I found this depressingly on-the-nose.
1. Yes it is.
For instance this from AP, In a sharply divided country, here's something many Americans agree on: It's hard to know what's a true and honest fact.
Democrats are more likely to say they rely on scientists and academics, while Republicans are more likely to trust what they hear from President Donald Trump.
"When I hear him on Fox News -- that's where I get all my information," said Al Corra, a 48-year-old Republican from Midland, Texas. Trump, he said, is the easiest way to cut through an otherwise confusing information environment....
More Democrats than Republicans say they consider something to be factual if it's been verified by scientists -- 72% versus 40% -- as well as academics -- 57% versus 30%.
Thirty percent or so of the population is all it takes to ruin things. They got that. You need a supermajority to not fuck things up in the face of a small group determined to shit on the floor.
Fox must have some champion editors to make Trump the least confusing source in the information environment.
Elsewhere in the annals of douchebags of infinite derpitude we have the tragic boredom of governance:
@NBCNews: Analysis: The first two witnesses called Wednesday testified to President Trump's scheme, but lacked the pizzazz necessary to capture public attention.
@jeffmason1: (Reuters) Consequential, but dull: Trump impeachment hearings begin without a bang
Unlike the best reality TV shows - not to mention the Trump presidency itself - fireworks and explosive moments were scarce, however.
Very non-wow. So boredom.
Just back home from being on a vacation and may be a bit grumpy.
4: It's true Trump contradicts himself a lot, but a lot of his supporters also believe that every word of the Bible is the literal Truth, so they have a lot of practice handling that kind of paradox.
Teo is literally the only American ever to have read the entire Bible and he's a Democrat.
4. You're confused. Trump is always consistent about the important question, "whose fault?"
5: This stuff is soooo depressing. Literally, "Nothing to see here, move along" from our respectable purveyors of news.
Meanwhile, Roger Stone puts the truth itself on trial.
9 but the answer is always "anyone but me". It's a lot like listening to a 2 year old sometimes.
10: Not actually what they're saying.
8: Not true. David Plotz, formerly of Slate, wrote a book about reading the entire Bible. Presumably, he is also a Democrat.
But, you only have to read the first few chapters of Genesis to get caught up in contradictions.
14: I well bet money that effectively no Trump voters have read even that much.
Unless Baptists actually read between sermons.
15: I don't know. There's so many "Bible-study groups". At least a few of the participants have to read a few pages now and then. Right?
Last time I was hiking, there was a Bubble study group signed in the register two days ahead of me. There was also an entire tree put in a fire pit.
The middle part was burned and the rest hanging out a dozen feet either side.
18: That's quite a spellcheck error there.
I think it was assholes playing with fire, unconcerned about the risk of spreading flames.
Also:
Stupid phone.
To be fair, it's a lot easier to maintain the inerrancy of the Bible if you haven't read it.
I think most "Bible study" groups just read small, carefully selected passages.
UPETGI is really the expert around here on conservative American Protestant attitudes toward the Bible, though. I'm sure he'll be along sooner or later to chime in.
And the ones that don't are full of Democrats.
Trump himself has almost certainly never read a word of the Bible, but I think he'd like Nehemiah.
Bevin conceded, saying it isn't fair to ask the legislature to overturn the voters.
This may have entertainment value if no more.
30 is only fair, considering he's British and died 60 years ago.
Bevin conceded, saying it isn't fair to ask the legislature to overturn the voters.
Last time they tried it it resulted in massive riots and at least one assassination, so that's probably for the best.
So anyway, what, a Republican lost? The majority won? Yay?
Where the fuck is this Kentucky place anyway? I thought it was just a junk-food brand.
A Republican who very deliberately and explicitly tied himself to Trump lost the governor's race by 5,000 votes.
That's not a lot. Do better, Kentucky. If you're an actual place, which I doubt.
My great, great grandfather lived there. He worked for the Union army and was rewarded with land in Nebraska. So, he must not have tried very hard.
On the other hand, it was some of the best land in Nebraska.
All the stills in the world, you still need grain.
