ComradeKayAdams

Trump is their OG communist, actually! Anyone else remember Executive Order #13948 back in the summer of 2020?? Oh, Commie Kay remembers… Right-wingers were praising this price control on prescription drugs because political tribalism often trumps (pun delightfully intended!) political principles. “Communist” is just a label now that has been rendered devoid of any meaning beyond “someone conservatives don’t like.” My very limited (and possibly erroneous) awareness of Kamala’s grocery price control proposal is that it would be a sunset provision reserved specifically for proven food price gouging. Temporary price controls do have a history of success when restricted to societal emergency situations. Permanent price controls, on occasion, can also work; you already mentioned such an example involving a price floor (minimum wages) and one involving a price ceiling (trust busting). But while price collusion is a type of market failure like any other, it can sometimes be difficult to prove conclusively. So one’s educated opinion of Kamala’s policy efficacy will depend on how obvious one thinks the evidence of collusion may be (based heavily on corporate profit margin histories), along with what one thinks are the causal factors of our present inflation: corporate price gouging (yes), lingering cost-push international supply chain issues (yes, somewhat, due to strife abroad and what not), cost-push energy supply shocks (LOL…an eyeroll for those who don’t understand how international energy free markets work yet dogmatically cling to them…), demand-pull stimulus effects (sure, though not in the way right-wingers think because CARES and ARP also prevented dangerous deflationary collapses), a lax monetary policy (certainly not ruling out artificially low interest rates and aggressive money supply expansions), etc. Kamala is also proposing a price control on rent, and right now I’m equally unfamiliar with the details of this particular policy. My firm belief, however, is that you can’t just throw government subsidies at this problem without addressing root causes (namely: corporate oligopoly effects on local housing markets). Furthermore, I’m an unapologetic tree-hugging eco-fascist who rages deliriously at the specter of creeping suburban sprawl; when I so much as hear mere MURMURS of lowering housing costs via a widespread government promotion of increases to the supply…BIG TROUBLE. EDIT: Misspelled “murmurs.” Terrible.

Note that I’m referring strictly to market socialism models in my response: 1. Taxation: You’re always going to have tax requirements, with all of the accompanying potential headaches, whenever you have public services. Market socialism is not necessarily any better or worse than other forms of government in this regard. Even societies practicing anarcho-capitalism will feature an annoying array of “tax-like” user fees that must be paid. 2. Nationalization: Market socialism definitely doesn’t forbid privatization! Private companies won’t be shut down as long as their ownership structures meet certain regulatory criteria. 3. Central Planning: The whole point of market socialism is to NOT have top-down micromanagement of a macroeconomic system! Government intervention into a free market isn’t the same concept as a centrally planned economy. No economic system of any practical merit is truly laisse-faire because many types of market failures are inherent. 4. Various Inefficiencies: On the microeconomic level, not all goods and services are the same. Some of them function better outside the profit motive (national defense, law and order, firefighting, transportation infrastructure, health care, water utilities, possibly all forms of energy, etc.). On the macroeconomic level, the theory behind market socialism is that societies are maximally efficient when socioeconomic mobility is optimal, and that socioeconomic mobility is optimal when labor exploitation is minimal (i.e., a laborer receives reasonable compensation for his/her contribution to the final product…so no cases of subsistence on food stamps while the capitalist accumulates wealth surpassing that of small countries…). The underlying theory is all rooted in standard Keynesian economics plus well-established Marxist critiques of capitalism. You basically want more people fully engaged in the economy, from both a consumer’s point of view and an investor’s one. You may recall from my previous post, however, where I did acknowledge my reservations with the ability of market socialism to set labor wages and generate entrepreneurial speculation. Successful food co-ops are succeeding within the framework of a decidedly capitalistic economy; billionaires can be genuinely unique in their risk-taking personalities. There are no simply defined problems with obvious solutions in the world of political economics, even though socialists and libertarians alike may implore you otherwise. That is my current belief.

For completeness, the number of states where abortion is on the November ballot stands at 11: Arizona, Nevada, Montana, Colorado, Nebraska, South Dakota, Missouri, Arkansas, Florida, Maryland, and our beautiful home state of New York. Arizona and Nevada are 2 of the 6 key swing states in the presidential election, while Montana has a hotly contested Senate seat in play. 5 of those 6 key swing states (including Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania…all but Georgia) also have a Senate seat up for election in 2024. Ohio’s Senate seat election could be influenced by the abortion issue, as well. It’s going to be a real challenge for the Democrats to sweep the 7 aforementioned Senate elections in order to reach an overall 50-50 Senate tie. But if they continue the trend of outperforming polls since Roe v. Wade was overturned, then it’s more than just possible and maybe even becomes the most probable outcome.

