Alright, a thread of some of the pieces I wrote this year that I think turned out ok:
More from Parker Molloy
why is everything so weird
This is almost fitting because I used to make fake "In Memoriam" videos for whenever a Trump official left the administration back in 2017 set to this song until they all got pulled because of copyright complaints. haha
Beat it
Now playing: Tiny Dancer
This is actually just the Trump campaign playlist he's used at rallies since his 2016 campaign, if you can believe it
This is almost fitting because I used to make fake "In Memoriam" videos for whenever a Trump official left the administration back in 2017 set to this song until they all got pulled because of copyright complaints. haha
Beat it
Now playing: Tiny Dancer
This is actually just the Trump campaign playlist he's used at rallies since his 2016 campaign, if you can believe it
Then they played the theme from "Titanic." Now it's "Funeral for a Friend" by Elton John. Whoever is in charge of the music is being either quite dumb or very subversive. https://t.co/bmF3osSyph
— David Corn (@DavidCornDC) January 6, 2021
Anyone who is legally eligible to cast a ballot in an election should be allowed to do so in whatever way is most convenient for them. If that's in-person on election day, great; by mail, great; in-person in the weeks leading up to an election, great.
That is the only acceptable way for a democratic republic to function. Voting should be easy and it should be encouraged. There should be:
- Automatic voter registration.
- No excuses needed to vote absentee.
This is not controversial.
It's telling how people defend more restrictive voting methods. Look at this ridiculous quote from Pete Hegseth about how everyone being able to easily cast a ballot somehow stripping people of the "recourse" of the ballot box.
https://t.co/4AcTPT2HfD
They know there's not widespread fraud. It's not about "fraud." It never was.
They just want to put as many obstacles in the way as humanly possible, to make it more difficult for people to vote.
"We could've voted in person. I can go to Walmart. I can go to a store, I can go to a restaurant, I can go to sports games in some places. You tell me we couldn't have voted? I just don't buy it."
No one stopped you from voting in person, Pete!
That is the only acceptable way for a democratic republic to function. Voting should be easy and it should be encouraged. There should be:
- Automatic voter registration.
- No excuses needed to vote absentee.
This is not controversial.
It's telling how people defend more restrictive voting methods. Look at this ridiculous quote from Pete Hegseth about how everyone being able to easily cast a ballot somehow stripping people of the "recourse" of the ballot box.
https://t.co/4AcTPT2HfD
They know there's not widespread fraud. It's not about "fraud." It never was.
They just want to put as many obstacles in the way as humanly possible, to make it more difficult for people to vote.
"We could've voted in person. I can go to Walmart. I can go to a store, I can go to a restaurant, I can go to sports games in some places. You tell me we couldn't have voted? I just don't buy it."
No one stopped you from voting in person, Pete!
If you're curious what Trump's defense will look like, all you have to do is turn on Fox News. My latest at @mmfa
The tl;dr is that for years right-wing media have been excusing Trump's violent rhetoric by going, "Yes, but THE DEMOCRATS..." and then bending themselves into knots to pretend that Dems were calling for violence when they very, very clearly weren't.
And in fact, this predates Trump.
In 2008, Obama was talking about not backing down in the face of an ugly campaign. He said "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."
https://t.co/i5YaQJsKop
That quote was from the movie The Untouchables. And there's no way anybody reading that quote in good faith could conclude that he was talking about actual guns and knives. But it became a big talking point on the
In 2018, Obama-era Attorney General Eric Holder was speaking to a group of Georgia Democrats about GOP voter suppression. He riffed on Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go high" line from the 2016 DNC.
The tl;dr is that for years right-wing media have been excusing Trump's violent rhetoric by going, "Yes, but THE DEMOCRATS..." and then bending themselves into knots to pretend that Dems were calling for violence when they very, very clearly weren't.
And in fact, this predates Trump.
In 2008, Obama was talking about not backing down in the face of an ugly campaign. He said "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."
https://t.co/i5YaQJsKop
That quote was from the movie The Untouchables. And there's no way anybody reading that quote in good faith could conclude that he was talking about actual guns and knives. But it became a big talking point on the
In 2018, Obama-era Attorney General Eric Holder was speaking to a group of Georgia Democrats about GOP voter suppression. He riffed on Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go high" line from the 2016 DNC.
This is what pisses me off about the constant bad faith victimhood crap people on the right do:
1. They wildly misrepresent something innocuous (no, Pelosi did not “ban” anything).
2. They come up with a “gotcha” example of hypocrisy... that relies on their misrepresentation.
This same exact nonsense gets trotted out constantly. “Oh, so now we’re not allowed to call ourselves husbands or mothers or uncles or aunts or men or women?! Outrage!” But no one at all is doing that, nor have they ever been doing that.
Yet the right loses its shit over this every few months. A lot of the time it’ll be something like... a lawmaker will introduce a bill that would tweak applications for marriage licenses to say “spouse 1” and “spouse 2” instead of just “husband/wife” because the status quo ...
... will have been creating actual legal issues for gay couples who then have to put something false on legal documents designating one of them as “wife.”