There deed is interesting because title starts with Napoleon. I guess the Spanish don't count any more than the Pawnee.
I know a number of Christians who have read the whole Bible. (OK, I'm taking their word for it, but they demonstrated impressive mastery.) I don;t think it is that uncommon among serious "literate" Christians.
serious "literate" Christians Trump voters
You see my skepticism.
When I was a little one I read the entirety of a comic book adaptation of the Bible. I vaguely recall feeling like it phoned in the Epistles, while totally playing up the historical books of the Hebrew Bible. Which, like, fair enough. Samson's a lot more fun than Paul slut-shaming or whatever.
I've thought about giving it a try sometime. I've been outside religion for so long that a refresher for cultural context and reminders of what other people believe would be useful, and I probably have some long held misconceptions that should be corrected.
As long as we're talking Abrahamic holy texts, I've also been meaning to read the Koran at some point. Can anyone suggest a good annotated English edition? My recollection last time I tried (when, admittedly, I was a cheap college student using Project Gutenberg's very old translation) was that the organization was not friendly to outsiders.
Arranged by length of surah, IIRC. Not friendly to anyone.
But, 2nd 46. Also the same for Ibn Battuta, while we're about it.
Read Moby Dick instead.
And listen to the complete recorded works of Peter Rowan. From the Wedding at Cana to the Heart Sutra.
Men and dogs jump to the sound of authority, they snap to attention at the sound of superiority
Is the violin in the third link some kind of heresy? Is it our destiny?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc1UhRUTKsU
The video could use a lot of work, but those voices are great.
If you ever feel sorrow For the deeds you have done With no hope for tomorrow In the setting of the sun And the ocean is howling For the things that might have been And that last good morning sunrise Will be the brightest you've ever seen
Have read Moby-Dick. An annotated English edition would not hurt though.
I'm not having very good luck with fiction lately.
This one is officially a Great American Novel, so you'll be good.
Moby-Dick is one of those books that I think I should read, but almost certainly never will. Because a biblically-inflected narrative of the adventures of a whaler just doesn't interest me enough to make the effort, I guess.
I will almost certainly never read Joyce's Ulysses, either. Oh, I've read a few excerpts, of course: who hasn't? But I consider his demands upon the reader to be arrogant and excessive ("The demand that I make of my reader is that he should devote his whole life to reading my works"), and anyway, I'm just too damn lazy.
(Have read Dubliners from first page to last, but that's different: that's reading James Joyce as storyteller, before he went all in with stream-of-consciousness, and stuff).
I'm sure it will surprise no one that I have also read Moby-Dick. It's not very fiction-y as fiction goes.
38 It's where my beloved bourbon comes from.
45.last If you're looking for an annotated version try The Study Quran, I went to grad school with one of the lead of the project and it's gotten good reviews though I've not looked at it. I prefer A.J. Arberry's The Koran Interpreted for capturing a good sense of the beauty of the Arabic though some consider it dated.
Oh hey, I'm also thinking of reading the Qur'an somewhere down the line so thanks for the recommendations, Barry. I'm not too concerned about a modern or annotated version so it sounds like the Arberry might be the best option for me. (For the Bible and Apocrypha I'm using the King James Version.)
51. I was thinking of a link for that, what with praying at the Alamo and all, but figured I'd tried enough patience with the others.
56: It's surprisingly funny, if that's any encouragement.
64 to 57, rather. And 53, I suppose.
What does "surprisingly funny" mean for a book where everybody dies except the one guy?
They all die in Dark Star. It's still pretty funny.
But I consider his demands upon the reader to be arrogant and excessive
Yeah, that's where I wound up, but only after having more or less read the whole book. Along with that, it didn't cohere for me as a single unified work - it was more like a series of literary experiments on the theme of a single day in the life of a few people in Dublin. It did have some great parts though.
Just about everyone dies in Dr. Strangelove and it's pretty funny.
I've never seen Strangelove either.
73: So, here's the plan:
1) Watch Dr Strangelove
2) Read Moby Dick
3) Profit!
I sold out. I don't need to read anything but analysis plans to profit. I'm probably going to waste ten minutes looking for something new on Netflix before continuing to rewatch Hinterland.