Oh…well that last sentence of mine was actually typed tongue-in-cheek, though your inability to recognize that was a failure of my writing style and not your reading comprehension! I’ll try to answer your questions: When market socialists speak of transitioning beyond the current U.S. mixed economy, they’re usually thinking of models that don’t meaningfully alter the existing ratio of private businesses to public services (well…aside from the health care industry…and maybe also the energy industry…). So all that would really change is the matter of who owns the means of production and the particular way this ownership is distributed. These ownership details, however, would then fall under government regulation. A simple example of what I mean: you want to start a business, but your business model involves you collecting 99.9% of all profits while the rest of your employees split the remaining 0.1% in the form of very low-wage jobs. The market socialist government steps in and tells you that, as founder/CEO, your personal profit collection is to be capped at, say, 51% while the rest of your employees are collectively entitled to the remaining 49%. So you can still make your high-quality products at lower costs to the consumer and with better worker compensation than your competitors. The key difference is that the socialist government more aggressively enforces minimum standards in the worker compensation component of your business plan. In case you’re wondering why I’m just a social democrat and not a full-blown market socialist: for me, it’s much more about data-driven macroeconomic optimization than it is about the restrictions to certain entrepreneurial freedoms. There ARE situations in which I believe supply-side solutions best promote growth (especially if there is greater national oversight of outsourcing, stock buybacks, taxation loopholes, etc.). My reservations with market socialism models are related to potential unintended consequences arising from supply-side market distortions as well as from labor market distortions. At least for the time being, I’d be more than okay with a robust social safety net that includes universal health care and the complete elimination of medical debt.

Were you wanting me to respond to the article, B-Man? I can do that: 1. GDP: I have a HUGE problem here with the author’s economic interpretations. According to him, Minnesota’s state GDP (per capita) fell below the national average as a direct consequence of progressive policies. I’m familiar with mountains of international macroeconomic data typically indicating the opposite correlation. Moreover, GDP has clear limitations in its usage for defining economic (and especially societal) health. Let’s dust off our introductory macroeconomics textbooks and recall one of its key operational definitions: [GDP] = [Government Expenditures] + [Private Consumption] + [Private Business Investments] + [Export/Import Differential]. It’s quite easy to imagine how a rare global pandemic can alter this formula for a random, mostly landlocked northern state in ways unrelated to the state’s public policies. Population changes affect this metric, too, and there’s no data specifically supporting a tax flight hypothesis for frigid Minnesota. What was the magnitude of Minnesota’s GDP fall, by the way?? That might also be relevant to the narrative formation… 2. George Floyd Protests/General Crime: The only criticism in the article with merit, in my opinion. Walz himself has acknowledged mistakes he has made during his tenure as governor, with respect to law and order in the state of Minnesota. I view such an admission as a sign of character strength. Voters who prioritize this issue are free to hold that against Walz, though I would remind these voters that crime is predominantly the domain of state and local politicians, not that of the POTUS. 3. Public School Test Scores: The declines between 2019 and now are part of observed nationwide phenomena not limited to Minnesota. They pretty much have everything to do with COVID and pretty much nothing to do with “woke agendas.” I don’t fault Walz for school closure policies that just about everyone else in the country and world followed. 4. Rural Popularity: I didn’t find his “mostly rocks and cows” remark to be an expression of contempt for rural people. Not at all! Rather, I interpreted it as a cute way to describe a basic political strategy. Since I hate arguments of “whataboutism,” I’ll reserve my thoughts on Vance’s “Hillbilly Elegy” for another time… 5. Military Record Controversy: Doesn’t bother me one bit. A middle-aged family man changed his mind and decided to retire, for whatever reason(s), after 24 years of service. Even if we were to assume cowardice as the singular explanation…so what?? The second Iraq War was beyond stupid, deeply immoral, and completely unrelated to our national security. Choosing not to die for the MIC and for corporate oligarchs is a sign of intelligence, as far as I’m concerned! Since I said that I’m against “whaboutism” arguments, I promise not to bring up Trump’s bone spurs… TL;DR Summary: Walz is super awesome. A social democrat’s dream candidate. His pragmatic progressivism is the perfect gateway drug for a potential revolutionary transition into market socialism by mid-century << crosses fingers >>.

Perhaps. If that’s the case, then she will be exposed during the debates and during any interviews scheduled after the Democratic Party convention. In the meantime, I’m guessing that her campaign team is specifically instructing her to keep a low profile while they iron out policy details leading up to this convention. Actually…Kamala COULD avoid any difficult interviews altogether and cruise to an easy 303 electoral votes victory, provided the following occur: 1. A pivot to the center on immigration. 2. Clarifications of the messaging on crime, inflation, and transgender rights. 3. An unambiguous positioning to the left of Biden on the Gaza genocide. 4. Stylistic wins over Trump in the debates. 5. Strong campaign ground game efforts in the college towns of the six swing states (Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada). 6. MOST IMPORTANT: the maintenance of good campaign vibes with delightfully irreverent memes. “Brat summer” must seamlessly transition to “brat fall.”

