🐱 Interesting clickbait, op-eds, fluff pieces and other smaller stories

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/24/caitlyn-jenner-halloween-costume-sparks-social-media-outrage-.html

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...een-costume-labeled-817515?utm_source=twitter

It's nowhere near October, but one ensemble is already on track to be named the most controversial Halloween costume of 2015.

Social media users were out in full force on Monday criticizing several Halloween retailers for offering a Caitlyn Jenner costume reminiscent of the former-athlete's Vanity Fair cover earlier this year.

While Jenner's supporters condemned the costume as "transphobic" and "disgusting" on Twitter, Spirit Halloween, a retailer that carries the costume, defended the getup.

"At Spirit Halloween, we create a wide range of costumes that are often based upon celebrities, public figures, heroes and superheroes," said Lisa Barr, senior director of marking at Spirit Halloween. "We feel that Caitlyn Jenner is all of the above and that she should be celebrated. The Caitlyn Jenner costume reflects just that."

 

[hotcheetospuffs]

Have you gotten a pizza with the cheese still attached?

Always.

 

[omori]

https://www.adweek.com/creativity/c...e-little-table-that-comes-inside-pizza-boxes/

View attachment 508171

You know what would make those plastic pizza-saver thingies that come inside takeout boxes look even more like tiny tables?


Tiny chairs!

Boston Pizza (a Canadian chain, actually) and John St. oblige with the Pizza Patio Set, which features miniature chairs in addition to the saver, aka the “pizza table” or “ottoman,” which is designed to keep that greasy cardboard lid from mashing your sweet, sweet pie.

View attachment 508172

“Patio season is a big deal for Canadians,” says client senior director of marketing Adrian Fuoco. “This was all about creating something fun that was part of our larger patio season initiative. Ultimately, we found a way to bring together the two things we’re passionate about — patios and pizza.”

The chairs were 3D printed using food-safe materials, and a limited number will be delivered with orders from select Boston Pizza locations.

If you want to kick back in bed with that doughy delight — and your physical specs fall within the typical range for humans — you might want to track down one of these pizza box/table combos from the chain’s previous promotion.

Finally, some good fucking news.

 

[Wesley Willis]

" online abusers feed off attention and the knowledge that they’ve caused their victims pain."


Kind of like people who think they're actual victims because someone said some words about them online? And especially ones who go one step further and try to write articles about it.

 

[Haramburger]

“Patio season is a big deal for Canadians,” says client senior director of marketing Adrian Fuoco. “This was all about creating something fun that was part of our larger patio season initiative. Ultimately, we found a way to bring together the two things we’re passionate about — patios and pizza.”

#CATPARTYMODDED

 

[Flying_with_the_Penguins]

Holy shit, its called a block button you stupid bitch.

When did SJW millennials start having the tech literacy of senile boomers?

 

[Lysol]

Finally, some good fucking news.

Incoming story about children choking to death on tiny plastic chairs.

 

[neverendingmidi]

Incoming story about children choking to death on tiny plastic chairs.

It’s Canada, not the US. Not quite so sue-happy.

I think they even have normal Kinder eggs.

 

[Red Sun]

>don't feed the trolls doesn't work
>I fed the trolls
>they got worse than they were before

Huh.

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/31/politics/donald-trump-rudy-giuliani/index.html

(CNN)The biggest misconception surrounding the special counsel probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election is that it will likely end in some sort of legal proceeding involving President Donald Trump. It won't -- for a bunch of reasons, the most important of which is that Robert Mueller, who is running the investigation, doesn't seem to believe a sitting President can be indicted.

The much more likely outcome is that Mueller releases the findings from his investigation sometime this fall — and lets the chips, as they relate to Trump, fall where they may. Which means — and this is what Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani have understood for months — that, ultimately, this isn't a legal fight, it's a public relations one.

Giuliani tipped his hand on that strategy Monday in an interview with CNN's Alisyn Camerota. "I'll be here with my version of the report and they'll have their version of the report and the American people, in that sense, are going to decide it," Giuliani said of the Mueller investigation.

The Trump Tower meeting: A timeline

"My version" vs. "their version." What that construct from Giuliani misses, of course, is that one of the "versions" will be the result of a Justice Department-commissioned investigation led by the former head of the FBI that has already spanned more than a year. The other "version" will be Giuliani's cable TV appearances and President Trump's tweets.

That is, on its face, an apples-and-oranges comparison. But remember what Giuliani and Trump know: The debate over whether and how much Trump did wrong (if anything) is almost certain to be decided in the court of public opinion, not an actual court. And in the court of public opinion -- particularly given the fealty that rank-and-file Republicans have shown (and continue to show) to Trump, the comparison is far more favorable to Trump's side.

