<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Twitter files #5: retrofitting the &#8220;rules&#8221; in order to ban Trump	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/</link>
	<description>A blog about political change, among other things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:59:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: neo		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657558</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[neo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:59:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657558</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hubert:

Well, I suppose I should let Bauxite speak for him or herself, but I don&#039;t recall a lot of admiration for the Romneys of the world.  

As for DeSantis, he&#039;s already served as that model. Unless there&#039;s another good candidate in 2024, I would like to see him run for president.  Of course, it&#039;s early, and things could change.  But I think Gelernter is wrong, wrong, wrong.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hubert:</p>
<p>Well, I suppose I should let Bauxite speak for him or herself, but I don&#8217;t recall a lot of admiration for the Romneys of the world.  </p>
<p>As for DeSantis, he&#8217;s already served as that model. Unless there&#8217;s another good candidate in 2024, I would like to see him run for president.  Of course, it&#8217;s early, and things could change.  But I think Gelernter is wrong, wrong, wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Hubert		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657555</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hubert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:49:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657555</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Neo: Romney is an example (&quot;e.g.&quot;) of a typical establishment GOP politician. He embodies the qualities that Bauxite respects--an (apparently) orderly personal life, the appearance of gravitas, Scheinheiligkeit (&quot;show-holiness&quot;--it&#039;s better in the original German), a demonstrated willingness to &quot;reach across the aisle&quot; to &quot;get things done&quot;, appeal to middle-of-the-road voters--and that Trump mostly lacks. That&#039;s what I&#039;m talking about.

I too voted for Romney in 2012. I too agree that he was a much better choice than Obama and that he would have been a better--or less harmful--president. That&#039;s why I voted for him. But that was ten years ago. A lot has happened since then. A lot has been revealed as well about the workings of D.C. and the GOP.

I think I&#039;ve been pretty clear in my comments on this forum. So has Bauxite. He respects the GOP establishment. I don&#039;t. He despises Trump and MAGA voters. I don&#039;t. I don&#039;t think the kinds of politicians he favors are capable of addressing the situation we find ourselves in, primarily because they helped get us here. I&#039;m not entirely sure who is. Maybe DeSantis is. Maybe we&#039;ll have a chance to find out. In that connection, I thought Daniel Gelernter made a good point in his piece from a few days ago in American Greatness. He argued (as a Florida resident, among other things) that the center of political gravity will soon be shifting to the states and that DeSantis would be of more use as a model and a rallying point for other GOP governors.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neo: Romney is an example (&#8220;e.g.&#8221;) of a typical establishment GOP politician. He embodies the qualities that Bauxite respects&#8211;an (apparently) orderly personal life, the appearance of gravitas, Scheinheiligkeit (&#8220;show-holiness&#8221;&#8211;it&#8217;s better in the original German), a demonstrated willingness to &#8220;reach across the aisle&#8221; to &#8220;get things done&#8221;, appeal to middle-of-the-road voters&#8211;and that Trump mostly lacks. That&#8217;s what I&#8217;m talking about.</p>
<p>I too voted for Romney in 2012. I too agree that he was a much better choice than Obama and that he would have been a better&#8211;or less harmful&#8211;president. That&#8217;s why I voted for him. But that was ten years ago. A lot has happened since then. A lot has been revealed as well about the workings of D.C. and the GOP.</p>
<p>I think I&#8217;ve been pretty clear in my comments on this forum. So has Bauxite. He respects the GOP establishment. I don&#8217;t. He despises Trump and MAGA voters. I don&#8217;t. I don&#8217;t think the kinds of politicians he favors are capable of addressing the situation we find ourselves in, primarily because they helped get us here. I&#8217;m not entirely sure who is. Maybe DeSantis is. Maybe we&#8217;ll have a chance to find out. In that connection, I thought Daniel Gelernter made a good point in his piece from a few days ago in American Greatness. He argued (as a Florida resident, among other things) that the center of political gravity will soon be shifting to the states and that DeSantis would be of more use as a model and a rallying point for other GOP governors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: TJ		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657551</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TJ]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:22:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657551</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thank you Hubert, Mike K, TommyJay. AGREED. This is very consequential stuff

Somewhere online this morning, someone attacked Tucker because of his wealth. I had no idea. So I looked into it.

It seems half of his fortune is inherited and has been well invested in real estate, recently amounting to half his net at $250 million.

The other half is earned from FNC, where his annual income is $41 million, plus ratings bonuses amounting to several million more.