A below average president whose political impotence helped contribute to the rise of neoliberalism. Far from the worst ever, however. I don’t feel like treading into the deep weeds of 1970’s macroeconomics right now, but my basic opinion is that the underlying issues went well beyond the purview of his office. Reagan, in fact, ended up benefiting greatly from Carter’s chairman of the Federal Reserve (Paul Volcker). As for the non-economics stuff: I think Carter was pretty good on the environment, civil rights, and foreign diplomacy. Mixed feelings on the Carter Doctrine. The Iran hostage crisis was poorly handled, no doubt, though its occurrence was a consequence of several decades of American imperialism that happened to blow up on Carter’s watch. Sure, though a lot of PEPFAR’s success can be attributed to its subsequent years, once all the ridiculous Christian moralizing that imbued the program during its earliest incarnation was removed. Bottom line: I do like PEPFAR, but it doesn’t move the approval needle for me when you factor in the second Iraq war, Afghanistan, the loss of freedoms from the Patriot Act, the inability to prevent 9/11, his Katrina response, causal factors of the Great Recession, the national debt, global warming denialism, all of the LGBT bigotry, etc… GWB not only failed to address major crises that were presented to him, but he unnecessarily created entirely new ones and failed to anticipate others on the distant horizon. Ugh…fine. I’ll bump him slightly ahead of Andrew Johnson. Happy now??

THANK YOU. From my unapologetically biased perspective as a progressive, I’d easily rank him as the worst president of the American Neoliberal Era (1980-2024+): 1. Clinton 2. Obama 3. Reagan 4. Bush Sr. 5. Biden 6. Trump 7. GWB He’s probably in the running for worst ever…even worse than the likes of Johnson, Buchanan, Harding, etc.

STOP IT, B-Man. Us young progressives adore Bernie Sanders, a noted Jewish politician. Many supporters of the BDS movement, of course, are Jewish themselves. Shapiro’s problem is that he’s a genocide-enabling Zionist who doesn’t fully defend the First Amendment. Please read my posts in the “Israel and the Slaughter in Gaza” thread to understand how and why this conflict was always primarily about stealing land, not defeating Hamas or rescuing hostages. Yes, Kelly has been against the PRO Act since joining the Senate in 2020. I still think Cooper is the most likely choice, unless of course my newest meme (attached below) goes viral in time. I’ve also been working on additional campaign slogans: “2024 is the year: vote Harris-Beshear.” “A new political frontier with Kamala Harris and Andy Beshear.” “These two are top tier: Kamala Harris and Andy Beshear.” “A political pioneer: Kamala Harris, plus Beshear.” “Donate money or volunteer for Kamala Harris and Andy Beshear.” “A clean campaign with no need to smear: in 2024, vote Harris-Beshear.” “Enjoy a glass of wine or a can of beer with Kamala Harris and Andy Beshear.” “Avoid the Trumpian nadir: choose Harris and Beshear.” “For Trump and Vance we shed no tear: opt for Harris and Beshear.” “More patriotic than Paul Revere is how I would describe Harris and Beshear.” “At least our candidates don’t get shot in the ear: vote Kamala Harris and Andy Beshear.” “I sure hope the Russians don’t interfere! In 2024, vote Harris-Beshear.” “Behind the corporate oligarch veneer is a fun flirty candidate plus a VP named Beshear.” “Harris did NOT sleep her way up in her career, and neither did Andy Beshear!” “Stick with the front or try it in the rear? Hey…why not both when with Andy Beshear?!” “You some kind of Texan? A steer? A q_u_e_e_r?! Well…all are ok with Harris and Beshear!” “This particular campaign slogan is totally sincere: the best VP is simply Andy Beshear.” EDIT: Filter doesn't like the word, "q_u_e_e_r."

On second thought, Tibsy, this ticket might have way too much estrogen for America in the year of our Lord 2024. Let’s just go with my choice: Kentucky’s governor. Mama Kamala and America’s Generic Dad…the K-Hive teaming up with the B-Hive…swallowing the coconut pill and receiving the racehorse tranquilizer (a Kentucky Derby reference), etc… I even have the campaign slogan ready: “Spare us your fear. Choose Harris and Beshear.” Alternate slogan: “Kick it into gear with Harris and Beshear.” We can print these on green t-shirts so that they can color match with my green MAFA hats. You: “What does the ‘F’ stand for, Kay?” I’m so glad you asked, Tiberius!! The “F” stands for “Forested,” as in “Make America Forested Again.” The hats are conversation starters and are meant to spread awareness on the importance of reforestation efforts to meet our nation’s carbon sequestration targets, as outlined in both the “30 by 30” movement and the Paris Agreement. I plan to wear my brown yoga pants and brown ballet flats with the t-shirt and hat, so that I LITERALLY look like a tree. How cool is that?! Wouldn’t you like to be a tree for a day, Tiberius?? << Narrator: Sensing the sudden discomfort in Tiberius, Kay decides to quickly change the conversation. >> Allow me to clarify: Harris should consider adopting progressive policies that poll favorably for at least 60-65% of the GENERAL American population. At the absolute bare minimum, she must distance herself from Biden’s foreign policy on Israel-Palestine. I would also add transgender rights, regardless of wherever their current favorability polling happens to be, because these issues accentuate the fundamental mean-spiritedness of the Trump-Vance MAGA movement (and also because it’s a moral imperative of the Democrats to make the case for transgender rights like they did for gay marriage a decade ago). You guys are falling into the same logical traps that killed Hillary’s 2016 campaign if you think far-left progressives have greater motivation to come out to vote against Trump than do center-left liberals/neoliberals and independents. In essence, progressives are known to be much more motivated by issues than by personalities or party affiliation. Liberals, centrists, and independents tend to be the opposite (broadly speaking, of course) when it comes specifically to Donald Trump. I would also pay close attention to the sudden rise of Tim Walz, the (very) progressive governor of Minnesota. The mere fact that he’s now being mentioned in corporate media conversations for VP suggests to me that the Biden/Harris campaign machine has alarming internal polling data…data showing establishment Dems to be in SERIOUS trouble with Midwest progressives.

