Category Archives: Politically Incorrect

Saturday Night Live has been on television for 46 seasons, and from the very beginning the show has routinely spoofed politics and presidential elections. From Chevy Chases bumbling Gerald Ford to Darrell Hammonds randy Bill Clinton to Tina Feys unqualified Sarah Palin, many cast members have made names for themselves by crafting on-point impressions. All you have to say is strategery, and you can instantly visualize Will Ferrells inept, bumbling George W. Bush.

But in recent years, SNL has ceded presidential impressions to A-list actors, like Alec Baldwins low energy and very orange Donald Trump. And after Woody Harrelson and John Mulaney trotted out their Biden impressions last year, Jim Carrey has joined this season to offer his zany, energetic take on Joe Biden. The announcement was met with excitement; Carrey is, after all, an iconic figure in comedy.

But after the first three episodes of season 46, it brings me no pleasure to note that Jim Carreys Joe Biden just plain doesnt work. While the SNL make-up team have done an admirable job with Carreys transformation, Carrey himself never manages to capture the essence of Biden. He is too high energy, always mugging and pointing finger guns, to capture any of Bidens gravitas.

Last nights episode spoofed the two presidential debates, where Carreys Biden comes out in full force, but then takes a turn for the soporific, appearing as both Mr. Rogers and Bob Ross. Great impressions should be a distillation of character traits, but there is nothing authentically Biden in Carreys disconnected performance. If anything, Carreys frantic mugging is more Ace Ventura or Fire Marshall Bill than it is Biden.

And worst of all, its not funny. SNL has struggled to find satire in the already cartoonish Trump administration, but has played it safe with their political material. There have been solid sketches and some incisive Weekend Update moments, but in one of the most politically tumultuous eras in recent memory, SNL has dropped the ball hard.

And its not like there isnt funny material to mine in Joe Biden. Jason Sudeikis spent much of the Obama administration delivering a goofy take on the vice president that played on many aspects of Bidens personality: his working class Scranton roots, his long-winded stories, and his politically incorrect fumbles.

And the impression worked, highlighting the dichotomy of Obamas reasoned and mature delivery with Bidens cowboy-ish antics. But Carreys Biden is hamstrung by a bothsidesism that has twisted the mainstream medias coverage of the election. Its a narrative that has boiled down to Trump and cronies have killed over 210k people and they are wildly corrupt and inept, but look, Bidens old too! that simply doesnt match the current political moment.

Will SNL shift gears and swap Carrey out for Sudeikis or someone else? Its unlikely, given Carreys star power and the fact that were only 2 weeks out from the election. And its a shame, because political satire has often been what SNL does best. Perhaps theyre just as exhausted and burnt out by the relentless news cycle of 2020 as we are. Whelp, at least we still have Maya Rudolph as Kamala Harris.

(featured image: screencap/NBC)

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.

Have a tip we should know? tips@themarysue.com

View original post here:
We Need to Talk About Jim Carrey's Joe Biden Impression on SNL - The Mary Sue

Opinion: Democrats and certain pro-education groups are trying to toss a judge off the bench for daring to (briefly) strike down Proposition 208. Do we really want to go there?

A judge's decision that it was in the best interest of two children for their mother to lose parental rights was correct, the state Supreme Court found, reversing an earlier decision that such a move was based on shaky facts.(Photo: Getty Images)

Democrats and certain supporters of public education have a message for Arizonas judges, one they are hoping voters will deliver on Election Day:

Cross us at your peril.

It seems the Maricopa County Democratic Party is mad because Proposition 208 was briefly tossed off the ballot by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Christopher Coury.

Mad enough, in fact, that the party has mounted a revenge campaign to throw him off the bench one that has been endorsed by Save Our Schools Arizona and Planned Parenthood.

Judge Coury, the party says, has a dangerous record of abusing his position to pursue his own extreme political agenda.

Turns out this "dangerous record of abusing his position amounts to one case in the 10 years he has been on the bench:

Proposition 208, the proposal to raise income taxes on the wealthiest Arizonans.

Coury in July tossed the initiative off the ballot, ruling that the 100-word summary of the proposalwas misleading by its omissionof its principal provisions.

Looking for the other side of the story?Subscribe today for access to even more opinions.

It was a terrible decision, both in its tone (snarky) and its content (alarming). Had his ruling stood, Arizonans likely would have found it far more difficult to put any initiative onto the ballot.

