MrWilson 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (2523)

• On the post: John Roberts Wants You To Stop Believing Your Own Eyes

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 07 May, 2026 @ 10:26am

  This feels like Robert E. Lee telling slaves that they shouldn't criticize him for fighting the North so hard in order to preserve the "right" of slaveholders to enslave them. It's an inherently patronizing and blatantly bullshit take. He also seems to think unpopular just means "people don't like it" rather than "it's actually an unconstitutional power grab."

• On the post: John Roberts Wants You To Stop Believing Your Own Eyes

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 07 May, 2026 @ 10:18am

  I'd explain it, but the comments don't allow for a script that loads a completely different explanation every time you glance at it or respond to it, whatever serves the argument in the moment.

• On the post: Voter Suppression In South Dakota Is Well Underway, Even Without SCOTUS’s Help

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 06 May, 2026 @ 09:42pm

  there is basically no one to be “racist” against in South Dakota.

  "It's okay to be racist if you're only racist towards a few people..." is a weird argument to make. Also, about 180,000 non-white residents in the state is a lot of people, so "basically no one" is the bigot math we expect from you. You're literally erasing people of color here. This is an act of racism. But continue to tell us you're not racist. "I didn't say the n-word so it's not true!"

  Everyone has a right to be armed.

  Not according to the law, no. Toddlers? Convicted criminals? "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."

  • Noted gun nut Antonin Scalia, DC v Heller

  Ergo, you have to check who is a citizen.

  Read the article. It literally covers the issues relating to checking. Who decides what is valid proof? Racists like you?

  and I’m the “bad faith”.

  Yep, always will be.

• On the post: Trump’s Anti-Migration Purge Is Breaking Up Military Families, Screwing Afghan Allies

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 06 May, 2026 @ 09:23pm

  If you were president how would you avoid committing human and CONSTITUTIONAL rights violations while applying immigration laws?

• On the post: Voter Suppression In South Dakota Is Well Underway, Even Without SCOTUS’s Help

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 06 May, 2026 @ 07:01pm

  You just want fraud.

  This strawman is so weak and tired and predictable. We could just write a script to generate this bullshit. "If we burn someone alive, it will kill their cancer. If you oppose immolating cancer patients, you just want everyone to get cancer!" "If we don't put cameras in bathrooms, people might commit crimes in there. If you oppose spying on people in the bathroom, you just want crime!" The funny thing is that you sound exactly like the people who made absurd, bigoted, misogynist arguments against women's suffrage, desegregation, et al. Some anti-suffragists argued that women would neglect children because voting would be a distraction.

• On the post: Trump’s Anti-Migration Purge Is Breaking Up Military Families, Screwing Afghan Allies

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 06 May, 2026 @ 05:59pm

  One more crack in the great conservative lie that they care about service members. "Thank you for your service..." but also the VA sucks, your house was illegally foreclosed on while you were overseas, you have to pay back the GI Bill for those classes you dropped, and also get out of the country. If nothing else, it's a sign conservatives think they have impoverished enough poor citizens to fill the ranks for the next illegal war that they don't need to supplement with immigrant soldiers too.

• On the post: ‘Free Speech’ President Trump, Once Again, Tries To Get Jimmy Kimmel Fired For Jokes

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 06 May, 2026 @ 01:50pm

  A substantive post might contain any of the myriad reasons. All of your posts amount to "I disagree."

• On the post: Someone Ask Alito: If December Was Too Late To Fix Unconstitutional Gerrymandering For The 2026 Midterms, Why Is May Okay?

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 06 May, 2026 @ 01:24pm

  because it literally doesn’t mean anything anymore when a shitlib says it.

  You not understanding what terms mean, even after it's been explained to you, isn't the same as them not meaning anything. There a hundreds of academic articles that can explain it to you if you cared to understand it, but your accusation is a confession as always. You don't want the term to mean anything. You don't want to know what anything means because you want to use it in whatever way you perceive will benefit your argument in the moment. You accuse others of being racist or fascist in order to water down the meaning, but those terms still mean something. Trump does the same thing. The irony is that conservatives spent decades decrying how post-modernism decoupled the concept of objective truth from the general perception of reality in society, but conservatives have fully embraced that reality is whatever you want it to be, even variably in any moment. The "truth doesn't care about your feelings" crowd invents their own "truth" based on their feelings. All events are reframed through the propaganda lens. You're taught to trust people who sell you dick pills and dewormer and distrust the people who would make sure you got affordable healthcare. When you lash out, the irony is that you're just performatively displaying your own self-harm. So please, continue demonstrating how self-destructive you are while chasing that dopamine hit.