It’ll be something like that, just meant to fix an issue that has no material impact on 99% of people.
And the right, like clockwork, will lose their minds over it as though anyone is trying to “ban” the concept of someone being a husband or a wife or a man or a woman or whatever.
From a few years back, here’s Bill O’Reilly doing that
1. They wildly misrepresent something innocuous (no, Pelosi did not “ban” anything).
2. They come up with a “gotcha” example of hypocrisy... that relies on their misrepresentation.
Shot/Chaser pic.twitter.com/NwAZg7TTrL
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) January 2, 2021
This same exact nonsense gets trotted out constantly. “Oh, so now we’re not allowed to call ourselves husbands or mothers or uncles or aunts or men or women?! Outrage!” But no one at all is doing that, nor have they ever been doing that.
Yet the right loses its shit over this every few months. A lot of the time it’ll be something like... a lawmaker will introduce a bill that would tweak applications for marriage licenses to say “spouse 1” and “spouse 2” instead of just “husband/wife” because the status quo ...
... will have been creating actual legal issues for gay couples who then have to put something false on legal documents designating one of them as “wife.”
It’ll be something like that, just meant to fix an issue that has no material impact on 99% of people.
And the right, like clockwork, will lose their minds over it as though anyone is trying to “ban” the concept of someone being a husband or a wife or a man or a woman or whatever.
From a few years back, here’s Bill O’Reilly doing that
More from Politics
Here we go. Tag 4 des Impeachments. Trumps Verteidigung.
Es wird argumentiert, dass Trump nur habe sicherstellen wollen, dass die Wahl fair abgelaufen sei. Die Verteidigung zeigt Clips einzelner Demokraten, die der Zertifizierung von Trumps Stimmen 2016 widersprechen. (Dass es 2016 keinen von Obama gesandten Mob aufs Kapitol gab?Egal!)
Die intellektuelle Unehrlichkeit ist so unfassbar, ich weiß kaum, wo ich hier überhaupt anfangen soll; so viele fucking Strohmänner auf einmal.
Die Verteidigung spielt random Clips, in denen Demokraten “fight” sagen, fast zehn Minuten lang. Weil Trump 20mal am 6. Januar “fight” gesagt hat. Dies ist kein Witz. Komisch, dass sonst die Folge nie war, dass ein Mob das Kapitol gestürmt hat und Pence hängen wollte
“Dieser Fall geht um politischen Hass” Ich mein, ja. “Die House Managers hassen Donald Trump.”
So close.
Michael van der Veen begins Trump's defense: "The article of impeachment now before the Senate is an unjust and blatantly unconstitutional act of political vengeance" pic.twitter.com/xRaZHEPIaC
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 12, 2021
Es wird argumentiert, dass Trump nur habe sicherstellen wollen, dass die Wahl fair abgelaufen sei. Die Verteidigung zeigt Clips einzelner Demokraten, die der Zertifizierung von Trumps Stimmen 2016 widersprechen. (Dass es 2016 keinen von Obama gesandten Mob aufs Kapitol gab?Egal!)
Die intellektuelle Unehrlichkeit ist so unfassbar, ich weiß kaum, wo ich hier überhaupt anfangen soll; so viele fucking Strohmänner auf einmal.
Die Verteidigung spielt random Clips, in denen Demokraten “fight” sagen, fast zehn Minuten lang. Weil Trump 20mal am 6. Januar “fight” gesagt hat. Dies ist kein Witz. Komisch, dass sonst die Folge nie war, dass ein Mob das Kapitol gestürmt hat und Pence hängen wollte
WATCH: Trump's defense plays nearly 10 minutes of clips showing Democrats using the word "fight," to defend Trump using the word "fight" about 20 times in his speech to supporters before the Capitol riot began https://t.co/YUg7sgxuDX pic.twitter.com/3eMNp7E2S2
— CBS News (@CBSNews) February 12, 2021
“Dieser Fall geht um politischen Hass” Ich mein, ja. “Die House Managers hassen Donald Trump.”
So close.
You May Also Like
#24hrstartup recap and analysis
What a weekend celebrating makers looks like.
A thread
👇Read on
Let's start with a crazy view of what @ProductHunt looked like on Sunday
Download image and upload
A top 7 with:
https://t.co/6gBjO6jXtB @Booligoosh
https://t.co/fwfKbQha57 @stephsmithio
https://t.co/LsSRNV9Jrf @anthilemoon
https://t.co/Fts7T8Un5M @J_Tabansi
Spotify Ctrl @shahroozme
https://t.co/37EoJAXEeG @kossnocorp
https://t.co/fMawYGlnro
If you want some top picks, see @deadcoder0904's thread,
We were going to have a go at doing this, but he nailed it.
It also comes with voting links 🖐so go do your
Over the following days the 24hr startup crew had more than their fair share of launches
Lots of variety: web, bots, extensions and even native apps
eg. @jordibruin with
What a weekend celebrating makers looks like.
