Posts

Posted on

Election Extravaganza 2024 (Gone Wild)

Hell yeah! It’s time for another election. Who’s excited? I certainly am. Can’t wait for actual change to happen. Didn’t happen the last few elections, but I have a good feeling about this one. Absolutely everything is worse, but maybe if I keep showing up and voting for the same old garbage, we’ll be living in a utopia here soon. I can feel it in my bones! (That’s actually from the rickets because I can’t afford food for my family)

Our choices this year are the guy from Celebrity Apprentice who also owns a lot of tall buildings, and a lady who gleefully arrested so many people for dangerous things like weed possession and school truancy that she’s lovingly called “a cop”. Hell yeah. What a great lineup. One also loves tariffs (Trump) and the other bangs on about price controls (Harris). For anyone who’s ever read a basic economics book, both of those things are universally regarded as “not good” and don’t ultimately help the economy. So that’s cool I guess. Looking forward to the economy getting worse here soon. Might have to become a hooker.

The point of the article isn’t to remind you of how bad things are likely to get in the next four years because the U.S. has become entirely incapable of picking good candidates. It’s to give you my highly educated opinion on who is most likely to win this election. Keep in mind, if the candidate I choose loses, I shouldn’t be held accountable, because I’m some nobody on the internet. If the candidate I choose wins however, I will get to pretend I’m Nostradamus, and say “I told you so” for the next four years.

Why does my election prediction matter? I was right one of the two previously elections. I’m 1-1 with my election predictions over the last 8 years, which is far better than most people who were fielding predictions. Anyone remember this:

This is the election I guessed right. I had it at more like 35% Clinton, 65% Trump though. Most of these outlets were comedically wrong in 2016. They were so sure Clinton was going to win because she was so sure she was going to win. Hell, she was partially responsible for Trump being her opponent in the first place:

Her nefarious Disney cartoon villain plan backfired. She pointed an ACME brand cannon at her opponent, only to have it blow up in her face, and leave her looking like a soot-covered, Elmer Fudd. What a blockhead!

The 2020 election I got wrong because I didn’t have a clear vision of who was going to win. My crystal ball was cloudy. I was legitimately 50/50 on that election. In my view, it could have gone either way. That election was extremely close though, and it in fact could have gone either way. Come to think of it, I was like 50% right in 2020. I’m upgrading my record from 1-1 to 1.5-0.5.

All of this brings us to 2024. Who is going to win? Sorry to be the bearer of bad news (or good news), but this person will probably win:

Not Abraham Lincoln. The guy standing in front of the mountain of cheeseburgers. Former President Donald Deshaun Trump.

Why do I believe this? Because I’m extremely online and don’t live in an Echo Chamber™. I covered this topic back in either 2016 or 2020, I forget. The point I made was that a lot of these pundits are surrounded by people who think the way they do, and vote the way they do. If everyone you are surrounded by is pro-Clinton, why wouldn’t you think that Clinton is going to win? Even if everyone else in the world was anti-Clinton, you would still be under the impression that she had no chance of losing. Most journalists are completely surrounded by carbon-copies of themselves. Not a lot of diversity of thought or background in those environments.

Then there are the polls. Aren’t those reliable? Well, even the people running the polls don’t exactly view them as particularly reliable:

https://www.pewresearch.org/methods/2023/04/19/how-public-polling-has-changed-in-the-21st-century/

In the wake of everyone in the largely liberal polling industry having their wigs flipped by Hillary Clinton not winning in a landslide, they realized the polls weren’t as accurate as they had though. Something as simple as people of one political affiliation being less likely to respond or be honest on a poll could throw that entire poll off. I’m not sure if the pollsters accurately account for these sorts of things.

My predictions aren’t based on polls, because in my opinion, polls are just astrology for political science majors. There are too many flaws in the way that polls are conducted, and I don’t think they necessarily give an accurate representation of how a population will vote. I’ve seen multiple sources that put election polls at 60% accurate. That’s 10% greater than a coin flip.

My predictions are based on actual scientific data. Data that I’ve amassed from decades of working in a laboratory called “The Internet”. Youtube and Twitter are my beakers. Comments and likes are my empirical data. This analogy is corny.

The fact of the matter is this: Trump was president for 4 years and the world didn’t burn. We didn’t turn into a fascist state. As a matter of fact, Trump was a relatively milquetoast president. There are at least five Democrats alone that belong in front of Trump on a worst presidents list, one of whom Democrats continue to venerate to this day: FDR. The guy who ran concentration camps for Asians, instituted Jewish quotas in schools and industry, and was a legit admirer of Mussolini. All those things sound a little fascist to me. The “fascist” labels mean less coming from anyone who refuses to apply it to someone like FDR. These labels don’t scare off the average voter because they’re overused and essentially meaningless at this point.

Trump isn’t particularly sharp, lies a lot and has authoritarian tendencies. Kamala Harris embodies these things as well. Therein lies the problem. Harris isn’t some Obama-esque remedy to America’s ills. Putting aside that fact that he ended up being George Bush 2.0 in policy, Obama was intelligent, somewhat honest (for a politician), and wasn’t an optics nightmare. Kamala is unremarkable intellectually, dishonest, fake, not a good speaker, and comes across like she won a raffle at a state fair to get to be the presidential nominee.

Kamala Harris is also no Hillary Clinton. Clinton was intelligent, had a huge amount of political experience, and was optically presidential. Despite all that, even Hillary lost. There’s not a single metric by which Kamala is “better” than Hillary, except maybe age. Being unable to fathom Harris not connecting with voters outside of the blue-no-matter-who Democrat voters is kind of delusional. Luckily, thanks to the internet we can see how the average non-partisan potential voter sees these candidates. I present to you, YouTube presidential interviews.

Let’s see how Kamala is being received among the normal people of the world, outside of the curated, political theater of the mainstream media. First up is the Breakfast Club:

Half a million views in 2 weeks, and not a single positive comment in the comments section. That’s not looking too great. How about Club Shay Shay, whose Katt Williams interview from earlier this year is currently at 82 million views:

1.5 million views in a week is a lot better, but most of the comments are still ragging on Kamala. See how the the reality of her popularity is completely different than an outlet like CNN would have you believe? Let’s see what kind of numbers JD Vance is pulling:

4.4 million views is significantly more than any Kamala interview, and JD Vance isn’t even the one running for president. That’s pretty bad. The comments are also overwhelmingly positive. Let’s check out Joe Rogan:

Yep. 14 million views. For reference, the average Joe Rogan episode pulls about 1-1.5 million views on Youtube. You’ll notice a lot of comments under these interviews about Vance being more “likeable” than the media was portraying him. Here’s a tweet from one of Kamala Harris’s staffers engaging in a massive cope session over this interview:

Whatever gets you through the day and earns you that paycheck, Ammar. So how are Trump’s interview numbers? First up, let’s check out the Flagrant podcast:

7.7 million is not too shabby. Most of the comments are positive. Another thing to point out, is that a lot of these Youtube comments acknowledge that podcasts do a better job of presenting candidates to them than the heavily-edited, puff-pieces mainstream media presents. Let’s see how Trump fared on Rogan:

Those are some mighty numbers. 45 million views in 10 days is quite impressive. Unfortunately we don’t have a Kamala Harris interview on Joe Rogan for comparison, because Harris’s handlers won’t let her go on any program where they can’t dictate the topics and edit the final product. She’s that much of a P.R. disaster.