For comparison I checked out Rush Limbaugh’s net at death, in early 2021.

$600 million, with $85 million annual income from his talk radio gig, etc.

Thus, taking away Tucker’s inheritance, is he really in Rush’s league? I think not — not yet. Perhaps in the decade ahead. But not at $45 million a year.

I don’t recall WHY Tucker was attacked, other than wealth. Some nefarious associations I suppose? If I see some credibly raised, then I might look into it. Otherwise, I’m done here on this topic.

I’d only add that, like Neo, his capacity to rethink himself — to challenge his set opinions — does earn him positive credibility.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Hubert, Mike K, TommyJay. AGREED. This is very consequential stuff</p>
<p>Somewhere online this morning, someone attacked Tucker because of his wealth. I had no idea. So I looked into it.</p>
<p>It seems half of his fortune is inherited and has been well invested in real estate, recently amounting to half his net at $250 million.</p>
<p>The other half is earned from FNC, where his annual income is $41 million, plus ratings bonuses amounting to several million more.</p>
<p>For comparison I checked out Rush Limbaugh’s net at death, in early 2021.</p>
<p>$600 million, with $85 million annual income from his talk radio gig, etc.</p>
<p>Thus, taking away Tucker’s inheritance, is he really in Rush’s league? I think not — not yet. Perhaps in the decade ahead. But not at $45 million a year.</p>
<p>I don’t recall WHY Tucker was attacked, other than wealth. Some nefarious associations I suppose? If I see some credibly raised, then I might look into it. Otherwise, I’m done here on this topic.</p>
<p>I’d only add that, like Neo, his capacity to rethink himself — to challenge his set opinions — does earn him positive credibility.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Don		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657550</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Don]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:20:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657550</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The power and scope of the administrative state is the root problem. The core power in the administrative state is the intel and police agencies. The expanse and power of these agencies is unconstitutional, and they are unwilling to give it up.

Media and big tech go along. It&#039;s the easy way, and also since they are all university educated they share ideology and beliefs. Outliers, like Sharell Atkinson who report stories that they don&#039;t want get sidelined and have careers cut short.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The power and scope of the administrative state is the root problem. The core power in the administrative state is the intel and police agencies. The expanse and power of these agencies is unconstitutional, and they are unwilling to give it up.</p>
<p>Media and big tech go along. It&#8217;s the easy way, and also since they are all university educated they share ideology and beliefs. Outliers, like Sharell Atkinson who report stories that they don&#8217;t want get sidelined and have careers cut short.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: neo		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657548</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[neo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:17:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657548</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hubert:

I don&#039;t know what you&#039;re talking about when you write that Bauxite (or anyone else here) thinks we should vote for Romney.  First of all, no one here is advocating voting for Romney, nor has anyone advocated voting for him during the Trump years.  Second of all, unless he tries to run for national office, one would have to be a Utah resident to vote for him next time, if in fact he runs for re-election to the Senate, which he may not.

But if you&#039;re talking about voting for him in 2012 when he ran against Obama - I advocated it then and if I had it to do all over again I would advocate it again.  A Romney presidency from 2012 to 2016 certainly would have been better than an Obama one.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hubert:</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know what you&#8217;re talking about when you write that Bauxite (or anyone else here) thinks we should vote for Romney.  First of all, no one here is advocating voting for Romney, nor has anyone advocated voting for him during the Trump years.  Second of all, unless he tries to run for national office, one would have to be a Utah resident to vote for him next time, if in fact he runs for re-election to the Senate, which he may not.</p>
<p>But if you&#8217;re talking about voting for him in 2012 when he ran against Obama &#8211; I advocated it then and if I had it to do all over again I would advocate it again.  A Romney presidency from 2012 to 2016 certainly would have been better than an Obama one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Barry Meislin		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657538</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Barry Meislin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 17:05:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657538</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Yep, in spite of past perceived flakiness (perhaps not only &quot;perceived&quot;), Gabbard is THE ONLY Democrat to stand up and say, &quot;THIS IS WRONG&quot; WRT her (former) party&#039;s criminal shenanigans.

She also took on Hillary Clinton very handily and is well known for telling the person currently playing &quot;VP&quot; a few inconvenient facts during the primary debates way back when...(seems like such a long time ago...).