I really like Andy Beshear, the current governor of Kentucky. He would present himself as a nice complement to Harris and a nice countervailing force to Vance. I’d also be fine with J.B. Pritzker and Gretchen Whitmer. The most realistic pick, however, is probably Roy Cooper because of his current working relationships with Biden/Harris and because of the perception of North Carolina as a key Southern swing state. FYI…progressives will NOT support Josh Shapiro (genocide apologist), James Stavridis (imperialist), or Mark Kelly (anti-labor). Harris can’t win the “northern blue firewall” (Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania) without sufficient support from progressives, and a practical path to 270 EC votes becomes too difficult for the Democratic Party without all three of those states. So it’s perfectly reasonable to think of progressives as the power brokers of 2024. Whether or not Bernie, Jayapal, and The Squad are willing to utilize this power to actually influence Kamala’s policy agenda is another matter altogether.

I assume you read this sentence near the bottom of the article: “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reiterated time and again that Israel will not end the war in Gaza until Hamas is destroyed.” If part of that peace deal included Hamas destroying itself, no wonder why Hamas rejected it… Of course, we can all rationally deduce that this wasn’t part of the peace deal. We have four variations here of the truth (besides the actual truth): what Hamas leaders say, what Israel’s government leaders say, what Blinken says, and what AIPAC-funded media sources like the New York Post report. None of these involved parties, to date, have shown themselves to be wholly trustworthy. What’s perplexing to me is why an uber-skeptical conservative such as yourself would suddenly trust the Secretary of State for Joe Biden! Assiduous readers of the Kay-mmunist Manifestos have probably already surmised what’s happening: Blinken’s mendacity regarding the peace deal is providing legal cover for Israel and the U.S., while also allowing both countries to save face in the general international community. It’s in the best interests of both countries to muddle and obviate the truth from reaching the ICJ and uncompromised media sources. For Israel’s government, the post-October 7 Gaza conflict was always about stealing land and resources more so than rescuing hostages and destroying Hamas. Violence and illegal settlements in the West Bank have escalated, while not even 50% of the hostages have been successfully returned after 8+ months and while Hamas recruitment in Gaza increases. What any permanent ceasefire means to Israel’s political leaders with ICC arrest warrants in their name (Bibi et al.) is their subsequent loss of power and their having to face domestic and international criminal prosecution. By the way: remember the recent IDF rescue mission in the Nuseirat refugee camp that saved 4 hostages? The one that you wanted me to celebrate? According to the Gaza Health Ministry, 274 Palestinians died and 698 more were injured during that mission. According to Hamas, 3 other hostages died during it. Pragmatic negotiations for partial hostage releases could have prevented this reckless carnage. Just saying… Also: I have no “embargo” on criticizing Hamas. I’ve always called them untrustworthy terrorists and psychopaths whose interests aren’t aligned with those of Palestinians. Do you have an “embargo” on criticizing Israel?? When are you going to call out their far-right government and the IDF as war criminals guilty of ethnic cleansing and genocide?? I hope you’re having a great Father’s Day, Leh-nerd. Tomorrow is Meatless Monday, so plan your meals accordingly.

That PFR HOF metric undersells Cookie’s worthiness, in my opinion. It explicitly penalizes players who only played in the AFL and not the NFL. It also excludes the 6 CFL seasons during Cookie’s physical prime (ages 21-26), years that would later qualify him for Canada’s own football HOF. 1956-1961 happened to be a time in pro football when the CFL was still considered to be roughly on par with the NFL in talent. Furthermore, the PFR HOF metric doesn’t consider Cookie’s civil rights contributions to the sport. Lynch and McCoy were both selected for the 2010’s NFL All-Decade Team, so that’s a good indication that they will eventually make it in. By any metric we use (total First-Team All-Pro nominations, total Pro Bowl nominations, accrued Hall of Fame RB seasons, number of 1k+ rushing yards seasons), the Bills are definitely up there with the greatest NFL franchises for RB’s. I’m guessing the top competitors are the Browns, Steelers, Colts, Oilers/Titans, Cowboys, Bears, and Rams. This elite status has been mostly by design because cold-weather Buffalo has always prioritized running the ball. We may even end up with the most prolific running QB in pro football history! My own top 5 all-time Buffalo RB’s ranking: 1. OJ 2. Thurman 3. Cookie 4. Shady 5. Cribbs James Cook can make my list if he has two more seasons like last one, cleans up his pass-blocking issues, and stops dropping crucial TD passes.