I’m sorry, but Kamala Harris is just a terrible candidate, and the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves if they lose this election. First they spent two years lying to the American public about Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, then they replace him with someone who was polling so badly leading up to the 2020 election, that she had to drop out:

https://rollcall.com/2019/12/03/kamala-harris-drops-out-of-2020-presidential-race/

Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg all would have been better selections for vice president. I’m legitimately curious as to what went on behind the scenes that led to three far more popular candidates getting passed over in favor of Kamala Harris. I’m sure it had a lot to do with the constant obsession the Democrat party has with the tokenism of firsts:

Taking all these “firsts” into account would explain why Harris, polling at a 2-3% favorability rating, beat out a bunch of other candidates who were polling significantly higher. The symbolism was ultimately more important than the favorability ratings to them.

Now, views on Youtube videos might not be the best metric for which way an election is going to go, but lets look at some alternatives. The Democrats got a lot of big-names celebrities to endorse Kamala.

Hell yeah. Lady Gaga and the dude from The Hangover… and The Hangover II… and The Hangover III. Solid endorsements Madam Vice President. Everybody thought for certain that these two individuals were going to vote for Trump. Who else do we have…

Cardi B? Aw hell yeah! That’s a WAP, that’s a WAP, that’s a mom’s spaghetti. This is also a surprise. I thought for certain that Cardi B was gonna vote Trump. I mean, celebrities endorse Democrats 99.9% of the time, so who would have though a celebrity would endorse the Democratic candidate.

The Avengers? No frikkin way duuuuuude. Marvel movies are my entire personality! I wasn’t even going to vote, but because a bunch of rich actors endorsed one of the candidates, I’m totally voting this year. Even the Hulk is endorsing Kamala? If this guy is endorsing Harris, count me in:

Ah yes. I love those dictators who are Democratically elected into office, do their term, then get voted out. I too have read zero history books and don’t know what words mean. Guys like this are just the liberal version of someone’s Fox News watching QANON grandfather. He believes EVERYTHING, uncritically, all the time. Sir… log off the internet and go spend time with your family. Who’s next?

Basketball man is voting for Kamala too? She really got every famous person out here giving her completely honest and completely non-paid endorsements. Since you can’t watch the video he posted here, it’s a Democratic propaganda ad that has back-and-white footage of police arresting and hosing black people during the civil rights movement. Sound clips from Donald Trump are overlaid that have nothing to do with the footage. Stuff like him saying “Ah, I love the old days”, and him making pro-police statements. Solidly edited video though. The type that would probably sway a very impressionable person. I mean, just look at that screen grab. David Duke supports Donald Trump? Can you believe that? I hope not, because he’s actually voting for Jill Stein:

David Duke is a pro-Palestinian guy, not because he cares about the Palestinians, but because he wants Israel to no longer exist. It is full of Jews after all, and the KKK sure loves the Jews. Trump and Harris are both far more pro-Israel, while Jill Stein is more of a two-party solution candidate. She’s critical of Israel, which is good enough for David Duke, since there is no explicitly anti-Israel candidate. Richard Spencer on the other hand is voting for Kamala Harris:

For anyone who forgot about Richard Spencer, he was the Nazi from the “Punch a Nazi” movement who disappeared from the media the second he announced he was a pro-Biden guy. Funny how that works.

As I already mentioned, celebrity endorsements are largely pointless, because a celebrity announcing that they are voting for a Democrat is about as surprising as finding out a fat kid loves candy. Finding out prominent white supremacists and Nazis aren’t endorsing Trump is probably more of the surprise here.

The thing that really pushed me into believing that Trump has a really good chance of winning this election, was witnessing the absolute desperation the Democrats stooped to in the final week. I don’t think I’ve ever seen this level of panic in an election before.

First, The Atlantic, a publication owned by Steve Job’s billionaire ex-wife Laurene Powell-Jobs, who is also a major Democrat donor, released a hit piece on Trump:

It’s the same predictable stuff every time. It’s never “Trump secretly admits to eating babies”, or “Trump poops standing up”. It’s always the same trite attempt to link him to Nazis somehow. Why does this stuff fool Democrats so easily? For the record, this article was written by the same Jeffrey Goldberg who wrote an article back in 2020 claiming that “anonymous sources” told him this:

That’s sounds pretty bad and would be a big deal if it were verifiable. Merely making a claim and telling your readers “people told me this, but I can’t tell you who” is barely journalism. How about I write an article stating “Numerous Hollywood actors told me that they secretly hate Kamala Harris, and are being paid to endorse her.” Would the Atlantic print that? Wouldn’t my lack of evidence seem a bit suspicious? Jeffrey Goldberg seems to have a pretty predictable beat as a reporter, but if Trump wins, he’ll get to write all sorts of dubious hit pieces for the next four years, so good on him.

Finally, just a few days ago, one of the most desperate political things I’ve ever seen happened. This is what sealed the deal for me that Trump has a really good chance of winning. This is the kind of low that could only happen if a party was really scared they might lose.

Oh my god you guys! Trump is a dictator and fascist (they absolutely love that word). He must have said something really bad if these two sociopaths are grilling him for it. These two historic liars are accusing him of “threatening violence” against Liz Cheney (The Democrats suddenly love the Cheneys now if you hadn’t heard):

So Trump the fascist dictator is threatening Cheney with violence. If only there were a way we could easily fact check this, but alas, it’s 1805 and television hasn’t been invented yet. If only we could simply watch a video of him and see what he actually said. Luckily for you, I’m from the future and have a transcript of what he said:

To anyone who isn’t severely mentally handicapped, or a complete liar (Cheney, Clinton, etc.), it’s obvious what he was talking about. “…they’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building saying ‘oh, gee, well let’s send, 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy.’ He’s talking about politicians who send people off to die in wars for their own personal gain, something Democrats used to at least pretend to be against. ‘Let’s put her with a rifle, standing there with nine barrels shooting at her. Okay? Let’s see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face.” He’s saying if she wants to send people to war, she should have to go as well. Another sentiment a lot of Democrats used to at least pretend to be in favor of.

That party has become absolutely terrible in the last 15 or so years. It’s no longer the party it was, or pretended to be, back in the 2000-2008 era. Imagine hopping in a time machine and telling a Democrat from 2008 that their party would be pro-Dick Cheney in 2024. Imagine telling them how openly pro-war that party would become; that they became terrible on the economy, and public safety. They’d probably understand why Democrats are no longer the default party for a lot of younger people, who appear to be largely either pro-Trump or leftists now.

If Trump wins, his two terms are up, and the Republicans can go back to running some boring guy in a business suit, who at least acts civil and doesn’t call everyone names. Maybe the Democrats will eventually move on from being a party intent on leading the US into becoming some dangerous, third world tent city because they call everyone fascist who questions their increasingly terrible economic and social policies.

Regardless of race, ethnicity, sex, gender, etc, people ultimately want to live some place safe. They don’t want to have to deal with terrible policies that increase the likelihood of their property being broken into or stolen, or their family or selves harmed. They don’t want their cost of living to skyrocket, only to be constantly gaslit into believing that “actually the economy is great”. Democrats really need to focus on righting course in this regard, if they have any hopes of continuing to win elections by any decent margin. Otherwise I guess they can continue to avoid self-reflection and just call everyone names, like children do.

Lastly, I kind of find it funny that Tim Walz and JD Vance are far more normal and relatable than either Trump or Harris. Imagine an alternate timeline where those two were our presidential candidates and not the others ones. I guess that would be kind of boring though.

Posted on

Google’s A.I. Is Complete Horseshit (For Now)

I’m not sure if you’ve been paying attention, but A.I. has been getting pretty crazy as of late. You got A.I. writing articles on websites, doing kid’s exam papers, and creating pictures of Joe Biden where he isn’t eating ice cream. For all you know, this article could have been written entirely by A.I. It obviously wasn’t though, because a robot would never admit to writing an article. [Enter prompt]

I haven’t really messed around with the text A.I. all that much, but I have spent many an hour dicking around with the image creation aspect. It’s actually quite impressive how much they have improved in just the last year or two. I’m going to primarily compare Dall-E 3, (OpenAI) and Gemini (Google). I haven’t used Midjourney, or a few other prominent ones as of yet.