Heroic. (To be sure, she IS a vet....)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep, in spite of past perceived flakiness (perhaps not only &#8220;perceived&#8221;), Gabbard is THE ONLY Democrat to stand up and say, &#8220;THIS IS WRONG&#8221; WRT her (former) party&#8217;s criminal shenanigans.</p>
<p>She also took on Hillary Clinton very handily and is well known for telling the person currently playing &#8220;VP&#8221; a few inconvenient facts during the primary debates way back when&#8230;(seems like such a long time ago&#8230;).</p>
<p>Heroic. (To be sure, she IS a vet&#8230;.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Hubert		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657536</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hubert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:50:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657536</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[TJ: seconding TommyJay&#039;s thanks for that clip of Tulsi Gabbard and Tucker Carlson. Everybody should watch it. Here&#039;s Tucker saying, in the plainest possible way, that members of Congress are owned by the intelligence community:

https://youtu.be/SKEWD4-nwyA?t=2580

Quotes:

Carlson: &quot;I&#039;m just telling you there are members of Congress who are controlled by the intel agencies, and that&#039;s a fact, and I just think that that&#039;s completely incompatible with a free society or with democracy and I don&#039;t know why nobody ever says it.&quot;

Gabbard: &quot;I think you just said why they never say it, right?&quot;

Gabbard refers to Chuck Schumer&#039;s January 2017 comment on the Rachel Maddow show about how Trump was &quot;dumb&quot; to take on the intelligence community &quot;because they have six ways from Sunday of getting back atcha&quot;. Clip of Schumer saying it:

https://youtu.be/by4MzrVODeQ?t=82

She says, correctly, that Schumer spoke the quiet part out loud. She and Carlson also note that Schumer&#039;s statement got no meaningful response from the powers that be and conclude that&#039;s because the D.C. establishment (a) knows it&#039;s true and (b) doesn&#039;t care. They&#039;re OK with it.

They go on to talk about the gormless GOP establishment figures of good character whom Bauxite thinks we should be happy to vote for (e.g. Mitt Romney, who accused Gabbard of &quot;treason&quot;--a charge she called him on and which he, typically, didn&#039;t have the guts to defend or back up), Ukraine, and the media.

Again, I recommend the video to everyone on this forum. Health warning for self-designated conservatives who care a lot about superficial markers of worthiness and good character: Gabbard and Carlson use salty language, including the f-word. I found their language entirely appropriate and extremely refreshing. Carlson also has some good things to say about Trump, which might be upsetting for establishment conservatives of the worthiness school. Based on this clip, I&#039;d seriously consider voting for Gabbard in 2024 or beyond (if she runs). I don&#039;t care if she comes from a weird cult-y family and uses the f-word in public. She gets the big issues. That&#039;s probably why she dropped out of politics.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TJ: seconding TommyJay&#8217;s thanks for that clip of Tulsi Gabbard and Tucker Carlson. Everybody should watch it. Here&#8217;s Tucker saying, in the plainest possible way, that members of Congress are owned by the intelligence community:</p>
<p><a href="https://youtu.be/SKEWD4-nwyA?t=2580" rel="nofollow ugc">https://youtu.be/SKEWD4-nwyA?t=2580</a></p>
<p>Quotes:</p>
<p>Carlson: &#8220;I&#8217;m just telling you there are members of Congress who are controlled by the intel agencies, and that&#8217;s a fact, and I just think that that&#8217;s completely incompatible with a free society or with democracy and I don&#8217;t know why nobody ever says it.&#8221;</p>
<p>Gabbard: &#8220;I think you just said why they never say it, right?&#8221;</p>
<p>Gabbard refers to Chuck Schumer&#8217;s January 2017 comment on the Rachel Maddow show about how Trump was &#8220;dumb&#8221; to take on the intelligence community &#8220;because they have six ways from Sunday of getting back atcha&#8221;. Clip of Schumer saying it:</p>
<p><a href="https://youtu.be/by4MzrVODeQ?t=82" rel="nofollow ugc">https://youtu.be/by4MzrVODeQ?t=82</a></p>
<p>She says, correctly, that Schumer spoke the quiet part out loud. She and Carlson also note that Schumer&#8217;s statement got no meaningful response from the powers that be and conclude that&#8217;s because the D.C. establishment (a) knows it&#8217;s true and (b) doesn&#8217;t care. They&#8217;re OK with it.</p>
<p>They go on to talk about the gormless GOP establishment figures of good character whom Bauxite thinks we should be happy to vote for (e.g. Mitt Romney, who accused Gabbard of &#8220;treason&#8221;&#8211;a charge she called him on and which he, typically, didn&#8217;t have the guts to defend or back up), Ukraine, and the media.</p>
<p>Again, I recommend the video to everyone on this forum. Health warning for self-designated conservatives who care a lot about superficial markers of worthiness and good character: Gabbard and Carlson use salty language, including the f-word. I found their language entirely appropriate and extremely refreshing. Carlson also has some good things to say about Trump, which might be upsetting for establishment conservatives of the worthiness school. Based on this clip, I&#8217;d seriously consider voting for Gabbard in 2024 or beyond (if she runs). I don&#8217;t care if she comes from a weird cult-y family and uses the f-word in public. She gets the big issues. That&#8217;s probably why she dropped out of politics.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mike K		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657535</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike K]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657535</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;Tonight Tucker Carlson streamed a list of former CIA, FBI, and NSA officials who were working at Twitter when Musk took over. They even had d some former foreign spies working there. Was Twitter becoming an intelligence organization for the Dems?&lt;/i&gt;

