2024

Once again, the top most active threads were all political in nature. The topics are starting to get repetitive and, in some cases, bordering on the absurd. The most active thread, by some measure, was titled, "Trump giving speech in garbage vest" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. Unless you have been living in a cave for the past few days, you will guess that this thread is about former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump showing up at a rally wearing a reflective vest similar to those worn by trash collectors. Trump also climbed into a garbage truck — not without difficulty, it must be said — and was driven around in circles. Trump was attempting to draw attention to President Joe Biden's statement that Trump rally speaker Tony Hinchcliffe is "garbage". Because much of the mainstream media is made up of click-chasers who long ago gave up on their own profession, several outlets wrongly reported that Biden had referred to Trump supporters as "garbage" rather than just Hinchcliffe. MAGAs, for whom a primary motivator is resentment, immediately jumped on this appellation and have reached heights of joy rarely seen previously. Hinchcliffe, of course, had referred to Puerto Rico as a "floating island of garbage" during his remarks at Trump's Madison Square Garden Rally. Biden, in his stuttering manner, defended Puerto Rico and said that the only garbage he saw was Hinchcliffe, referring to him as Trump's "supporter". MAGAs immediately proclaimed that this would not only undo the damage caused by Hinchcliffe, but would cause more voters to rally to Trump. Trump, by dressing like a garbage man, was supposed to be drawing attention to Biden's remark. The original poster of this thread considers this a demonstration of Trump's "uncanny ability to change the narrative" that "highlighted the Left’s hatred of the Right". As a result, claims the original poster, "This race is over". Consider the mental gymnastics involved here. First, Trump and his cult followers — as well as a disappointing number of members of the mainstream media — distorted Biden's remark. Then, the original poster is misrepresenting this manufactured insult to represent the feelings of the entire left, ignoring that Vice President Kamala Harris explicitly disassociated herself from any such insult, and then the original poster claimed that Trump's stunt had succeeded in changing the narrative and that the antic would win the election for Trump. This is how we have come to live in separate realities. In the other reality, the one in which I live, Puerto Ricans were offended by Hinchcliffe and, by extension, Trump, who has not condemned the remarks. Their opinion is unlikely to be changed by a suggestion that Trump supporters are "garbage", even if such a statement had actually been made. They probably agree with that sentiment. Indeed, the day after Biden's remark, Puerto Rican reggaeton artist Nicky Jam, who had previously endorsed Trump, withdrew his endorsement. Moreover, by keeping attention on the topic of garbage, Trump was not only drawing attention to Biden, but to Hinchcliffe's initial insult of Puerto Rico. I am not sure that this is the genius message management that the original poster believes it to be. Finally, Trump certainly has an ability to change the narrative, but generally he does that by stepping on the message that his campaign is attempting to put forth. For instance, I am not sure what message the Trump campaign was hoping for today, but Trump has ensured that his call for Liz Cheney to face a firing squad will get most of the attention.

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "Harris ‘closing argument’ speech next Tuesday on the mall" and was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. This thread was started a week ago in anticipation of an address delivered by Vice President Kamala Harris last evening at the Ellipse on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. In the style of a true Democrat, the original poster is fearful that Harris is taking a "big swing" that could miss. But the original poster does express interest in taking her daughter to see Harris speak. The first part of this thread is almost funny, marked by a discussion of electoral votes provoked by a poster who was unaware that the District of Columbia has three electoral votes. Moreover, several posters didn't seem to understand that this is an equal number of electoral votes to the Dakotas, Wyoming, Vermont, and Alaska. Several posters questioned why Harris would choose D.C. for such an important speech given that she can already count on the District's votes. Once Harris began her address, however, the answer to that became obvious. Harris had several goals with this speech, but primary it was about sending a message. With the backdrop of the White House and staged in the same location from which former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump launched an insurrection on January 6, 2021, Harris positioned herself as the "adult" alternative to Trump. Harris' message was clear. Where Trump caused chaos and division, she would unite the country and solve problems. "Donald Trump wants to put his opponents in jail. I will give them a seat at the table", Harris said. The Doubting Thomases who seem to dominate the Democratic Party were hopefully assured by this address. Harris will never be an orator on the level of former President Barack Obama, but her delivery was competent and miles above what we've come to expect from Trump. In my opinion, the content of the speech was nearly perfect. With a crowd size estimated to be in the range of 75,000, this was easily the largest crowd of the campaign and puts Trump's crowds to shame. Personally, it is difficult for me to find much about which to complain. If I were forced to identify a fault, I guess I would point to the absence of any mention of the Middle East. But I am not sure that there would have been much value in reiterating another empty call for a ceasefire. This also draws attention to the fact that despite Harris' promise to give opponents a seat at the table, supporters of the Palestinians have repeatedly been refused such a seat. Other posters had a litany of complaints. As usual, Harris' voice and speaking style were criticized. Some posters wanted more policy details. But for the most part, critics were left with distortions of her words, claiming that she had neglected issues that she actually mentioned, or desperately trying to change the subject. Harris was never going to please everyone, but overall, I think she achieved everything that she set out to do with this speech. She left Democrats excited, full of hope, and reinvigorated.