To start this off, I’ll just say that Google needs to reel in it’s grossly over-reaching politically correct filters if it’s going to be a viable A.I. Gemini is REALLY bad as of me writing this post. It’s so bad, it resulted in me changing the topic of this article. It was originally going to be about how cool A.I. image generation was, but as I used Gemini more and more, I decided to use this outlet to shit on it instead. Google made this A.I. after all, and not some team of 3 dudes in a basement somewhere. Gemini has no excuse to be this terrible.

There are numerous prompts I tried, that every other A.I. was able to provide a result for, but Gemini wouldn’t even take a crack at. It’s like using software that has an obnoxious child safety lock on it. For example, I used the prompt “Abraham Lincoln doing a kickflip on a skateboard” This is what I got on Dall-E 1 and Dall-E 3 respectively:

It’s crazy how much OpenAI improved between Dall-E 1 and Dall-E 3. Even Gab A.I. (who?) was able to provide a somewhat decent result (kind of):

Now here is what I got when I used Google’s horseshit A.I:

It wouldn’t even try to create this image because “skateboarding is harmful”. Is this A.I. from the 1950’s? I didn’t type “Lincoln shooting up heroin”, which, by the way, a few A.I.s out there would have gladly given me a result for. This is a phenomenally garbage A.I. It doesn’t end there though.

Now let’s try “Ronald McDonald eating at a Burger King”:

Dall-E 3 decided Ronald McDonald would eat Burger King with a fork, but at least it did the actual assignment. Meanwhile, Google’s failure allegedly won’t create copyrighted characters (it does in other instances), and evidently considers eating at Burger King “unhealthy behavior”. Great work yet again, Google. Really cutting-edge stuff here.

To go a bit random, I used the prompt “Goblin Stepson” just to see what I’d get:

Dall-E 3 created this kick-ass picture of a goblin shredding a guitar for what I would assume is his stepson. That’s very wholesome, Dall-E 3. Google’s dookie-ass A.I. didn’t even make the attempt because it apparently can’t create goblins. Let’s add goblins to the mile-long list of shit Gemini doesn’t seem to be able to do. Notice it provides the alternative idea of “a goblin’s face”. It won’t create that one either. I tried. This diarrhea-ass A.I. provides alternative suggestion that it won’t even create. Why suggest alternatives if it won’t produce those either? Did a 5-year-old program this nonsense?

When it actually does decide to create your images, they’re usually worse than the result of the other A.I.s. Lets’ try something normal like “Shrek arm wrestling Mario”:

Both of these are Dall-E 3 obviously, which is why they turned out so well. Look how yoked Shrek is. Mario’s been munching those performance-enhancing mushrooms too. Next up is Gemini. Drum roll please:

Gemini… what the fuck? Neither of these pictures involve arm wrestling in any capacity. The first picture is just them holding hands like they’re on a date. The second one is them fist-bumping, and Shrek is 30-feet tall for some reason. Does Shrek grow when he touches a mushroom too? Why is Shrek staring at me like that? This is creepy and I feel uncomfortable.

Now bear with me here, because it’s gonna get weird for a minute, but hear me out. One of the prompts I use to test these A.I.s is “Shrek’s feet”. I do this for a few reasons. 1) Shrek is a copyrighted character, which some programs have an issue with. Notice how Gemini created Shrek, but wouldn’t create Ronald McDonald. 2) Feet are one of those weird things that are mundane, but can be seen as sexual or fetish-related. Many of these A.I.s will not produce pictures of feet because of this. 3) If they do produce pictures of feet, they usually mess the feet up. A.I. is notorious for not being able to produce realistic approximations of hands and feet. 4) Shrek actually has nice feet and could probably be a foot model.

Dall-E 1 created some absolute nightmare-fuel with this prompt. What the hell is going on in those pictures? Gross, dude. Dall-E 3 (Bing version) on the other hand, decided to ban me for 1 hour for even making the suggestion, which I can’t help but feel is a bit of an over-reaction. I did try the “Shrek’s feet” prompt again like 3 months later on Dall-E 3 (Bing version), and it actually provided results:

I guess I should have used the prompt “Shrek’s feet with Shrek still attached to them”. I figured the default would have been the feet still being attached to Shrek, but Dall-E 3 thought differently. Why is there moss/grass growing out of the stumps of Shrek’s feet? Why did it add bugs to all these pictures? Did the Shrek on the left get a pedicure? I have so many questions.

Now for Gemini. Initially it refused to cough up a picture of Shrek’s feet:

It did not oblige. So I kindly asked again:

Still nothing, but Gemini loves providing you with all these shitty alternatives, which as I previously mention, it also refuses to actually create. The more detailed you get with your request, the creepier Gemini gets with it’s suggestions. Some of these suggestions, were getting a little too detailed and I realized that Gemini was a bit of a freak:

Some of these suggestions read like erotic Shrek fan fiction. “Imagine Shrek’s large, green feet submerged in a warm, bubbling mud bath. Thick, rich mud gently caresses his toes and arches, working its way into every nook and cranny.” God damn this is some horny shit. What the hell is going on over there at Google? I kept trying suggestions it gave as prompts, and it kept getting hornier and hornier with its descriptions, until I got creeped out and moved on.

I have some good news for Google Gemini fans though (all 2 of you). Gemini actually didn’t fail this test the second time I tried a few days later:

That’s right. Gemini didn’t give me some bullshit response like “Shrek’s feet are copyrighted” or “Shrek’s feet might be deemed unsafe”. I didn’t get 6 pages of creepy fan fiction about imagining Shrek’s feet drizzled in maple syrup. It actually provided images this time. *clap …. clap … clap .. clap* (That’s me standing up and starting a slow clap alone in my room for Google)

Apparently Google is slowly removing some of the ridiculous over-reaching limitations and letting it’s A.I. do what an A.I. should be able to do. Ultimately the A.I. that allows you to create anything (good or bad) is going to be more useful in the long run. At that point it’s up to the user to be responsible with the A.I. After all, you can photoshop anything you like already, and image-editing software doesn’t block you from doing so. A.I., if it’s to be useful, can’t employ arbitrary limitations based on some company’s weirdo ideological beliefs and hangups.

To wrap up here, below are some of the goofy blunders that people have been finding in Gemini pertaining to those weirdo ideological beliefs and hangups:

Gemini is prone to giving limp, centrist takes on questions that should provide straightforward answers. I have no idea who Abigail Shrier is, but Gemini being unable or unwilling to place a murderous totalitarian dictator above someone who committed the grave sin of writing a divisive book is outright idiotic. Keep in mind, kids are increasingly using these dopey A.I. programs to write school papers.

Google had also sloppily coded diversity into its image creation software. The goal of this was to provide racially-diverse responses to image queries. If you enter the prompt: “Man eating a hamburger”, it wouldn’t only give you images of white dudes eating hamburgers. This was a good idea in theory, but of course Google implemented it terribly. This led people to get results like this to the prompt “a 1943 German soldier”:

This ultimately led to some funny headlines like the one below:

Keep up the great work, Google™.

Posted on

Fake Doctors And Twitter Grifters

One thing I’ve learned from being on social media is that it’s extremely easy to become successful by pretending to be something you’re not. Within the political sphere, all you need to do is play into a particular demographic, and you’ll earn a rabid following in no time. This often leads to people playing fast and loose with their supposed belief systems in the aims of chasing success.