I was a bit “hangry” at the time of that post. Perhaps my combative tone would have been more subdued had I first consumed my pre-workout “No Cow: Chocolate Peanut Butter Cup” bar?? Or perhaps not. Part of the Commie Kay experience is simply dealing with the behaviorally volatile nature. To paraphrase a seminal vegan cartoon character, “I yam what I yam, and that’s all that I yam: a SWEET potato! Now let’s have a strong posting finish while I eats me some spinach…” Didactically speaking, I rarely see the value in criticizing Hamas or in defending the defensible components of the Israeli nationalist perspective here at PPP. This is a very far-right forum (especially if you have BillStime and Tibsy blocked), so that side of the debate is thoroughly presented on just about every related news event imaginable. If this was, say, a 2010’s ISIS internet chat room, then you might think I was some ardent Zionist based on what would be the content focus of my posts. Nevertheless, I HAVE posted advocacy here before for hostage human rights and for Israel’s right to exist in peace, as well as scathing criticisms of Hamas…but you apparently don’t read my posts all that often or all that closely anymore, Leh-nerd. << Kay Adams cry emoji >> Merit in SOME of my remaining bullet points, you say?? Let’s revisit my most important debate point: #7. Israel’s government leaders now claim, post-10/7, that they can’t entertain giving Palestinians their own sovereign state (or full and equal citizenship, for that matter) because that would be akin to rewarding terrorism. Do you agree with that sentiment? Keep in mind that one could conceivably do two things concurrently: grant a particular subset of humans what should be their inalienable rights as human beings, as well as prosecute terrorists for their acts of terrorism. My central argument has long been that Israel was a terribly flawed construction since its inception, which has made their generational path to perpetual national insecurity inevitable, and which has set them on a ruinous path of moral damnation, and which can best (or only?) be salvaged with a one-state solution that also provides specifically stated tyranny-of-majority constitutional protections for Jewish people. Thank you for the well-wishes on my core workouts, Leh-nerd. It’s all about what you can wear after Memorial Day weekend. “Oooh whoa, oh-ah, it’s a cruel summer,” as Taylor Swift tells us. I like that. Which dirty name?? Oh…you mean “sh!thead?” Well, Leh-nerd, you did insinuate that I was unhappy to see Israeli hostages freed, as if the nuanced politics of Commie Kay can be reduced to such starkly Machiavellian terms… I didn’t see Muppy at the most recent TBD PPP Girls meeting, but I was the meeting recorder there (and the only one at the meeting, incidentally). The minutes read as follows: “1. Leh-nerd S. is a poopyface. 2. Crown braids FTW. 3. L. Skin-erd is a doodoohead. 4. Cucumber-based moisturizers FTW. 5. L.S. smells like fecal matter from the neck up. 6. Next meeting’s snacks: birthday cake-flavored No Cow bars.”

BLATANTLY INCORRECT. My ideal peace deal would look something like this: 1. Immediate release of all hostages from October 7. 2. Immediate and permanent ceasefire. 3. Partial release of hostages whom IDF is holding. 4. Full and immediate allowance of international humanitarian aid inside Gaza. 5. Complete withdrawal of IDF from the Gaza strip. 6. Some type of international reconstruction agreement, in the spirit of the 1948 Marshall Plan. 7. Agreement to, and outline of, a one-state or two-state or contiguous two-state (including Negev Desert) or three-state (Gaza and West Bank as separate countries) solution. Note condition #1. The only reason why I’d be willing to compromise on #1 as a multi-stage process instead is because I acknowledge that #7 is going to take a bit more time to sort out than a resolution by, say, tomorrow morning. I’m simply choosing to prioritize the urgent famine crisis for hundreds of thousands of Gazan children over the extended hostage conditions of ~50-100 adults. Several problems I’m seeing with your point of view: 1. Palestinian lives are worth much less to you than Israeli lives, for some reason. 2. You don’t recognize the importance of the aforementioned condition #7 to enduring peace (as both a practical and a moral imperative). 3. You’re apparently oblivious to all the war crimes committed on Israel’s side…such as the Guantanamo Bay-like conditions to which the IDF themselves are subjecting their Gazan detainees (some genuinely guilty of something; some likely not). A negotiation is fundamentally still a negotiation, regardless of the stakes, with various gives-and-takes (cool accidental rhyme!). Or at least that’s how Hamas likely sees it. I thought we were discussing more along the lines of how the world is and not how we want it to be? Israel emboldens Hamas when they commit daily war crimes and continue to occupy/steal other people’s land, yet you’re fixated on the impact from a relative handful of powerless American leftists speaking out against genocide?? What a joke. “Powerless,” by the way, is a very apt descriptor because Biden and Congress would have otherwise ignored all the AIPAC bribes months ago and withheld munitions to Israel. Fantastic!! You did it, Leh-nerd!! You just solved the hopelessly intractable Israel-Palestine crisis!! Yay!! Netanyahu: “Release all our hostages. Here’s a very detailed outline for a peace deal.” Sinwar: “No.” Biden: “Please return their hostages. Here’s a complex, multi-phase peace proposal.” Sinwar: “Hmmm…nope.” Leh-nerd’s personal e-mail to Yahya: “Bro, you need to release all the hostages. It’s that simple. Come on now. Here’s a random pic of my hand outline on a napkin, with a ‘Go Bills!’ phrase and a poorly drawn Bills logo in the center.” Sinwar: “Okay, deal. You had me at ‘bro,’ good sir.” It’s cause to celebrate. Stop being such a sh!thead. Helpful life hack: I’m going to the gym right now to put the finishing touches on my flat summer tummy, while listening to Joe Marino’s Locked on Bills podcast, with a delicious VEGAN snack beforehand. Try my habits sometime instead of your 24/7 TBD PPP right-wing brain rot routine. P.S.: I believe Tibsy is a standard liberal and might be insulted to be lumped in with progressive leftists like myself. But he can speak for himself…he has beautiful long hair, so he’s probably busy picking out the perfect conditioner at Wegmans at this moment.

