Some corporations have been bowing to the religion of woke.
So far, Target has lost 8 billion for promoting pride children’s clothing, tuck (your dick) tranny bathing suits and their other Satan inspired stunts.
The bill’s summary claims it would end “school lunch shaming” and “provides an additional incentive for local food procurement.”
But the 47-page bill doesn’t explain how the government would pay for the program. How much does the program cost? How will the government offset the payments?
Oh, wait. These people think money grows on trees.
The 44th first lady (hard to type those words about an America hater) tried this as her signature program. It was a failure as the kids hated the meals so much that they wouldn’t eat the swill. A lot of “food” got thrown away. $500 million down the drain and it ended silently and thankfully.
Yet here we go again. Trying to force their opinions on others for conformity.
I had a friend who ate an oatmeal creme cookie and a lemonade from the snack machine. His dad was a university professor so they weren’t poor. He was saving up his money. He bought a Porsche before anyone in the class of 1100 that we graduated in.
I ate PB&J and loved it. The school meals were ok, but almost no one wanted or could eat them.
I hated Mondays when working, but even though the thought occurred to me, I didn’t kill anyone over it. I worked with a girl who used to stay up until 3 on Sunday night night in what she said was denial of the weekend being over. She was a crazy girl, but not this level of crazy.
In 1979, 16 year old Brenda Ann Spencer was arrested after killing two people in California. When asked why she did it, her reply was "I just don't like Mondays.” pic.twitter.com/wshbd2VD8h
BREAKING: The mass shooter in Allen today was a Hispanic male with what appears to be a gang tattoo on his hand. I’m putting a screenshot of it as it is against the 1984 truth speak narrative rules.
Of course it is an illegal because they have lost control of the border.
This isn’t about guns, it is about criminals invading the country. If they really cared, they would recognize that fentanyl is killing more Americans than guns. The media is protecting the failure in the White House.
Let’s not forget that Kamala Harris is the border czar. Since she is doing nothing, it’s squarely on her.
BREAKING: The mass shooter in Allen today was a Hispanic male with what appears to be a gang tattoo on his hand. pic.twitter.com/CUs4mJHrFl
Yep, she’s gone. It says leave of absence, but when you cost your company at least 5 billion and counting, along with a century old reputation, your ass is history.
She’s going down as the girl who did the worst marketing campaign in history (Gillette may argue this one) all in the name of woke and inclusivity. A college freshman would identify this as the textbook example of f**king up to the extreme.
The controversial marketing exec behind Bud Light’s partnership with Dylan Mulvaney has taken a leave of absence as the boycott against the beer brand rages on.
Ad Age reports that “Alissa Heinerscheid, marketing VP for the brand since June 2022, has taken a leave of absence, the brewer confirmed, and will be replaced by Todd Allen, who was most recently global marketing VP for Budweiser.”
In an interview on the Make Yourself At Home podcast from March 23rd, Heinerscheid revealed that the brand was in decline and they needed to “attract young drinkers… then there will be no Bud Light,” which led to the controversial partnership with trans TikToker Dylan Mulvaney.
Note: Bud replaced her with a man. He probably got marching orders to stop pissing off the once loyal customers and figure out a way to stop the hemorrhaging of profits and reputation.
It doesn’t take a genius to know a guy isn’t born with boobs. Even if you put silicone in there, they still aren’t boobs if on a human born a male.
Nike could have picked any female in the world to promote their products, yet they picked a mentally health challenged boy with a dick to sell their workout products.
I doubt they will be as affected as Transnheuser-Busch because they have put the worst people as spokespersons already (I’m looking at you Colin Kaepernick, America hater and racist cry-baby). They have a solid track record for being in the woke dumpster.
Megyn Kelly sums it up perfectly: He has no idea what it is like to need and wear a sports bra. It’s also cringe worthy to see him prancing around like a pansy. Three women with six boobs calling Nike and their pretender out for disrespecting females.
“I’m sorry, Dylan doesn’t have breasts. Dylan’s been taking some sort of a hormone that has turned Dylan into some — I don’t know what’s happening there, but those are not breasts,” she said. “And Dylan doesn’t need any sort of a bra, never mind a sports bra.”
A self-described “Southern Mama” said she was “sick and tired” of Nike “pushing us around” before burning her sports bra and encouraging others to join in the viral challenge.
“All you real women out there – we are in the fight of all fights,” the woman who goes by the TikTok handle “chatterbox.mama” said to her more than 140,000 followers on Tuesday.
“Since the 1960s, we have been fighting for the right to be women,” she said.
“Nike, you should be ashamed of yourself,” the TikTok influencer continued.
“You chose a little boy with no breasts and some junk in his pants to represent real women.”
The TikToker declared: “Nike, I am done with you.”
“I will never, ever buy a Nike product for as long as I live,” she said.
“And there are millions and millions and millions of women just like me.”
She then challenged other women to “burn your Nike bras … as a way of showing our solidarity and how serious we are that we will be recognized.”
As soon as I saw the Bud Light campaign with the tranny Dylan fake-a-girl as spokesperson, I had to ask who could be that out of touch with a customer base.
I was almost positive that it was from the Ivy League and most likely Harvard. I also figured it had to be a girl. No straight Bud Light drinking man would think a tranny would be a good idea. The final guess was it was a someone who was woke.
What gets me is what executive at Budwiser gave this the green light when it got to his/her desk? This had loser written all over it that any redneck in mid-America would instinctively know.
Here you go. Every guess I made was right, not that it was hard given what a FUBAR decision this was.
And there it is
Bud Light went woke & recently hired Alissa Heinerscheid, a Woke Ivy League grad, as the first woman to lead marketing for a major beer brand
She’s also now the 1st woman to destroy the largest beer brand in the industry
My already rock bottom opinion of Harvard was able to go lower.