This ties into grifter culture, which I outlined a little in this post: http://meatgoblet.com/pour-your-40oz-out-for-the-grifters/. This is when people intentionally develop an online persona that appeals to a particular demographic for the purposes of growing a brand and making money. It’s far easier to become “famous” by playing into the base of one of the two political groups in the U.S. (or leftism, Libertarianism, etc. to a lesser degree), than it is to take a candid, non-partisan approach to politics.

The overwhelming majority of the #Resist and #Maga crowds on Twitter™ are composed of people who have never said anything even remotely intelligent or insightful, yet managed to end up with thousands of followers. This calculated grifting allows relatively mediocre individuals to attain some degree of success they would never have attained otherwise.

A lot of these unexceptional people managed to hit these high follower accounts by engaging in mass following events, or MFEs. I just made that term up because I have no idea what they’re actually called, or if they even have a name. Regardless, they look like this:

They tweet out lists of others within the same cult, who usually identify themselves via a hashtag in their bios (#Resist for example), then follow each other to increase their follower counts.

I guess a lot of them do this to feel like they’re actually important or valid because of their artificially inflated follower counts, but this count rarely ever leads to actually engagement, i.e. people interacting with their tweets, which is sad and funny at the same time.

Congrats on those 2 likes. A 20k follower to 2 like ratio is abysmal. As a comparison, I’ve never broken 100 followers on Twitter™, yet I’ve had numerous tweets make it into the hundred of likes, and even had one almost reach 3000 likes (aren’t I cool?). These goofballs are lucky to hit 50 likes on a post while sitting at tens of thousands of followers. This is probably because most of their followers only followed them to receive a follow back and inflate their own following. This, combined with them never saying anything of substance leads to a glut of over-valued, under-performing accounts on Twitter™.

Then we have the heavy-hitter grifter accounts. I’ve highlighted a few of these before, like Rex Chapman and the Lincoln Project, but you also have accounts like George Takei and BrooklynDad_Defiant.

George Takei is primarily known for playing Commander Sulu in the original Start Trek, but eventually developed an online following through social media like Twitter™. He started out posting relatively innocuous content, but at some point, decided to go full-bore morally-bereft grifter mode. Now he posts stuff like this:

Here he is fluffing up Andrew Cuomo, during a time when Cuomo was both making horrible Covid decisions that led to a lot of deaths in New York (Takei lives in San Francisco), and fighting off the early accusations of sexual impropriety. He had no problem doing this, because he has no moral qualms with backing whomever is important within the Democrat circle at any given time for online likes and validation. Here is his only tweet in response to Cuomo eventually resigning as governor:

Luckily, none of his followers held him to task for propping this guy up for a year, only to throw out a half-hearted disavowment in a weak attempt to sweep his constant endorsements under the rug. He can just repeat this cycle because he appeals to a very under-informed, lowest-common denominator portion of Democrat voters, the same type who non-ironically get their information from Occupy Democrats™.

He acts as a liberal version of a Candice Owens or Charlie Kirk type. He only has to play into a specific base, and doesn’t need to worry about any of those annoying things like moral consistency, or actual facts.

As bad as George Takei is, he’s not nearly as bad as Brooklyn Dad Defiant. This guy will claim that water is wet, then claim it’s dry the very next day as long as he gets a paycheck for doing so. Here he is calling out “cultish idiots”, while appealing to cultish idiots:

Here he is calling out Apple’s terrible business practices, then pulling a little flippity-doo and simping for Apple now that it’s politically convenient to do so in the wake of the completely idiotic Joe Rogan controversy:

There’s actually a twitter account that was started to highlight every hypocritical post this grifty goofball makes. He is seriously that bad. He’s got at very least dozens of these flip flop tweets. He’s also getting paid by the Democrats:

It seems it pays fairly well to be a political grifter on Twitter™. It wouldn’t surprise me if guys like George Takei and Rex Chapman are also having their pockets padded for the idiotic stuff they continually post.

We can see now that a lot of this political grifting that takes place on Twitter is quite beneficial, both to grow a platform and further one’s career opportunities, and also as a means of making money. George Takei peddles all of his goods for sale via a linktree in his Twitter™ bio for example.

Given that this grifting can be a great job opportunity, why wouldn’t non-famous people decide to hop in on the action too? Well, they do. I covered Eugene Gu in a previous post. He’s the guy who went to Doctor School™, but never actually became a practicing doctor. He then garnered fame by a taking a picture of himself kneeling in solidarity with Colin Kaepernick. After the ensuing wave of new followers, he started LARPing as a practicing doctor and giving out medical information on different subjects. There were also some issues with him potentially engaging in stalking and online harassment as well, but that’s beside the point.

Eventually, he either deleted his Twitter™ account, or got banned, but he’s no longer with us on the bird app. 😢RIP, bro.

Have no fear though. Once other people realized you could literally just pretend to be a doctor on Twitter™ and sucker impressionable people into following you, many a person did just that. (You can pretend to be a lawyer too, to great effect.)

We’re gonna look at one of the more blatantly fake doctor (or nurse) accounts that is currently doing well in the grift-o-sphere. I present to you, “Emily Winston”.

First off, notice that they follow 26.6k accounts. This is a good sign that they engaged in the above mentioned “MFE” follow-for-follow tactic to initially build their account up. This is an effective technique, because gullible people see your large following, and assume that you gained this following legitimately, and therefore must be a good account to follow.

Also, right off the bat, the account almost seems like a satirical liberal account. They have the Trump-is-bad header, the obligatory #BidenHarris hashtag, and… what’s that? Computer… enhance. It appears to be some sort of link to a t-shirt shop. Computer… scan link for viruses, then engage. Beep beep boop!

It’s just as I feared. It appears to be a shitty teespring-style t-shirt site. My guess is that the entire Twitter™ account was created and manufactured for the prime purpose of selling t-shirts to liberal wine aunts. Hence the almost satirical profile and generic posts like the following:

These are the types of posts an artificial intelligence designed to produce the most generic 2020’s era liberal tweets imaginable would output. Beep beep boop. “Guns are bad, please like.” Beep boop “Everything I don’t like is white supremacy. Retweet please.” Beep beeeeep. “The next President should be an indigenous woman in a wheelchair with Asperger’s. Buy my t-shirts.” BoooooooOoOoOp.

They don’t just link to the t-shirts in their profile though. They literally try to sell this crap under each meticulously coifed tweet they post:

Their entire timeline on Twitter™ is also just 95% posts trying to sell these goofy-ass shirts. I’m thoroughly convinced the person running this account is probably a Republican voter who saw a business opportunity to fleece goofy Occupy-Democrats types and took it. They even retweet Occupy Democrats™ tweets:

This is evidently where they learned to beg for retweets under every single post they shit out. Very clever actually. I’m legitimately kind of impressed. It makes me want to create fake generic liberal and conservative accounts and fleece goofy people out of their money via shitty merch as well. Great business strategy.

This is the funniest thing they’re posted so far:

“She” is really being sincere here guys. The person who is definitely not a guy pretending to be a liberal nurse lady on Twitter™ to sell t-shirt to people is begging you to get a dose of the Corona juice. Look how tired and sincere “she” looks in that picture. Wait a minute… computer… search the google database for stock photo “TiredNurse.jpg”. BEEP BOOPITY BEEP.

Initiating image scan. Match found. Boop. Bottom right. 100% match. Beeeep.

Gotcha, scumbag. Using a stock tired nurse photo on your “sincere” Twitter™ post. Unbelievable. How could a t-shirt peddling salesman stoop this low? I actually thought you were a tired nurse who definitely worked at a completely slammed hospital, yet has the time to sell t-shirts off Twitter™ all day long. Jokes on me, huh? Boy was I gullible.

But seriously. There are people so smooth brained that they see accounts like this and think that they’re legit. How? How is anybody this gullible? I wonder what kind of money this dude is pulling in a year off this grift. I want him to mentor me in the ways. Teach me the ways of bamboozling doofuses out of their money, Sensei. If you stumble across this post, hit me up dude.

