Politics & Stuff

[Vesper 28,494]

Nothing to see here, just the richest man in the world joking about why no one has attempted to assassinate Harris and /or Biden

 

 

[Vesper 28,494]

Elon Musk’s “Dark MAGA” Conversion Could Spell Election Chaos

Once seen as a real-life Iron Man, the Tesla chief has morphed into a total Trump fanboy—and admits he’ll be “fucked” if the former president loses. Will he use X to throw a wrench in the works if Harris wins?

 

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/elon-musk-donald-trump-dark-maga-twitter

 

 

For years, Elon Musk liked to think of himself as a real-life Marvel superhero, a Tony Stark–esque genius who would save humanity from its greatest threats. He dressed like a superhero for Halloween. He once seemingly compared himself to Batman in a tweet. He was repeatedly called “the real-life Iron Man” in the media, and even made a cameo in Iron Man 2, reveling in the comparisons between him and a superhero. But the past few years have shown a different version of Musk—one more akin to a comic book supervillain who undergoes a dark transformation. Picture Spider-Man donning the all-black symbiote suit or Superman losing his moral compass. Yes, he’s gone through one of those classic transformations, and the shift seemed ironically complete when he appeared onstage at a Donald Trump rally this past weekend in Butler, Pennsylvania, wearing a black “Make America Great Again” hat and proudly declaring, “I’m dark MAGA,” before literally jumping up and down.

Now, I have no problem with people declaring their allegiance to Trump. We all have our political viewpoints. People may be voting for Trump because of their staunch belief in the Second Amendment, or because they’re drawn in by his promise of lower taxes (for the rich), or because they’re antiabortion, or because they’re steadfast supporters of Israel—or because they just hate Kamala Harris. But none of these reasons really apply to Musk, and the question that people can’t stop asking about him is: why? Is this about lower taxes? Did Harris kill his puppy when they were younger? Call him a bad name? Make fun of his hair? What exactly is it that made Musk transform from a Democrat-supporting champion of renewable energy and free speech to a Trump supporter and cultural warrior? What made him go from talking about the science of renewable energy and solar power to shilling conspiracy theories about the government’s Hurricane Helene response and baseless claims that undocumented immigrants are being used by Democrats to steal elections?

While it’s tempting to frame Musk’s recent embrace of far-right views as a strategic move tied to financial incentives or corporate interests, the former poster child for progressive ideals—who was arguably one of the most influential people fighting against climate change—appears to have made this ideological pivot for far more personal reasons. As one Silicon Valley insider put it to me: “This started when he became angry at authorities during COVID, when they forced him to close his car plants, and then he was truly radicalized about social issues by his daughter’s decision to transition.” The nail in the superhero coffin, it appears, was when she fought back against him in public, calling her father a “serial adulterer” and his actions “beyond stupid” and “desperate.” (To be fair, plenty of people have used one of those words against their parents before.)

Indeed, during the pandemic, Musk publicly fought against local government restrictions, particularly those imposed in Alameda County, California, which forced him to shut down Tesla’s Fremont factory. Defiantly, he reopened the factory in May 2020 against local orders, even tweeting, “If anyone is arrested, I ask that it only be me.” (That may have seemed like a brave move, but it was really just chest-thumping; Musk knew full well that the United States wasn’t going to toss the richest man on earth in jail.) But that moment really fanned the flames, making Musk irate—not at the situation (in which tens of thousands of people were dying from COVID), but rather at Democratic state officials who were dictating what he could or couldn’t do with his factories, which he saw as an affront to his autonomy and his businesses’ survival.

If you imagine Musk’s views as a tightly woven fabric, this was the moment when you could see the first thread start to unravel. The COVID confrontation marked the beginning of Musk’s detachment from the left-leaning politics of California, which he came to see as an obstacle to his success.

Then, in 2022, he purchased Twitter.

That’s when his views started to flip-flop in all directions. One moment he was for free speech— declaring himself a “free speech absolutist”—and the next thing you know, he was suspending accounts and reinstating some previously banned users (like Trump), managing to silence those who criticized him, including users who impersonated him and journalists he found annoying. While he said he voted for Joe Biden in 2020, Musk endorsed Trump—whom he previously urged to “sail into the sunset”—in the immediate aftermath of the July assassination attempt. Oh, and there are his foreign policy takes: From suggesting that Ukraine give Crimea to Russia to proposing that Taiwan be made a “special administrative zone” of China, it’s as if Musk fancies himself a one-man United Nations, solving conflicts with the wisdom of a Twitter poll. To call Musk inconsistent would be generous—he’s more like a wind sock, blown about by whatever personal vendetta is closest to his heart at the time.