I now await the case study or new textbook of colossal marketing mistakes along with Gillette trashing it’s male base and losing $8 Billion. I wonder which one will lose the most money and customers (and loyalty).
I give it a short bus as it is that bad of a mistake. It just confirms what I learned in the working world, that an Ivy League degree and especially Harvard are among the most overrated and overpriced mistakes parents make.
How tough can it be to sell beer, especially Bud? Get some guys, some trucks, animals (likely dogs) and good looking actual girls. Then film at the beach, a sporting event or concert. If you don’t want to spend the money on loser executives and advertising campaigns, cut the price a bit and you just got a bigger college customer base.
Go woke and go broke, every damn time.
Just to rub some salt into woke, the exec behind the Gillette ad was also a woke girl.
Carolyn Tastad, group president of P&G North America
And in her own words, how and why she killed the brand to be inclusive to a new generation. Like I said, she could have just given them a price break without chasing off the other 98% of her existing customers. You have to try really hard to be this bad. I wonder how proud Harvard is for teaching how to fail.
Whoever hired her made a bad decision.
Meet Alissa Heinerscheid, Bud Light’s VP of Marketing. She explains her strategy of using “inclusive” marketing to promote the brand to young people.
Remember the Gillette commercial about #MeToo and the best a man can get? That cost them about $8 billion in sales and a lot of customers. It was one of the textbook worst marketing campaigns, trashing your clientele. You don’t lecture your customers on how to behave and expect success.
“In less than two minutes you managed to alienate your biggest sales group for your products. Well done,” wrote one angry viewer.
Not to be outdone and in a hold my beer moment, Anheueser-Busch put a tranny as the face of Bud Light. It tastes like weasel piss anyway, but it may top Gillette as the worst marketing move.
Way to cut your throat. Woke marketing execs love to make fun of folks in flyover country, but that is was where a lot of Bud drinkers live.
It will be a hit to the bottom line. It could be the new advertising screw up of the century, except the press will celebrate it instead of reporting properly.
Sooner or later, they sales numbers will come in and I don’t think it will be pretty for AB or Bud Light, the new joke of beers. No real man is going to be caught dead with a Bud Light now in public.
The face of this flavored water now is a guy pretending to be a girl. He had face altering surgery, but like all males when born, he still has a dick. Unlike the latest Supreme Court Justice, I can define what a female is and this loser isn’t one.
Just because it is the latest fad doesn’t mean it’s any good or that people like it. Remember eating Tide Pods or a spoon of Cinnamon? Nobody likes that or does it anymore either.
Get woke, go broke….every time. That’s right Gillette, I didn’t forget what you did last year. I’ll never shave with your razor’s or drink a Bud Light ever again.
Yeah, I think it’s BS like most do, just like being woke. Blaming others so you think that it will make people equal.
Woke definitions
Trying to silence someone for their beliefs is a cross between 1984 and Communism.
I wonder if the rest of the world is getting tired of the MSM egging on the mentally deficient or deranged people. They gang up like the mean kids on the playground who got together to bring someone down to build themselves up.
Critical Race Theory = anti-white positioning, or negation of people of European descent.
It’s very rare that a democrat doesn’t get re-elected in Chicago. She’s one of the few in the last 4 decades. She didn’t get re-elected because she did a bad job as mayor, not because it is racist or sexist as she claims. Chicago is the last place that would happen,
A local reporter who had his press credentials revoked tells outgoing Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot to "pack your suitcase and get the hell out of my city." pic.twitter.com/jNwWuCxgG8
For people trying to get a job or increase business, it might be a valuable platform.
Unfortunately, it is still social media that is trying to be politically correct. I ran across this article so that you get a feel for what Cringe is.
Why LinkedIn? Just, why?
One of the funniest running jokes on Twitter is people trolling cringey LinkedIn newsfeed content: humble brags, faux inspiration, hustle porn, buzzwords galore and more.
A Twitter search for “linkedin cringe” returns an endless scroll of hilarity:
Here’s a representative tweet that blew up last week. Someone posted a photo of a “resilient” tree, which prompted a perfect response that notched 430k+ likes: “Gonna be hell when LinkedIn finds out about this tree.”
What is in the DNA of LinkedIn that leads to such predictably cringe content?
To answer the question, I read a bunch of forums, articles and great insights from the LinkedIn Engineering Blog. I think the cringe is due to 3 factors:
The personality: What LinkedIn asks you to be?
The customer: Who is actually paying LinkedIn?
The algorithm: What drives engagement?
The Personality
My least favorite version of Trung is “CV Trung”. By this, I mean the way I write about myself and career on my resume.
Why? Because CV Trung is a knob.
Here are some actual bullet points from my most up-to-date resume, circa 2019: (comments in bold)
“CFA Charter-holder, passed all 3 exams on the first attempt” (no one cares)
“Professional working proficiency in Vietnamese” (not even close)
“Leveraged background in finance to lead a cross-functional team that developed machine-learning analytics tools” (dude, STFU)
Humans don’t talk like this. Half of this isn’t even true!
What is going on?
Canadian sociologist Erving Goffman has the answer: in a book called The Presentation of Self in Every Day Life, Goffman posits that every person goes through life wearing many “masks”, like an actor in a theater play.
Most people are different personalities at work vs. home vs. happy hour. People wear these different masks to impress or avoid embarrassment with different audiences.
Back to LinkedIn. It’s your online resume and directly tied to your identity.
The setup forces everyone on the site to basically wear the professional “CV mask” of their personality.
Bland. Buzzwords. Inoffensive. A little exaggeration. Self-promotional (but not too much). Desperate to impress.