Fortunately, Coury was overturned by a unanimous decision of the state Supreme Court.

That had to sting.

But tossing ajudge off the ballot because of one decision a political party doesnt like?

That's a sting could be felt far and wide in the state.

Since 1974, Arizona has had a merit selection system for appellate judges and superior court judges in the states larger counties. Rather than electing the candidate who can amass the most campaign contributions, applicants are screened by a committee that then forwards a selection of names to the governor. Once appointed, each judge then periodically goes the ballot so that voters can decide whether he or she should be retained.

The idea is to create a system of independent judges who can focus on the law rather than their re-election prospects.

Rarely have judges been targeted for ouster since Arizona went to merit selection, but that seems to be changing. Two years ago, a grassroots education group threatened to try to knock out Supreme Court Justices John Pelander and Clint Bolick because they were among the 5-2 majority who voted to toss Invest in Ed off the 2018 ballot.

Now, the county Democratic Party is taking up whereRed for Ed left off.

After over 400,000 Arizonans signed petitions to put the Invest in Ed initiative on the ballot, Judge Coury tried to remove it and issued an opinion that was politically motivated and legally incorrect ..., the party says. Now we have a chance to tell Judge Coury to keep politics out of the courtroom!

Actually, if Coury is ousted, the Democrats will have succeeded in ensuring thatpolitics is front and center in every courtroom.

Courysays ethical rules prevent him from discussing his decision because the Supreme Court has not yet issued its reasoning for reversing him. He actually went on Sunday SquareOff this week to plead for his job, emphasizingthat he's been reversed fewer than five times since being appointed by Gov. Jan Brewer in 2010.

"I am a judge who actually follows the law as it is written," he told 12News' Brahm Resnik. "That's what I interpret my job to be and that's what I've done. Politics don't enter into my ruling. They never have."

Apparently, the Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance agrees.

The 33-person panel,comprised of judges, attorneys and members of the public,does performance reviews of every judgeup for retention. By a vote of 33-0, Coury met all five standards includinglegal ability, integrity andtemperament.

Every judge met the standard this year and in fact, rarely is a judge recommended for ouster. (It does, however, happen.)

So we have a choice.

We can do as Democrats are campaigning for us to doand dump a judge who made one boneheaded decision out of thousands made over a decadeon the bench a decision, by the way, that was promptly overturned uponreview.

We can send a message to every Arizonajudgeto rule based not upon the law but upon what will get them re-elected.

Or we can have faith that in the end, a judgemade a mistake and the judicial system worked to correct it, as it is supposed to do.

Me? Im thinking we have enough political hacks in this state without invitingmore into Arizonas courtrooms.

Reach Roberts at laurie.roberts@arizonarepublic.com.

Read or Share this story: https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2020/10/19/democrats-revenge-campaign-against-arizona-judge-christopher-coury-bad/5980269002/

Read the original post:
Democrats want revenge on an Arizona judge who ruled against Prop. 208. It's a bad idea - The Arizona Republic

Why is this shaped like this?

Let's talk about two things that used to not go together: Japan and butter. Like other East Asian cultures, butter was never a part of the traditional Japanese diet, and was actually treated with disgust when introduced by Europeans in the 19th century.

(Fun politically-incorrect fact: When living in Japan, I learned that the word "butter" was used in an outdated anti-foreigner slur. Both Westerners and overtly Western things were referred to as bata-kusai, "kusai" being Japanese for "stink." It was thought that eating butter produced uniquely European body odor, hence the slur was "butter stinkers.")

Today Japan has accepted butter (particularly where baked goods and confectionaries are concerned). Uptake isn't as brisk as in America or butter-crazy France, but it's produced locally (in the Hokkaido region) and consumed in enough quantities that the country experiences occasional butter shortages, like this one in 2014.

Also, butter in Japan doesn't come like butter in the 'States: It comes in slabs, as they've adopted the traditional European form factor. (I believe it's just us Yanks that form butter into sticks.)