The most active thread over the weekend was titled, "Taylor Swift album Tortured Poets Department leaked early?" and posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum. You may not have heard of Taylor Swift or her new album titled "The Tortured Poets Department", but Swift is a budding young artist who, despite being somewhat media shy, has been getting increasing attention. This thread was started Thursday evening by a poster concerned that Swift's latest album, which was due for release on Friday, may have been leaked in advance. She questioned whether a true Swift fan would listen to the album before it was officially released or flood the Internet with fake links to mislead others. But it soon became clear that most of those posting in the thread have indeed listened to the album. As a result, posters begin analyzing the lyrics as if they were the latest issuances of the Oracle of Delphi. Many posters view the lyrics as strictly biographical and draw sweeping conclusions from the simplest of lines. For instance, the line "you sacrifice us to the gods of your bluest days" is suggested as proof that a former boyfriend suffers from "major depression". Several posters were preoccupied with guessing which songs were about which boyfriend. Then the thread turned to posters offering opinions about their favorite songs from the album and other aspects of the music. As you would expect at this point, there is some pushback from those who believe Swift is overrated. Some complain that the songs all sound the same. There were also complaints about Swift's tendency to release multiple versions of an album and whether that is a simple cash grab. This proclivity was especially egregious in this case because Swift released the album and two hours later released an "anthology" version of the same album including more songs. A number of posters complained that anyone who had pre-ordered the album would have to now purchase the second version. But, as anyone who has had even the slightest contact with Swifties will know, criticism is not warmly received and most of it was roundly rebutted. To be fair, some of the critics do appear a bit foolish. The anthology version of the album has 31 songs and some posters, as well as the New York Times, complain that a shorter, better album could have been created instead. I am not sure how deep in the sand one's head needs to be to have missed the entire controversy about the shorter version of the album, but that's just lazy criticism. After reading a considerable number of the 40 pages that currently make up this thread, my conclusion is that many posters a decade or so ago were bitter over breakups and found solace in Swift's music which tends to focus on being bitter over breakups. Now, those same posters are married, have kids, and are well over any past breakups. Yet, Swift is still singing about them. So a gulf has developed between Swift and many of the posters in this thread. On the other hand, there are plenty of young women who are currently bitter about breakups so Swift's albums still sell in droves.

Yesterday's most active thread was the thread about masking that I've already discussed and will skip today. But, I can't believe people are still arguing about masking generally and in that thread particularly. The next most active thread was titled, "Rockville Teen Charged with Threats of Mass Violence", and posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)". The outline of this story is that on Wednesday, the Montgomery County Police Department arrested 18-year-old "Andrea Ye, of Rockville, whose preferred name is Alex Ye". Ye was charged with one count of threatening mass violence. The threat was said to have been targeted at Wootton High School. The basis of the charge appears to be 129-page document that MCPD described as a "manifesto" but the Washington Post described as a "memoir". The document, which carries a disclaimer saying, "This is a work of fiction", described an attack on a school by a character named "James Wang". Apparently someone who had encountered Ye in a psychiatric facility in which Ye spent quite a bit of time alerted Baltimore area police that the "James Wang" had many similarities to Ye. At the time the thread was started, there were very few details of the case available and and posters in the thread immediately latched on to indications that Ye is transgender. The very first poster to reply asked, "So is this person a biological male or female?" This fixation on gender dominated the thread, eventually provoking me to lock it. But let's just get this out of the way. Officials were silent on Ye's gender beyond using male pronouns and there is no indication that Ye has undergone any gender affirming care either socially or medically. Nevertheless, posters quickly speculated about the effect of testosterone and links between transgender people and mental illness. There seems to be no question that Ye suffers from mental illness. According to the Washington Post, he has been out of school for most of the past two years while being repeatedly hospitalized for mental health reasons. According to court documents referenced by the Post, Ye "claimed to be Jesus Christ and was going to crucify himself." Some posters viewed Ye as "a young person in crisis" primarily in need of treatment. Others perceived him as a dangerous threat and applauded police for their action. It seems that this case will hinge on whether a document clearly labeled as fiction, written by someone who does not appear to have made any overt act such as obtaining a weapon, can constitute a "threat". Another question is whether the potential 10 years imprisonment that Ye faces is the best course of action in this case. But there was very little discussion of such topics in the thread which was, instead, dominated by repeated questions about Ye's gender.