CV Trung if I could grow facial hair (via @StateOfLinkedIn)
As a professional social network, LinkedIn has the cringe built in. The platform also prompts cringey engagement activity like:
Please <click button> to endorse <person> for being good at <skill>
It is <person> one year workversary please <congratulate>
This is not how normal people interact! I’ve literally never uttered the words “workvesary” out of my mouth (and have no idea what it sounds like).
Case in point:
Via @PanchamShreyas
Whenever someone strays from the “CV Mask” and gives an honest take, it resonates:
(L to R, clockwise): An honest consultant, my “education” section and Conan O’Brien’s very funny “test score”
Having said all that, LinkedIn’s mission is to “connect the world’s professionals to make them more productive and successful”. As we’ll see, the site has been able to do that for many of its 800m+ users…cringe or no cringe.
MY RESPONSE AND TROLL
I already troll LinkedIn by changing my profile. My college went woke. I am so ashamed of them for what they represent that I changed it to Faber, of Animal House fame. No one noticed, but I don’t get any college links anymore, so there is the silver lining.
I decided to engage in the cringe by posting a false invention to detect both that and Sh*t posts. There already is an app that does this, so I made up my own. It’s just cringe stuff that is deep in sarcasm for those who troll my page and try to market unwanted advice to me. It’s working well as I’m being left alone. I haven’t done what my career was for years anyway.
Here’s a sample: Helped change the course of the future with the invention of the Revalvitating Capitulator. A vital component in the development and distribution of LinkedIn cringe.
I even used the cringe generator and got this:
And a special shout out to Alex Cohen, who has turned long-form LinkedIn shitposting into an art:
In the end, it’s just another social media fail, but at least there is fun in it for those who recognize sarcasm. I troll it now in my profile because it went woke a while ago. I don’t even bother posting or liking except to very few people that I had a real connection with in the past.
Like most of Social Media, it’s a time suck. Cringe beats woke every time.
Even before the empty gala, internal staff had their doubts about such methods, according to a report by Devex citing anonymous interviews; staff described it as “Digital garbage,” and “depressing and embarrassing.”
The link to the article is below, but when you think your s**t doesn’t stink, you usually wind up sitting in it. Zuck is in a Mt. Everest pile right now.
I guess he didn’t live through Second Life, or is behind on his FPS games reality wise. That’s a lot closer to what kids want.
He’s got the money to waste, let him. It’s costing the employees with layoffs, delayed hiring and cuts in perks. Welcome to the real world.
Everyone in the world other than him can see it’s a loser. Even if they gave the $1000 headsets away for free, many get sick wearing them. A lot of people just aren’t ready for this outside of early adopters.
When I can do what they do in the Ironman movies in 3D, I’ll consider it then.
Here’s the story:
The EU commission has tried and failed to be “down with the kids.”
The commission’s foreign aid department threw a virtual “gala” on Tuesday night, having spent €387,000 (about $400,000) on developing their metaverse platform, in an attempt to attract the interest of young people. Only six showed up.
According to one of the only attendees, Devex correspondent Vince Chadwick, it was an immediate flop and he was the only one left after “several bemused chats” with the “roughly five other humans” who briefly joined.
I’m here at the “gala” concert in the EU foreign aid dept’s €387k metaverse (designed to attract non politically engaged 18-35 year olds — see story below). After initial bemused chats with the roughly five other humans who showed up, I am alone. https://t.co/ChIHeXasQPpic.twitter.com/kZWIVlKmhL
Chadwick shared a short clip on [hotlink]Twitter[/hotlink] showing multi-coloured paperclip-shaped avatars dancing on a stage next to a tropical beach. “Is anybody out there?” read one message on the screen. “The concert is just the same DJ spinning the same music,” said another.
Struggling in its early days, the metaverse space is part of an expensive plan designed to promote the EU commission’s Global Gateway Initiative, which aims to spend $300 billion by 2027 building new infrastructure in developing countries, and the official trailer was dropped on their social media in mid-October.
Our shared digital space is the perfect place to get to know new people and reflect on global issues to make a difference for our shared future. #WhoWeArepic.twitter.com/IAA01vIYbo
— EU International Partnerships 🇪🇺 (@EU_Partnerships) October 13, 2022
The platform is supposed to be a new way to explore the Initiative “through a series of ‘hero’ stories in a virtual environment,” according to the commission.
Users can find information through stories played on video screens around the tropical island on which it is set, while encountering other unusual additions such as an open book art installation on a liquid floor, drones that carry screens flashing words such as “education” and “public health,” and the ability to walk on water.
A spokesperson said the project aims to “increase awareness of what the EU does on the world stage,” targeting young people in particular who spend their time on TikTok and [hotlink]Instagram[/hotlink], and who are “neutral about the EU” and “not typically exposed to such information.”
Though rarely reported on in the mainstream media, COVID-19 vaccine boosters have been generating a lot of controversy.
While some countries are quietly compensating people for devastating vaccine injuries, and other countries are limiting COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, the United States is now recommending children 12 and older get Pfizer-BioNTech’s Omicron-specific booster, and young adults over the age of 18 get Moderna’s updated shot.
Against a backdrop of confusing and often changing public health recommendations and booster fatigue, the authors of this new paper argue that university booster mandates are unethical. They give five specific reasons for this bold claim:
1) Lack of policymaking transparency. The scientists pointed out that no formal and scientifically rigorous risk-benefit analysis of whether boosters are helpful in preventing severe infections and hospitalizations exists for young adults.
2) Expected harm. A look at the currently available data shows that mandates will result in what the authors call a “net expected harm” to young people. This expected harm will exceed the potential benefit from the boosters.