American butter form factor

French butter form factor

Japanese butter form factor

Image credit: Jada Yuan

Why explains why, to Americans, Japanese butter dishes look strange and wide-bodied:

Yoshikawa EA?CO Butter Case Container

Yoshikawa EA?CO Butter Case Container

Yoshikawa EA?CO Butter Case Container

Yoshikawa EA?CO Butter Case Container

Yoshikawa EA?CO Butter Case Container

This one's even got an integrated cutter:

Skater Butter Cutter & Case

Skater Butter Cutter & Case

Skater Butter Cutter & Case

Skater Butter Cutter & Case

You probably noticed that funky knife in the photos of the Yoshikawa Case above. If you saw it out of context, you'd probably not know what it was:

Yoshikawa EA?CO Nulu Butter Knife

The angle in the handle is a function of the slab form factor of European/Japanese butter. The little holes are to extrude separate noodles of butter, which (the Japanese find) are easier to spread.

Yoshikawa EA?CO Nulu Butter Knife

Yoshikawa EA?CO Nulu Butter Knife

Yoshikawa EA?CO Nulu Butter Knife

The serrated side is for cutting toast.

Yoshikawa EA?CO Nulu Butter Knife

This design for a butter knife/grater takes the manufacturing a step further, stamping nacelles into the surface to guide the butter noodles:

Arnest Butter Knife Stainless Steel Grater

Arnest Butter Knife Stainless Steel Grater

Arnest Butter Knife Stainless Steel Grater

Arnest Butter Knife Stainless Steel Grater

Arnest Butter Knife Stainless Steel Grater

Lastly, there's this bizarre thing. Why on Earth should it be shaped like that?

KAI Rectangular Cut Butter Knife

KAI Rectangular Cut Butter Knife

My speculation--and this is based purely on the year I spent living there, during which time I witnessed fantastically anal-retentive table manners--is that a) This is for those who don't want to grate the surface of their butter, which probably gets messy as you work your way down through the slab, and b) this satisfies the Japanese need for order.

In other words, for us Americans who want a pat of butter, we just cut one from the stick; but for Japanese users faced with a slab, a crosswise slice would be too unwieldy to balance on your average butter knife.

An alternative would be to cut more manageable diagonal slices--i.e. cut a corner off of the slab--but I'm guessing a slab of butter with 45-degree angles cut into it would be too visually chaotic for Japanese sensibilities. This "tool" leaves behind an orderly 90-degree cut.

KAI Rectangular Cut Butter Knife

Read the original post:
Analyzing the Design of Unusual Japanese Butter Tableware - Core77.com

First, give tax breaks and incentives to businesses, in the hope that this will induce them to expand their operations, spending more on capital equipment and new employees.

Second, give tax cuts (or maybe one-off cash grants) to individual taxpayers or welfare recipients, in the hope that they will spend most of the money and thereby generate economic activity and jobs.

Those two categories involve the government making "transfer payments" from itself to households or firms. The third category is the government spending money directly by paying someone to build a house or an expressway or to work for the government and perform some service.

As a rule, economists expect direct spending to yield a greater stimulus (and thus have a higher "multiplier" effect) than transfer payments. Thats because all the governments spending adds to demand for goods and services in the "first round", whereas some of the money you transfer to a firm or individual may be saved rather than spent, even in the first round.

Economists consider saving a "leakage" from the various rounds of the "circular flow of income" round and round the economy. Other leakages occur if the money is spent on imports rather than locally made goods and services.

Still on direct spending, if your primary goal is not so much to add to the production of goods and services (real gross domestic product) as to increase employment, youd be better off directing your government spending to a labour-intensive purpose (employing an extra uni tutor or aged-care nurse, for instance), rather than a capital-intensive purpose, such as a new expressway.

Now lets look at how the budgets main measures fit these three categories. Its temporary measure to allow firms an immediate write-off of the cost of new equipment (costing the revenue $26.7 billion over four years), its temporary measure allowing firms to carry back current losses for tax purposes ($4.9 billion), its research and development tax incentive ($2 billion) and its temporary JobMaker "hiring credit" - wage subsidy ($4 billion) add up to total revenue forgone under the first category of tax breaks to businesses of almost $38 billion.

This is far bigger than the money going to individual taxpayers and welfare recipients in the second category: personal tax cuts ($17.8 billion over four years) and "economic support payments" to pensioners ($2.5 billion), a total of just over $20 billion.

Under the third category, direct government spending on goods and services, the main measures are various infrastructure programs mostly via grants to state governments - worth more than $10 billion over four years.

So you see how much the budgets fiscal stimulus measures have been affected by the governments "core values". No less than $38 billion goes as tax breaks to business, three-quarters of the $20 billion in transfers to individuals comes as tax cuts, leaving about $10 billion in direct spending going to the least labour-intensive purpose transport infrastructure.