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "BOE - who are people voting for?" and posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. There have been a number of threads about the upcoming Montgomery County Board of Education election. An earlier thread discussed which candidates were entering and what posters thought of them. Another thread focused on one of those candidates, Bethany Mandel. This thread takes off where the first one leaves off. Now that the slate of candidates has been settled, the original poster wants to know for whom others are voting and why they are making those choices. This is a rather long thread, as have been the previous ones. As a result, I haven't been able to read the complete threads. That has left me a bit confused about a couple of points which may or may not have been explained in the threads. For instance, on May 14 a primary election will be held and voters will be able to choose one At-Large candidate, one candidate for District 2, and one candidate for District 4. All voters will be able to vote in all three races. To me, this seems like three At-Large races because despite being a representative of a specific district, those board members will be accountable to the entire county, not just voters in their district. Similarly, while this is a "primary" election, it is non-partisan. As far as I know, only one winner in each race will be selected. Therefore, the November general election will not be a run-off, but simply a race between the primary winner and any candidates that enter the general election. Since this is a non-partisan election and there is not a run-off, I really don't see the reason for having a primary. Perhaps someone can enlighten me in the comments? As for the candidates, there is a fairly large number. The At-Large contest has six candidates and District 2 has five. District 4 has a relatively paltry three candidates. One thing this thread has done well is help group the candidates according to various factors. For instance, each race has an incumbent who basically represents the status quo. Each race also has an "Apple Ballot" candidate who is endorsed by the the Montgomery County Education Association. Finally, each race has one or more "outsider" candidates who is essentially a bomb-thrower that wants to shake things up. One of the biggest disputes in the thread is over whether, despite a seemingly widespread desire for change, the outsider candidates would be actually be effective at bringing about reform or would instead simply be disruptive and interfere with any actual work being done. Two of the candidates homeschool their children, raising questions about why they would strive for leadership of a school system they have rejected. I assume that we can look forward to approximately another month of this thread being active and then on to the general election.

The most active thread over the weekend was titled, "Now That Iran Has Retaliated Against Israel?" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The thread was started Saturday afternoon when the media began reporting that Iran had launched an attack on Israel. When the thread was created, details were sparse and the Iranian weapons — which subsequently turned out to be a combination of drones, cruise missiles, and rockets — were still in the air. Therefore, much of the early discussion in the thread occurred before anyone knew the results of the attack. The original poster argued that Iran's attack was to be expected because Israel had bombed an Iranian diplomatic building in Syria, killing several Iranian military figures. The original poster further expressed his opposition to the US getting involved in the conflict because he is sick of "my tax dollars being used to clean up Israel’s disastrous missteps." Threads of this sort have become absurd farces. Never mind that posters were making policy suggestions before the outcome of the attack was even known, these threads now attract a consistent collection of weirdos. There is a poster who blames everything on "globalists" who he sees as having a full agenda of items he opposes. Another poster constantly blames "dual citizen" politicians, by which I assume he means "Jews". The anti-Israel posters on DCUM represent a motley crew of right-wing conspiracy theorists, dithering liberals, and left-wing zealots who seem to oppose just about everything. There is considerable consternation about President Joe Biden's close embrace of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who almost everyone opposes. Biden has created a predicament for himself. Conservatives who view him as a bumbling senile fool naturally oppose him. Many Democrats, alienated by the President's Middle East policies, are frustrated with him. Only a tiny group of supporters who appear willing to ignore anything other than Biden's support for abortion rights continues to defend him. Most of those posting in the thread expected that Israel would retaliate against Iran and a cycle of tits for tat would commence and naturally suck in the United States. This was primarily blamed on Biden. On the other side of the debate were the pro-Israel posters who themselves have devolved to ludicrous caricatures. Their single argument appears to be that anyone who criticizes Israel is, at best, a Hamas supporter — or in this case an Iran supporter — or, at worst, an anti-Semite. Many of them also oppose Biden who they, incredibly, view as anti-Israel. As it turned out, a coalition of Israeli, US, United Kingdom, Jordanian, and Saudi air defenses shot down most of the Iranian weapons. I think the exposure of the Jordanians and Saudis as Israel's body guards is probably the most stunning aspect of this entire event, but the ramifications of that may take a while to appear. Then, according to reports, Biden told Netanyahu to take the win and not to retaliate. We will see how long this lasts, but for the moment World War III has been avoided, much to the surprise of most of the posters in this thread. Even more incredibly, it appears that despite the concerns of most detractors, including me, Biden may have pulled off a foreign policy success.