3) Lack of efficacy. The vaccines have not effectively prevented transmission of COVID-19. Given how poorly they work—the authors call this “modest and transient effectiveness”—the expected harms caused by the boosters likely outweigh any benefits to public health.
4) No recourse for vaccine-injured young adults. Forcing vaccination as a prerequisite to attend college is especially problematic because young people injured by these vaccines will likely not be able to receive compensation for these injuries.
5) Harm to society. Mandates, the authors insisted, ostracize unvaccinated young adults, excluding them from education and university employment opportunities. Coerced vaccination entails “major infringements to free choice of occupation and freedom of association,” the scientists wrote, especially when “mandates are not supported by compelling public health justification.”
The consequences of non-compliance include being unenrolled, losing internet privileges, losing access to the gym and other athletic facilities, and being kicked out of campus housing, among other things. These punitive approaches, according to the authors, have resulted in unnecessary psychosocial stress, reputation damage, loss of income, and fear of being deported, to name just a few.
22,000 to 30,000 Previously Unaffected Young Adults Must be Vaccinated to Prevent Just 1 Hospitalization
The lack of effectiveness of the vaccines is a major concern to these researchers. Based on their analysis of the public data provided to the CDC, they estimated that between 22,000 and 30,000 previously uninfected young adults would need to be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent just a single hospitalization.
However, this estimate does not take into account the protection conferred by a previous infection. So, the authors insisted, “this should be considered a conservative and optimistic assessment of benefit.”
In other words, the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 are essentially useless.
As we just past the one year anniversary of one of the top military, political and budget blunders of history. We left $84 Billion of arms that are now showing up around the world. It was blamed on the prior president, but history shows that all the plans by the previous president were ignored, yet they blamed him. We dropped everything and left. We left our respect, our weapons, our faith in the military and a lot of other things there that day.
I for one, want a tax break for this. It was unnecessary to withdraw the way it was done and was a rudderless action. It will go down with Viet Nam as our worst military actions. In both, the people left behind suffered the most by the brutal people who ruled.
I read that it’s likely that we will have to go back to Afghanistan. That area is destabilized and the 12th century barbarians are taking over again.
China has moved it to take over the area for their expansion against India. There are a lot of rare earth elements they can harvest for cheap. There are plenty of poppies for drugs. China moves a ton of Fentanyl into the US over the Mexican border. They now have an endless supply to make it with.
Here is a list of what was left. We get to fight against our own technology when we have to send troops back in.
It was a royal screw up.
-2,000 Armored Vehicles Including Humvees and MRAP’s
-75,989 Total Vehicles: FMTV, M35, Ford Rangers, Ford F350, Ford Vans, Toyota Pickups, Armored Security Vehicles etc
-45 UH-60 Blackhawk Helicopters
-50 MD530G Scout Attack Choppers
-Scan Eagle Military Drones
-30 Military Version Cessna’s
-4 C-130’s
-29 Brazilian made A-29 Super Tocano Ground Attack Aircraft
=208+ Aircraft Total!!
At least 600,000+ Small arms M16, M249 SAWs, M24 Sniper Systems, 50 Calibers, 1,394 M203 Grenade Launchers, M134 Mini Gun, 20mm Gatling Guns and Ammunition
-61,000 M203 Rounds
-20,040 Grenades
-Howitzers
-Mortars +1,000’s of Rounds
-162,000 pieces of Encrypted Military Communications Gear
To be fair, Quayle wasn’t as bad as they made him out to be. He wasn’t one of theirs so the media attacked him for reading the teleprompter on how to spell Potato. Presidents 44 and 46 need a teleprompter to talk to elementary school kids.
Carter couldn’t make a decision so he is historically rated near the bottom.
With the current president and Veep, Quayle and Carter don’t have to go down as the worst.
At least they don’t give her anything important to do now that the election is over. The one thing she was supposed to do is oversee the protection of the southern border and that worked out worse than misspelling potato.
I think everyone gets that Biden isn’t helping anyone do better other than Hunter and Congress.
Vice President Kamala Harris just spoke at the scene of the Highland Park mass shooting.
“We have to take this stuff seriously, as seriously as you are because you have been forced to take this seriously,” she said. pic.twitter.com/vpLSydpJM0
By death, I mean the first time it was allowed to be fully implemented and the world can see the destruction of deficit spending. It is how it will end when Keynes is allowed to play out without interference.
I’ve always wondered what could happen in a pure Milton Friedman or Keynes economy. It’s been more Friedman since the failure of the The New Deal, a Keynesian try and spending your way out of a depression. Of course WWII and a good economy actually did it, supporting Friedman, but it hasn’t stopped many presidents since then of trying it. Friedman’s capitalistic ideas brought more freedom and prosperity than the current philosophy
I don’t think they believe anything about Keynesian economics other than the part about government spending, because the Keynesian politicians use to to launder money back to into their pockets.
We know the New Deal (like the Green New Deal) failed and just spawned other failures like welfare, the Great Society and now Build Back Better.
At least we know how it turns out in a Keynesian model now, Build Back Broke. It gives power to the few and the government, which is not how our republic succeeds.
Everyone can see our economy being destroyed. Gas prices, food shortages, wars, inflation, border security…all there in back and white. They are socialistic policies that have a zero record of success.
The motto of the interloper now serving in the White House is “Build Back Better” – and the trillions to “build back” is an updated version of the New Deal on steroids. The Dems spend to a new level of excess which, for them, is ecstasy. In fact, a better name for their spend, spend, and spend more programs should be “Excess Ecstasy Exhilarates.” The foundation of the New Deal was found in the economic theory of John Maynard Keynes. Keynes was a British economist who developed the theory of ‘deficit spending’ – the idea that the government going into debt would jump-start the depressed economy which, then, would experience reinvigoration. There would be more employed, tax-paying citizens as well as corporate profits which would, in turn, restore the needed balance to the federal books. The deficit spending would restore a solvency that was lost due to the Great Depression.