Liberal "core values" over "bang for buck": Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Treasurer Josh Frydenberg before the budget announcement.

Now, according to the budget papers or according to the budget "glossies" fudged up by ministerial staffers with lots of colour photos of good-looking punters the government and its minions have estimated the number of jobs the top programs are expected to create.

The immediate asset write-off and loss carry-back for businesses is expected to create about 50,000 jobs. Is that a lot? Well, remembering we have a labour force of 13.5 million, it doesnt seem much. And dividing the 50,000 into the budgetary cost of $31.6 billion gives a cost of $632,000 per job.

Thats infinitely more than any of those extra workers are likely to be paid, of course, and absolutely pathetic bang per buck. Giving money to business in the hope it will do wonders for "jobs and growth" is a classic example of "trickle-down economics". Clearly, a lot of the money doesnt.

But, when you think about it, its not so surprising that so much money produces so few extra jobs. Why not? Because almost all the capital equipment Australian firms buy is imported. And because firms get the concession even if they dont buy any more equipment than they would have done.

Loading

Next, the budget documents imply that the personal tax cuts worth $17.8 billion will create a further 50,000 jobs. That works out at $356,000 per job still terrible bang per buck. Why so high? Too much of the tax cut is likely to be saved.

Finally, the budget documents tell us the $4 billion cost of the JobMaker hiring credit will yield "around 450,000 positions for young Australians". Thats a much better but still high - $8900 per "position" which I take to mean that a lot of the jobs wont be lasting or full time.

So, what measures would have yielded better job-creation value? The ones rejected as politically incorrect: big spending on social housing, a permanent increase in the JobSeeker unemployment benefit or even just employing more childcare workers.

Ross Gittins is the Heralds economics editor.

Ross Gittins is the Economics Editor of The Sydney Morning Herald.

View post:
No 'bang for buck': Budget is big on political correctness, weak on job creation - Sydney Morning Herald

Photographs courtesy of https://time.com/

On September 29, over 73 million Americans took to their televisions to witness an unsightly dogfight that some are calling a presidential debate. With two more debates on the calendar leading up to the election, each candidate is looking to sway voters in their direction. Be that as it may, their mission will prove difficult. Here is why.

As a result of the 2016 election, the term silent majority has made a comeback. The silent vote, which consists of Americans who vote for a candidate but choose not to support them publicly, played a crucial part in the election of President Donald Trump. However, 2020 is a much different story.

President Donald Trump is and has been losing in national polls consistently for the last year. In fact, the deficit has yet to go below 6 percent since June, according to RealClearPolitics. This is nothing new for Trump. He was consistently down in the polls prior to the 2016 election. The difference Trump faces this time around is a greater challenge to overcome.

There is no underestimating Trump in this election. Democrats see him as an urgent matter that must be dealt with. Polarization in the U.S. has plagued Americans, in both a sense of unity and bitterness. People either love Donald Trump or they hate him. There is not much middle ground.

Some promising news for the Trump administration is that a majority of his loyal base seems likely unphased by his recent faux pas.

RealClearPolitics average of national polls show:

Questions surrounding the importance of the popular vote arose following the 2016 election. Due to the electoral vote, Donald Trump was able to defeat former secretary of state Hillary Clinton despite losing the popular vote. In spite of this, current polls paint a much different picture rolling into November.

Florida, Wisconsin and Arizona are just a few of the significant states to watch come Election Day. Each of these states electoral colleges voted in favor of the current president last election. If the tides were to turn in these three states as polls are projecting, former Vice President Joe Biden is locked in to win in cosmic fashion.

Voting by mail, while controversial, has been a popular choice amongst American voters this election. Over ten times the amount of votes have already been cast than this time in 2016, surpassing 5.6 million, according to Newsweek. Democrat voters have requested absentee ballots at a much higher rate than Republicans, while conservatives are hoping for a sweeping Election Day voter turnout.

In a Quinnipiac poll, 94 percent already know who they are going to vote for. Donald Trump has had almost four years to convince people that he deserves a second term. He has fans who see him as an underdog, taking on the government establishment and often being politically incorrect. Those opposed see him as lacking the skills to lead the country and an inadequate compassion for marginalized communities, including African-Americans and immigrants. Trumps main selling point, a strong economy, has been wrecked by the coronavirus. The question for the few undecided may be whether they think Trump can turn that around if given another term.