Ha, was going to cite Strangelove as well, but I don't know if it's canon whether the War Room people actually die.
76 : presumably most of them make it into the Mineshaft, no?
I think the guy riding the bomb down probably died.
76: I was assuming they lived - that's why I said "just about everyone". I guess that's a fairly high proportion of the characters in the movie, but a very very small percentage of the humans on Earth.
78: No, he survived and became a superhero.
It is best not to bother with Moby-Dick, though. It is a bad book, overwritten in the way that so much period literature from the mid 19th century is.
People had too much free time back then.
76 : presumably most of them make it into the Mineshaft, no
But how? There's not enough time, surely.
And the Mineshaft hasn't been set up yet, I thought. It's just a plan.
47 There's a new Ibn Battuta translation but more later when I'm no so drunk. Also I've a favorite Ibn Battuta mistranlation story that I'm not sure I've relayed here, but again,. when I'm not so drunk.
83: the Doomsday Device doesn't blow the whole world up instantly, it just blows up a bit of the Zokov Islands and produces a load of fallout. It would take time for the fallout to reach the US ; quite possibly enough time to get the mjneshafts stocked up.
I mean, all the people in the War Room seem to think it's feasible, and they should know.
One of the points of the movie being how wise the people in the war room are.
90: According to 73, you've never seen this movie. We may need to hold hearings to investigate this.
92: Aha! So you're admitting that 90 is hearsay.
88: I don't remember if it's ever spelled out, but I always thought that the Doomsday Device started a chain reaction which would eventually result in nuclear explosions all over the earth.
For fuck's sake, Trump is visiting the UK again?? Why? Why now?
Is he... on the run? There's a spare room at the Ecuadorian embassy if he needs it.
95: no, it's a very big fusion bomb jacketed in Cobalt Thorium G, which will produce a Doomsday Shroud of fallout encircling the earth for 93 years.
Peter Sellers plays three roles, which makes him a better actor than Patty Duke, but a worse one than Mike Meyers.
Isn't the end of the movie lots of mushroom clouds, though? That's how I remember it, although it's been ages. So, the Doomsday Shroud, but many other bombs going off as well, I'd thought.
96: Two days before the election? Does he think Johnson wants his help?
Oops. "A two-day visit[;] ahead of the election."
100: Yes, that's what I remember, and must be the source for the misunderstanding in 95.
I'm so glad we got that sorted out. I don't feel the need to get round to watching the movie now. Also, Moby-Dick is indeed absurdly overwritten but totally worth reading anyway. Also, has a chapter-length cum joke.
Moby Dick is good, but it... uh... could have used some editing. Only the beginning is funny, though.
Untrue! The cum joke is in the Indian Ocean somewhere.
Final bit of Strangelove trivia: in the film, the Soviets are the first to use nuclear weapons. The missile fired at the B-52 'Leper Colony' is a nuclear-tipped SAM.
Ignoring the Doomsday Device (which, after all, they didn't tell anyone about), there's the "conventional" nuclear arsenal of both sides going off.
Doesn't China just make up a number anyway?
Beijing gathers together all the made-up numbers from lower levels of government, subtracts to what it thinks the real number is, then adds a number it made up itself.
I don't you're joking, but seriously, no. In the PRC almost everyone collecting and analyzing stats, and many of the people supplying the raw data, are Party members whose promotions depend strongly on hitting growth targets. GOSPLAN with Chinese characteristics.
So, "smallest increase" is almost certainly a substantial decline?
IDK. Im/ex sectors where we have independent stats have shown major slowdowns, but IDR if actual contraction or just (much) slower growth.
Oh, fixed assets? Some of that would show up in reduced imports, but those presumably would be lagging indicators. But they include the indicators in 116, so yeah maybe. Basically I'm just handwaving here though, so someone with knowledge should talk.
Who wants to go out on Saturday and collect newsprint for the War Effort?
Eurasia
Eastasia
Eurasia
Eastasia
Eurasia
OCEANIA: HANDS OFF EURASIA!
We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when.
Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in Dallas with all that stuff!
"Have you ever seen Dallas from a B-52 at night?"
The cum joke is really long, and not funny. I heard better cum jokes in middle school. Do not read Moby Dick to fill your cum joke needs.
I can't believe I share a language and substantial cultural background with people who think Moby-Dick is overwritten.
The cum joke is not really a joke. I mean yes, the word "sperm" is funny, but that's not all it's doing.
During a summer with only a few English books in France, I read an abridged Moby Dick. I probably had the patience to read the whole thing then. Honestly, the thing that stuck with me was the chowder for breakfast.
"Chowder for breakfast" in Moby Dick is like the "banana breakfast" in Gravity's Rainbow: code for "I didn't finish it, or if I did I don't remember it."
126 Especially in comparison to the fucking Bible, for Christ's sake.
Maybe I'll read an abridged version. I read an abridged "Tale of Two Cities" and really liked it despite never being able to read Dickens in the original form.
I just don't have the kind of free time that Roger Stone is going to have.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUmHlTws8zY
Just like there's always a Trump tweet, there's always a Rowan song.
I've probably linked this one before: https://archive.org/details/sci1999-04-27.shnf/sci99-04-27d2/sci99-04-27d2t04.shn
This is from the same concert: https://archive.org/details/sci1999-04-27.shnf/sci99-04-27d2/sci99-04-27d2t02.shn if you folks are in the mood for some of that reggaebilly.
128:
Come; let us squeeze hands all round; nay, let us all squeeze ourselves into each other; let us squeeze ourselves universally into the very milk and sperm of kindness.
Yes, it's a joke about masturbation and homoeroticism on ships, but precisely because it goes on so long (and employs rhetoric that some find overwritten) at some point it stops being such a joke and turns into an actual evocation of New Testament love and fellowship, a rare respite from the generally grim ambiance of Old Testament vengeance.
In conclusion, everybody STFU and read Moby-Dick. Also, has somebody recut it entirely as a play?
It has to be over-written. The plot summary on Wikipedia is longer than the one for Infinite Jests.
I feel for some reason you in particular bear a certain obligation.
Because of my past killing whales.
Anyway, the former commenter who suggested the pseud got all threatening and banned.
No. Just remembering where my pseud came from brought it to mind.
She didn't get banned for anything that had to do with me either.
Hmph. We'll see in the grand jury testimony.
I'm not reading a novel, but if I got angry at every time somebody asked me to read something that there was no way I was going to read it, I'd have an unhappy life.
Anyway, isn't this the level of play we expect from a winning campaign: https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1195777715544166401
file 144 under things I missed I guess.
147: I've been feeling better and better about Warren.
So, is Trump having a health issue or did he get a Fox News commentator too far up his butt to get out without medical assistance? Sean Hannity is the base, but not a flared base.
The spokespeople are saying so much about how healthy he is, but it's really not as convincing as swimming across the Yangtze.
I've wondered if he was going to hate himself to death.
I had a personal project to read the Bible around the time I was in college or maybe just after I graduated. I think I got as far as Chronicles, definitely read to Samuel and Kings.
My interest came out of having taken some classes in medieval and early modern European history, and I spent a lot of time looking at editions and translations, ultimately settling on a Douay-Reims (Challoner Revision). I may have finished the whole thing if I'd just read the KJV lying around at home instead of doing textual research.
I don't you're joking, but seriously, no.
I won't, but I could name several countries I have strong suspicions/third hand knowledge about with respect to maintaining dubious GDP figures.
Sean Hannity is the base, but not a flared base.
I laughed.
155: First world countries? OECD members? EU members? Established democracies? To be clear, I don't doubt for a second lots of countries cook the books, but I read the comment I responded to as implying they're all equally bad, and specifically that the PRC isn't abnormal among major economies. I think both those claims are false.
First world countries? OECD members? EU members? Established democracies?
No, not those.
Why did Trump put 'cash' in quotation marks when he tweeted about how he's going to help farmers?
Was it a Trump tweet or a staffer tweet?
I think he fired all the staffers who weren't fucked up anyway.