Category Archives: culture

Facebook Employees and Virtue-Signaling

Posted on by
Reply

Here are a couple of examples, from a batch of leaked Facebook internal emails.

Chief Technology Officer Mike Schroepfer asked employees to “hang in there” as the company figured out its response. “We have been ‘hanging in there’ for years,” one person replied. “We must demand more action from our leaders. At this point, faith alone is not sufficient.” [Emphasis added]

And

“All due respect, but haven’t we had enough time to figure out how to manage discourse without enabling violence?” another staffer responded. “We’ve been fueling this fire for a long time and we shouldn’t be surprised it’s now out of control.”

And

“I’m tired of platitudes; I want action items,” another staffer wrote.

And

[Y]et another staffer wrote[,] “History will not judge us kindly.”

And yet, none of these Precious Ones, along with so many of their cronies, cared enough about these failures and their claimed inability to do anything about them to resign rather than continue to go along with them.

All of these Precious Ones, along with so many of their cronies, plainly care more about their paychecks than they do about their integrity or their morality.

As the New York Post put it in a related piece summarizing The Atlantic article,

Mark Zuckerberg’s obsession with growth has overridden ethical concerns and allowed hate speech and incitements to violence to spread unchecked….

That’s Facebook, from top to bottom, for all the…whining: management’s demand for growth above ethics and employees’ demand for paychecks above ethics.

Lies of Progressive-Democrats—More

Posted on by
Reply

Senator Tom Carper (D, DE) is on the hot seat (pun intended) this time. Despite current rising inflation and resulting higher prices for everything energy-related (like transportation fuel, home and office heating and cooling, food), he’s demanding continued and increased Federal spending, in particular, the Progressive-Democrats’ spend-a-thon reconciliation bill—inflation be damned. Because climate.

Our planet is on fire….

On fire. If we’re on fire today, what was the state of our planet in past ages when it was so much warmer than it is today, and life was lush?

If we’re on fire today, what was the state of our planet in past ages when atmospheric CO2 was so much higher than it is today, and life was lush?

Does it matter to Carper that those prior ages don’t even correlate with each other? Apparently not—just spend the damn money.

Does it matter to Carper that today, 11,000+ years after the end of the last Ice Age, we’re still cooler than Earth’s geologic warming trend line? Apparently not—just spend the damn money.

Does it matter to Carper that the mid-Holocene period of 7,000 to 5,000 years ago and beginning some 4,000 years after that Ice Age ended—a period which some might conclude was pre-industrial—was warmer than it is today?

Never mind that Carper surely knows these data full well; his intern briefed him on these things when his intern did the research for Carper.

Just spend the damn money.

“Take the American People for Fools”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what Congressman Jodey Arrington (R, TX) says the Biden-Harris administration and their Progressive-Democratic Party syndicate are doing to us average Americans with their claims that their $3.5 trillion reconciliation package won’t cost us anything.

It’s actually more like $5 trillion, Maria, and their gamesmanship and their sleight of hand will be to try to truncate the duration of these policies. But no matter how short the duration the policies are, they will be extended, they will be made permanent, and they will be expanded like every other mandatory spending and entitlement program that has ever showed up on the balance sheet of our government.

But it’s not only Biden-Harris and their syndicate who are taking us for fools.

They will be extended. They will be extended only because politicians—Republicans and alleged Conservatives, as well as Progressive-Democrats—will actively vote to extend them, and Presidents—Republican and alleged Conservative, as well as Progressive-Democrat—will sign those extensions into law.

Certainly, it’s hard to cancel, or to expire, such policies. Certainly, it’s hard to stop trading welfare payments—however unneeded they are in truth, however damaging to our free market economy, and so to our individual liberties and responsibilities, they might be. It only gets harder, though, the longer such unneeded programs are allowed to exist.

Those who vote for extension, permanence, expansion while proclaiming the damages such programs do are choosing their own, their personal, political fortunes over what they know to be their duty to their constituents and to our nation.

It’s often hard to do one’s duty. Hard, though, means possible. And duty is a necessity, not a nice to have.

Those who, like Arrington, claim to be against such programs yet keep extending them are the ones who take us for the biggest fools. Just like they do with every other mandatory spending and entitlement program that has ever showed up.

Zeroing In

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what the Biden-Harris administration claims is all it wants to do with its “new and improved” personal bank account monitoring scheme.

…banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions would be required to report annually on accounts with deposits and withdrawals worth more than $10,000….

Here’s Biden-Harris’ Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen:

Today’s new proposal reflects the administration’s strong belief that we should zero in on those at the top of the income scale who don’t pay the taxes they owe, while protecting American workers by setting the bank account threshold at $10,000 and providing an exemption for wage earners like teachers and firefighters

Because some American workers are more equal than others of us, and so more deserving of protection from this government spying.

On top of that is the Biden-Harris/Yellen disingenuousness and that of their Progressive-Democratic Party syndicate that this is solely about tracking down those Evil Rich Tax Dodgers. Even at $10,000, though, those Evil Ones would need hundreds, if not thousands, of bank accounts to get down to sizes even approaching that $10k threshold. No, this move remains centered on the prurient interest those peopling our government have in the private doings of us common citizens.

After all, rather than spying on those of us average Americans of whom this administration disapproves (remember how narrow the “exemption” really is), the government could simply audit those Evil Rich individuals. No peeking in windows necessary that way.

Besides, I have it on good authority that the men and women in our government already know what income has gone unreported and how much tax is owed. From that, those worthies also already know where that missing income is and who owes it. If anyone.

An EU Attack on National Sovereignty

Posted on by
Reply

Poland’s Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, is objecting to the European Union’s claims to overriding authority over its independent constituent nations, Poland in particular. In an open letter to the EU’s parliament, then in debate during the next parliament session, he said

…EU mission creep…would lead to a “centrally managed organism, governed by institutions deprived of democratic control.”

And then,

EU competencies have clear boundaries, we must not remain silent when those boundaries are breached. So we are saying yes to European universalism, but we say no to European centralism.”

Which argument for the sovereignty of the Union’s constituent nations was answered dismissively by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen:

Your arguments are not getting better. You’re just escaping the debate[.]

She then laid out three options by which the EU would seek to compel Poland’s acceptance of EU suzerainty:

  • first: a so-called infringement, where the European Commission legally challenges the Polish court’s judgment, which could lead to fines
  • second: a conditionality mechanism and other financial tools whereby EU funds would be withheld from Poland
  • third: application of Article 7 of the EU’s treaties. Under this, rights of member states—including the right to vote on EU decisions—can be suspended because they have breached core values of the bloc

Despite this,

Poland’s ruling nationalist Law and Justice party says it has no plans for a “Polexit[.]”

Maybe the party and the citizens should begin thinking about it.