This election, like most, is a referendum on the incumbent. And when it comes to Donald Trump, everyone has their opinion.

Read this article:
The Election is Decided, Just Not Announced Yet - The Journal

Starting out bitter and then becoming sweet, the romantic comedy is a tired genre, but directorJames L. Brooksrefuses to let it derail his film. Instead, he exposes the genres vulnerabilities, taking us on a journey of self-discovery.As Good as It Getsis about fighting for love and acceptance from even the harshest of big-screen characters.

Bigoted, ill-tempered, and homophobic, Melvin Udall (Jack Nicholson) is an obsessive-compulsive novelist devoted to writing romance novels, a feeling he ironically doesnt subscribe to nor believe in. Asked by a fawning fan how he writes his female characters so convincingly, Melvin replies, I think of a man. And I take away reason and accountability.

This pavement-crevice-avoidingcurmudgeon despises everyone in his apartment, and the movie opens with him slam-dunking his neighbours dogdown the trash chute, bellowing, This is New York. If you can make it here, you can make it anywhere.

The first half-hour of the film is both hilarious and hard to watch, as Melvin spews venom at all unsuspecting New Yorkers in his path, including the kind-hearted waitress Carol (Helen Hunt), who serves him daily, just the way he wants. Carola single mother bound by her own stressful circumstancegood-heartedly tolerates Melvins diatribes. But she draws the line when Melvin mocks her childs severe asthma attacks, demanding he apologizes. Albeit small, its Melvins first sign of vulnerability, which is monumental for a character as cynical as he.

Later on, Melvins neighbour, Simon(Greg Kinnear), is hospitalized after a botched robbery. This leaves Simon unable to care for his dog, Verdell, and leads Frank, his agent and love interest (Cuba Gooding Jr.), to convince dog-hating Melvin to take care of him. After unwillingly agreeing, Melvin, to his amazement (but not ours), develops a grudging affection for the ugly but endearing pooch that wags its way into his corroded heart.

Now, Melvin is a sinner on the road to redemption, kicking and screaming along the way. His reluctant good deedscovering Carols sons medical bills and caring for his neighbours dogreveal a different, more hospitable side of him.

Eventually, the three main characters converge on a road trip to Simons estranged parents house. Along the way, Melvin forms an unlikely friendship with his neighbour and falls in love with the caring waitress. Amid the troubled waters that they all seem to share, they begin to mend their scattered selves, sparking the films iconic, tear-inducing line: You make me want to be a better man.

This politically incorrectmovie depicts a love thats transformative, exploring traditional romantic elements and a fresh-spin on thechanged mantrope. Meanwhile, the music parallels Melvins progression, from abrupt violin squealsin the opening to softer instrumentals by the end credits. Change is imminent for everyone willing to pursue it.

As Good as It Getsreveals our need for companionship. While Melvin flirts with abandonment, the other characters, those he insults most, help divulge his dormant humanityall done in a believable fashion.

As one of only seven films in history to earn Oscars for both Best Actor and Best Actress,As Good as It Getsenraptures us through its leading roles. Both Nicholson and Hunt embody complex characters as we rummage through this refreshingly raw storyline. Under the influence of love, Melvin becomes a man who, while still brash, finds warmth and optimism in life. Its a testament to whyAs Good as It Getsremains a superior piece of sentimentality. One thats uncompromisingly human and true.

See original here:
Rewind: As Good as It Gets (1997) - The Medium

One of the unexpected side effects of the novel coronavirus and it affects almost everyone is that it has broadened our knowledge while narrowing our minds.

Over the last few months which have felt like about a decade weve turned into amateur epidemiologists, learning new terms and concepts. Medically-wise, its probably about as valuable as believing youre a lawyer because youve watched a lot of Law & Order.

Each on their own this is the age of social isolation after all now and again panics that the pandemic will never end and simple pleasures we once took for granted a hug, a meal with friends, large family celebrations will remain a thing of the past.

We also reach out toward the glimmer of hope, whenever it appears on the horizon: news of a promising treatment; a possible vaccine; reports that Vitamin D can help mitigate the risks.

Sadly, the further we progress in our knowledge of the virus, the further apart we grow.