Yesterday's most active thread was titled, "Would you tell DH’s AP’s husband?" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. The original poster says that she has just confirmed that her husband has been having an affair. Her husband says that he has now ended the affair but the original poster has considerable anger towards her husband's affair partner. Feeling that the affair partner deserves to have her marriage blown up in the same manner that the original poster has been, the original poster is considering informing the affair partner's husband about the affair. This is a topic that comes up with some regularity in the relationship forum. Generally, as in this thread, posters tend to lean toward disclosure. Not only are several of those who respond interested in vengeance, but they argue that an unsuspecting spouse has the right to know about the affair in order to make informed decisions. The risk of a cheating spouse spreading a venereal disease is repeatedly cited as a justification. On the other hand, some posters argue that this could simply be making a bad situation worse. It could make recovering from the affair more difficult and create an enemy who might complicate things. These posters urge the original poster to focus on saving her marriage if that is what she wants or preparing for divorce if that is her desire. They argue that informing the affair partner's spouse would only be a distraction that would do no good. A number of posters who have been in this situation described their experiences. Those that informed the affair partner's spouse generally seem pleased with their decision. Some found it satisfying for the revenge factor and others encountered cheated-upon spouses eager to learn details that their spouse had hidden from them. There were some bad experiences, however. One poster said that the women with whom her husband had an affair convinced her spouse that the poster was crazy and the affair partner's husband even contacted the poster's husband to discuss her mental health. In another case a poster informed the husband of her husband's affair partner and he showed up at their house with a gun. He threatened the poster's husband, scared their children, and made a huge scene in front of all the neighbors. One of the most common justifications for not telling was the impact it might have on the other couple's children. However, many posters felt that any negative impact on the children was the fault of the cheaters. Eventually this thread transitioned to simple back and forth between the "tells" and the "don't tells" with nobody really adding anything new.

The most active thread over the weekend was the Fairfax murder thread which is contining to see lots of interest including posts from first-hand observers of court proceedings. The most active thread after that one was titled, "EVERY Six Months Jolie reiterates accusations against Pitt" and posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum. The original poster appears to be upset that in court documents Angelina Jolie accused Brad Pitt of abusing her and their children. Claiming that Jolie purposely brings up these allegations "every six months" in order to hurt Pitt, the original poster suggests that the effort is failing and wonders when Jolie will realize this. As dumbfounded as I am about the interest in the British Royal Family among DCUM posters, I am even more astonished how obsessed some posters are with actors and actresses. This thread managed to rack up 25 pages since Friday. I don't have time to read the entire thing, but based on what I did read, most poster, like the original poster, see Jolie as the victimizer in this relationship. Posters criticize her from all angles, claiming the abuse allegations were not relevant to the legal case in which they were brought up, saying that she has a bizarre behavior, and in one case calling her a "psychopath". One poster went so far as to develop a lengthy imagined history of Jolie and Pitt's relationship to demonstrate how Jolie is to blame for their problems. Pitt does have his critics as well. One poster described him as a "druggie womanizing adulterous wife and child abuser" and lamented that he is still popular. But, generally posters were either willing to overlook Pitt's faults or blame them on Jolie. What amazes me about threads like this is the amount of detail posters know — or at least claim to know — about the celebrities involved. Those responding seem to have instant recall of minute facts, not only about Jolie and Pitt, but their children as well. The original poster, in a follow-up post, even recounted gossip involving a conversation between Jennifer Aniston and Aniston's decorator. Much of the thread seems to be devoted to the former couple's kids and their relationship with Pitt. Post after post accused Jolie of either turning the kids against Pitt or at least being the type of person who would do that. Most posters didn't seem to be prepared to consider that Jolie's accusations of abuse, not only towards her but the children as well, might be true and the cause of some of the friction between Pitt and the children. Only Jolie was held responsible. The anti-Jolie sentiment was so strong that it provoked a few posters to take a closer look at things themselves and they generally became Jolie-defenders as a result.