A thread
👇Read on
Let's start with a crazy view of what @ProductHunt looked like on Sunday
Download image and upload
A top 7 with:
https://t.co/6gBjO6jXtB @Booligoosh
https://t.co/fwfKbQha57 @stephsmithio
https://t.co/LsSRNV9Jrf @anthilemoon
https://t.co/Fts7T8Un5M @J_Tabansi
Spotify Ctrl @shahroozme
https://t.co/37EoJAXEeG @kossnocorp
https://t.co/fMawYGlnro
If you want some top picks, see @deadcoder0904's thread,
We were going to have a go at doing this, but he nailed it.
It also comes with voting links 🖐so go do your
#24hrsstartup was an amazing event
— Akshay Kadam(A2K) \U0001f47b (@deadcoder0904) November 19, 2018
I never went to a hackathon but this just felt like one even though I was just watching \U0001f440
Everyone did great but there were a few startups that I personally loved \U0001f496
Some of my favorites are in the thread below\U0001f447
Over the following days the 24hr startup crew had more than their fair share of launches
Lots of variety: web, bots, extensions and even native apps
eg. @jordibruin with
\U0001f3a8\U0001f3c3\u200d\u2640\ufe0f DrawRun just launched on Product Hunt! Idea to App Store to Product Hunt in 68 hours!\u2070\u2070https://t.co/mxnLZ8FRSu
— Jordi Bruin (@jordibruin) November 20, 2018
Thanks for the motivation @thepatwalls @arminulrich @_feloidea
IMPORTANCE, ADVANTAGES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF BHAGWAT PURAN
It was Ved Vyas who edited the eighteen thousand shlokas of Bhagwat. This book destroys all your sins. It has twelve parts which are like kalpvraksh.
In the first skandh, the importance of Vedvyas
and characters of Pandavas are described by the dialogues between Suutji and Shaunakji. Then there is the story of Parikshit.
Next there is a Brahm Narad dialogue describing the avtaar of Bhagwan. Then the characteristics of Puraan are mentioned.
It also discusses the evolution of universe.( https://t.co/2aK1AZSC79 )
Next is the portrayal of Vidur and his dialogue with Maitreyji. Then there is a mention of Creation of universe by Brahma and the preachings of Sankhya by Kapil Muni.
In the next section we find the portrayal of Sati, Dhruv, Pruthu, and the story of ancient King, Bahirshi.
In the next section we find the character of King Priyavrat and his sons, different types of loks in this universe, and description of Narak. ( https://t.co/gmDTkLktKS )
In the sixth part we find the portrayal of Ajaamil ( https://t.co/LdVSSNspa2 ), Daksh and the birth of Marudgans( https://t.co/tecNidVckj )
In the seventh section we find the story of Prahlad and the description of Varnashram dharma. This section is based on karma vaasna.
It was Ved Vyas who edited the eighteen thousand shlokas of Bhagwat. This book destroys all your sins. It has twelve parts which are like kalpvraksh.
In the first skandh, the importance of Vedvyas
and characters of Pandavas are described by the dialogues between Suutji and Shaunakji. Then there is the story of Parikshit.
Next there is a Brahm Narad dialogue describing the avtaar of Bhagwan. Then the characteristics of Puraan are mentioned.
It also discusses the evolution of universe.( https://t.co/2aK1AZSC79 )
Next is the portrayal of Vidur and his dialogue with Maitreyji. Then there is a mention of Creation of universe by Brahma and the preachings of Sankhya by Kapil Muni.
HOW LIFE EVOLVED IN THIS UNIVERSE AS PER OUR SCRIPTURES.
— Anshul Pandey (@Anshulspiritual) August 29, 2020
Well maximum of Living being are the Vansaj of Rishi Kashyap. I have tried to give stories from different-different Puran. So lets start.... pic.twitter.com/MrrTS4xORk
In the next section we find the portrayal of Sati, Dhruv, Pruthu, and the story of ancient King, Bahirshi.
In the next section we find the character of King Priyavrat and his sons, different types of loks in this universe, and description of Narak. ( https://t.co/gmDTkLktKS )
Thread on NARK(HELL) / \u0928\u0930\u094d\u0915
— Anshul Pandey (@Anshulspiritual) August 11, 2020
Well today i will take you to a journey where nobody wants to go i.e Nark. Hence beware of doing Adharma/Evil things. There are various mentions in Puranas about Nark, But my Thread is only as per Bhagwat puran(SS attached in below Thread)
1/8 pic.twitter.com/raHYWtB53Q
In the sixth part we find the portrayal of Ajaamil ( https://t.co/LdVSSNspa2 ), Daksh and the birth of Marudgans( https://t.co/tecNidVckj )
In the seventh section we find the story of Prahlad and the description of Varnashram dharma. This section is based on karma vaasna.
#THREAD
— Anshul Pandey (@Anshulspiritual) August 12, 2020
WHY PARENTS CHOOSE RELIGIOUS OR PARAMATMA'S NAMES FOR THEIR CHILDREN AND WHICH ARE THE EASIEST WAY TO WASH AWAY YOUR SINS.
Yesterday I had described the types of Naraka's and the Sin or Adharma for a person to be there.
1/8 pic.twitter.com/XjPB2hfnUC