In practice, this did not work out (unemployment was still in double digits throughout the 1930s), but because of the passage of the Wagner Act, which made it easier for workers to organize into unions, and because of the use of the radio for the well-known “Fireside Chats” – a real novelty in American politics which intensified public support for FDR – and because of residual anger towards the Republicans who had maintained power throughout the 1920s and were thus assumed to be the ones who had caused the Depression, Keynesian economics became the go-to model for economic policy in the United States for all decades since that time.
However, the Keynesian model has been weaponized under Build Back Better in a most sinister way. The present shift is to make us more amenable to the globalist fantasies gaining popularity in recent decades to ensure a transition towards world governance and a cooperative world economy (rather than a competitive one) under the cloak of “meeting needs” and “sustainability.” These two concepts are key pillars in a document written and published by the United Nations called Agenda 2030. Although the original United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 stressed the need for individual rights after WWII and promoted those rights in nearly every sentence of that document, the present document – Agenda 2030 – only refers to rights in one of the ninety-one sections: Section 19.
Instead of rights, needs are emphasized. This is consistent with the Communist Manifesto authored by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848. A key principle in that document is “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” The actual needs of people would be the uppermost goal of envisioned communist society rather than ideas like rights, freedom, responsibility, property ownership, pursuit of happiness, or even security. The new communistic premise is that if needs are met then people will automatically experience security and happiness and will not need the abstract fluff of such bourgeois, outdated, and elitist ideas as rights, freedom, or ownership. Further, the meeting of communist needs must be based on sustainability. If we run out of energy, clean air, or water at some point in the future, we would then not be able to meet peoples’ needs. Therefore, plans and actions to sustain all the materials and planetary conditions that will keep us from running out of the natural resources are “necessary” – even if that means enslavement and tyranny. ‘Sustainability’ works in tandem with the ‘meeting of needs’ as a combination that is a cornerstone for a new world governance policy.
The Build Back Better plan superficially appears to be an updated and extravagant Keynesian or New Deal-style spending program, but the endgame is not economic recovery that forever establishes federal government dominance over the states in the socio-political realm. Rather, this BBB is the connection of an enlarged federal government and authority with a depreciation or elimination of U.S. sovereignty in favor of global, communist-style governance. But as if the endgame were not sinister enough, we see this updated Keynesian expansion of expenditures is not a result of economic collapse due to a devastating Depression, as was the justification in the 1930s.
Rather, simultaneously with expanded spending, the goal of the BBB plotters is to weaken the economy and usher in economic and socio-political chaos and mayhem. The southern border hands-off policy is literally facilitating the entrance of millions of unvetted persons. By limiting or eliminating natural gas and oil production in the territorial U.S. under the guise of protecting the environment, the feds incentivize other countries to expand their production of these energy sources. That production, which still means higher energy prices here in the U.S., has an equally negative effect on the world climate as fuel production in our country. But the brooding minds behind BBB want to see inflated prices. They want to see shortages. They want to see racial unrest. They want to see upsurges in crime as new theories of law inform the release of repeat offenders and shorter sentences to destabilize society. The BBB autocrats want to see a society that increasingly identifies as LGBTQ because this radical individualism weakens the social fabric. They want to see Chinese fentanyl imported to kill our citizens who are weak-minded and susceptible to drug use.
Thus, despite its resemblance to the New Deal, the BBB’s so-called governance (properly called betrayal) is at the front end linked to global health, green initiatives, and “interdependence” as an excuse for diminishing U.S. sovereignty. Initiation of these policies was not to combat financially depressive conditions but rather designed to undermine the freedoms and economic viability of the U.S. This might be likened to prescribing chemo to a patient who did not have cancer, and then, in order to justify the perverse treatment plan, injecting the patient with cancer cells in order to justify that plan. The goal of the sinister and aberrated “plan” would not be the recovery of the patient and return to normal living, but to place the “cured” individual into custodial care rather than independent living. That is the equivalent of a United States with diminished sovereignty in a world governance system.
The rest of the world should take notice that WEF leaders want to do this everywhere. It’s just that Trudeau is an idiot and keeps stepping in it at every move.
To my friends from Canada who ragged on Trump for 4 years, good job up there, eh?
I’ll bet you wish you had your guns back now don’t you.
When I was raising a girl scout, I bought dozens of these waist killers. I brought them into work one day and offered them to my co-workers. While most declined or took one or two, Laura Knapp, from the NHD proceeded to knock down an entire sleeve as I watched in disbelief. I thought it was an imposition on my generosity, but then she was in the meme.
Things aren’t going so well for the platform of hate and envy. In the last 3 stock trading days, Meta stock has dropped nearly $100 a share, falling from $323 last Wednesday to $224.91 on Monday. They announced that they are losing people on the platform for the first time (that we have been told).
Now this from Captain Obvious:
The late October announcement from Mark Zuckerberg that Facebook was being rebranded as Meta has been met with less than stellar reactions from the public. A survey from Morning Consult indicates that the public opinion of the rebrand, the metaverse concept and Zuckerberg, himself, were largely unfavorable.
While a slight majority (55%) of the US adults surveyed have some level of favorable opinion of Facebook, fewer have a favorable opinion of the company’s rebrand name, Meta. Only one-quarter had favorable opinions of the Meta name, compared to the 4 in 10 who had a somewhat/very unfavorable opinion of the name. Millennials are most likely to express an unfavorable opinion about Meta, while Gen Z are more generous in their opinion of the name change.
