Saturday, August 24, 2019
The 90 Miles Mystery Video: Nyctophilia Edition #26
Before You Click On The "Read More" Link,
Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.
If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.
Please Leave Silently Into The Night......
The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #723
You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?
It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,
from the beautiful to the repugnant,
from the mysterious to the familiar.
If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,
you could be inspired, you could be appalled.
This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.
You have been warned.
Friday, August 23, 2019
Payback: Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate
Iconoclastic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard did the unforgiveable in the eyes of the hidebound Democratic Party establishment: She knocked down one their favorites, Kamala Harris.
Because right after this incident from the last debate:
Now, through the miracle of rule-rigging, the Democratic establishment has maneuvered to exact a price from her: No appearance at the next Democratic debate. No more taking down the next favorite.
Get a load of this from Michael Tracey in a piece written for RealClearPolitics:
Tulsi Gabbard is on the verge of being excluded from the next Democratic presidential debate on the basis of criteria that appear increasingly absurd.
Take, for instance, her poll standing in New Hampshire, which currently places Gabbard at 3.3% support, according to the RealClearPolitics average as of Aug. 20. One might suspect that such a figure would merit inclusion in the upcoming debates -- especially considering she’s ahead of several candidates who have already been granted entry, including Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Beto O’Rourke, and Andrew Yang. But the Democratic National Committee has decreed that the polls constituting this average are not sufficiently “qualifying.”
What makes a poll “qualifying” in the eyes of the DNC? The answer is conspicuously inscrutable.
Tracey also noted that Gabbard was well above the campaign donor threshhold with 160,000 unique donors from all 50 states which ought to have gotten her in. But according to his piece, the Democratic Party bigs are weighing the matter towards polls they arbitrarily say the key ones, superceding even money raised in a rather subjective process, moving the goalposts. It all raises questions about how rigged those particular polls might be, or if they made those decisions just to Get Gabbard out. As a result, it looks like Gabbard isn't going to make the cut.
Which raises the question of whether this was 'punishment' for that little misdeed around Kamala Harris at the last debate. Nobody messes with Kamala, it seems, so now Tulsi must pay a price.
Two things not explicitly mentioned in the Tracey report also stand out to strengthen the argument:
One, the herd is not really being culled for Debate Three.
Democrats are still going to be taking Marianne Williamson into the debate as well, along with this lengthy list of pipsqueaks and other obscure characters listed below. Just not that woman in the white pant suit who is remembered for the debate's most memorable moment in Debate Two, the takedown of Kamala Harris.
Here’s who has qualified so far:
Because right after this incident from the last debate:
Now, through the miracle of rule-rigging, the Democratic establishment has maneuvered to exact a price from her: No appearance at the next Democratic debate. No more taking down the next favorite.
Get a load of this from Michael Tracey in a piece written for RealClearPolitics:
Tulsi Gabbard is on the verge of being excluded from the next Democratic presidential debate on the basis of criteria that appear increasingly absurd.
Take, for instance, her poll standing in New Hampshire, which currently places Gabbard at 3.3% support, according to the RealClearPolitics average as of Aug. 20. One might suspect that such a figure would merit inclusion in the upcoming debates -- especially considering she’s ahead of several candidates who have already been granted entry, including Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Beto O’Rourke, and Andrew Yang. But the Democratic National Committee has decreed that the polls constituting this average are not sufficiently “qualifying.”
What makes a poll “qualifying” in the eyes of the DNC? The answer is conspicuously inscrutable.
Tracey also noted that Gabbard was well above the campaign donor threshhold with 160,000 unique donors from all 50 states which ought to have gotten her in. But according to his piece, the Democratic Party bigs are weighing the matter towards polls they arbitrarily say the key ones, superceding even money raised in a rather subjective process, moving the goalposts. It all raises questions about how rigged those particular polls might be, or if they made those decisions just to Get Gabbard out. As a result, it looks like Gabbard isn't going to make the cut.
Which raises the question of whether this was 'punishment' for that little misdeed around Kamala Harris at the last debate. Nobody messes with Kamala, it seems, so now Tulsi must pay a price.
Two things not explicitly mentioned in the Tracey report also stand out to strengthen the argument:
One, the herd is not really being culled for Debate Three.
Democrats are still going to be taking Marianne Williamson into the debate as well, along with this lengthy list of pipsqueaks and other obscure characters listed below. Just not that woman in the white pant suit who is remembered for the debate's most memorable moment in Debate Two, the takedown of Kamala Harris.
Here’s who has qualified so far:
- Joe Biden
- Cory Booker
- Pete Buttigieg
- Julián Castro
- Kamala Harris
- Amy Klobuchar
- Beto O’Rourke
- Bernie Sanders
- Elizabeth Warren
- Andrew Yang
Isn't Julian Castro polling around something like zero? Maybe he's there for affirmative action purposes, alongside his lockstep extremism.
