Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Recently Flagged Comments

Recently flagged comments from all news stories on this site. Users must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you want to retrieve a comment of yours that was recently deleted, visit your user page and click the Moderation link.

As someone who has a hesitant libertarian bent, I don't understand the new breed of right-wingers. They claim to be small-government conservatives yet clamor for government interference in a woman's fundamental choice about whether to allow a separate organism to grow inside her body. They love self-defense, reacting with joy when someone kills a burglar who is looking to steal some stuff to fund their opiate habit, but they don't recognize a woman's right to bodily integrity. Even if she gets pregnant intentionally, choosing later to terminate the pregnancy, isn't that akin to inviting your brother to stay with you and then evicting him in the winter, condemning him to homelessness and possibly death? Let's just assume for the sake of argument that the choice to evict your brother is immoral. Fine. Believe what you want about morality, but how can a right-winger justify laws restricting a person's right to bodily integrity? If you're truly a small-government conservative or libertarian, why do you think the law should enforce morality on citizens? What if, 100 years down the road, the US is a majority Muslim country? Do you support the government making and enforcing laws requiring "moral" behavior in the eyes of the Muslim majority? (Keep in mind that only a minority of US citizens believe abortion should be illegal.)

Although not relevant to this particular topic, I have another bone to pick with Trump-cons. Why do so many of you fly a blue line flag AND NOT an American flag? You're flying a flag celebrating government! Or did you fail to realize that police are government? Not only are they government, but they're the form of government with the most power to interfere in our lives. They can steal your property, kill you, and make your life a living hell without consequences. How dumb can a group of people be?

"Everyone should have those benefits... well maybe not aromatherapy but child care and good quality health care and at least two weeks of vacation and so on."

Child care should not be the responsibility of the company. It is your choice to have kids so any benefit they provide you is a benefit they are not providing to the employees that don't have kids. As for 'government', it is the same thing. We have no shortage of population so we don't need to subsidize people for having kids beyond all the programs that already exist.

"In other modern countries, they get those benefits just for showing up."

And in the longer term, those systems fail unless they are backed by a huge oil reserve or other natural resource which provides a huge per capita benefit vs. the rest of the world.

"They don't have to just show up... at a tech company, like I've been doing most every time I can summon the effort to go to work."

I think you are going to have to try harder if you want anyone to believe you worked at any tech company other than circa 1999...

"Have you seen what it's like to be poor? Have you seen the spam folder of a poor person's email account lately?"

I grew up poor. The fact they can even have a spam folder shows you how well off the 'poor' in the US live.

"It's pretty clear which party wants the bottom 80% of households to have it better, and which party wants the bottom 80% of households to have it worse."

Yes, the Democrats want to keep poor people poor and drag the middle class down too so they can have a stronger voter base. You can see this in all of their policies from destroying education to crippling US companies via regulations and new woke initiatives. You think our international competitors care about your woke initiatives and the fact that you think math is racist?

"Money is fungible. It doesn't care if you get it by renting apartments or inventing YouTube. But only one of those creates wealth. The other is parasitic."

Yes, renting a house creates wealth for the lessor and the lessee. It provides an essential good/service that allows people shelter so that they can do productive things with their time. YouTube is a vast destroyer of wealth on par with fidget spinners in providing mind numbing videos for people to watch rather than being productive.

Seems very common in tech & FAANG-worker circles.

As a former F, and current G I can say for a fact this is correct; except for foreign workers (Chinese, Indian) they take marriage and children seriously, hence the Cupertino School district being so competitive. Which also is why, in general, they can afford the homes in silicon valley. DIWK ;-)

This is in reference to the simplistic takeaway that a decline in traditional nuclear family statistic is our culture.

A valid observation, I would argue that all culture values have roots in the family unit; ergo, less families, the culture will suffer/fragment.

An easy and faux fix would be for older generational households to either split up, to adopt or foster child(ren) so that they can be counted as a nuclear family unit >:).

Incentives is the issue IMO, why would an older person (>50) want to raise children again? What is the incentive to have single parent households, why are DINKs not having kids? Family leave? Child support enforcement? idk ..

Well, I would also argue that it doesn't have to be a man and woman to have a nuclear family. Just that it requires two people with a shared interest, namely wanting to raise kids. That being said, I see no reason, to be married other than to nurture children. You make an interesting observation, multigenerational families are even better.

As a thought experiment, perhaps once a society goes down that path it can't go back, how do single parent children even understand what a two parent household is like.