The public’s opinion of Mark Zuckerberg is also far from positive. More than half (54%) of all respondents report that their opinion of Zuckerberg is somewhat/very unfavorable. This sentiment is felt most by Baby Boomers, with 62% having an unfavorable opinion, compared to just 16% with a favorable opinion.
Along with announcing the rebrand to Meta, Zuckerberg introduced the company’s concept of the metaverse — “a set of interconnected digital spaces that lets you do things you can’t do in the physical world. Importantly, it’ll be characterized by social presence, the feeling that you’re right there with another person, no matter where in the world you happen to be.” It’s safe to say the concept has fallen flat in the eyes of US adults. About 7 in 10 (68%) say they are not interested in the project. This point of view is shared across all demographic groups but articulated most by women (73%) and Baby Boomers (84%).
Turns out at least one major marketing expert agrees with what the plebeian public already knows — Mark Zuckerberg may not be able to pull off this Metaverse thing.
“If he pulls it off, it’ll be one of the most impressive feats in — not even corporate renewal — but vision around maintaining growth,” Galloway said during the podcast. “I don’t think they’re going to. I think this thing is already a giant flaming bag of shit.”
Form Factor
Part of Zuckerberg’s problem, according to Galloway, is that Meta’s Quest headset, previously known as Oculus, is still way too clunky to impress Meta’s target audience.
“The people in this universe are not impressed with the universe he envisions, and specifically the portal,” Galloway said on the podcast. “One of my predictions in November of 2021… was that the biggest failure in tech-product history might be the Oculus.”
There’s also the issue of spending. Zuckerberg sank $10 billion into the Reality Labs division, only to see company stock prices dip by more than 20 percent this week. Galloway says that with public opinion of Meta so low, there’s little hope the company can recoup its investment.
I for one don’t celebrate failure, but I don’t like those who have ruined the lives of a lot of people, selectively censored what is morally right and have bought an administration who has trashed the country in a year.
I posted recently how Mars Candy went woke. I hate woke anything. It only makes our lives worse by a few people who don’t want anyone to be happy. It’s Social Terrorism (I’m inventing that definition).
Here’s the truth. We are not equal. Some are better than others because they try harder, were born that way, are smarter, luckier or made better decisions. The worst decision is going Woke. Ask Gillette about their 9 billion dollar loss last year when going woke.
I can’t be alone in getting sick of this crap. Be whoever you want to be, just don’t shove it down our throats and try to force the rest of the world accept nonsense we know isn’t true.
Anyway, this sums it up for me and helped me decide to only buy Reece’s Piece’s. I’m sure I’ll find out that Hershey’s has done something similar, I just am choosing to ignore it until I can’t.
Even on the M&M’s promo website, the green M&M – which previously had been branded as kind of the “sexy” M&M, now identifies as a “hypewoman“:
What’s your best quality? Being a hypewoman for my friends. I think we all win when we see more women in leading roles, so I’m happy to take on the part of supportive friend when they succeed.
Tucker: M&M’s will not be satisfied until every last cartoon character is deeply unappealing and totally androgynous. Until the moment you wouldn’t want to have a drink with any one of them. That’s the goal. When you’re totally turned off, we’ve achieved equity… pic.twitter.com/rz7VtVCHWu
Popular News host Tucker Carlson made fun of the changes during a Friday segment, saying they were designed to to turn people off, which would mean “equity,” at least in the left’s eyes, had been achieved:
Well, it’s worked on me. I’ve bought M&M’s for decades, but no more. Take your woke shit and shove it where the sun don’t shine.
Recently, fascist book announced that they were copying Google (Alphabet) by rebranding to Meta.
I was taken aback as meta means death in Hebrew and I’m pretty sure Zuckerberg is Jewish. His actions and those at Facebook don’t indicate that he believes in God though, quite the opposite. It is appropriate as it’s death to your mental health to be on one of their platforms.
Censorship
There are many examples of fake book taking down posts that didn’t fit the narrative, especially during the election. Zuckerbucks donated about $400 million to swing the election the way it went. Who says you can’t buy an election? Joseph Kennedy did it in 1960 so this is nothing new.
They admit that their censorship is just someone’s opinion anyway.
The Metaverse
I’ve been around long enough to remember the farce that was Second Life. It’s where you played a sort of real life video game in a virtual world. The head of quantum computing at IBM had his department go to virtual meetings for about 2 months in that space. It was such a pain in the ass that the world gave up on it.
To me, it was like Leisure Suit Larry and the Land of the Lounge Lizards, if you are old enough to remember that funny game.
So now, they want us to believe that we’ll wear an Oculus headset and pretend we are in the Matrix. That trope has a long way to go before it really catches on.
What I Think
There is a growing trend in the Comics to head to the Metaverse. The next Dr. Strange will go there. Avengers Endgame showed how you can do it through the Quantum Realm.
That’s not what it really is though. Something is up with Facebook that needs a re-direct. That is what you do in the PR World when things aren’t going your way and you don’t want to address the issue on the table. You go ahead and change the subject and talk about something else. The MSM and politicians do it daily.
Facebook Inc. knows, in acute detail, that its platforms are riddled with flaws that cause harm, often in ways only the company fully understands. That is the central finding of a Wall Street Journal series, based on a review of internal Facebook documents, including research reports, online employee discussions and drafts of presentations to senior management.
It usually has something to do with money, so ad revenue must have been an investor issue, or the fact that Instagram was causing depression in teenage girls because of their self-image being destroyed by others.
It also could be that there are 2 groups of fake book users. The elite users who can break all the rules, and the rest of the rubes that don’t include celebtards, politicians or their favored group.