Two, Google seems to have already done a number on Gabbard, taking down her paid-for campaign ads during the first debate when Internet viewers' interest in her spiked to the highest levels of all the campaign. Google, most of the reporting has neglected to note, is brimming with former Obama administration operatives. Democrats, the pillars, the money, the establishment. Might that suggest some sort of fix in for Gabbard as well? It's pretty obvious something is going on.
Now she's done the unforgiveable: She embarrassed the Democrats' prized favorite, Kamala Harris, tanking her ratings in the polls, and for that, the Democratic political machine has issued a political death sentence.
Right after Tulsi finished the second debate, Kamala Harris really did utterly tumble in the polls. Democratic voters, now aware of her incredibly corrupt record as a prosecutor - endorsing false testimony, keeping people in jail beyond their terms, throwing the impoverished in prison for marijuana crimes while admitting she enjoyed the weed herself -- are avoiding her now like a bad smell. Harris is damaged goods now, and she won't recover. Tulsi, on the other hand, seems to be rising as a result.
For the Democratic establishment, that's unforgiveable. They're going to make Gabbard pay for that one by not allowing her a seat at next month's Democratic debate.
It goes to show that the Democrats are still the same old Democrats, and up to their old rigging tricks, putting their thumbs down on the scale for the candidates they prefer. They've done it before, against Bernie Sanders, and now they are...
Two, Google seems to have already done a number on Gabbard, taking down her paid-for campaign ads during the first debate when Internet viewers' interest in her spiked to the highest levels of all the campaign. Google, most of the reporting has neglected to note, is brimming with former Obama administration operatives. Democrats, the pillars, the money, the establishment. Might that suggest some sort of fix in for Gabbard as well? It's pretty obvious something is going on.
Now she's done the unforgiveable: She embarrassed the Democrats' prized favorite, Kamala Harris, tanking her ratings in the polls, and for that, the Democratic political machine has issued a political death sentence.
Right after Tulsi finished the second debate, Kamala Harris really did utterly tumble in the polls. Democratic voters, now aware of her incredibly corrupt record as a prosecutor - endorsing false testimony, keeping people in jail beyond their terms, throwing the impoverished in prison for marijuana crimes while admitting she enjoyed the weed herself -- are avoiding her now like a bad smell. Harris is damaged goods now, and she won't recover. Tulsi, on the other hand, seems to be rising as a result.
For the Democratic establishment, that's unforgiveable. They're going to make Gabbard pay for that one by not allowing her a seat at next month's Democratic debate.
It goes to show that the Democrats are still the same old Democrats, and up to their old rigging tricks, putting their thumbs down on the scale for the candidates they prefer. They've done it before, against Bernie Sanders, and now they are...
EGAD! THIS IS BRUTAL!
More InSaNe GIFS:
More Amazing Animated Gifs HERE
Animated Gif Collection #2 HERE
Animated Gif Collection #3
Animated Gif Collection #4
Animated Gif Collection #5 -OR- Motorcycles And Bulls Don't Mix..
Animated Gif Collection #6 or Bet She Lost Some Teeth...
Animated Gif Collection #7 -OR- This Is What Happens When You Fall Asleep While Driving...
Animated Gif Collection #8 -OR- Fish: 1, Dog: 0
Animated Gif Collection #9 -OR-Out Of Control Bus -OR-
Animated Gif Collection #10 -OR- How To Launch An Oil Truck Into The Air
Animated Gif Collection #11 -OR- Man That Must Have Hurt
Animated GIF Collection #12 -OR- This Is Brutal
Animated Gif Collection #13 -OR- This Guy Was Inches From DEATH!
Animated Gif Collection #14
Concerning Survey Finds Too Many People Believe Snopes Is A Legitimate Fact-Checking Website
U.S.—A troubling new survey released by The Babylon Bee confirmed Wednesday that too many people think Snopes is a real fact-checking website.
The survey found that over 60% of people believe Snopes is a real website, while only 25% understand that it's satire. The remaining minority thinks that Snopes is the name of a gangsta rapper from California, "one of those guys who makes the hip-hop about the devil's lettuce and shooting people."
In the study, we went to a Walmart and grabbed random people by the arm and started shouting at them: "HEY, DO YOU THINK SNOPES IS REAL!?" The ones who didn't run away screaming or call for security responded, and of those few dozen people, we got our results. Most said, "Sure, yeah, whatever, please just leave me alone and don't hurt me!" while others said they thought it was satire site. A few people said, "Snopes Dogg? I loved his album, Straight Outta Compton."
Despite the fact-checks on Snopes.com clearly being "labelled fact-checks," many people were taken in by the site's ruse. Snopes has managed to fool many readers with its brand of fact-checking in the past. We're not sure if muddying the details of actual investigative journalism qualifies Snopes as a real "fact-checker."
"This is clearly a threat to democracy," said the head researcher we specifically paid to say "this is clearly a threat to democracy." "Maybe people who read Snopes just aren't as informed or educated as people who...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)