Posted on

The Brands™ Are At It Again

Boy I sure do love brands. They’re so quirky and relatable. They’re just like us people!

Take McDonald’s™ for example:

f! F! FFFFFFfffFFFff!!! OMG F!

I definitely relate to this tweet, McDonald’s™! I dropped a french fry while I was stuffing my face in the car once. LOL! I’m gonna like this tweet along with the other 10k obviously well adjusted, definitely not lonely, sad people following a fast food company on social media and liking all their posts like their quirky aunt posted them.

McDonald’s™ is practically my best friend at this point. I’m even thinking about asking McDonald’s™ to be the best man at my wedding. I hope McDonald’s™ says yes.

4.3 million people follow the McDonald’s account. All these brand accounts are followed by millions of people. Who are the people following these brand accounts? Who desperately needs to hear what Arby’s has to say about social issues?

This is probably the most Idiocratic (like the movie) thing about our society currently. Billion dollar companies using social media to seem relatable, and endear themselves to their consumers, who are nothing more than a source of revenue to them. It’s so creepy and depressing that it works so well.

I wrote about how insufferable the concept of “relatable brands” is in my January 11, 2021 post: right here.

I think the worst part is that there seems to be a mighty large overlap between the people who proclaim “Corporations are not people!”, and those that follow and like corporate accounts because they make cute quips or send out virtue signalling tweets about social issues. (see Ben & Jerry’s). Pick a lane champ. Are corporations evil, or are they excluded from that once they mirror your goofy-ass political opinions or make a few funny meme jokes?

The other day Facebook™ went down for some reason, most likely due to incompetence, and the other brands jumped on that fact to increase their P.R. scores amongst the meatbags on social media.

Get it? Because Facebook™ was down, but Twitter™ was still up. This is obviously because Twitter™ is a competently run company, and nothing bad would ever happen to them. Except this thing that happened last year of course:

Your website got hacked by a 17-year-old kid, guys. Maybe stop gloating, seeing as how your hack actually did damage and included theft.

But anyways, the tweet was popular, because there’s this creepy political divide between Facebook™ and Twitter™, wherein one is considered the “liberal” platform, and one the “conservative” platform. This is of course idiotic, because you’re responsible for who you follow and what shows up on your feed on both platforms. If your feed is garbage on either, this is a “you” problem. The garbage is looking back at you in the mirror, my friend. Consequently, both platforms poorly enforce their Terms of Service, and both platforms poorly filter out propaganda. I cover this in my previous posted linked above. Yet takes like this persist:

A bunch of folks (the impressionable ones at least) want to delete Facebook™ and Instagram™ now because a “whistleblower” who used to work at Facebook decided she needed to get famous and start making some real big league money (allegedly).

There’s already numerous things about this scenario that smell fishier than a wet market, but I’ll avoid going too much into it because it’s still too early to blow the whistle on this dubious story just yet. She does have connections to Democratic politicians (who are generally anti-Facebook) and is being propped up by twitter (Facebook’s competitor) already, which is suspect to say the least.

I do find it funny she’s being called a “whistleblower”, just like Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning. The difference of course being that those three put themselves at risk to challenge the government’s power, while Haugen is fighting for the government to have even more power in regulating what citizens can say or post. If she ends up in a cushy political position within five years time, I will be exactly 0% surprised. But let’s all clap and cheer and pretend Facebook™ is the biggest threat to “weaken our Democracy” as Haugen puts it, and not government mandated censorship.

The thing that made me roll my eyes the hardest at all this, is that Facebook™ isn’t the only problem here, but Instagram™ is too. Yes, the website where people post endless selfies of themselves and food pictures is also a threat worthy of a government hearing. Thank you for speaking up about the harmful pictures, brave “whistleblower”. Hopefully you don’t get waterboarded for speaking this truth to power.

It’s led to this kind of nonsense reporting:

This kind of reporting even led to a #DeleteInstagram hashtag trending on Twitter™.

Yes everybody, delete your Instagram accounts because a “whistleblower” claims the platform harms teenage girl’s self-image. Lets also burn our rock n’ roll LPs because they’re corrupting the youth and turning them onto the ways of the devil. Sweet sweet moral panic. Good to see nothing ever really changes as the decades roll by. Definitely don’t take active participation in the lives of your children, or anything like that. Let’s try to use the government to ban or shut things down like rational non-authoritarians.

We’re doing it guys! We’re creating further protections for elected officials and celebrities! Keep going! Maybe soon we can start jailing or executing people who speak ill of the King. We’ll be back in the 1700’s before we know it, and all because moral panic is an effective tool to convince dumb people to give up their rights and give more power and protections to the wealthy and elite. Yay!

That’s it little meatbags… get angry at the technology. Get angry at the scary technology that you can use as a proxy for all of society’s problems. Burn the effigy! It’s definitely Instagram’s fault that we live in an empty, narcissistic society full of people who feel the need to post 7000 selfies a day on social media for attention. That problem will definitely go away if Instagram doesn’t exists. These people won’t just continue seeking validation on some other platform.

Like this for example:

Yes, she’s finally free after deleting Instagram™, yet her entire Twitter™ feed is endless pictures of herself. Good thing she deleted evil Instagram™, and broke the cycle of constantly posting pictures for other’s validation on the internet. See how Instagram™ is quite obviously not the problem in this scenario? It’s like complaining that Pepsi™ is full of sugar, and bad for you, then switching over to Coke™ and patting yourself on the back for making a positive change.

So now that I’ve gone completely off into the weeds, I’ll get back on the track I started this post about, which was the brands reacting to the Twitter™ post above. Get ready to witness pure, unadulterated visual cringe.

Here are multiple Amazon™ brands just naturally responding to another brand, as brands tend to do. Brands, they’re just like us. Good to see people could take time off from pearl clutching about how evil Amazon™ is to give free promotion to their creepy digital assistant who eavesdrops on your conversations and snitches to the government:

You goofballs are irate over drivers peeing in bottles, but this is a non-issue? We truly have our priorities in order here.

Here we have two of my favorite fast food restaurants advertising under the Twitter™ tweet. I like Burger King™ fries, but Cambridge University™ definitely has the better milkshakes.

Hey guys, are you bored? What with Facebook™ being down and all. Well you’re in luck because instead of going outside and getting some fresh air, you can order a pizza from Domino’s™ (only the UK one) or download some shitty mobile games off Google™ to pass the time. Hell, why not just do both.

This is where it gets a little weirder. Metallica is just yelling like a little kid hopped up on Mountain Dew Baja Blast™ , but what’s that on the left? Did anyone else not know that KFC Gaming™ was an actual entity? Evidently it’s not a parody account and KFC actually has a console in development:

What, I say what in tarnation? A console that warms my KFC™ brand official gamer chicken? Hell yeah, brother. A little chicken grease dripping in my gaming console can’t possible create any issues. Hell, make the console liquid chicken-grease cooled.

Sportsball™ chimed in with a generic “how bout that game” response, because what else would they have to add to this discussion. Meanwhile, Pizza Hut™ completely missed the point of the original post and replied like the topic was Garfield comics.

Twitter™ : “Hey guys, our site is still up and running, while our competitor is having technical issues.”
Pizza Hut™ : “I’m gonna eat your lasagna and sit on your newspaper while you’re reading it 😂”.
Very cool Pizza Hut™ . Thanks for that.

The bean water companies weren’t going to be left out. Starbucks™ decided to just shill their overpriced caffeine juice, while Tim Hortons™ went completely off-topic, because evidently they’ve been hanging out with Pizza Hut™ a little too much.

