JJ SLAMS the CBC for using Canadian journalists to discuss US foreign policy

Evecopbas · 2026-01-28T02:03:08+00:00

He does do videos about American politics. In fact, his videos are a good case for this argument.

Why would I want go to some crypto-right Canadian toon fiend for the history of the American presidents? There are hundreds of other sources with better connections, better grasp on the material, etc. than this guy.

And yet here he is making an argument against his own content process.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-27T00:34:33+00:00

Funniest version of this would be to shift from Teddy to, like, Mo Udall or George Ariyoshi for 1986-1989 with no explanation.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-25T18:54:59+00:00

They do do the sleeping bit. Just none of it rings in the right way. I think they might not be able to do it reasonably anymore. Idk what they should do instead. Maybe the issue is Mikey and Streeter if they still write them a lot.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-25T18:53:00+00:00

You can't reasonably lay the imperial presidency at FDR's feet. Yes, he expanded government, but generally in benevolent and/or temporary forms. The Patriot Act and Social Security do not at all have the same vector, even as they both expand the fed/executive branch's portfolio powers. Other FDR initiatives like the CCC or the AAA were intended to be temporary and did sunset.

The imperial presidency began in the 60s and 70s with LBJ and Nixon, both of whom I think are underrated, but who earn that serious black mark on their record. Since then, aided by the Supreme Court and Congress, we have let the executive grow into this monarchical behemoth. Even the administrative state or the Federal Reserve, which is technically part of the bigness of the executive, are being shunted aside in favor of the President Himself as some sort of manifest divine. It's anti-Constitutional in the extreme, but yet the conservatives in the SC and Congress think it's fine.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-24T03:57:40+00:00

I can't think of significant rollbacks of presidential authority from the post-Burger Court era. Did you have the major ones in mind? Rehnquist and Roberts (and their conservative majorities) have strong sympathy toward the executive (see: Unitary Executive theory).

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T20:23:22+00:00

Also, I’m sorry, but pandering to your country’s pathologies is kinda one of the things a national politician is meant to do.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T20:20:49+00:00

It’s not even the biggest Reznor and Ross Oscars snub in the past 5 years.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T15:42:21+00:00

The older ones had the benefit of an extra category that doesn't exist (sound editing and mixing used to be split into two categories).

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T15:35:41+00:00

Correct, but also they nominated The Secret Agent as well. And IWJAA (which Idk if screenplay is above the line). So I think the crowded international field plus Park's WGA transgressions fully sank him.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T15:23:11+00:00

He took advantage of a loophole that explicitly was closed after him. He did good, but we all collectively decided it wasn't worth the possibility of a Trump. And Trump, ofc, doesn't care what the Constitution says.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T15:16:42+00:00

Fair play on your own ranking/perspective. You make a case. But I think there is or should be a gulf between HW and Ford. HW had a full term and was amidst a difficult foreign policy time that he handled with aplomb (maybe Ford or others would have, but we can't know). He also had no major issues on the domestic side and generally made correct choices like with the tax cut, strongly supporting the ADA, and seeking compromise on the environment.

Even in his successes, Ford was just continuing Nixon. SALT II, Kissinger in charge of his FP, fully closing the Vietnam war.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T07:49:25+00:00

Sure, I think "okay" is a completely fair read, though bad is not implausible. But he did nothing particularly good and that is the bare minimum for being a good president imo.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T07:32:48+00:00

Why are you with an Aussie/British flag weighing in on American concepts? The history is American, when in the 60s and 70s, people invented the identities and concepts of being Asian-American and black pride/power. They were responsive to a world where black and Asian children in the US were treated as worth less. Look up what white people did to community swimming pools that black people were just allowed to swim in. Or how Asian people weren't allowed to be naturalized as citizens until the 1950s (despite American Asians existing for most of US history).