Which brings us to the impetus for the complete tearing of the thread that tied Musk to the left. The theory in Silicon Valley is that the thing that made him feel like he’d been “red-pilled” was not an attempt on Trump’s life, or his own taxes, but actually a family rift that spilled into the public eye.

This goes back to 2022, when his daughter Vivian came out as transgender and sought to legally change her last name from Musk to Wilson, citing her desire to have no relationship whatsoever with her father. In a court filing, she wrote: “I no longer live with or wish to be related to my biological father in any way, shape or form.” The painful estrangement clearly left Musk feeling abandoned, and he blamed the entire thing on “the woke mind virus,” a term he now uses to describe progressive social values he sees as destructive. In his eyes, the left—which he once applauded, and whose members were the main purchasers of his innovations and ideals—had now taken away his child. (Walter Isaacson’s biography of Musk suggests that this event played a major role in catalyzing his shift toward more extreme political views.)

Now, if you’re Elon Musk and someone attacks you publicly, you come after them with all the might of your 200 million-plus followers, and often even your lawyers. And while he did say that Vivian was “dead” to him, he couldn’t really take his daughter to task publicly, because that would be a step too far for the man who earned the name Space Karen.

So instead, he appears to have decided to attack the entire Democratic Party, while giving tens of millions to support Republican candidates and causes. As they say in the movie industry, CUT TO last weekend, when Musk came out onstage at the Butler, Pennsylvania, rally in his black MAGA hat, proclaiming, “I’m dark MAGA!”

While Musk is clearly Trump’s biggest cheerleader in the tech community (even more so than the fawning All-In podcast posse, who had him on their show and didn’t ask many substantive questions), he is far from the only person who has been red-pilled in Silicon Valley, and there are many (at least behind the scenes) who are actually cheering him on. “While many Americans feel Trump is a severe threat to democracy, there are plenty of people out there who believe that the woke mind virus, also known as the 2024 Democratic Party—the extremist flank of which has taken to cosplaying terrorists on college campuses—is a greater threat to democracy than even Donald Trump,” said one Silicon Valley investor. “And Elon, I believe, falls squarely into that camp.”

The big question is, now what? Musk’s trajectory toward Trumpism and far-right ideologies is deeply personal—a reaction to perceived injustices inflicted by those he once considered ideological allies. Musk has to figure out how to reconcile promising us a greener future and embracing a party that says climate science isn’t real. And even Musk knows this could all backfire spectacularly if voters choose a different path.

This week, on his own platform, he sat for an interview during which host Tucker Carlson said, “If he loses, man… You’re fucked, dude,” to which Musk candidly admitted, “I’m fucked. If he loses, I’m fucked,” while (perhaps nervously) laughing.

If Trump does lose, he’s likely to deny the election results again, and while Trump would inevitably take to social media to question every vote, it’s Musk—who owns X and has the power to decide which vote-related conspiracy theories are allowed on the site—who would play a pivotal role in Trump’s attempts to undermine the democratic process. Instead of banning any baseless claims, Musk would likely be the one amplifying them to the more than 200 million who follow him, fueling the narrative and ensuring that the conspiracy theories reach as many people as possible.

In the end, Musk’s journey from a visionary hero to a “dark MAGA” antihero is our own fault. Maybe we looked at Musk as the superhero, and later the villain, when in reality, he was neither; rather, he was the guy financing the bad guy, which, let’s be honest, isn’t exactly the sexiest role in a superhero movie. But the thing about that guy is, he’s often driven by personal vendettas, bruised egos, and shifting loyalties. That guy’s transformation is less about ideology and more about resentment—toward government control, toward personal rejection, and toward a world that didn’t bend to his will. And as with any good comic book character, the winds may shift yet again—because if there’s one thing we know about Musk, it’s that the wind sock that is his point of view will change directions once more.

[Fulham Broadway 16,742]

7 hours ago, Vesper said:

Except we in the LGBTQ community did not 'decide' to be queer, we were born that way.

Political orientation, yes, that is 100 per cent a choice.

Yeah I did know that 😆 -just imagining cosmicjunior making a conscious choice because of her dads politics

[Vesper 28,494]

10 hours ago, cosmicway said:

He could become gay - I can't control sex.
But commie ? How and why ?

because she 👇🏽 converted him

The communist Greek goddess Eris, keeper of the eternal Hammer and Sickle on Mount Olympus

Edited Sunday at 07:40 by Vesper

[Fernando 6,428]

15 hours ago, robsblubot said:

Maher also talks about this in the video I posted 

His account for who did what also matches what I remember. 

 

Yup that is what I'm saying. 

Like they fight for abortion and the LGBT community because they care for their body and rights so they take it out against USA and Israel but don't defend the rights of women and gay in Muslim countries..... 

I always thought that was backwards but then again it's the media and info that people are getting that just blame everything under the sun for USA and Israel. 

But here's a pinch for your thoughts, if usa and Israel get wiped out then your left with Islamic nations taking the world and then women will have less freedom than they are used to and LGBT will be outright ban. 

As I always said Israel ain't no saint as neither USA. And in war ugly things will happen. I remember our war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq, we did so many wrong stuff and in the end we left and quickly it went into the chaos those regions....but LGBT choosing the side of Hamas when they don't understand what they will do then is just weird. Sounds a lot like propaganda what is being brainwashed to many young people today. 

[Fulham Broadway 16,742]

Explains why Israel gets so much US money, and why Christians blindly accept it

 

[Vesper 28,494]

1 hour ago, Fernando said:

if usa and Israel get wiped out then your left with Islamic nations taking the world

If every jew in Israel was permently removed in the next week and never came back, do explain how that means Islamic nations will take over the world.

I would love to here how only 7.3 million Jews in a country smaller than Haiti, smaller than Belize, and a country that almost 100 per cent dependent on the US for its military projection is necessary to hold back Muslims from taking over the world.

Hell, remove the US from any external efforts at preventing it and even then what Islamic nations are going to take over the EU, Russia, India (despite have a shedload of Muslims, the Hindus dominate ate every level), all of South America, China, Japan, the non Muslim-controlled parts of Africa, etc etc?

Saudi Arabia? LOL, they are nearly as dependent on the US as is Israel and only have around 35 million people.

here is a list of the top 25 countries with the largest number of Muslims in 2022 (in millions)

 

Good luck with that list taking over the world for Islam, lol

 

[cosmicway 1,303]

11 hours ago, Vesper said:

You are the one spewing unscientific claptrap, not me.

Also, pro-tip:

Sex organs do not determine inherent sexual orientation.

In fact, your bringing up people born without sex organs shows the illogical nature of your 'it's a choice and only a choice' argument, as your statement injects a selective BIOLOGICAL underpinning (albeit one that is falsely reductive to sexual organs) to your claims.

There is no such scientific find.
Everyone knows it's a myth.
There are no people who are normal otherwise but were born gay but of course there are normal people who decided to become gay.
It is an acquired trait.
Lawrence of Arabia is a known historical example.
 

[Fernando 6,428]

1 hour ago, Vesper said:

If every jew in Israel was permently removed in the next week and never came back, do explain how that means Islamic nations will take over the world.

I would love to here how only 7.3 million Jews in a country smaller than Haiti, smaller than Belize, and a country that almost 100 per cent dependent on the US for its military projection is necessary to hold back Muslims from taking over the world.

Hell, remove the US from any external efforts at preventing it and even then what Islamic nations are going to take over the EU, Russia, India (despite have a shedload of Muslims, the Hindus dominate ate every level), all of South America, China, Japan, the non Muslim-controlled parts of Africa, etc etc?

Saudi Arabia? LOL, they are nearly as dependent on the US as is Israel and only have around 35 million people.

here is a list of the top 25 countries with the largest number of Muslims in 2022 (in millions)

 

Good luck with that list taking over the world for Islam, lol

 

But the point is still standing. People are against the rw policy and protesting but don't do it for the violation of women in Muslim countries. 

US and Israel are where gays and women have more freedom then if they live in Gaza and Muslim countries. 

Edited Sunday at 13:26 by Fernando

[Vesper 28,494]

2 minutes ago, Fernando said:

But the point is still standing. People are against the rw policy and protesting but don't do it for the violation of women in Muslim countries. 

 

I give no pass whatsover to Muslim countries and any Muslim who individually violates human rights.

They can all FOAD if they engage in sort of anti-human.

I have zero tolerance for any and all barbarous activities and endeavours.

Just because I condemn what Israel is doing in no way prevents any of the others being spared my condemnation.

It is not an either/or thing.

[Vesper 28,494]

14 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

There is no such scientific find.
Everyone knows it's a myth.
There are no people who are normal otherwise but were born gay but of course there are normal people who decided to become gay.
It is an acquired trait.

That is absolute horse-shit, and also laden with nebulous power conceptions like 'normal'.

How dare you try and define my (and countless others throughout human history) inherent qualities, to put me (and the others) into some artificial contrivance and construct of your own adoption.

You are an ignorant and bigoted individual who puts those qualities on display for all to see far too often.

Laughable that you think all non cis-hetero people in history somehow chose their orientation, especially those who pay (or will pay) the ultimate price (death) simply for being who they were and/or are.

[cosmicway 1,303]

7 minutes ago, Vesper said:

That is absolute horse-shit, and also laden with nebulous power conceptions like 'normal'.

How dare you try and define my (and countless others throughout human history) inherent qualities, to put me (and the others) into some artificial contrivance and construct of your own adoption.

You are an ignorant and bigoted individual who puts those qualities on display for all to see far too often.

Laughable that you think all non cis-hetero people in history somehow chose their orientation, especially those who pay (or will pay) the ultimate price (death) simply for being who they were and/or are.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/there-is-no-gay-gene-there-is-no-straight-gene-sexuality-is-just-complex-study-confirms

[Vesper 28,494]

34 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/there-is-no-gay-gene-there-is-no-straight-gene-sexuality-is-just-complex-study-confirms

non sequitur

I never claimed that there was a single 'gay gene' that played the definitive role in determining sexual orientation.

Did you even read the article you posted?

Starting with the title:

There is no ‘gay gene.’ There is no ‘straight gene.’ Sexuality is just complex, study confirms

and more from the article:

There is no single gene responsible for a person being gay or a lesbian.

 

Sexuality cannot be pinned down by biology, psychology or life experiences, this study and others show, because human sexual attraction is decided by all these factors.

 

The study shows that genes play a small and limited role in determining sexuality. Genetic heritability — all of the information stored in our genes and passed between generations — can only explain 8 to 25 percent of why people have same-sex relations, based on the study’s results.

 

Moreover, the researchers found that sexuality is polygenic — meaning hundreds or even thousands of genes make tiny contributions to the trait. That pattern is similar to other heritable (but complex) characteristics like height or a proclivity toward trying new things.

 

For instance, Bailey added, there is no evidence that things like conversion therapy work.

snip

 

and from another article about the study:

 

There’s (Still) No Gay Gene
Genes seem to play a role in determining sexual orientation, but it’s small, uncertain, and complicated.

https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2019/08/there-s-still-no-gay-gene

There is no one gene for being gay, and though genes seem to play a role in determining sexual orientation and same-sex behavior, it’s small, complex, and anything but deterministic.

 

Though the genetic effects are small and their provenance uncertain, Neale continued during the press conference, the results do show that genes have a role to play in the development of sexual behavior. “There is no single gay gene, but rather the contribution of many small genetic effects scattered across the genome,” he emphasized. 

 

Not everyone has embraced the approach of legitimizing homosexuality through genetics, however. “There are people who say it doesn’t matter,” that their rights shouldn’t depend on biochemistry, says Bronski. Others have warned that the search for a genetic cause would pathologize homosexuality in the same way psychology did in the twentieth century: efforts by psychoanalysts such as Irving Bieber led to the inclusion of homosexuality in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders until 1972. 

 

For Bronski, all this effort raises the issue of “Why is this even a question? And why are you doing this research? The genetic part of it, even if there are things people can discover, seems to me to be a minute aspect of the complexity of how people are sexual…It seems to me like doing an analysis of a great novel like Anna Karenina and focusing on the commas and periods rather than the themes.”

Edited Sunday at 14:44 by Vesper

[cosmicway 1,303]

16 minutes ago, Vesper said:

non sequitur

I never claimed that there was a single 'gay gene' that played the definitive role in determining sexual orientation.

Did you even read the article you posted?

Starting with the title:

There is no ‘gay gene.’ There is no ‘straight gene.’ Sexuality is just complex, study confirms

and more from the article:

There is no single gene responsible for a person being gay or a lesbian.

 

Sexuality cannot be pinned down by biology, psychology or life experiences, this study and others show, because human sexual attraction is decided by all these factors.

 

The study shows that genes play a small and limited role in determining sexuality. Genetic heritability — all of the information stored in our genes and passed between generations — can only explain 8 to 25 percent of why people have same-sex relations, based on the study’s results.

 

Moreover, the researchers found that sexuality is polygenic — meaning hundreds or even thousands of genes make tiny contributions to the trait. That pattern is similar to other heritable (but complex) characteristics like height or a proclivity toward trying new things.

 

For instance, Bailey added, there is no evidence that things like conversion therapy work.

snip

 

and from another article about the study:

 

There’s (Still) No Gay Gene
Genes seem to play a role in determining sexual orientation, but it’s small, uncertain, and complicated.

https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2019/08/there-s-still-no-gay-gene

There is no one gene for being gay, and though genes seem to play a role in determining sexual orientation and same-sex behavior, it’s small, complex, and anything but deterministic.

 

Though the genetic effects are small and their provenance uncertain, Neale continued during the press conference, the results do show that genes have a role to play in the development of sexual behavior. “There is no single gay gene, but rather the contribution of many small genetic effects scattered across the genome,” he emphasized. 

 

Not everyone has embraced the approach of legitimizing homosexuality through genetics, however. “There are people who say it doesn’t matter,” that their rights shouldn’t depend on biochemistry, says Bronski. Others have warned that the search for a genetic cause would pathologize homosexuality in the same way psychology did in the twentieth century: efforts by psychoanalysts such as Irving Bieber led to the inclusion of homosexuality in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders until 1972. 

 

For Bronski, all this effort raises the issue of “Why is this even a question? And why are you doing this research? The genetic part of it, even if there are things people can discover, seems to me to be a minute aspect of the complexity of how people are sexual…It seems to me like doing an analysis of a great novel like Anna Karenina and focusing on the commas and periods rather than the themes.”

Look, I 'm not gay but I have the following experience.
I was introduced to a milf, somewhere in Piraeus city.
Not a convent nun by profession.
So I go there and we have wild sex.
After that I get up to walk out and she says "shhhhh - move quietly - the neighbours".
I do that and I put my hand on the doorknob to open it.
But she had locked the door.
She says "oh dearie, let me unlock" and approaches me from behind.
Then with one hand she unlocks the door and with the other hand she puts her finger up right my *ss.
Now that was a hard on. I nearly turned back to say "let's go have another one".
This proves to you something then.
I don't know what happened to her.
Maybe she goes to church now passing the eucharist bread.

[Vesper 28,494]

30 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

Look, I 'm not gay but I have the following experience.
I was introduced to a milf, somewhere in Piraeus city.
Not a convent nun by profession.
So I go there and we have wild sex.
After that I get up to walk out and she says "shhhhh - move quietly - the neighbours".
I do that and I put my hand on the doorknob to open it.
But she had locked the door.
She says "oh dearie, let me unlock" and approaches me from behind.
Then with one hand she unlocks the door and with the other hand she puts her finger up right my *ss.
Now that was a hard on. I nearly turned back to say "let's go have another one".
This proves to you something then.
I don't know what happened to her.
Maybe she goes to church now passing the eucharist bread.

 

[Fulham Broadway 16,742]

56 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

This proves to you something then.

Think this is the first time someone has come out of the closet on TC. 

Topic to be renamed Jerry Springer Thread

[Vesper 28,494]

58 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Think this is the first time someone has come out of the closet on TC. 

Topic to be renamed Jerry Springer Thread

1 hour ago, cosmicway said:

She says "oh dearie, let me unlock" and approaches me from behind.
Then with one hand she unlocks the door and with the other hand she puts her finger up right my *ss.
Now that was a hard on. I nearly turned back to say "let's go have another one".

The neologism "pegging" was popularized due to the sex education movie Bend Over Boyfriend released in 1998. After, it became the winning entry in a contest for the "Savage Love" sex advice column, held by Dan Savage in 2001.

Directed by Shar Rednour
Produced by Fatale Media

Starring Carol Queen and Robert Lawrence

Also starring: Laura Goodhue, Cupcake Jones, M, and Troy

Special guest appearance by Cosmicway

[Fulham Broadway 16,742]

People lurking, reading this thread, saying ''oh its picking up now''