That CTH post with the link to Tulsi and Tucker&#039;s conversation has already been posted by someone else.  It is definitely worth watching.  Another conversation video worth watching is &lt;a href=&quot;https://joelkotkin.com/joel-kotkin-with-john-anderson-on-neo-feudalism/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow ugc&quot;&gt; here.&lt;/a&gt;  Kotkin is discussing his book, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.amazon.com/Coming-Neo-Feudalism-Warning-Global-Middle/dp/1641770945&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow ugc&quot;&gt; &quot;The Coming of Neo Feudalism.&quot; &lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Tonight Tucker Carlson streamed a list of former CIA, FBI, and NSA officials who were working at Twitter when Musk took over. They even had d some former foreign spies working there. Was Twitter becoming an intelligence organization for the Dems?</i></p>
<p>That CTH post with the link to Tulsi and Tucker&#8217;s conversation has already been posted by someone else.  It is definitely worth watching.  Another conversation video worth watching is <a href="https://joelkotkin.com/joel-kotkin-with-john-anderson-on-neo-feudalism/" rel="nofollow ugc"> here.</a>  Kotkin is discussing his book, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Coming-Neo-Feudalism-Warning-Global-Middle/dp/1641770945" rel="nofollow ugc"> &#8220;The Coming of Neo Feudalism.&#8221; </a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: TommyJay		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657532</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TommyJay]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:42:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657532</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[TJ on December 14, 2022 at 3:48 am said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKEWD4-nwyA&#038;t=2405s

Barry Meislin on December 14, 2022 at 4:01 am said:
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/12/13/huge-development-in-kari-lakes-election-lawsuit-n1653242

Thanks for those links.  Amazing, especially TJ&#039;s Tulsi &#038; Tucker interview.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TJ on December 14, 2022 at 3:48 am said:<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKEWD4-nwyA&#038;t=2405s" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKEWD4-nwyA&#038;t=2405s</a></p>
<p>Barry Meislin on December 14, 2022 at 4:01 am said:<br />
<a href="https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/12/13/huge-development-in-kari-lakes-election-lawsuit-n1653242" rel="nofollow ugc">https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/12/13/huge-development-in-kari-lakes-election-lawsuit-n1653242</a></p>
<p>Thanks for those links.  Amazing, especially TJ&#8217;s Tulsi &amp; Tucker interview.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: stan		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2022/12/13/twitter-files-5-retrofitting-the-rules/#comment-2657518</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[stan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 13:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thenewneo.com/?p=122798#comment-2657518</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Watching the Bloomberg financial channel. Headline uses the term &quot;election deniers&quot; as a factual statement. Just Dem cheerleaders. All the time.

Walked through the kitchen where my wife has the Today show on. &quot;CDC is strongly urging people to wear masks as a good medical quality mask is the best protection against the flu.&quot;

Science and truth are dying. And our government and news media are relentlessly beating them to death.

Misinformation is killing people. The perps are government, news media and Big Tech. Free speech saves lives.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Watching the Bloomberg financial channel. Headline uses the term &#8220;election deniers&#8221; as a factual statement. Just Dem cheerleaders. All the time.</p>
<p>Walked through the kitchen where my wife has the Today show on. &#8220;CDC is strongly urging people to wear masks as a good medical quality mask is the best protection against the flu.&#8221;</p>
<p>Science and truth are dying. And our government and news media are relentlessly beating them to death.</p>
<p>Misinformation is killing people. The perps are government, news media and Big Tech. Free speech saves lives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