No I don’t, actually, and you would know that if you had been reading my earlier posts on this conflict. In my contemporary pie chart of blame, a majority of it is filled with Israel, a significant portion the United States, and some of it actual anti-Semitism. At one point in history, the pie chart was roughly evenly split between Great Britain and European/Middle Eastern anti-Semitism. LOL…so Israel gets all its hostages back and Hamas, in return, gets some vague promise of a future cessation in hostilities? Helpful hint, Leh-nerd: an important part of negotiations is trying to understand the perspectives of all involved parties. This type of offer has already been denied multiple times by Hamas, but the N-th time will be the charm? You say that “a ceasefire is in everyone’s best interest.” Is it, though? The humanitarian crisis in Gaza doesn’t seem to be the paramount concern of Hamas. They’re almost reveling in the internecine warfare because, at some level, they may even think they’re defeating Israel: the IDF can’t hold cities in Gaza, Hamas recruitment is up, Israel is losing respect internationally, Israel’s economy is declining, Hezbollah is getting involved, the Camp David Accords are in jeopardy at the Gazan border, and American leftists are applying political pressure on Biden. You’re trivializing, by the way, the importance of those negotiating factors you enumerated. Land disputes are absolutely integral (read: causal) to this entire conflict and to the motivations of both sides. Hamas prisoner swaps are valuable negotiating leverage for Israel, as are financial settlements (though who are we kidding here…the American taxpayer is going to be footing the bill for any urban reconstruction…regardless of the outcome in November’s elections). Well it shouldn’t have been okay for us then, and it’s not okay for Israel now. Are you attempting to present an argument here other than American hypocrisy? When you are a longstanding imperialistic superpower founded on principles of settler colonialism, you become inured to all the egregious human rights violations you yourself inflict abroad. The rest of the world acquiesces because seriously challenging a superpower has negative consequences. It also helps to have the Fourth Estate owned by corporate oligarchs profiting in some way from the regime change wars, military occupations, coups, assassinations, and illegal drone strikes committed…not to mention the obvious international exploitation of labor and natural resources. It also helps to have the electorally culpable civilian population geographically isolated from the blowback, thanks in large part to two major oceans. My best explanation, however, for the discrepancy in outrage you’re noting: the evolution of independent news media and social media platforms have profoundly altered the landscape of propaganda efficacy, between the Second Iraq War and today. Right, but different wars have different civilian casualty ratios. The one in this ongoing Gaza conflict could easily be as high as 10:1 or 20:1, when you consider bodies still unaccounted for that are trapped underneath the rubble, or the slipshod manner in which adult males get lumped into the category of “combatants.” I’m certainly no expert military strategist, but was it really necessary to raze ~65% of Gaza’s buildings with 70 thousand tons of bombs, including every hospital but one, all schools and universities, media centers, mosques, museums and other heritage sites, cemeteries, etc…not to mention the farmland destroyed and the severe restrictions in humanitarian aid that are creating famine conditions?? The answer is “YES” if you are intentionally trying to make a place unlivable. Just shout, “but…Hamas tunnels!” every time a human rights referee challenges a bomb strike of yours.

Yeah, what a world…a world that denounces collective punishment, ethnic cleansing, and genocide as a response to a terrorist attack…sounds like a world with a functioning moral compass, actually…a world that was overwhelmingly on Israel’s side after the October 7 attack and until Israel went psychotic… People who truly care about the future well-being of Israel will stop wallowing in realms of perpetual victimhood, stop indulging in interminable revenge fantasies, and start thinking about the factors that precipitated those unforgivable atrocities on October 7. You see the obvious analogy between 10/7 and 9/11, right?? Who is discarding common sense here?? You want a peace deal in which all Israeli hostages are immediately released. Awesome! So do I. Now what are you suggesting Hamas be offered in order for them to agree to such a deal? SUGGEST SOMETHING so that I can then give you my opinion of the likelihood that Hamas accepts it. You already know what I would suggest. If Hamas were to dare reject an Israeli offering of Palestinian statehood at this particular moment in the conflict’s long history, I believe Palestinians would quickly turn against Hamas. You don’t need to insinuate or speculate anything about me because I’ve been very clear and upfront on this topic. You can read my entire post history in this thread (February 13-16, March 4-8, March 23, April 15-22, and now). I’ve also posted in the equivalent thread over at BillsFans.com (October 10-13 and November 8). It’s disappointing that you are unable to denounce the blatant ethnic cleansing and genocide that Israel is committing in Gaza. I do think very highly of your character, believe it or not, which is why I’m particularly upset that you aren’t seeing through the Zionist propaganda permeating mainstream/corporate American media. You’re only reinforcing my point: it takes a high level of imagination to consider Mr. Lumpkins as anything other than a MAGA voter. What do you think Fuzzy’s policy stance is on gun rights?? How about eminent domain?? STOP DESECRATING MY CHILDHOOD. Next thing you’re going to tell me is that Jess Mariano wasn’t the perfect partner for Rory Gilmore, and that Rory would have been better off marrying Logan…<< Kay Adams eyeroll >>