Quick, do this thought experiment: Name the first 10 words that come to mind when someone says "Mueller probe." If you are being honest with yourself, my guess is that the words "no collusion," "witch hunt" and maybe even "13 Angry Democrats" made it into that top 10. What that means is that even if you roll your eyes when you hear "no collusion," it seeps into your consciousness — and that's a win for Trump.

Especially when you consider that lots and lots of people aren't rolling their eyes when Trump unleashes a tweet blasting the allegedly partisan bias of Mueller's team or how the whole probe is based on false pretenses. In a CBS News poll released earlier this week, 70% of Republicans described the Mueller probe as a "witch hunt." That same poll showed that more than nine in 10 "strong Trump supporters" trust Trump for "accurate information" as compared to 63% who trust "family and friends" and 11% who trust the "mainstream media."

Need more? In March, roughly three in 10 Republicans approved of Robert Mueller in CNN polling. By May, that number was down to 17% approval. That data is backed up by other polls. Last July, a Politico/Morning Consult survey showed that 27% of Republicans had an unfavorable view of Mueller. By this June, that number was 53%.

Those numbers speak to the effectiveness of the PR campaign against Mueller (and his team) by Giuliani and Trump. It also speaks to the fact that this is largely a one-sided conversation. Mueller himself never speaks in public. The special counsel's office has released only a handful of statements since it was created. Mueller is, rightly, focused on running an effective and thorough investigation. But that leaves him and his team uniquely vulnerable to the campaign-style attacks by Trump and Giuliani. An attack unresponded to, in the context of politics, is an attack believed by some chunk of the voting public. Again, that isn't Mueller's concern. He is focused on drawing fact-based conclusions and releasing them in a report. He's not planning to run for anything.

Trump, on the other hand, is running for a second term. And the President has shown time and time again he is willing to say and do whatever it takes to win an argument in the court of public opinion. Which is what he has set about doing over the past six months or so.

Mock all the "no collusion" and "collusion isn't even a crime" comments if you want. But remember that a big chunk of people already believe — before Mueller has released a single final finding — that his whole probe is a partisan witch hunt that should never have been started in the first place. Short of Mueller producing an email from Trump saying "Yes, let's collude with Russia ASAP!" those people will not change their view — either on Mueller or Trump. (In truth, even if Mueller did produce an email from Trump that clearly showed collusion with the Russians, I'm not sure that would change the base's view.)

That's the secret Trump and Giuliani know -- and have been executing against for months. And like it or not, it's working.

 

[Derp Potato]

Why do I hope, just to watch the media completely flip shit, that Mueller comes out and says the DNC and the Clintons colluded with Russia and/or foreign nationals.

 

[GnomeofDoc]

Why do I hope, just to watch the media completely flip shit, that Mueller comes out and says the DNC and the Clintons colluded with Russia and/or foreign nationals.

I don’t know man don’t get your hopes up yet we don’t even have a date when Muller will release their findings.

 

[ADN_VIII]

I don’t know man don’t get your hopes up yet we don’t even have a date when Muller will release their findings.

Definitely don't hold your breath. It took years for Watergate to run it's course. Even nailing Enron to the wall took a while.

 

[Nobunaga]

I don’t know man don’t get your hopes up yet we don’t even have a date when Muller will release their findings.

If muller decides to share his findings how long until the alphabet agencys, the clinton mafia, the democrats want a piece of his ass buried 40 feet underground?

 

[Yoda]

Posting your personal opinions to Twitter for the world to see is a voluntary action, of course you are bringing it on yourself. Take some responsibility, Geraldine.

 

[adorable bitch]

Even my little sister is more intelligent and thick skinned than this middle aged dumb thot.
Because she happens to know what a block button is.

 

[Hux]

I'm going to get this tweet engraved in gold and put in the Smithsonian if it kills me

 

[NomiMalone]

These op-ed pieces posing as actual news are annoying as hell, especially when its core is manufactured outrage.

“Don’t feed the trolls” is an oft-quoted refrain whenever online abuse comes up, but it is far too simple, and as the (anonymous) writer of this brilliant piece notes, it is hardly effective.

No, Geraldine, that user "Film Crit Hulk" is not an anonymous writer. It's Mike Symonds, some random white dude. Why are you allowing him to mansplain to you how online abuse works? He also wrote some dumb shit about Roseanne dogwhistling racism a few months ago.

Spoiler: Quora is now a source of dox!

 

[Slap47]

There’s a lot of discussion about how we need to reach out and talk to people who disagree with us – how we need to extend an olive branch and find common ground – and that’s a lovely sentiment, but in order for that to work, the other party needs to be … well, not a raging asshole

Perhaps twitter is just a place to shout shit for internet points and not a good venue for discussion where long anecdotes and citations can be used?

 

[Y2K Baby]

She does seem to be a cunt

Do you consider yourself to be a verbal abuser of women?