Mark Zuckerberg has said Facebook allows its users to speak on equal footing with the elites of politics, culture and journalism, and that its standards apply to everyone. In private, the company has built a system that has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules. The program, known as “cross check” or “XCheck,” was intended as a quality-control measure for high-profile accounts. Today, it shields millions of VIPs from the company’s normal enforcement, the documents show. Many abuse the privilege, posting material including harassment and incitement to violence that would typically lead to sanctions.
Banning people from the platform for not conforming to their standards. Like a lot of things, that will come back to bite you. Look who he banned and who is building an alternate social media platform now.
AR vs VR
I think there is something to be said for an Augmented Reality world first. That is helpful. I don’t think that a virtual reality world is what anything other than gamers are going to do for now.
If I see someone walking around with an Oculus headset on, I’m going to slap them an then point to someone else when they take it off just to mess with them.
This is something that is way down the road and as soon as the real AR is available, won’t be as attractive. If you want to live in a play world, you can do it via video games right now.
As usual, I distrust Facebook and their motives as should you. I dumped them as a platform. I had to go there a couple of weeks ago to find a workout schedule at my gym that wasn’t anywhere else. I saw the usual tripe there and was almost physically ill for a day. I promptly deleted the account so I wouldn’t have to see it anymore.
It’s hard to hide the truth now because of the facts. The most jabbed places are experiencing the highest Covid rates. People are getting jabbed and are dying.
Stories and links below.
Science destroys the vaccine narrative, “Likely no benefit, Just harm” – from Vlad Tepes
This is the real deal. Not circumstantial. We are so far past the point where these shots should have been stopped and many people forcing it should be on trial for very serious crimes.
Beginning at the 35 minute mark, Malone gets into the heart of the dilemma we face. He makes it crystal clear that the authorities were wrong and that there is no hope that vaccines are the answer. He makes it clear that the delta variant is going to run through the population and no amount of vaccination, masks, and lockdowns can do anything about it. The focus must be switched to treatment. There are known effective treatments, and more are under development and testing. Malone himself was cured by Ivermectin.
For the first time in history, the world’s population has been used for mass clinical testing of an experimental vaccine. The evidence is piling up. Official reporting databases show extraordinary numbers of deaths and injuries associated with the Covid vaccine. The vast majority of new cases are associated with the fully vaccinated. The fully vaccinated spread the virus as easily as unvaccinated Covid patients according to the CDC and Dr. Fauci himself. The vaccine is associated with spontaneous abortions. These are all facts now quietly acknowledged by the bungling public health bureaucracies, but still mainly kept from the people.
The latest data from the U.K. Health Security Agency, which recently replaced Public Health England, shows that Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” have an average effectiveness rate of -73 percent in people over the age of 18.
This means that the jabs are actually making injected people lose their immunity to the Chinese Virus, not gain more of it. This fact runs contrary to false narrative being spread by the government and the mainstream media that Wuhan Flu injections are “safe and effective.”
As you may recall, Pfizer openly lied about its Chinese Flu injections, falsely claiming that they provide 95 percent effectiveness against the Fauci Flu. The company did this by blatantly manipulating its clinical trial data to produce artificial results.
As explained by The Exposé, Pfizer’s calculations were “extremely misleading and only measured relative effectiveness rather than absolute effectiveness.” This allowed for a gross contortion of the data by the company…….
Equality of outcome is communism. The benefit of a degree from such a school would mean that you were the elite. Now, you don’t know if they worked hard and learned or coasted. The Harvard benefit is meaningless now.
Real Equality is equal opportunity. People will decide the real outcome no matter what Harvard says because human nature dictates that some will do better or worse than others. To not acknowledge that shows a lack of understanding of history and lack of intelligence. That is what Harvard is striving towards with this Diktat.
Save your money and go to a real school where meritocracy will give you a real education.
Harvard panelists want ‘bold societal change’ which includes ‘equality of outcomes’
Panelists at a Harvard University event on equity last Friday called for “bold societal change” to eradicate the vestiges of racism and sexism.
This includes, according to at least one participant, ensuring “equality of outcomes.”
The Truth and Transformation Conference, hosted by the Kennedy School Ash Center’s Institutional Antiracism and Accountability Project, was hosted by Harvard American Studies PhD candidate Mary McNeil, The Crimson reports.
McNeil’s dissertation asks in part “What critiques did [Black, Native, and Afro-Native peoples] proffer of [Massachusetts] as a crucial site in the development of an anti-Black, settler-colonial nation?”
Asian Americans Advancing Justice President John Yang told the panel “it is important to acknowledge that racial groups experience racism differently.” Eschewing the concept of equal treatment for everyone, Yang said “[T]hat’s not right, because the reality is, different communities have suffered in different ways.”
Yang backs efforts to combat alleged “disinformation,” saying platforms like Facebook and Twitter need to be better at it: “Let’s be clear: there is a campaign out there that is trying to distort a lot of what is happening in society […] part of it is on all of us to make sure that we are contributing to getting the right information that is out there” (emphasis added).
AAAJ purports to “advocate for an America in which all Americans can benefit equally from, and contribute to, the American dream.” Which means it lobbies for progressive initiatives du jour,like overturning former President Trump’s misnamed “Muslim ban.”
Panelist Eric Ward, director of the Western States Center, said all of society needs to “invest in transforming power structures to achieve aspirations surrounding equity.” He added that “recognizing systemic racism and sexism is key to ensuring that everyone can ‘live, love, worship, and work free from fear and bigotry.’”
Perhaps the most eye-raising statement was from panelist Halima Begum, chief executive of the Runnymede Trust, allegedly the United Kingdom’s “leading independent race equality think tank.” Begum said “non-governmental institutions, such as news platforms and corporations, are also responsible for ensuring ‘equality of outcomes.’”