The Powerpuff Girls reference conjured up childhood nostalgia. I was enjoying the ephemeral dopamine kick before getting to the rest of your post. An international pariah state status is a highly intolerable position in which an economically aspirational country can find itself. Ask 1980’s South Africa. I totally respect wanting all Israeli hostages released upfront in any peace deal, but my point is that Israel would need to initially offer something truly substantive to Hamas in return. Otherwise, the round of negotiations would abruptly end. That truly substantive thing would likely be on the order of a promise of Palestinian statehood, with an opening gambit maybe being the approximate pre-1967 Green Line borders? I do realize negotiations aren’t this simple, of course, especially considering that Netanyahu’s interests aren’t necessarily aligned with those of Israel (and likewise for Yahya Sinwar and Palestine). By the way, I can’t tell if you’re unaware of the full scope of the genocide in Gaza, or if you simply don’t value Palestinian lives nearly as much you do Israeli lives?? Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor is doing an admirable job of collating the facts and evidence of the genocide. The picture being painted is perhaps the darkest stain on human existence in the twenty-first century. P.S. Fuzzy Lumpkins would be a MAGA hat-wearing Trump voter in the year 2024. Disagree?

A Powerpuff Girls reference?? Leh-nerd, you had my curiosity…but now you have my attention. Hostages are the main negotiating leverage Hamas has over Israel, so demanding their full release is pointless before a suitable articulation of this Phase 2 criterion is met: “a permanent end to hostilities.” Unless Israel agrees beforehand to the end of apartheid practices or to the establishment of a separate Palestinian state, I don’t see why Hamas would bother entertaining such a condition to a peace agreement. The current peace proposal is obviously a good one for Palestinians because they badly need the humanitarian aid ASAP, but it’s also a good one for Israel because it’s in Israel’s financial and national security interests to avoid their international pariah state trajectory (and because some hostages released is always better than none). Acceptance of this proposal would also be ideal for Brokering Biden in terms of party coalition building and November electability. Better late than never, I suppose, even as Genocide Joe’s main leverage (the withholding of U.S. munitions) remains unutilized... Moot debate, however, since I believe Netanyahu already rejected the proposal. It should be apparent that hostage rescue and the defeat of Hamas (a practical impossibility, by the way) were secondary objectives to Israel’s government and to the IDF. It should have been apparent since late October that Israel’s main agenda was ethnic cleansing and a genocide to facilitate said cleansing. They want to finish in Gaza (plus the West Bank via acceleration of illegal settlements…plus southern Lebanon military encroachments…plus the Golan Heights) what they started with the Nakba in 1948. National security risks and/or make-believe Biblical mandates are the lies that Israelis tell themselves to justify their support of collective punishment, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. At least European settlers were a bit more forthright with Native Americans: they wanted their land and their resources, and they believed they were innately superior humans who could make better use of it all. Zionists have historically been far more duplicitous toward Palestinians, though the mask is slipping.

LOL…Chase Fraser is such a showman! Many of the coolest and most creative lacrosse goals that I’ve ever seen came from him. That one-bounce goal of his last night was super fun, too. A lot of the NLL’s problems come down to really poor marketing. It’s not so much that people are rejecting the pro lacrosse product as it is that people don’t even know of the league’s existence.

I don’t still live in WNY, but I follow the Bandits as closely as I do the Sabres and only slightly less intensely as I do the Bills. By any objective measure, as of last night the Bandits are now considered the greatest franchise in professional lacrosse history! That alone is worthy of our respect, regardless of how one might feel about this sport in relation to football or hockey. Point of clarification: the top pro indoor league of lacrosse is considered to be completely on par with the top pro outdoor league. This isn’t the case for gridiron football or soccer, but it is for lacrosse! The top indoor league is Buffalo’s National Lacrosse League (NLL), while the top outdoor league is the Premier Lacrosse League (PLL) which starts in two weeks. Many of the world’s top lacrosse players play in both leagues. Most of the Bandits’ offense, for example, also play together for the Carolina Chaos in the PLL (yet another Carolina/Buffalo pro sports connection…LOL…). Canadians and Indigenous peoples prefer the more physical indoor/box version of lacrosse, while Americans tend to prefer the outdoor/field version. The indoor version resembles ice hockey in style of play, with elements of strategy that are also seen in basketball. The outdoor version resembles soccer too much in pace, which is why I personally think the NLL will eventually overtake the PLL to become the undisputed top version of professional lacrosse in North America.