I would also amend my argument about income inequality, it all begins with parental inequality which begets income inequality.

Cultural Decay

Many people have struggled to define the term "culture" due to such a variety of societal aspects. According to the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, culture is "the customs and beliefs, art, way of life and social organization of a particular country or group." So, defining culture in this way, the term describes all the means by which a specific society explains itself to its members. This, for example, includes literature, music, values or different works of art and gives all human beings a sense of meaning that embeds them within their society. However, there are sometimes traits that are not unique to the normative standards of the dominant culture. That implies that there are specific social groups which differ from the majority of the society. They are described as "subcultures". That makes clear, that there is no standard culture because of regional and social differences. Nevertheless, all different cultures have established their own way of thinking, living and being. Whenever a culture is questioned by a large group of its population it results in a change of the established structures. Some of the changes are good, but history has shown that they often tend to be changes for the worst in the long run.

In this case, the term "decay" is used refer to this process. According to the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, it means "the gradual destruction of a society, an institution, a system, etc." Therefore, it can be said that the term "cultural decay" describes the loss of respect for tradition, a weakening of the cultural foundations, and a decrease in cultural diversity.

It is very important to consider the cultural identity of the individuals when talking about "cultural decay". That means that their behaviours, customs and traditions might not be seen as normal by every other culture. Therefore, it always needs to be specified from which perspective someone passes judgement about another culture. Finally, it has to be said that "cultural decay" does not necessarily mean that there is a decline in every facet of the culture. While one part is in decline, some other parts might simultaneously be in expanding.

This is a 5-paragraph OAN story. Take it for what is it worth.

Not a fan of Nunes, but certainly seems like he's correct.

Not only the cycles he mentions, but the creation of extremist.

Former Santa Clara University professor indicted on arson charges in connection with Dixie Fire

The blaze is the second-largest in California's history and the biggest to burn in the U.S. this summer, as climate change turbocharged severe

Seems to me the GlobalWarming fanatics took over the reasonable argument.

Nunes is a jerk, but in this case the clock is correct.


This is a shame because Chris Cuomo's show was one of the better ones on primetime cable news.

Better show? That no one watched :

But CNN, unlike Fox News, is a media outlet with professional standards....
Anyone who thinks Tucker Carlson should still be on the air should probably sit this one out.

IOW : My Tribe, My Tribe, My Tribe ....

Anyone watching FoxNews or CNN is pretty much brainwashed, and should sit this one out.

Who wrote the software running in your head? Are you sure you actually want it there?


There's also this...

Trump's $300 Million SPAC Deal May Have Skirted Securities Laws (October 2021)

...The former president began discussing a deal with a blank check' company early this year. Investors weren't told.

Just days after Donald J. Trump left the White House, two former contestants on his reality show, "The Apprentice," approached him with a pitch. Wes Moss and Andy Litinsky wanted to create a conservative media giant.

Mr. Trump was taken with the idea. But he had to figure out how to pay for it.

This month, the former president found a way. He agreed to merge his social media venture with what's known as a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC. The result is that Mr. Trump " largely shut out of the mainstream financial industry because of his history of bankruptcies and loan defaults " secured nearly $300 million in funding for his new business.

To get his deal done, Mr. Trump ventured into an unregulated and sometimes shadowy corner of Wall Street, working with an unlikely cast of characters: the former "Apprentice" contestants, a small Chinese investment firm and a little-known Miami banker named Patrick Orlando.

Mr. Orlando had been discussing a deal with Mr. Trump since at least March, according to people familiar with the talks and a confidential investor presentation reviewed by The New York Times. That was well before his SPAC, Digital World Acquisition, made its debut on the Nasdaq stock exchange last month. In doing so, Mr. Orlando's SPAC may have skirted securities laws and stock exchange rules, lawyers said.

SPACs sell their shares to investors through an initial public offering and then find a private company with which to merge. Because SPACs are empty vessels, stock exchanges allow them to list their shares without disclosing much financial information. But that creates opportunities for SPACs to serve as backdoor vehicles for companies to go public without receiving the kind of investor scrutiny they would in a traditional listing. To prevent that, SPACs aren't supposed to have a merger planned at the time of their I.P.O.

Lawyers and industry officials said that talks between Mr. Orlando and Mr. Trump or their associates consequently could draw scrutiny from the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Another issue is that Digital World's securities filings repeatedly stated that the company and its executives had not engaged in any "substantive discussions, directly or indirectly," with a target company " even though Mr. Orlando had been in discussions with Mr. Trump....


Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable