Comments by "TheThirdMan" (@thethirdman225) on "news.com.au" channel.

There are a few DEI hires in his own administration...
4
@David C No he doesn't. He said transition.
4
Not really. Nobody is going to outlaw the oil industry. Their plan, like that of many other modern democracies, is simply to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. That doesn't stop oil companies from producing lubricants, for example. It can't be done overnight either. It will take a generation. And when you look at the strides made by companies like Tesla and Toyota in electric commuter vehicles, it's hard to see too many negatives.
3
I think you’ve forgotten why he left Red Bull in the first place. He had wins under his belt yet he was being usurped by the then as-yet unproven Max Verstappen, while being gaslighted by Helmut Marko. Red Bull have a right to run their team their way but when you have toxic people like Marko or Jos Verstappen involved, it’s pretty hard to imagine how anyone could be entirely happy there. Marko just went the same route he did with Mark Webber. He just gaslit him until he left.
2
@rockstargrader That was a self-fulfilling prophecy. Helmut Marko and Jos Verstappen made sure of it.
2
@ LOL!! Well played. Add to that Elon Musk (neurodiverse) and a couple of background actors, Sam Altman (gay) and Peter Thiel (also gay).
2
Because they are writing for a specific audience.
2
@tmayne220 I’m not. I’m relating what he said. Sure, there will be legislation that says there are things you can and can’t do. That’s not outlawing an entire industry. Besides, you do a lot more with oil than just burning it.
2
"just so they can say they care. It makes no difference in the end. It's just for the show." Ya think? Really? So they're either going to deliver on it which, in your mind, will mean the end of the oil industry or they're not going to do it, in which case, what are you worried about? I don't get it. They can't just say stuff just for show and simultaneously destroy the oil industry. "Ehem foreign policy. All hail CCP" How so? I thought the Reps were trying to make the case he was pro-Russia.
2
You're not listening. You're not even listening to yourself.
2
Well I haven’t seen you come up with anything believable. So yep. I ignored you. Good bye.
2
@benmoon2688 Well, what do you think "stand by" means?
2
If you believe the answer is as simple as that, you probably believe in Father Christmas and the Easter Bunny.
2
Fascist regime? Who were the ones waving fascist flags at the Capitol building the other day? Who are the ones who refuse to acknowledge 61/62 recounts? Who are the ones who wanted to hang Mike Pence? Not the left wing. Not “big tech”. You are so blind to fascism that you’re supporting it.
1
@trebleizerquartet1717 Answer the questions I asked first. No rigged election either. If you’re going to claim that then you’re going to have to examine all the states Trump won too. Lost 61/62 court cases. Lost the recounts. Lost in the Supreme Court. Lost the College votes Lost, lost, lost. Everyone is sick of the lies and the sore losers. Trump lost. Get over it. Anyone with a brain would be planning for 2024.
1
@trebleizerquartet1717 Tech companies can ban whoever they like. You agree to the terms and conditions when you sign up.
1
@trebleizerquartet1717 Anyone who thinks that the fascists are rigging the election and everyone else is protesting is just manipulating facts to fit the storyline. Nothing new for the Trump camp. The trouble is that Trumpism and fascism are so close that the adherents are completely blinded by their own sense of righteousness and grievance. Just about everything Trump has done over the past few months has been straight up fascism. 1) Firing experienced Pentagon staff and stacking the Pentagon with loyalists, 2) cult of personality, 3) framing everything as a struggle or battle, 4) identifiable enemies, 5) rampant nationalism, 6) call to unify against a common enemy, 7) compromising public institutions, 8) blatant sexism and racism, 9) anti-democratic rhetoric and 10) encouraging people to attack public institutions. Last Wednesday was Trump’s Bierhalle Pusch.
1
@trebleizerquartet1717 Don’t flatter yourself. You haven’t got a point.
1
@trebleizerquartet1717 You’re the one still carrying on about stolen elections.
1
@trebleizerquartet1717 By the way: fascist isn’t just a name to be thrown around against whoever you don’t like.
1
@trebleizerquartet1717 First and foremost, the claims to freedom of speech do not extend to lies or incitement, which can be found on platforms such as Parker. Google and Apple can take whatever action they deem necessary to limit the spread of insurrectionist material. This is not a first amendment matter, nor is it a matter of being anti-competitive. Secondly, the social media companies can do as they please with regard to deleting posts or suspending/banning posters. You should know this because you agreed to terms and conditions when you signed up. Finally, just throwing around the term or implication of “fascism” to describe something you don’t like doesn’t make any point more valid. Fascism conforms to fairly specific norms which few understand. Judged by those norms, Trump is very close to, if not actually, fascist and few who know anything about it would doubt it. Calling me a coward doesn’t make you right either. Get over yourself.
1
@trebleizerquartet1717 You must think you’re arguing with someone as sensitive as you are. Since you don’t know what a fascist is, I’m hardly likely to worry about you calling me one. Read the points I made about what constitutes fascism. You still don’t know what it is and you’re still throwing it around as some sort of insult. You’re not even arguing on the same plane. And no, when it comes to what gets published - I’m assuming you know what constitutes publishing - publishers are under no obligation to promote anything that is clearly and demonstrably false. You’re arguing this same old canard that all points of view deserve the same weight. They don’t. This is why I said companies are under no obligation to provide platforms for things that are demonstrably untrue. Arguing that losing 61/62 court cases, all the recounts, losing in the Supreme Court and losing the College vote would not meet a reasonable standard of proof as a case to continue to post claims of massive electoral victory when it is used to incite is a nonsense. Publishers are under no obligation to publish what you think they should. Especially when it incites. Apparently you know nothing about publishing laws.
1
Except that the polls mostly didn’t get it wrong. Of the last two weeks they showed a steadily shrinking Biden margin and they said it would be a close election. And for the most part, they were right.
1
@ Elon Musk (neurodiverse) and a couple of background actors like Sam Altman (gay) and Peter Thiel (gay). Now how's about you focus on the real topic here: Trump has made an accusation he can't prove. So if the onus of proof is on anyone, it isn't me. Good luck.
1
@ LOL!! Their only qualifications are their belief that 2020 was a stolen election, their loyalty to Trump and their addiction to ’owning the libs’ as an instrument of policy. Why else would you appoint an avowed anti-vaxxer with brain damage Secretary for Health? Trump’s new cabinet will be a revolving door of chuckleheads who are simply unqualified or have so many skeletons in their closet that they are simply too much of a liability. Musk, Altman and Thiel are a different matter. The tech bros are the power behind the leadership. And they’re barking mad.
1
I guess we don't need an investigation now. Apparently common sense is all that was needed and the cause is obvious... I'm afraid common sense isn't going to be very common for the next few years.
1
@joey23 It was an unfortunately common sentiment in the 1860s...
1
Yep.
1
Steady pair of hands.
1
They didn't get it wrong. The vast majority of polls predicted a Biden win.
1
@pd8506 Polls don't do that.
1
@benmoon2688 I disagree. Instead of telling them to go home and stop taking the law into their own hands, which they’re not entitled to do, he told them to stand by. That is not a clear directive. If he had said the former nobody would be in any doubt.
1
@benmoon2688 I had a think about what you said afterwards and I can kind of see where you're coming from.
1
There was always someone who was going to be unhappy about this. Anyone who thinks this is easy is delusional. No good blaming Andrews unless you’re prepared to put yourself up there and take the heat.
1