His own thoughts are far more important to him than anything Matt or anybody else has to say. You don’t understand. If Walter lets even ONE of his invaluable thoughts slip away, its absence has catastrophic consequences not just for America, but for humanity.
As a spinny brained person it's not that. When someone else's thoughts gets your brain going, you can't stop it. The smarter the other person is, the more I interrupt--but it's really my brain trying to catch up with their brain.
One way to think of all the interruption is if a very dumb person kept asking you to explain things in a simpler way--it's not meant as an insult or interruption.
Now that's doesn't make it any easier to deal with--and frankly I use a safe word with my friends--and it really helps a lot.
But it's just a spinny brain trying to catch up with very interesting ideas.
There is an argument to be made that the value of what we say is in what we make other people think--and by that measure the spinny brained interruption is biggest compliment you can pay.
Now that's still doesn't make it any easier to deal with.
I have a friend who does similar behavior when we chat, but only when she has had a few drinks. Inhibition and social etiquette go out the window. What does Walter have in that vaporizer? Would he, like my friend, be a better collaborative conversationalist when not under the influence?
A tip for Walter, when someone says something you want to respond to during a conversation like a podcast then instead of interrupting, MAKE A WRITTEN NOTE, and refer back to it a moment or two later. In a sales scenario not rudely interrupting but not losing your train of thought is essential.
Yes, we occasionally remind him about being interrupty, and he's been backsliding more lately.
Poor Matt has enough trouble articulating a thought sometimes and I usually find his thoughts very interesting. But I think we only get to hear about half of them.
I'm delighted, contra Matt, the ACLU and the millionaire bubble-heads are "standing up" for free speech.
Why? Because the ACLU and the signatories rallied to action in a week to defend? - a multi-millionaire attention-whore on his way who inflamed a dangerous situation and acted like an asshole.
Matt needs to not be angry, Matt needs to start thinking and stop reacting - coz I'm just human and "I feel really, really, really, really strongly about this." They couldn't give a fuck and they just fucked up.
Without an ACLU and Kimmel 400 rally to free speech, shouting from the rooftops America would never know what a contemporary ACLU reaction might actually look like if they actually give a shit. Now the world knows.
The ACLU Kimmel 400 demonstrates concretely what the ACLU priorities are. Now, when Matt and others confront the ACLU over each specific case of not acting, the ACLU get to explain why they didn't lift a finger to help anybody who was censored over the last decade.
Matt and Walter are right - the Jimmy Kimmel Free Speech tour - brought to by Raytheon and Moderna - champions of free speech, MAHA, and peace throughout the world TM.
One of the great things about listening to Matt and Walter whine about getting censored by the security state is their inability to grasp that they're getting fucked for exactly the same reason Charlie Kirk got shot - they deserved it, had the fucking coming. Coz the constant in all this is unthink will be punished. Always. Get it?
A suspension that apparently had no government involvement at all, as 1/300th of Jay Leno's audience is about to see one week later while watching the show that got "censored"
The left has simply been on a progression of increased aggression to protect their control. It started with winning elections and infiltrating all other centers of power, including media and education. But, when those controls were challenged by Trump, they moved to the cancel culture phenomenon, to silence or punish speech. Finally, when that failed and Trump was re-elected, they have resorted to direct violence.
Walter, I like you, I do. You often have really interesting things to say. But you interrupt Matt a lot when he’s just trying to lay out the case wrt what he’s trying to discuss. And you make your point and I find myself going “ok, got it”, and then dreading the upcoming “and, something something”, often followed by a couple more of those. With respect, try to tighten it up, my friend.
This episode was on fire, then MT said last week “could have been worse . . .” WTH. Worse than what? Worse than 1A assassination? Worse than thousands of degenerates expressing their joy on-line about the murder? Worse than political leaders proudly smearing the dead man? I Know that is Not what you meant, and context is king. And watching Kirk get smeared is disgusting. Christopher Hitchens. He would not be allowed to open his mouth if he was still around.
But many of us who never followed CK have been touched by this. We saw the Zapruder film, but not in real time. And we are watching the response to this murder. Prayer. Forgiveness. Make fun of it, that is OK. Christians are used to it. “Piss Christ” anybody?
Query: Do all those Hollywood signatories know the ACLU defended the Nazis!!! in Skokie in days gone by? Why hasn’t the ACLU been cancelled?
People think they're entitled to one's agreement, all too often. Fact is, no-one is even entitled to KNOW another's opinion if that other doesn't choose to broadcast it.
You’re right, that was a gross generalization on my part. If you’re reading Taibbi critically, then good for you. I don’t see much evidence of that on these pages.