• On the post: NYPD Union Sues Oversight Board For Letting People Know How Awful Some Cops Might Be

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 06 May, 2026 @ 01:09pm

  The same logic they use everywhere. "Biden did X, so Trump can do anything he wants." All morality is relative to them and it's always digging down because as long as you're not as bad as what you accuse others of (even if you're completely making it up), you're relatively "better."

• On the post: NYPD Union Sues Oversight Board For Letting People Know How Awful Some Cops Might Be

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 05 May, 2026 @ 06:52pm

  you guys

  "I group everyone I disagree with into a single group." Who is "you guys?" BLM activists? Liberals? Leftists? Decent human beings? Non-Fascists? Techdirt commenters? Any direct quotes available? No? Just making up shit as usual? Of course.

  demanded every cop wear bodycams

  I still do. And they can't turn them off on duty. And they don't get to see the footage before writing a report. And they don't get to hold back footage. A non-police review board should be in control of footage review and release.

  and then the body cams showed that like 99.999% of all police shootings were justified

  Totally, that happened right after your Canadian girlfriend kissed you in front of everyone after you did a 720 kickflip on that sick half pipe midair while drinking a Sprite and everyone clapped, dude! Not only is that percentage off, but a lot of footage isn't released, so you can't even make a useful determination of what percentage is justified. But also, as we saw with Renee Good and Alex Pretti, fascists will claim just about any shooting as a justified shooting. Challenge round: Provide an example of a police shooting that you do agree was unjustified.

  (some of them now want to get RID of bodycams, lol)

  This is a big [citation needed]. Just searching for that claim, the top results are reddit threads of people admitting that their only sources are conservative-leaning organizations making the claim or Matt Walsh making the claim or random Redditors making the claim on unpopular opinion posts. Actual Justice Warrior did a video covering a single author saying that bodycams are used by police to try to make them look good because they can control the release of the footage that doesn't make them look bad and hide what does. I didn't see the author say he wants bodycams banned, just that more reform is needed beyond just bodycams and bodycams actually increased budgets. It's also full of AJW spewing complete falsehoods and strawmen about what the guy is saying. But this is the same script played over and again by conservative media that conflates everything, cannot perceive nuance, and outright lies. The video title says ban, but the literal video shows the author not saying that. Do you have an actual source for your bullshit? And how much is some? There is criticism of cops reviewing their own footage and police getting to choose what to release and what to hold back. The ability of cops to turn off their cameras and them knowing that the camera is running in advance of turning it on, but without audio, can be problematic also because they can still lie about what was said before that point. The most amazing thing is that cops still do terribly bad and stupid things on camera even when they know they're wrong. Bodycams haven't exonerated cops. It's shown that many of them are authoritarian bullies who don't even know the law and they'll still lie about what's on the recording.

• On the post: Flock’s Sales Pitch Included Recordings Of Kids’ Gymnastic Classes

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 05 May, 2026 @ 05:55pm

  Gyms and pools are still public spaces.

  If you showed up to the gym or the pool and started staring at children, you'd likely be asked to leave, at minimum. But now creepy people like you can get a job watching them on camera. "It's public" doesn't make it ethical to do so.

  Children shouldn’t have “revealing” outfits there.

  Classic victim-blaming from the "well what was she wearing?" crowd. Should children wear burkas in the pool? Or maybe you aren't and shouldn't be an authority on what children wear. That's creepy.

  You r*****s are literally making up reasons to prevent cops from stopping crime.

  I'd like to prevent cops from committing crime. Also prevent the crimes committed by Flock employees and anyone else who gets access to their totalitarian panopticon bullshit. But yes, tell us again how you're not a fascist, but you definitely want an authoritarian surveillance state where cops cannot be questioned and conservatives run everything. That's totally not fascism... But since you want to prevent crime and you think surveillance is great for that, you should just broadcast your life 24/7 and post your browsing history for all to see. You don't have anything to hide do you? You're not a dirty criminal, so you have nothing to fear through exposure, right? Or is it just other people you're fine with being surveilled? Hypocrisy was definitely on my bingo card.

• On the post: Someone Ask Alito: If December Was Too Late To Fix Unconstitutional Gerrymandering For The 2026 Midterms, Why Is May Okay?

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 05 May, 2026 @ 05:37pm

  “I know you are but what am I” is not much of a comeback, r*****.

  • Guy who recently said "Very literally, and I mean this, “no U”."