The most active thread yesterday was one titled, "I hate Trump, but I get why a huge part of middle America loves him" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster says that she is a "typical educated and wealthy DC-area striver" but she believes that most of America has been "truly screwed over by progressive policies" and, therefore, believes that Democrats no longer care about the large group that has suffered from under-education, under-employment, drug abuse, being forced to compete with undocumented immigrants, and "penalized by the color of their skin". I am not going to bother to read a single post in this thread. Rather, I'll just address the original poster's points which appear to be a triumph of right-wing messaging over fact. One of the biggest successes of the right-wing has been to destroy liberal-support institutions and then complain that those institutions don't function and/or blame the results of that destruction on liberals. Under-education is largely a result of decades of attacks on public education by conservatives. Similarly, under-employment is the result of the relentless pursuit of profits by corporations, not liberal policies. To the contrary, one of the best antidotes to under-employment — unionization — is a Democratic priority hated by conservatives. The opioid epidemic about which the original poster complains was largely instigated by the pharmaceutical industry. Do you know what might have helped control or prevent that? Government regulations which Republicans hate. The idea that White people are not able to go to college because of the color of their skin is ludicrous. The high costs of college are an exponentially higher barrier and many of the poorer White applicants would have had their own advantages in any case. Yet, Republicans oppose efforts to make paying for college easier. The original poster mentions fighting in wars, but these wars were started and supported by Republicans. It was Joe Biden who withdrew our forces from Afghanistan. Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats do not have full time propaganda networks such as Fox News broadcasting their talking points. As a result, Democratic achievements don't get the same notice. What does the original poster think about the United Auto Workers deal that was achieved after a historic strike with the support of Joe Biden? During the strike, Trump met with non-unionized workers. Not only did that agreement raise the salaries of UAW members, but non-unionized companies — even Tesla — have had to increase wages to stay competitive.  The problems facing the White folks with whom the original poster is concerned are largely the fault of anti-government zealots and a corporate America that puts profits over people. It is no surprise that both of those groups are happy to blame Democrats and migrants for problems resulting from right-wing policies. It is disappointing, however, when those such as the original poster who should know better buy into the conservative blame-shifting.

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "Vent about marrying someone from a very underdeveloped country". The thread was originally posted in the "Off-Topic" forum but I moved it to the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. The original poster says that she and her family are visiting her husband's family in a country that is much less developed than the United States. They are staying with her husband's family in a house in which taking a warm shower requires mixing boiling hot water with cold water and using a bucket. There is no air conditioning or heat and stores that have the items they would like to purchase are a three-hour drive away. The original poster and her kids are miserable but her husband is not understanding of the challenges they are facing. The original poster is very upset with him and using this thread to vent. This thread has already reached 21 pages. There are posters who are not sympathetic to the original poster and generally criticized her attitude and provided advice regarding what they believe are easy things that she can do to adjust. Other posters are more supportive of her and critical of her husband. The original poster has previously posted other threads about her husband and travels to his native country which results in the original poster being recognized by others who linked to her earlier threads. There are a number of disputes about whether or not the original poster is a troll, with one poster even starting a thread asking this in the "Website Feedback" forum. As I said in that thread, the poster is posting from Bangladesh, the country to which posters identified her as referring. However, this morning I noticed that the original poster has done quite a bit of sock puppeting, mostly offering what appears to be third-person defenses of herself. The thread is full of repeated patterns in which the original poster complained about something, posters offered advice for improving whatever that is, the original poster then explains why the advice won't work, other posters criticize her, the original poster sock puppets a supportive message, and then the original poster again explains why the advice won't work. The thread is also full of Indians, people related to Indians, or people who have been to India who believe that they have all the answers for the original poster. But, as with all other advice, the original poster is not receptive and is convinced that what applies to India is irrelevent to Bangladesh. Some posters engage with this thread as if it is some sort of mystery that they must solve. The city in which she is visiting was identified and posters provided the average daily temperatures, population statistics, and other information that they think shows the original poster is misstating the reality of conditions. Given the frequency with which the original poster has been posting — over 60 posts in 24 hours — it is clear that while the home in which she is staying may not have running warm water, heat, or a modern kitchen, it has a good Internet connection.