Among the new terms that have popped up lately is pandemic fatigue. This is not the debilitating tiredness suffered by many who have been hit with the virus itself, it refers to the overwhelming exhaustion from the measures taken to prevent its spread.

Corona is a virus with an attitude and the public is beginning to respond in kind.

If the first closure was an imposition that we could somehow live with or needed in order to live the second closure is much harder. Weve reached our mental capacity to deal with the disease and the uncertainty, insecurity and tension that goes with it.

Different countries are responding in different ways and this, too, is being analyzed again and again as things are when the public has a lot of spare time on its hands.

Once upon a time, the words Swedish model conjured up a politically-incorrect image of a leggy, Scandinavian blonde. Now, the term triggers discussions about the cost of trying to create herd immunity (some 6,000 Swedes died out of a population of 10 million) while keeping the economy running.

The German model is researched by amateur economists and their epidemiologist counterparts alike: The value of testing and tracing and the best exit strategy from lockdown.

At least Taiwan is finally getting the global attention and admiration it deserves: The Republic of China remains a flourishing democracy and an economic powerhouse and has witnessed the deaths of just seven people due to coronavirus (out of a population of close to 24 million).

Israelis, in general, have responded as Israelis do, by being creative. We are a nation that takes rules as guidelines and a starting point for negotiations rather than as something mandatory and binding.

Part of the problem is that we dont really understand the rules. Why are we stuck indoors when it seems healthier to go outside wearing masks and maintaining a safe distance, of course and get some of that free Vitamin D?

Yisrablof, the peculiarly Israeli style of bluffing, or pretense, is flourishing. Israelis are taking the interpretation of the law into their own hands. What can be more Israeli than falafel stalls? For some reason, restaurants and stalls are allowed only to do deliveries, but not takeaways. Hence, falafel stall owners across the country have come up with the idea of setting up a stand a few meters from the kitchen.

Customers whatsapp their orders which are delivered minutes later to where they are waiting in surprisingly orderly lines. Dont worry, Ill whatsapp myself, a falafel guy cheerfully told me last week. He was wearing a mask and gloves. I went along with the pretense. Surviving the economic crisis is already hard enough.

An even bigger bluff is taking place in the local sporting scene: Officially permitted to practice and play only if participating in a European tournament, several Israeli basketball teams registered with the Balkan League and are now holding games among themselves close to home a net profit as far as theyre concerned. Beitar Jerusalem soccer club realized its goal equally inventively, registering for a six-a-side foreign tournament.

BUT THE pandemic is taking a huge toll on society.

Perhaps it has caused us to collectively go through a grieving process. We mourn not only loved ones who have been lost to the virus, but also the lives we had. I suspect that many who managed to move on from the denial phase of bereavement are now stuck in the anger phase.

And here it is exploding on the streets and social media. From the outset of the coronavirus in Israel in March, there has been an open battle between the demonstrators and the prayer-goers. And were not talking about six people per side, but thousands.

With synagogues closed, religious Jews are praying in street minyans, or from balconies and in parks. The numbers have been limited sometimes to only the minimal prayer quorum of 10. Demonstrators, on the other hand, were free to gather in tens of thousands free to protest their perceived lack of freedom; free to protest the alleged crimes of the prime minister and demand his removal without trial; free to demonstrate against the collapse of the economy and the loss of jobs.

Those watching the demonstrators wonder why they consider themselves immune to the virus. Is self-righteousness a more effective protection than prayer? The mass entourage of mourners at the funeral of a haredi religious leader is clearly a danger, but no more than mass protests in a pandemic.

The protests are popular in part, I suspect, because with all other places of entertainment closed, this is the place to be. And most Israeli media encourage it. Live broadcasts from the protests on all the main channels ensure that they have ratings and status.

But here, the herd mentality kicks in: Where are you? my left-leaning friends ask each other as they gather on traffic circles, bridges and at junctions abiding by the rule of staying to within 1,000 meters of home.

Everyone supports us, they assure themselves on social media, while at the same time expressing shock at being verbally abused. Clearly, not everyone in the country is with the protesters. Some citizens believe that democracy means apart from the right to demonstrate the need to change governments via elections, and to determine criminal status in a court of law, not a kangaroo court.

Social media fosters the divide. People exist in echo chambers, hearing only the views of their friends who express the same opinions or risk being unliked, unfollowed, unfriended. A social media death.