  You would lose an argument with a fetid rat corpse because it has more integrity.

• On the post: Flock’s Sales Pitch Included Recordings Of Kids’ Gymnastic Classes

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 05 May, 2026 @ 11:53am

  The privacy violations always just get ratcheted up. People get complacent. They trust hand-waving statements that ethics and standards are in place. Then you hear random horror stories about a guy using access to stalk his ex-wife or someone blackmailing someone else. And a legislator will call for a hearing and "something must be done," but the dust settles and people go back to trusting the system. And then they vote for someone who wants to lower taxes but also give contracts to their fascist tech bro buddies, so the standards are stripped away while you expect that tax break that never really materializes or gets offset by inflation and tarrifs. Much like school shootings, just stand by for the next big privacy scandal. It'll happen again and you'll find out someone wasn't as honest as they pretended to be.

• On the post: The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Ruling Is Results-Driven Cynicism, Not Law

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 04 May, 2026 @ 07:15pm

  Oh, everything else aside, the "answer your page" thing doesn't make sense. The pagers were the explosives, so if you got a page, you were injured or dead. If you're able to answer the page, it means your pager didn't explode. So you're functionally telling someone to survive the explosions rather than die in one. Even your melodramatic death wishes are stupid.

• On the post: The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Ruling Is Results-Driven Cynicism, Not Law

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 04 May, 2026 @ 07:09pm

  I imagine he considers himself a free speech absolutist and will defend that statement while celebrating over my dead body after I'm murdered for my speech.

• On the post: The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Ruling Is Results-Driven Cynicism, Not Law

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 03 May, 2026 @ 07:24pm

  "I came back to say I don't care what you think." "Did you hear me? I really don't care!" "I feel like you're not listening. I said..."

• On the post: The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Ruling Is Results-Driven Cynicism, Not Law

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 03 May, 2026 @ 07:23pm

  You literally are just anti-semitic.

  Are American Jewish people antisemitic when they oppose Israeli genocide? Again, you're pretending Israeli government = all Jewish people. That's not only wrong, it's antisemitic. You don't get to tell Jewish people what they think or who they are.

  1200 Israelis were killed for absolutely no reason

  Not for no reason. I'm not saying it was for justified reasons, but there are reasons. The same way there are reasons why the Israeli government is committing genocide. There is always a reason. Murder and genocide are never justified, however. But saying "no reason" just means you will justify Israelis committing murder, but not Hamas doing the same. If you're unaware of the history behind the reasons, the internet is a great resource for learning. Hint: Both militaries/armed groups in the conflict have committed atrocities. But civilians should still not be targeted (by either side). But you seem to think Hamas doing something means it's morally open season on children in Gaza. Your "moral high ground" is deeper than the Mariana Trench.

  when they fight back in a very controlled way

  This is 2026. We have news reporting, satellites, blogs, social media, live streams, etc. You do realize that it's possible for people to be aware of what's actually going on such that you can't successfully gaslight us with "in a very controlled way." Or do you just mean controlled as in intentional? Because that doesn't make it better.

  you scream “genocide”.

  I call genocide genocide, yes. 21k children getting murdered is genocide. Targeting civilians is a war crime. Murdering journalists, aid workers, and doctors is also a war crime.

  Answer your page you fucking terrorist.

  It's telling that you think it induces terror for someone to point out that you support genocide. If speaking the truth has such a horrifying effect on you, you should probably check your uniform cap for a skull.

• On the post: The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Ruling Is Results-Driven Cynicism, Not Law

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 02 May, 2026 @ 04:18pm

  When what you want is less systemic racism and what you get is more systemic racism, then yeah, that definitely is racism. You being ignorant or in denial about racism doesn't make it magically not exist. Your solipsist myopia isn't the entirety of all reality.

• On the post: The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Ruling Is Results-Driven Cynicism, Not Law

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 02 May, 2026 @ 04:16pm

  Oh hey, another person who disingenuously conflates Israel's genocidal right wing government with all Jewish people. Now that's what I call antisemitism.

• On the post: FCC Leaks To Semafor They’re ‘Investigating’ ABC Because A Comedian Told A Joke. Again.

  

  MrWilson ( profile ), 02 May, 2026 @ 10:39am

  Yet another example of a conservative accusation-confession through an attempt to make criticism of then impossible by reflexively or prematurely accusing others of their own intentions and actions and nature. It's just one big Principal Skinner meme and it's always the other side that is fascist, racist, gerrymandering, a danger to children, ignorant of the law, bad for the economy, prone to censorship, etc.

Next >>