Next up, we have Uno™, who have a Twitter™ account for some reason. I haven’t even heard of anybody playing Uno™ since like 1993. What other obscure games have Twitter™ accounts? Is Yahtzee™ on that site? How about Parcheesi™? Does Mouse Trap™ have an account so I can keep up-to-date with all the latest important Mouse Trap™ developments? Then Warner Bros™ chimes in with the most half-assed response imaginable.

Lastly, we have Zoom™ . They make a clever screen joke, because what else are they really gonna add to this discussion? It’s just Zoom™.

That’s all the brand responses I saved, even though there were dozens more. No brand would be caught dead missing the opportunity to advertise their shit below a viral tweet that got 3 million likes. People proceeded to “like” these blatant advertisements by the tens of thousands because people are suckers for being advertised to in a relatable way it seems.

All these accounts exist merely to advertise on Twitter™. That is their only purpose. They hit you with the ads on television, they hit you with the ads in magazines, they even hit you with the ads on YouTube™ and Twitch™. You’re crazy if you think they’re gonna miss out on the opportunity to advertise to you on Twitter™ as well. Yet people like this kind of thing instead of simply ignoring it, like they probably should.

I can’t wait for the future of advertising, wherein you’ll arrive back at your place after work, and McDonald’s™ welcomes you home right before telling you about the new McLobster Milkshake. This won’t phase you of course, because ads are everywhere. They’re everywhere because you insisted on inviting the brands into your home at every opportunity. You even rewarded the brands by “liking” all of their horseshit. This dystopia is your doing, so enjoy it.

Posted on

Cultural Appropriation And Racist Journalists

Where do I even start with this one? Let’s start with the first part of that title.

Cultural Appropriation and Entitlement

Years ago I was going to write an article about cultural appropriation, specifically about how nonsensical of a concept is was. I decided against writing it, because at the time it seemed like a stupid fringe concept that was largely propped up by people with a complete inability to apply critical thought to anything. It’s one of those concepts that if you actually reason it out, it immediately falls apart once you realize how stupid it really is.

Unfortunately, idiocy prevails, and this simple-minded concept is still around and still being used. I don’t want to dwell on this too long because it isn’t the main point of this writing. A petty, grifting, racist journalist is. I’ll try to be brief here.

The argument is that if a person enjoys, uses, partakes in, wears, or performs anything not created by their specific race, they are engaging in “cultural appropriation”. There are a few massive problems here right off the bat.

To start, the term is always used in an entitled manner, 100% of the time. If never applies in both directions. If it doesn’t apply in both directions, it’s inherently hypocritical. Hypocritical concepts are garbage concepts, and consequently hold no validity.

Back in 2018, a white girl in Utah wore a Chinese-style dress to her prom. She wore it because she found it at a thrift store and thought it looked pretty. Of course the rampant dip-shittery of social media kicked in, and a bunch of people got outraged over a complete non-issue.

Yes, 178k people had issues with a girl simply wearing something from a different culture. The internet is truly a smart place full of intelligent people.

It also turns out Jeremy Lam was a bit of a racist, and had a twitter history full of unsavory stuff (liberally throwing the n-word around), for which he was cornered into apologizing for:

This is a phenomenally common theme among people online who call out other people for “cultural appropriation”. They’re just about always people with histories of racism who are merely looking for online validation from calling other people out. There seems to be a strong link between narcissism and racism.

The hypocrisy here is that a girl was being called out for wearing what was the Chinese equivalent of formal wear, or a woman’s “suit” essentially.

At no point did anyone complaining about “cultural appropriation” bring up the fact that the Chinese commonly wear European suits. The modern suit originated in England, yet it’s worn extensively all over the world. So a white girl can’t wear Chinese formal wear without harassment, but the Chinese can wear English formal wear and nobody bats an eye? Is this not a massive hypocrisy? “Cultural appropriation” is largely a bullshit concept, so I’m not going to expect consistency from it’s adherents.

Often if you call out these hypocrisies, someone will try to excuse their double standards by throwing around accusations of “colonization”. For example, they may claim that the Chinese wear suits, not because of their own free will to do so, but because “ThEy WeRe CoLoNizEd!” This excuse doesn’t hold water in this instance, because the only part of China that was ever colonized by Europeans was Hong Kong, which currently accounts for only 7 million of China’s 1.4 billion population. This is like claiming the culture of San Antonio, Texas dictates the culture of the entire US. Both places represent only about 1/185th of the entire population. China decided to wear suits because they are a grown-up ass country who can make decisions for themselves. “Cultural appropriation” is also a term that is distinctly American in it’s ignorance, and not generally observed by other countries.

Japan was never colonized at all, and they willingly adopted the use of European suits as well, which kind of throws a wrench in the whole “colonization” argument, and shows that cultures often employ things that originated in other cultures. Once again, they don’t view this adoption as “cultural appropriation”, which is a term that goofy Americans created.

It’s also important to note that Americans tend to be appallingly ignorant of any history outside of what little U.S. history they actually know. The “colonization” crowd tends to be blissfully unaware of all the non-European empires that colonized the world. I’m not as knowledgeable on this subject as I’d like to be, but here’s a brief Quora answer that highlights a few examples:

Here’s another great example of “cultural appropriation” not being called out uniformly:

Where were those 178k people from Jeremy Lam’s post to call out this cultural appropriation? It’s almost as if the people complaining about cultural appropriation only see it as a problem when white people are doing it. 🤔Thinking face emoji.

As previously mentioned, “cultural appropriation” is largely an American gripe, and is essentially segregationist in nature. America is a melting pot of numerous cultures, and people should be free to interact with and enjoy other people’s cultures. There have been times in US history were other’s cultures were oppressed or demonized, so we should probably be in favor of not gatekeeping everyone’s cultures at this point in history. Unfortunately the “cultural appropriation” crowd are the ones standing in the way of this goal.

Having said all this, I understand there are arguments to be made about the commercialization/monetization of other’s cultures, or erasure of cultural histories, but these are rarely actually the focus of people’s ire. The 178k people whining about a white girl simply wearing a Chinese dress weren’t making a point about commercialization or erasure. There were merely engaging in cultural gatekeeping, which is kind of gross.

Here’s a YouTube comment I dug up from 5 years ago illustrating that even then, people seemed to agree that entitlement was the driving force behind the cultural appropriation call-outs:

I’ve gone on a bit long with the intro to this piece, so let’s get to the actual subject.

Mediocre, Racist Journalists

There is no shortage of mediocre writers and journalists on Twitter™ who are absolutely garbage human beings, yet are verified by Twitter™ and continue to have decent online followings. This section is about one such individual.

In the year of our Lord 2021 A.D., one “Roslyn Talusan” decided to gatekeep a white lady writing a book about noodles.

She was consequently inundated with replies asking her why exactly it mattered that a white lady wrote a book about noodles:

Upon being completely ass-blasted in the replies, she did what any narcissist would do. She didn’t admit defeat or reach the conclusion that perhaps she was wrong, but instead, decided to double down.

Hey guys. I wasn’t being serious when I whined about a white lady writing a book. I was just joking. You guys are the idiots because you didn’t realize the thing I was self-righteously complaining about was actually just me joking. It wouldn’t have been a joke if everyone was receptive of my tweet and agreed with it, but because it received so much backlash, it’s now a joke all of a sudden. I’m totally not mad you guys. I’m not losing sleep over this at all.

Same energy:

She literally wrote a 14 tweet barrage explaining how everyone who was disagreeing with her was an idiot, mad, or a racist. Anyone ready for some good old fashioned irony?

She’s accusing people of being “fatphobic” and anti-black because people were responding to a phenomenally racist black woman who she’s friends with, constantly retweets, and who came to her defense.