I refuse to follow either side or any leader blindly. Id rather remain outside the herd mentality than give up my basic freedom to make up my own mind and change my opinion when circumstances change.

I urge everyone, the prayer-goers and the protesters, people of all political and religious persuasions, to realize were all in the same boat. No one has the right to drill a hole in it. Who are you kidding? can too easily turn into Who are you killing?

liat@jpost.com

Go here to read the rest:
Herd immunity vs herd mentality: pandemic fatigue and the toll on society - The Jerusalem Post

BUFFALO, N.Y. Stevie Johnson wasnt sure what to think. When informed the Buffalo Bills had applied to trademark Bills Mafia after 10 years, he was autographing a stack of football cards on a coffee table.

Nice! said Johnson, his Sharpie strokes uninterrupted.

The club, he was told, wanted to sell Bills Mafia merchandise 10 years after others had cultivated the brand.

Hold on, Johnson said. He sat upright, stopped signing and gave a sideways glance. I dont know if thats right.

Johnson is Bills Mafias patron saint. He was critical to the phrases 2010 inception. Though the team distanced itself from the organic fan movement when it began, the lone receiver in team history to gain 1,000 yards three consecutive seasons has hailed it from the jump.

Over the past decade and with virtually zero assistance from the team, Bills Mafia has become the...

Link:
'Bills Mafia' finally joins team's official family after years of being rebuffed - The Athletic

The issue I have with this message is not that Frito-Lay is looking for recognition by asking not to be recognized: That's a flex we see all too often when corporations that splash on CSR are looking for some R on their hefty I. They are forgiven. The issue, as far as I'm concerned, is that each day we stray further from God's light. God's light, in this context, being that Frito-Lay is a chips brand that I don't associate with crisis-time job creation or freely accessible Covid-19 testing facilities for the general public. I associate them with Dorito-dust on my fingers that requires more hand washing than I'm technically comfortable withbut I still go in for seconds after the wash. Because it makes me feel good.

Eating chipsor any comfort foodis a very intimate act that involves people inserting highly processed products into their body, being fully aware that they hold no nutritional value whatsoever. And yet I love doing it. Judging by Frito-Lay's post-lockdown sales figures (Lay's +32 percent, Tostitos +42 percent), I am not the only one.

When, in the wake of the global financial crisis, Simon Sinek suggested brands should start with the "why" instead of the "what," I have been cheerleading the shift toward purposeful marketing. "People don't buy what you do; people buy why you do it" was genius in 2009, and it still holds up 11 years later. But during Cannes Lions 2019, where the why trend culminated in a champagne-fueled orgy of purpose, we could already see the logical endpoint of the movement on the horizon: What began as sincere started morphing into woke-washing.

In food marketing, where I'm operating globally with the company I co-founded, the "why" has always had a shorter shelf life than in other categories. That's because decisions about which foods to consume can often be completely irrational, and this irrationality is accelerated by stress factors likesay, oh I don't knowa global pandemic. During times like these, it's the "what" that drives people: products with bright colors, strange consistencies and untraceable ingredients can exist and be successful in this space. Asking "why" opens up both the brand and the consumer to a line of questioning that might be best left unexplored.

This leaves a great opportunity-gap for brands to explore politically incorrect positioning, or at a minimum, ignore politically correct positioning. Take the upcoming relaunch of Cheese Puffs, a product so wonderfully out of touch with today's values about transparency that it is unthinkable that any self-respecting R&D department would come up with it in 2020. As Cathy Erway notices in her highly recommended Eater piece about the return of '90s snacks, Cheese Puffs deliberately look like nothing you would find growing in naturethey are the polar opposite of artisanal.

Yet Kraft Heinz is plotting a comeback for the snack because nostalgic '90s kids find comfort in eating a product that is designed to be so light that it actually tricks the brain into failing to recognize you are overeating. There has always been room for this kind of product, but the Covid-19 pandemic and the global lockdown have provided brands the opportunity to rebrand indulgence as self-care.

As all food brands did, French dairy behemoth Danone saw a spike in sales during the pantry-loading phase of the pandemic in March. But when the new reality settled in with people, the company noticed its indulgent product lines continued to outperform expectations. People, they found, were opting for familiarity and gratification.