I can’t lose any more respect for Harvard because I don’t have any. They just met my expectations that are already at the bottom of the barrel.
The owner of a New York City supermarket chain predicted the food prices will increase sharply in the coming months, with some increasing 10 percent in the next two months.
John Catsimatidis, the billionaire supermarket owner of Gristedes and D’Agostino Foods, warned that food giants such as Nabisco, PepsiCo, and Coca-Cola will prioritize raising prices on products.
“I see over 10 percent [price increase] in the next 60 days,” he said in an interview with Fox Business on Monday, adding that the trend will not drop “anytime soon.” Catsimatidis cited rising inflation and supply chain bottlenecks that are currently plaguing supermarkets and other retailers around the United States.
Catsimatidis then cautioned: “I see food prices going up tremendously” because food company CEOs “want to be ahead of the curve and the way they’re doing it is they’re dropping all promotions. They are dropping low-moving items.”
The brilliant John Hawkins presents the facts about this subject. It is to be the 2014 top priority from our executive branch. Readers should evaluate the facts and judge for yourself if this is good for the country or not. Park your ideology at the door (regardless of its source) and think through the argument. Your beliefs are yours, just make sure to check with history to see what information it supports
The truth is that income inequality is of minimal importance in a nation like America, where so many people already move between classes, where the poor are doing so much better than they used to, and where our poor already do so well compared to the rest of the world. “Among children from families in the bottom fifth of the income distribution, 84 percent of those who go on to get a college degree will escape the bottom fifth, and 19 percent will make it all the way to the top fifth.” During the Great Depression, more than 60% of Americans were living below the poverty line. Over the last 50 years, that number has generally ranged between 12%-15% — and even that dramatically overstates the number of poor Americans because it doesn’t take into account government assistance that’s being paid out. On top of all that, liberals get so angry when people point out that more than 80% of poor Americans have cell phones, televisions and refrigerators while “most Americans living below the official poverty line also own a motor vehicle and have more living space than the average European.” Yet, they don’t take into account the fact that almost half of the world’s population still lives on less than $2.50 a day. In other words, if you are poor, you can live better and have more opportunity to advance in America than you will anywhere else. That’s why immigrants all across the world still want to come to this country.
1) The higher the government mandated minimum wage/living wage, the more people it prices out of jobs: When you force businesses to pay people more than they can return in value with their work, companies tend to respond either by hiring better quality people, replacing the jobs with automation, moving the posts overseas or by looking for opportunities to get rid of the positions entirely. The higher the wages and benefits the government insists on, the more stagnant it makes the labor market for the people who need to build their skills the most. If your goal were to deliberately put as many young, unskilled single mothers out of work as possible, the best politically feasible way to do it would be to jack the minimum wage up into the stratosphere.
2) It emphasizes making people more comfortable, not helping them succeed: There is no shame in taking any honest job, but you’re not supposed to make a living pressing the button that drops the fries into the grease at McDonald’s. If you work long enough at an entry-level job to worry about raising the minimum wage, you’re failing your family, your society and yourself. Instead of encouraging minimum skill workers to demand that the government force businesses to give them more money than they’re currently worth, we should be encouraging people to build their skills and move up, move on or start their own business. Want poor people to be eligible for more education or training? Want to give them micro-loans? Want to make it easier for them to create small businesses? Those are policies that make poor Americans more valuable. That’s good for them and the country. On the other hand, trying to redistribute income ultimately brings everyone down, especially the poor Americans who lose their drive after becoming dependent on it.
3) The more government becomes involved, the more it stagnates the economy: As John F. Kennedy said, “A rising tide lifts all boats.” The stronger the economy is, the more jobs it creates and the more everyone — poor, middle-class, or rich — benefits. How do you make the economy stronger? You keep the government small, taxes low, and regulations light. That’s a proven formula that has worked time and time again. On the other hand, if you want to constipate the economy, you make the government bigger, increase taxes and pour on the regulations. How did that latter set of “solutions” work out for Detroit?
4) The more the government focuses on income inequality, the harder it is to get ahead: As Thomas Sowell likes to say, “There are no solutions; there are only trade-offs.” You can see this very clearly with Obamacare, where a few people are getting subsidized care, while tens of millions more are losing their health care and paying considerably more to make up for it. It works the same way with income inequality. Want to make Wal-Mart pay all its employees twice as much? Then that means all the poor Americans who shop at Wal-Mart will have to spend more of their limited incomes to pay for it. Want to give more tax dollars to the poor? Then the rich and middle class will have to pay more in taxes. So, the moment that poor American is making enough money to get into the middle class, he’s hit with a bigger tax bill that makes it harder for him to ever get ahead. In other words, the more resources we put into “helping” the poor, the harder we ultimately make it for those very same people to ever permanently escape poverty and live the American Dream.
5) It ignores the real causes of poverty: The real causes of lasting poverty in America are not greed, the rich, racism, America being “unfair,” or any of the other excuses that you hear so often. Instead, the harsh truth that so many people don’t want to hear is that if you stay poor in America, it’s usually because you made bad life choices. Via Walter Williams, here’s what you have to do in order to avoid poverty in America.
“Complete high school; get a job, any kind of a job; get married before having children; and be a law-abiding citizen. Among both black and white Americans so described, the poverty rate is in the single digits.”
Instead of lying to destitute Americans and telling them that the rich became wealthy by stealing the money that the poor never had in the first place, why not tell people the truth? Yes, it might make some poor Americans feel bad, but do you think welfare, food stamps, and living in a housing project do wonders for people’s moods?
Delusions of Adequacy 