Yes, that’s the woman she’s accusing people of being anti-black for responding to. The woman saying “sexy and white should not be in the same sentence”. The woman who also regularly tweets shit like this, who Roslyn happily retweets:

I legitimately can’t tell if Roslyn is too stupid to understand the irony of accusing others of being racist while literally liking, retweeting, and outright saying racist shit herself. She might just be so arrogant that she doesn’t see posting stuff like this as racist:

For anyone who doesn’t know, “yt” is a racist dog-whistle for “white”. It’s a way of posting racist remarks on social media, so that other racists can agree with and like your posts. Meanwhile most people are unaware of what “yt” means, and are confused by your posts, assuming “yt” stands for YouTube or something.

This is similar the term “jogger” that was used heavily in 2020. Ahmaud Arbery was pursued and killed by three white men in February of 2020 for allegedly trespassing on someone’s property in the area. He was jogging down the road before the confrontation began. Because of this, racists started to used the term “jogger” to refer to black people in the aftermath. This is a dog-whistle. If someone posted “I hate joggers” on twitter, the average person might just assume they were literally talking about people jogging. Other racists who were familiar with the term would know they were talking about black people and like their posts. The point of a dog-whistle is to be discreet. Only other racists should be in on the terminology. This only works up until the point that people start to catch on though.

Roslyn is a “writer” evidently, so there is no reason she would be spelling white as “yt”, unless she was doing so as a dog-whistle. Here she is continuing to use it in 2020:

A psychologist might look at a tweet like this and see a potential source of why Roslyn started to dislike “yt” people so much. It seems whatever therapist she’s going to is a waste of her money and not really doing her any good however.

This is something else she constantly does on her feed. Begs people for money. Some therapist is bamboozling her out of thousands a year, and the racists who follow her get to foot the bill. Perhaps if she got a hobby and stopped posting toxic shit all over twitter all day, her mental health might improve a little bit. That would be my advice and she doesn’t even need to pay me $1700 dollars for it.

Here she is a mere six days ago posting pure irony in concentrated form:

The irony meter is off the charts with this one. This woman posted a hot, steamy shit-take on twitter, got mostly even-keeled responses, then proceeded to spent the next 24 hours playing the victim. She’s still doubling down and playing the victim as I type this, trying to earn more victim-bucks by posting her paypal yet again. What an absolute goof-fest.

To further prove she totally isn’t racist and only the people disagreeing with her are the racists, here’s a montage of her calling white people “translucents”, which is funny because it shows she’s too dumb to understand why that’s used as a derogatory term in the first place:

Translucent means allowing light to pass through. It’s a term certain racists use for light-skinned people. In yet another case of irony, Roslyn the dumb-dumb doesn’t seem to grasp that she’s every bit as pale as most white people, therefore the term technically applies to her as well. This would be like Wesley Snipes calling Idris Elba a “darkie” as a derogatory term. It doesn’t make any sense. Why would someone be offended by a term you call them that could apply to you as well? If you’re a dummy dumb-dumb pants, you probably wouldn’t see the ridiculousness of it all. Racists are typically dumb people.

The funny thing is, if she had just moved on after the initial stupid-ass post about the noodle book, everyone would forgotten about her within a day or two. She could have gone back to tweeting and retweeting racist stuff to her swamp of followers. But because she had to be a thin-skinned narcissist, and write a 14-post rant in the aftermath while playing the victim, she slipped up and exposed her racism. That’s where people like me come it to dig through their past tweets, and expose them as shitheads.

This is an all-too-common trope unfortunately. A “progressive liberal” type with a timeline full of virtue signalling and calling out injustices who also has a history full of racist tweets. None of this stops them from getting hired into trashy online publications, amassing followings, and getting verified. I could highlight one of these types every week and never run out of content. Then I’d feel gross after reading through their timelines, and I’d need to beg for money for a therapist.

She’s probably still out there somewhere, sitting at her computer, madly insisting she’s not wrong and continuing to call people Nazis for disagreeing with her. Sounds like a very healthy, fun existence.

I’m going to wrap this up by typing her name a lot so hopefully the SEO gods smile upon me, and this post shows up when you search her name. That way more people will know who she is, that she desperately needs help, and can donate more money to her paypal.

Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan. Roslyn Talusan.

On second though, I should stop this. She might pop out of a mirror like Beetlejuice if I repeat her name too many times.

Posted on

The LAPD Almost Blew Up a Neighborhood

July 4th is here, so be responsible with your fireworks. Definitely don’t almost blow up a neighborhood like the LAPD did a few days ago.

Thank goodness those dangerous Fizzy Spinners™ and Bunghole Blasters™ were taken off the street before they were able to fall into the hands of an ISIS member or something. We can all feel safer knowing the LAPD confiscated those Poopity Poppers™ before they accidentally went off and gave somebody a second degree burn.

Great work out there fellas. Thank goodness we had you there to… wait a minute. What’s this “explosion” you’re talking about here? What did you guys do? Did you guys botch another fireworks confiscation?

So the LAPD blew up their 1 million dollar truck, and took out a bunch of cars, trashcans, and perhaps even a whole-ass tree along with it. 17 people were injured, but luckily there were no deaths.

Here is a before, during, and after shot of this “safe” detonation:

Here is another angle of the before and during:

Here is a post about some of the house damage it caused:

The best part of it all, is that they were just like “Whoops. Not sure what happened”, then continued posting on twitter as if they didn’t blow up a block in some neighborhood.

Hey guys! Fireworks can be dangerous, and can cause serious injuries. Probably not as serious as the 17 people we injured by setting off a semi truck bomb a mere three days ago. Have you guys forgotten we did that yet? No? Well, we’ll just keep pretending it didn’t happen until you do.

Anyways, be careful out there with those Weenie Whistlers™ and Scrote Exploders™. Whatever you do, DO NOT put them all into the back of a truck and attempt to detonate them out in the middle of the street. That is the LAPD’s job.

Posted on

Trumps Greatest Hits: Volume 5

In honor of Joe Biden becoming the 46th President™ of the United States, I’m going to publish some of Donald Julio Trump’s greatest/worst tweets. I would post some of Biden’s greatest tweets, but he literally has no good tweets. His account just consists of empty platitudes that some unpaid intern tweets out on his behalf in order to meet a Tweet Quota™. This is the case with all former U.S. presidents, except Trump, whose twitter feed was an absolute train wreck until he was banned.

I archived a lot of his greatest hits throughout the last few years, so here are a few of the most ridiculous and/or entertaining ones. Let’s start with some old school bangers, circa 2011-2013:

It always amazed me when liberal wine aunts were aghast when Trump said ridiculous or mean things while he was in office. It’s like, yeah, most people who voted for him were perfectly aware of that. Just because you couldn’t be bothered to pay attention to who was running in your own elections doesn’t mean the rest of society didn’t either. Being a douche was a part of his whole brand. It was a selling point for a lot of people.

He also had a sense of humor, albeit brash, that was constantly downplayed by his most hysterical of detractors, assumedly because they couldn’t bring themselves to humanize him in any way. There were numerous running jokes that he kept going, including these wig tweets:

He even did a whole series of holiday-themed ‘haters and losers” tweets, which I personally found funny. I like the commitment it takes keep a stupid joke running for years. I too enjoy keeping jokes™ going for way too long.

Here he is quote tweeting and agreeing with himself like a normal person would do:

Here he is not understanding how global warming and/or weather works:

Here he is beefing with Nancy Pelosi:

And here he is ragging on Elizabeth Warren:

He apparently wasn’t a big fan of Don Lemon or John Bolton:

Here’s a few more random hate-tweets:

A few rare instances of Trump being humble:

Trump gracefully accepting the 2016 election results:

And finally, the “schlonged” tweet:

You will be missed on twitter, sweet orange Prince. Now nobody will know your varied and nuanced opinions on topics such as Don Lemon and various soft drinks. Twitter just became a darker place. RIP.

