Uber Steve

whether war, vaccines, or critical infrastructure there is contingent of the right that seems to believe that their security from the worst things that happen is some kind of metaphysical principle rather than the result of specific historical processes that could've gone otherwise and still could

I think about this Tony Benn speech much more than I used to

New theory is that, like how evolution always leads crustaceans to evolve into crabs, politics during times of crisis always devolves to antisemitism

there's a new world order waiting to chestburst out of this one and we're currently in the "involuntarily shuddering and contorting and vomiting at dinner" phase

If America still had the rule of law, this would be the easiest prosecution ever, but we all know absolutely nothing will happen.

Co-sign every word of this.

Post See new posts Conversation Laura Rozen @lrozen · 2h From US admin official background briefing recording listening to, seriously question if US negotiators understood what Iranians were proposing. One official keeps saying acronym for “IAEA” wrong. They seem astonished Iran would not agree to the US supplying them nuclear fuel Laura Rozen @lrozen · 2h They took as suspicious proposals that Iran saw as concessionary. Laura Rozen @lrozen · 2h Explains why Oman FM tried to come to DC to explain what US negotiators may not have fully understood Laura Rozen @lrozen Am not saying what Iran proposed would have been enough, I dont know, but it seems US negotiators did not have the expert guidance to understand it correctly

On top of all the reporting that this war of aggression was planned well in advance, it seems that the reporting also indicates that the US political leadership are quite literally too stupid to understand basic diplomacy. I mean literally not smart enough.

Cashing in on that newfangled email craze. Did AOL actually sponsor this? Stunt casting Jean Stapleton?

Lukewarm movie take incoming: has there ever been a more useless and lazy movie as You’ve Got Mail? I have already seen these people fall in love before in a much better crafted movie a few years before, it’s a foregone conclusion now, there’s no suspense.

It’s funny because it’s like Marlo and Barksdale in The Wire, they want their name to ring out. He’s got too much Queens on him, typical outer borough try-hard, you’ll never impress us. You can be the president and we’ll still look down our noses at you. But thanks for the tax cut.

In his perverse way, he has so much unrequited love for that city. I get it, I love it too. He knows it still MEANS something to be the King of New York in a way we haven’t seen in a while, and he wants to be the first patriarch of a great dynasty. Astor, Morgan, Rockefeller, Trump.

Yes, this is a huge part of his pathology. He will forever be chasing that validation by New York Old Money and Great Men of Industry and Business, he knows they still look down on him, he wants to be JP Morgan but never will. Worshipped by 40% of the country and it will never fill that hole.

Headline: "The Oddfather" Subhed: "At seventy-eight, M a r l o n B r a n d o i s hard up, pissed off and stranger than ever. His latest project: a series of self-produced acting lessons - co-starring t h e likes o f Leonardo DiCaprio, Sean Penn a n d Michael Jackson - that he hopes to sell o n v i d e o" (i'll give the body text downthread)

I downloaded scans of every Rolling Stone issue published between its inception in 1967 and the end of 2007

Which means I can FINALLY share the greatest celebrity profile I've ever read: Jod Kaftan's "The Oddfather," a look at late-stage Marlon Brando that isn't available online

Join me!

🧵

Cannot overstate how repulsive I find this shit

What’s really striking in Saruman’s speech to Gandalf is how broadly (and unusually for Tolkien) relevant it is. Take out the one specific reference to the Elves and Númenor and it is just an absolute classic rationale for collaborating with evil in the confidence you can ultimately direct it.

Man, hang this fucking picture around her neck for the rest of her goddam life. What a hateful piece of shit. I want this in the 2nd paragraph of her obituary.

I keep myself warm at night knowing he’ll be remembered as a cautionary tale of a partisan hack who completely ignored the constitution for his own ends, worse than Roger Taney. Just a complete disgrace to his profession, law degree should be rescinded by Harvard.

Makes you see how the Brooks/Sumner beatdown happened. Like one cranky asshole really got angry in a way I can easily picture Scalise getting.

I think about this every day. I’m not saying it’s over, but it’s definitely, at a minimum, a fundamentally different version of what we thought we’d evolve to. The masks are coming off, everything we said about those fuckers for 50+ years was the truth.

democrats should internalize that this is what their colleagues think of them and act accordingly

There’s a guy who drives around my town in a truck with a sign on the tailgate that says “No Skinny Bitches” and now I’m wondering if these 2 are friends

“With goodwill and common sense, I believe we can come up with ways to do this, without vilifying and demonizing children.”

Wow. What a monster. Clearly she hates trans people.

You have got to get a grip.

Who else remembers the scandal of Obama calling out Citizens United and getting the Alito head shake?

And were any of those people a recent Democratic Party nominee for the office of president?

Going back to at least Clinton, the party nominee has been generally in favor of gay rights as they were understood at that time.

“Yet another guy”? Who was the last D presidential candidate who wanted us to hate LGBT people?

Already said I don’t. I’m talking about principles, not any one issue. Your deliberate obtuseness on this point honestly has me wondering if you’re the bot in this conversation.

I’m AI because I said I disagree with the notion that politicians should just base their legislative vote on opinion polls? That seems like a niche topic for programming a bot, but, ok? Have you just never met anyone who disagreed with you?

I absolutely don’t, you’re right. I’m just saying that it would be better if a rw politician who claimed to be voting their conscience against the public actually faced electoral consequences, but they don’t. None of the people in favor of Chinese EVs will vote any differently in the next election.

The problem is that in an increasing number of matters, the public’s policy preferences have become disconnected from their votes due to partisan blinders, so those politicians can defy the will of the electorate on those issues because the loyal party voters will still back them at the polls.

I mean… in principle, I don’t entirely disagree with this. There are reasons why we don’t do everything by democratic process, we elect representatives to make choices based on their knowledge and experience, and if we don’t like their choice we can vote them out in the next election.