a ruling on Friday, writing that the campaign’s evidence provided “little to no value” based on questionable or “unsound” methodology, adding that the evidence failed to show any “credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 General Election in Nevada was affected by fraud.”





-
If the evidence is so compelling, why can't i find it anywhere? "washed away?" Can't be that washed away, there's a court transcript that's easily readable. There's bits and pieces published on news sites, but the judges in 50 different states in the USA (many appointed by trump) and the supreme court too for that matter, didnt find anything presented to be compelling.



--------
SIDE NOTE
Did u watch Lombardi's ghost or whatever speaking at the super bowl? What do you think he meant by "...the courage and teamwork to triumph" The phrase jumped out at me, because it's not very encouraging. I mean I personally find it encouraging. But i guess a lot of people don't find talk like that encouraging, it's just a weird quote that doesnt make sense. It's like how do you get to the word "triumph" with the word "courage" --- that's just not very encouraging,,,some might say. It's like, what does he even do all day, TALK to the players to get them to do things? everyone knows that's not possible. Not encouraging. pffffft sorry i can't keep it up, yeah he incited the riot through encouragement.