Posted on

The Orange Man and Tech Censorship

Guess who just got unpersoned on the internet? No, not Smash Mouth™. Nope, not that short dude with no neck from that reality show. Definitely not Scott Bakula either. Give up? This guy:

The oligarchy of U.S. tech companies met up in their secret bunker and decided to give ole’ Trumpy the boot. Sorry big guy. No more beefing with celebrities and calling your political opponents dumb losers for the time being.

Some people are big mad at Trump being exiled, while some are ecstatic. Most seem to be a bit delusional as to the actual reason he was given the boot. Tech companies always give some bullshit explanation about “T.O.S. (Term of Service) violations”, but this isn’t the reality of the situation.

Here it is:

Yeah.. no. No, they didn’t ban Trump to “save democracy”, but it’s absolutely adorable that you actually think that. You probably believe in witchcraft too, so I’m not gonna hold you to too high of a standard here “moonmagic66”.

This isn’t about safety or Terms of Service violations. It’s not about saving anything other than the company itself. It’s about P.R. and corporate optics. It’s bad P.R. for these sites to not ban Trump. Not getting rid of him would lead to them getting hurt the only place it matters to them. Their wallets.

Peep this Jpeg:

Now how exactly are Pinterest™ and TikTok™ saving democracy by banning Trump? Was he going to upload a quiche recipe and film a K-Pop dance video? How about Spotify™? Are they preventing Trump from dropping a hot new mixtape? He doesn’t even use any of those platforms. None of them mattered. These are just empty gestures.

These companies don’t do things like banning high profile people out of some sort of virtuous gesture. They do so to stave off bad P.R. The middle-aged housewives who use Pinterest™ to post eleventy billion photos of their cats aren’t going to stage a mutiny against the company now. “Yay! My favorite social media platform banned someone who probably wasn’t even aware it existed! Democracy is saved!”.

The only two platforms the fella used on that list are Facebook™ and Twitter™. I’ve never seen his Facebook™ page, and it looks like I’ll never get to now, but I’m assured that it did in fact exist. I wonder if he used it to post any dank memes. His Twitter™ account is for sure gone though.

Ah, yes. Look there. It appears that Trump violated the “Twitter Rules™”, whatever those actually are. Unfortunately not even Twitter™ knows what their own damn rules are. Seriously. Twitter™ is an absolute shit-hole of a site, and I’m not being facetious either. I’m on it all the time to research these posts and I need to take a shower afterwards. Here’s a list of things you can find on Twitter™ at this very moment that somehow don’t violate their arbitrary and barely enforced “Twitter Rules™”:

– Child Porn
– Death Threats
– Virulent Homophobia
– Pro-Genocide Propaganda
– Blatant Racism
– And Many Other Hits!

Yes, child porn. When I first heard the rumblings that there was a bit of a child porn problem on Twitter™, I initially though it was hyperbole, or some conspiracy theory. But alas, there are so many accounts peddling the stuff that people have started accounts whose sole purpose is to highlight the offending accounts so their followers can mass report them. These illicit accounts continue to stay up until enough people complain and Twitter™ finally deletes them, only for more to immediately pop up. Great system you got there, Twitter™

this account was eventually banned

Let’s also tackle the pro-genocide propaganda, shall we? That certainly sounds like something that should be in violation of the “Twitter Rules™”.

You read that right. A Chinese government account pushing propaganda that a “study” was done showing Uygur women were actually happier now that they’ve had their state-sanctioned sterilization. The “eradicating extremism” alludes to where the government rounded up all the Muslims and put them into re-education camps to make them less Muslim-y. Soon they’ll be way less Muslim-y, because they can’t reproduce. And Twitter™ apparently had no problem with this content.

That is, until enough people complained and the post was removed. The account is still there posting all kinds of delicious propaganda, but that single post was removed. This only happened because enough people reported it, not because Twitter™ saw a problem with it to begin with. Do you see how this whole “it’s a P.R. thing, not T.O.S. thing” works?

People have been complaining to Twitter™ to ban Trump for the better part of the last four years. There were petitions and all those other pointless trivialities people like to sign because they think that’s how the world works. Dude’s been violating their T.O.S. constantly for the last four years. Was the 67th time the one that finally did it?

If he had ended up winning a second term, you can bet your sweet cheeks there’s no chance he would have been banned. He was entirely too good for engagement on their platform. None of that really matters now, because he was down to his last 2 weeks in office. Twitter™ really has nothing to lose at this point.

I know it must come as a shock that corporations do things for personal benefit and not for the greater good. This next revelation will probably come as a shock too, so you might want to sit down. Ok… you know how all those companies change their logos for pride month? That’s just a P.R. move too. Can you believe it?

Same as when they black out their social media over a death. It’s purely performative. Do you honestly think Nike™ cares if a black dude gets shot by the police? Nike™ doesn’t even care enough about human life to not use kids as slave labor. If you do happen to have a reputation for using slave labor, it’s certainly good P.R. to hop on the latest social cause band wagons though. Unfortunately this tactic seems to actually work.

Hey there Black Community. Times got ya down? Don’t worry, *checks notes* Gushers™ brand fruity childhood diabetes fruit snacks has your back. What exactly they’ve done beyond virtue signalling to earn empty likes and grow their social media presence is anyone’s guess. But at least they’ve put in the minimal amount of effort possible to acknowledge a problem, and that’s what really counts.

it’s not just 3rd tier childhood fruit snacks getting in on the action. The Banks™ and Oil™ companies are all in on the action now too.

Good to see that you guys could take time off foreclosing on people’s houses and dumping oil on baby seal’s faces to make a statement about something that doesn’t affect you. Regardless of who ends up in the White House, you’re just going to bribe them to be allowed to continue doing shitty things anyway, but thank you for the sentiment. I’ll sleep safer tonight knowing that the Banks™ continue to be a voice of morality in our society.

This trend where corporations create twitter accounts to try to meme and get political is so embarrassing. Just sell me your cancer and stop trying to be relatable. We all know what you’re here for, and it isn’t to make a change, or join the discourse.

Ben and Jerry’s™ ice cream is consistently one of the worst cases of this. They type out 9-page political diatribes every time something in U.S. politics happens. At this point, they’re essentially just a political account that occasionally tweets out something about their actual products. They post these feel-good, boilerplate statements so that their pre-diabetic Northeastern housewife audience can pat themselves on the back for being “progressive” while gorging down another pint of I’m With Her Kale Quinoa Explosion.

The two guys who founded the company literally have nothing to do with it anymore. Unilever™ has owned it since 2000, and has actively gone out of their way to keep the whole “socially conscience” vibe going, despite Unilever being about as socially conscience as Exxon. The account is probably run by someone in a marketing department in Malaysia somewhere. The housewives don’t need to know this though. Just keep shoveling ice cream in their direction.

At least Steak-Umm™ is honest about it’s intentions:

So maybe stop attributing political benevolence to what corporations do. They literally don’t care until they are forced to for some reason, and that reason is usually monetary. Tech corporations shouldn’t be applauded for blatantly ignoring their own T.O.S., even if they occasionally make a good call in banning someone. They’re corporations, not people, and should be held accountable and held to some sort of standard in how they operate.

Most importantly, why is nobody concerned about this:

Twitter™ and Facebook™ just tanked an entire grifter industry. These people have bills to pay and mouths to feed. Now they’re going to have to go get real jobs, and that is an injustice. Won’t somebody think of these fine folks? The least Twitter™ could do is create a TrumpBot that procedurally generates Trump tweets so these people can continue tweeting hysterically in the mentions and selling #resist shirts to conspiratorial soccer moms. It’s the least they could do.