 

[Coccxys]

President Donald Trump's recent tweets against open borders come as no surprise. Indeed, even fervent immigration advocates worry that open borders would lower the wages of low-skilled natives, erode national security, and overburden the social safety net. Trump doubled down, tweeting that he would be "willing to 'shut down' government" unless Congress approves funding for a border wall with Mexico.

Trump, however, has it exactly backwards: The solution to America’s immigration problems is open borders, under which the United States imposes no immigration restrictions at all. If the U.S. adopts this policy, the benefits will far outweigh the costs.

Legalize ALL immigration
Illegal immigration will disappear, by definition. Much commentary on immigration — Trump and fellow travelers aside — suggests that legal immigration is good and that illegal immigration is bad. So, legalize all immigration.

Government will then have no need to define or interpret rules about asylum, economic hardship, family reunification, family separation, DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and so on. When all immigration is legal, these issues are irrelevant.

The question of fairness about who enters first — those who waited in line or those who entered illegally — disappears. Amnesty for existing illegal immigrants also becomes a non-issue. Or an open borders policy could require anyone who entered illegally to exit the country — for exactly five minutes — and then re-enter legally.

Think about the money we could save and make
Expenditure on immigration enforcement would shrink to nothing, because open borders means no walls, fences, screening at airports, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), deportations, detention centers or immigration courts. A 2013 report estimated that immigration enforcement cost more than $18 billion annually, and standard indicators suggest costs have grown further since then.

Last year, U.S. employers filed over 336,000 petitions for H1-B visas for highly skilled foreign workers, but only 197,129 were approved. Complicated visa rules — for tourists versus job-seekers, STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) workers versus agricultural laborers, and students versus non-students — would all vanish. This would save resources and give employers new access to talented human capital.

More: My grandfather wouldn't be allowed into America under Donald Trump's policies

I was a 'lost boy' of Sudan and the US welcomed me. More refugees deserve that chance.

MS-13 beat me up and threatened to kill me. Then the US government took my kids.

The time people waste re-entering the country will evaporate. How often do you face long delays when entering Oklahoma from Texas? Never. But how often do you experience delays when you leave other countries for the United States? Almost always. One study pegs the cost of wait times at the U.S.-Mexico border alone to be more than $12 billion a year.

Economic efficiency will increase both in the USA and in immigrant-sending countries, because different kinds of labor will be better matched around the world to their most productive activity. This benefits the immigrants who earn higher incomes, but also U.S. consumers who face lower prices for imported goods and services. One academic study predicts that if borders were open everywhere, world gross domestic product could be twice its current value.

They will send their best
The government’s fiscal balance could actually improve with more legal immigrants earning income and paying taxes in America. And under open borders, any added immigration will plausibly come from those with even higher skills and incomes, who faced weaker incentives to immigrate when faced with the burden of current restrictions.

Expenditure on the welfare state will contract because even if immigrants vote for welfare spending, existing residents will vote for less generous benefits when they believe these accrue to recent immigrants.

What about possible bad outcomes of open borders?
Immigrants will not flood into America, although the rate of immigration might increase. Instead, much of the immigration will be temporary. Return migration happens because most people want to be near their families, surrounded by their own language, culture or religion.

If immigrants know they can re-immigrate, they are less likely to put down roots. Instead, many will come for a few years, to work or study, and then depart. This happens routinely in the European Union, which has mainly abolished immigration restrictions among member states, and it was common historically during periods of relatively open borders. Plus, increased immigration will lower wage differentials across countries, reducing the incentive to immigrate.

Crime will not skyrocket. Available evidence shows that immigrants are no more crime-prone than natives. And the additional immigrants likely to enter under open borders would plausibly be even less so, because they have shown respect for the law by not immigrating illegally.

Terrorists could well enter via open borders, but they do so now illicitly. Little evidence suggests that our immigration restrictions prevent terrorist attacks.

U.S. culture will not change dramatically. America’s immigrants have a long history of assimilation, and most have at least some affinity for American values. Indeed, the world is already more "Americanized" than ever. Even if values and culture change, so what? That happens in free societies. Who says America’s current values — some of them deeply evil — are the right ones?

Open borders are not without risks. Social safety nets might come under pressure, and natives will face added competition for jobs (though the evidence on this is mixed).

Ultimately, immigrants have always been vital to America’s economic strength and to its commitment to freedom. Since its founding, the United States has grown from a motley collection of colonies to one of the richest countries in the world, with some of our fastest growth occurring when immigrants arrived in large numbers.

America has nothing to fear, and much to gain, from open borders.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opini...-combat-illegal-immigration-column/862185002/

So apparently if they fling open the doors only the best and brightest will come and the country wont be instantly flooded. The magical pixies of the gumdrop forest will probably also appear to gift us all delicious treats but he's keeping that one quiet for now.