Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the funny-lull dept
This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is BernardoVerda passing along a quote about a specific speech issue that has (ridiculously) been put back up for discussion:
“I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.”
Texas State Senator Craig Washington (D–Houston) on 6 July 1989
- Often mis attributed to the late, great, Texas journalist Molly Ivins (which is how I came across it — an understandable error; it’s so Molly Ivins, but she was in fact quoting the Senator)
In second place, it’s MrWilson with a comment about the ousting of the CDC Director for not being “aligned with the president’s agenda”:
It makes so much more sense when every time illegal, unethical, or just insane behavior is justified by this administration using the phrase “the president’s agenda,” you substitute in “for der Führer and the glory of the Fatherland.” And no, that’s not hyperbole. Trump and his cronies are acting as if getting elected means Trump gets to do whatever he wants regardless of the legality or ethics. That is authoritarianism. That is anti-democratic. That is unconstitutional. And courts and Democrats had best stop rolling over or else they’ll find they’ve rolled themselves into a corner.
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we’ve got a pair of comments from n00bdragon. First, it’s a response to the assertion that Trump’s crackdown on DC is working to reduce crime:
You really think the national guard is rounding up all those murderers cruising the capitol mall? They aren’t actually policing the bad neighborhoods. Now, if you were a Trump flunky (you are, so just put yourself in this position I guess) what would you do if Donald J Trump himself told you “there better not be any crimes in DC, ever, because it’s solved now”. Would you accurately report a murder? Keep in mind, he just finished canning someone last week for reporting accurate statistics he didn’t like.
Next, it’s a comment about using Nixon as a benchmark for presidential crime:
Pretty sure we left mere Nixon-levels of criminality in the dust way back in Jan 2021.
Over on the funny side, it’s one again a bit of a slow week, with only a couple comments just barely racking up the votes to get badges — so we’ll forego the editor’s choice and just look at the two winners. In first place, it’s BernardoVerda again, this time with a different take on DC:
Too be fair, there has in fact been an ongoing and rapidly worsening crime spree in Washington DC, for many months now.
It’s actually pretty hard to miss, seeing as how it’s openly operating out of large, highly visible establishment at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, is barely bothering to disguise even its most blatantly unlawful activities, and is quite actively extending it’s tentacles across the entire country.
Only the most willfully blind fool could miss it.
In second place, it’s an anonymous comment about the right using DEI as a reason to destroy everything:
The real issue is that we didn’t have DEI for stupid white people. Now we have DEI for stupid white people.
That’s all for this week, folks!
Comments on “Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt”
Not a democracy
When a WHOLE group, plays Follow the leader.
But, if you want to FIX this. Do something that THEY are responsible for. THE People get the final Vote. As we have to live by it.
And if you want to Give all the republicans a headache. Publish the Vote from the last 15 years, of Which side Voted down the Fed Min wage. Then Look at all the repub states that NOW have a STATE Min wage. And post those wages per state.
They Arnt balanced, as they would be if they were Federal.
Re:
When it comes to federal minimum wage bills, like the Raise the Wage Act that keeps popping up (there’s versions from 2013, 2019, 2021, 2023, and 2025), the pattern is pretty clear: Democrats mostly vote yes to raising the wage, and Republicans mostly vote no. In fact, Republicans have been the main group blocking these bills from passing in the Senate and sometimes the House. There are always a few exceptions, but it’s a strong trend overall.
Here’s a quick summary of how it’s gone:
Democrats generally support raising the minimum wage.
Republicans generally don’t.
Bills like the Raise the Wage Act usually pass in the House when Dems are in charge but get blocked in the Senate because of Republican opposition.
The latest 2025 version wants to raise the federal wage to $17 by 2030, eliminating sub-minimums for tipped and disabled workers, but it’s still stuck because of those votes.
Now for the states… especially ones with Republican leadership or control. Most stick with the federal minimum of $7.25. But some have their own higher minimum wages, which is interesting, like Arkansas at $11, Florida at $14 (planning to hit $15 in 2026), Missouri at $13.75 and Nebraska at $13.50. The rest mostly hover at the $7.25 federal line.