THANK YOU. Someone had to say it. A more understated approach to makeup application might serve her well. We actually knew Kristi Noem was a sociopath two years before news leaked of her dog-murdering ways. She is on record for defending abortion bans even in cases of rape. If you’re someone who thinks the state should force a 10-year-old girl to carry her rapist’s child to term, you’re also very likely to be someone who won’t think twice about blowing a puppy’s brains out for the crime of acting on its canine instincts. I doubt Trump was ever seriously considering her as a VP candidate. He may be a lot of things, but he’s not nearly as dumb as your stereotypical MAGA supporter who still believes Trump is fighting The Establishment (i.e., corporate oligarchs and their political puppets). Trump probably understands Noem’s limited demographic appeal. If he wants to get re-elected, he needs to expand beyond the simpletons clinging to their God, guns, and supple Ned Beatty a** cheeks in some nondescript forest parcel located in flyover country. Speaking of pig squealing…I implore all the dog-loving omnivores in this thread to look up Yulin’s “Lychee and Dog Meat Festival” and then to ponder the intrinsic differences between pets and farm animals. Spoiler alert: there aren’t any.

Yay!! You can use an internet search engine! Now use it once more for any critiques of that paper’s flaws and limitations. Doing so may help explain why a paper that is 7 years old has negligible citations and no follow-up research, from the author himself or from any peers within the skeptical climate science community. The theme of my posts has been to direct some of that same skeptical energy toward the skeptics, too. The correlation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and surface temperature has been exhaustively researched over the years, so any future hypothesis that challenges the conventional wisdom has a steep mountain of scientific tests to climb. You just looked up the stratosphere cooling effect NOW?? We’ve been talking about it for several weeks! The theory has been around for many decades, soon after the discovery of the stratosphere itself. How much more time is needed for the data to persuade you? 1 year? A decade? A century? A full geological epoch? I have already explained why the data is so persuasive. Climate skeptics always have unreasonable standards that are never rooted in scientific reasoning… A solution to anthropogenic climate change is way too nuanced for me to address in full right now (and I’d rather focus on NFL draft gossip, to be honest, because this is my personal Christmas in April!). So a very brief summary: 1. What private industries should mostly control: market-driven technological innovation in solar energy, electric vehicle battery technology, nuclear energy, other green energy (wind, geothermal, hydro, biofuel), carbon sequestration, planetary terraforming, civil engineering, agricultural tech, and lab-grown meat. 2. What the government should mostly manage: fundamental STEM research funding in everything related to the climate change problem, carbon market legislation for industries, green economy training programs for displaced workers of old energy economy, public transportation upgrades, all other civil infrastructure upgrades, regulations/land acquisitions for curbing suburban sprawl, land reforestation, and EPA oversight of environmental conservation practices. You brought up COVID, by the way, as if managing a sudden pandemic in real time is comparable to long-term planning for climate change… Ironically enough, the absence of effective government economic intervention (in the form of financially compensating citizens who were forced to not work) was an enormous socioeconomic stressor but a policy that libertarian types supported. The standard free-market solution was to keep everything open as normal, but doing so would have rapidly overloaded hospitals and led to many more deaths.

Broadly speaking, the purpose of these protests is to raise public awareness on any/all of the following issues: 1. The ongoing genocide in Gaza. 2. Israel’s illegal settlements in the West Bank. 3. Israel’s active prevention of Palestinian statehood. 4. Israel’s system of apartheid against Palestinians. 5. The financial and diplomatic culpability of the United States in all of the above. The hope is that increased public awareness will, in turn, lead to both political pressure in the eventual form of a permanent ceasefire and widespread economic pressure in the form of the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement. Judging by the level of media coverage of these college protests, both good AND bad, both nationally and internationally, I’d say that they have been wildly successful in their objective! Recent polling trends support my assessment. Nevertheless, what’s so pathetic (but predictable) is the intellectual regression of American right-wingers. For fleeting moments within the past decade, one COULD sort of argue that they were the standard-bearers of free speech and anti-establishment politics. Their overall response, however, to the Gaza crisis and to these protestors has erased such Pollyanna-ish thoughts. You’re not for the First Amendment if you want the police to crack down on peaceful college protests. You’re not a crusader against the political establishment if you so easily fall for media narratives framed by the MIC, AIPAC, and all corporate oligarchs who financially benefit from the bellicosity of the U.S. empire’s Middle East vassal state. And you’re DEFINITELY not the ones fighting Nazis if you condone collective punishment, ethnic cleansing, and genocide against anybody!

I’m guessing you never skimmed through the articles or the Nature paper?? I’ll explain it another way: D = A – B – C D is the observed increase in Earth’s angular velocity. C is the calculated decrease in Earth’s angular velocity due to polar ice cap melting. A is the increase in Earth’s angular velocity due to mass movement within its liquid outer core. B is the long-term decrease in Earth’s angular velocity due to the Moon’s gravitational pull. “D” is what everyone agrees is happening. “C” is the subject of the Nature paper. “D” is positive and greater than “C.” So “C” is saying that global warming effects are slowing Earth down, but not enough to reverse the effects from “A” that are speeding up Earth (in the short-term). Did that clarify? And yes, I’m still quite confident in the science of anthropogenic climate change! If you have been paying attention to my posts, then you know why: data confluence plus an effective process of isolation/elimination of climate change-inducing variables. Any progress on an alternative scientific explanation for the cooling stratosphere?? Or on a scientific refutation of the causal relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide ppm and planetary mean surface temperature?? Ugh. This thread was at its peak when it was just Muppy and I analyzing awesome dresses. Somewhere between Leh-nerd Skin-erd posts, we must have leapfrogged a megalodon or two.