On LinkedIn, Danone's global marketing director added: "Nutritional advice and healthier eating trends are too often overshadowing the fact that indulging (from time to time, in a reasonable and balanced way) plays its part in keeping a healthy mind. :)"

It made complete sense for the swing toward indulgence to start in food. During the lockdown, we suddenly find ourselves in a world without parties, concerts and restaurants. Food is all we have, so there is room for brands in that segment to be politically incorrect. But expect luxury brands to follow suit. They speak to the same sentiment: making people feel better.

Does that mean a hard stop for the purpose parade? I personally don't think or hope so. Purposeful marketing has brought us a lot of good. It has pushed brands toward more sustainable models. But there's something refreshing about brands that drop all pretense and are honest about the fact that all they want is to make you happy.

So thank you, Frito-Lay, for creating 2,000 jobs (with benefits!) and feeding hungry kids. But my decision to keep buying Dorito's is driven by that fleeting moment of happiness that binging a bag of Cool Ranch gives me when my wife is out with friends.

And you know what? I love you for that, too, from the bottom of my Dorito-dust colored heart.

See more here:
The Return of the Politically Incorrect Food Brands - Muse by Clio

To the Editor:

As the election approaches, I am very concerned that much of the mainstream media, including The Times, repeatedly falls into the trap of focusing on President Trump his outrageous behavior, his mendacity, his corruption and his latest tweet while giving comparatively short shrift to Joe Biden and his agenda.

The Republican convention ended with no new platform except supporting Mr. Trumps re-election, while the Democratic convention produced a very substantive platform. Even when media attention is paid to Mr. Bidens agenda, all too often the focus is on how much it would cost rather than what it would accomplish.

There is a danger of repeating the mistake of 2016: heavily criticizing the Democrats shortcomings, while treating Mr. Trump as entertainment. An endorsement by the editorial board will be nice, but truly balanced coverage would be so much better.

Diane SunarIstanbul

To the Editor:

Re The Towering Lies of President Trump, by Greg Weiner (Sunday Review, Sept. 13):

As a lifelong Republican, I support many of the current administrations policies, and I believe that much of what President Trump says really is just hyperbole (rather than lies! as has become fashionable in the media). But there have certainly been lies. And there are real risks in re-electing him, including his consistent promotion of misinformation, division and authoritarianism.

As an epidemiologist, I believe that the unthinkable Covid-19 death toll has been tragic and absolutely preventable. A large part of me wants to join the Never Trumpers on their moral high ground. But an equally large part of me thinks its silly to pretend that policy under Joe Biden wouldnt be heavily skewed toward the left.

And so it goes. I think that Mr. Weiner mistakenly implies that support for Mr. Trump precludes trying to make the best judgment one can on the basis of competing views. I still dont know whom Im going to vote for when I get my ballot in the mail. But itll be based on serious consideration of arguments on both sides.

Carl GrafeSt. Anthony, Idaho

To the Editor:

Re Can Trump Win Pennsylvania?, by Michael Sokolove (Sunday Review, Sept. 13):

This article featured my hometown, New Milford, in rural Pennsylvania, where Donald Trump won by a landslide. Given that I grew up there, I know that: 1) this is a place where rifles are raffled off at happy hour; 2) my childhood classmates are planning to vote for Donald Trump (again); and 3) they worship him for the exact reasons the world does not.

To argue that he is offensive, crude, cocky, politically incorrect and unpresidential are actually points in his favor in their eyes that is how they view themselves. As long as Mr. Trump continues being unpresidential, he is, in a most ironic fashion, their most desirable presidential candidate. Frankly, we Democrats would do better to paint him as a proper, well-educated gentleman one who knows exactly which fork to use.

Ash AmbirgePhiladelphia

To the Editor:

Re Battleground Dispatches: 51 Days to Go (news article, Sept. 13):

To those Wisconsinites you profiled, and other swing state undecideds who say they dont know enough about Joe Biden yet, I have one word: Google. Or better yet, go to JoeBiden.com. His website is replete with detailed information about what he stands for and what he plans to do.

Then go visit donaldjtrump.com to see what he plans to accomplish in the next four years. Spoiler alert: Theres virtually nothing there. He wants your vote, but hes not going to tell you what hell do for you and your family, for America. He either doesnt want to commit to promises hell probably break, or hes just too lazy to make real plans and share them in writing. Why would anyone trust that?

Rebecca SpenceNew Providence, N.J.

Original post:
The Medias Coverage of the Election - The New York Times