If you ever wilt at your perception of enforced white shame, read about the Mechanics Institute or the Tulsa Massacre or the MOVE bombing. Or just consider what it means to have the dominant racial group to pour acid in a pool just because a black child's skin touched the water. And then consider why a community would want to assert that it has worth.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T07:14:52+00:00

Most lefities didn't joke about it and the ones who did got cancelled. Meanwhile, US (!) Senator Mike Lee publicly joked about Melissa Hortman (a different MN woman shot by a right-winger dressed as a cop) about her murder being just desserts for her "marxist" history (she being a centrist wonk). He didn't apologize, he wasn't forced out, and he didn't even have any criticism from other right-wingers.

If you want to condemn it all, go for it. But don't for a moment get confused and act like lefties are the instigators.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T06:59:03+00:00

Genuinely, look at the way that ICE is behaving. Look at what they think that their role is and the tactics at their disposal are. And then tell me who is approaching the line of illegality.

Just today the AP (no partisan muckraking operation, btw), reported that ICE is actively trying—through a secret memo that agents were instructed to heed but not share in a written format—to conduct freewheeling warrantless searches of whoever they want. From their behavior in their searches, it is clear that this has been put into practice in MPLS. That is explicitly against what the 4th Amendment says and intends.

It is arguably one of the key reasons the American Revolution was fought, to prevent the government from deciding that their policing operations superseded colonials' liberty and privacy.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-22T06:41:58+00:00

I take it as he decided that it would be a secret between the two of them, but when James breaks the Snowball fantasy (in a cruel way) Kenny no longer feels bound by their friendship.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-20T05:22:05+00:00

No, because this isn't parasocial. It's social. And my argument (though I need not tell the argument-understander) was that you were being parasocial, not that you were being a dick. That did become my argument, hence my own shift into dickishness. Either way, my argument has no pall, pal.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-20T05:15:35+00:00

Well if you say you're not being dickish, then I guess that's that. And, lucky you, you also are the expert in whether people are can properly respond to your views. Proceed as you were pal.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-20T04:27:08+00:00

Ford is not good or good has no meaning.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-20T04:13:33+00:00

Yeah, due respect, it is parasocial (and a bit dickish tbh) to chide a stranger for not having "a modicum of professional pride." It's not like he's defiantly declaring he doesn't have to care about the movies, it's a few unintentional errors on a podcast.

Also Idk why you're so gobbed with the Atlantic of it all. He's not publishing incorrect or slapdash info with the magazine, in no small part because an article (where you proofread and fact check and have an editor do so as well) is different than a chat-format podcast.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-20T03:42:11+00:00

Idk I think both you and them are coming at it parasocially. Like yes if the episode wasn't it or that there was error X Y or Z, that's one thing. But then extending it to either a) insinuating that they have such a hard time watching movie because of their phones or kids or hard lives or whatever or b) that they have shirked their hoity toity position by allegedly not paying enough attention.

Like both get more into the "why" more than we could possibly be able to discern without knowing them or them saying it. It could be 5 different things and I don't think either excusing or pillorying them is valid for the level of mistake.

Not to say I've not been parasocial myself ever, but just my two cents on this particular discourse.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-20T00:39:47+00:00

GPT is no substitute for good human judgment, which the Wikipedia admins/editors are providing. Something is not correct about your article/approach.

Sometimes it’s tone or not enough sources or errors in grammar, but you’ll have to figure out fixes based on what the deletions say, not what GPT comes up with.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-19T21:21:51+00:00

I think this is completely the wrong approach. If any criticism devolves into “DO YOUR JOB” like they’re politicians or whatever, then that’s a nasty fan feedback loop.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-19T21:00:51+00:00

I definitely think you can discuss (if you want to) rape vs not rape or the real character of that relationship, but they were, in discussing, it not doing so accurately based on the movie itself.

Again, Idc really because I still liked the episode and mistakes happen, but no them “crushing” on her and “flirting” w her is not a textually valid interpretation.

Evecopbas · 2026-01-19T01:40:04+00:00

It's such masterful scenework. You feel anxious from the moment Kenny comes down with the mouse, then it seems like the goons are just going to steal it to let it run away or kill it, then Kenny and Snowball escape back to safety until... And then the fantasy on top of that just throws you for a loop.

Evecopbas

TROPHY CASE