Oh, we left Nixon levels of criminality behind around 1985, Reagan levels of criminality behind during the Bush Administration, and Bush levels of criminality behind well before the last month of Trump’s first term.
Re:
All of which is to say, fuck Gerald Ford for pardoning Nixon and fuck Barack Obama for his limp-wristed “we tortured some folks” response to Bush’s wanton criminality.
Re: Re:
“For the sake of healing the nation, we’re not going to hold anyone accountable and we’re not going to put more safeguards in place to prevent it in the future…”
Re: Re: Re:
“I’m sure everybody learned their lesson.”
Re: Re: Re:2
Unfortunately for almost everyone, they did.
Re: Re:
(OTOH I don’t blame Merrick Garland for the failed prosecution against Trump; I think he did as well as anybody could within a criminal justice system that was unprepared for Trump’s delays, the Supreme Court actively protecting him, and an electorate that was willing to reelect him after watching him attempt to overthrow the government on live TV.)
Re: Re: Re:
I do blame Merrick Garland (and Biden) for slow-walking the all-important Jan 6 prosecution of Trump. They made a calculated decision that a hopelessly discredited Trump would recapture the GOP and lead it to certain defeat in 2024. Unfortunately for the country, they disastrously underestimated Trump’s power of recovery.
Re: Re: Re:2
This claim rests on a series of massive assumptions.
1)That a judge wouldn’t dismiss the claim under the Brandenburg standard.
2)That an appellate court or SCOTUS wouldn’t throw out the case under the Brandenburg standard.
3) SCOTUS wouldn’t invent a rule that says Trump is above the law (They did this, j6 prosecution would never work).
4) That if SCOTUS invented presidential immunity, it wouldn’t apply to J6.
5) That a successful prosecution would mean Jail time.
6) That his martyrdom wouldn’t be just as useful for a campaign by another supermicist.
7) That a failed prosuctuion (courts shut it down, jury deadlocks) wouldn’t have benefitted his ‘the government persecuted me, ill destory the government’ narrative.
And those are just the assumptions you are making about trump. How many voters do you lose if you aren’t going up against trump? You think as many dem voters come out when its not florida hitler? Do you understanmd how many voters only voted Biden 2.0 because they wanted to stop Trump 2.0?
Harris was cast as the progressive vote draw. She was not. Combined with a lack of messaging, dems had a very weak ticket. Trump was the big advnatage for dems. That was the big move to pull in the progressive vote. Run against trump. Harris would have been weaker against a newer opponent.
Re: Re: Re:2
I don’t think they slow-walked it; I think that’s a fundamental misunderstanding of just how fucking slow the criminal justice system is.
I’d recommend this article by Marcy Wheeler: The Opportunity Costs of Conspiracy Theories about Merrick Garland
Re: Re: Re:
All of the legal actions against Trump came too late. They thought they could bring cases in 2023 and have them wrapped up before Trump would be back in office and able to dismiss the cases against himself.
The only time a legal battle involving Trump gets resolved that quickly, is when Trump files an obviously dumb lawsuit in a place that has good enough protections against obviously dumb lawsuits.
Re: Re: Re:2
They took a long time, but we don’t have enough information to know if they wasted time preparing. Big complicated high profile cases take more preparation and evidence-gathering and ass-covering. Trump’s team was going to attack every angle, so they likely wanted to be ready for anything. The courts are where everything got delayed. SCOTUS and Trump judges provided that cover.
Re: Re:
No notes on this comment doublet.
ok
Now I want a shirt with the constitution on it.
distinctions
forego != forgo
Re:
I love Forgo. Juno Temple fucking crushed it in the latest season.
" it’s one again a bit of a slow week,"
The Worst/funny part in HOW news is?
That its REPEATED OVER AND ON EVERY F’ing CHANNEL FOREVER.
Which is why REAL news gets buried. There Isnt enough News to go around. And Why so many have QUIT, regular TV and even Much of the Internet/newspaper Type News.
Tehy Pickup and REPEAT the same thing/opinions Over and over. And generally there is little to NO logic, Cause you Get OPINION/He said so, news.