No personal offense intended, but I have read a bunch of your posts and I have no idea what you believe on any issue, except that you don't like Matt and Walter.
No personal offense taken. And I hope that you don't take personal offense if I accept at face value your contention that you don't understand any of my positions.
So, let's take the post in this thread as an example. I put to you, that if you try, you can easily ascertain that I firmly believe the following:
1) It is wrong and unhelpful to throw gasoline on the Charlie Kirk assasination by stoking the culture wars and cherry-picking quotes.
2) We should not blame vulnerable populations in knee-jerk fashion by labeling any of these events as a 'trans shooting.'
3) In these times we should not be apologists for efforts to censor.
I hope this helps. As to whether I have any personal animus toward Taibbi or Kirn, I do not.
Yes, it was, these are the same men who in 2015 sent death threats to my children because I was confused why a trans woman needed a moon cup and that men don’t menstruate on Reddit.
You can cut it many ways. I think Sherlock Holmes would tell you every murders is suis generis, but a theory that is more probable is that, like the Mangione, and Cooks assassinations, this is the result of the toxic brew of religion and rifles that produces toxic masculinity unable to deal with problems other than through violence. Interesting that the trans love interest was the law and order good citizen horrified by the violence who cooperated fully with authorities.
Hmm, look it up, most serial killers are white and from religious, gun loving households. Maybe they need more exposure to diversity and tolerance. A healthy dose of sex education would probably help too.
Wright Stuff - For those trying to parse Tyler Robinson's motivation for the murder of Charlie Kirk, 'trans shooting' is by far the most accurate explanation. Throughout human existence, extreme instances of sexual infatuation have left those afflicted devoid of rational thought. Robinson's e-mails to his transsexual lover are evidence of his lethal derangement.
Alvie, let’s put it this way, if a family of gun-toting Christian nationalists moved into my neighborhood I’d be much more concerned than if a family moved in that had a trans individual in it.
I see why you are skeptical. It’s easy to discount Kimmel as being ‘controlled by big pharma’ — but I think that was a cheap shot by Walt & Matt. There is zero evidence that this was a publicity stunt. There is however plenty of evidence that Trump wants to establish a situation in this country akin to Orban in Hungary or Netanyahu in Israel or Putin in Russia. I think Kirn and Taibbi do a disservice by pretending otherwise.
Last week Walter mentioned looking at these events like a chess game, that is look ahead. I couldn't help thinking that originally (1930s?) the US took over frequency bands, because they needed to reserve certain bands for the military, aviation, and other reasons, including public broadcasting. Putting the rider in about using public airways a certain way was probably unconstitutional, but at that time they were probably thinking the First Amendment only applied to newspapers, public speakers and the like, but I think since then the interpretation has broadened.
We already have countries like Russia, China, Europe, etc. taking control of digital communication, in the name of control. What would prevent the US from doing the same thing, citing ownership of broadcast frequencies as a precedent for also controlling? The argument is, since the government owns the medium, they also have the right to control it, sidestepping the First Amendment. I think it's wrong, and why it's wrong to use the "special case" of broadcast frequencies as allowing government control over what they "own".
I couldn’t have picked Jimmy Kimmel out of a police lineup before this week. I haven’t watched anything on ABC in 25 years. It probably won’t exist in ten more years. The FCC chairman apparently got out over his skis by shooting off his mouth at a time of high emotion. Plenty of people on his own side of the house didn’t appreciate him for it.
Kimmel’s show is not a production of ABC News. I’m drawing a blank when anyone wants to complain that a late night show contains inaccuracies. The broadcasters’ code of decency is as long-dead as Harry Reasoner and Howard K. Smith. I’m chuckling at the fact that ABC quickly had to bring back their money-losing neck-millstone. They might as well. They alienated 80% of the population a long time ago, and none of them are coming back no matter what the network does about their ninth-rate court jester. The happiness of the remainder is the only thing keeping them in business. This episode will change nobody’s mind about anything important. The hyperventilation is already dying down, and it will be over by the end of next week.
Back on Planet Earth, there’s one thing that ought to alarm everyone on both sides. In the aftermath of the Kirk assassination, the right of free and public political speech is now limited to people who have a minimum $3 million annual private security budget. And to howling nutties who have little to lose and less to contribute.
Jimmy is an insulting asshole, period. I know he has friends who he has been good to and they are loyal to him, that's fine, but what he said last week was really awful. As for the American Celebrities Liberties Union goes, they have been AWOL on the free speech issue for a long time. I think you are right, this is a fund raising move for the ACLU no question.
One of these days they have to invite this Walter Kirn guy on ATW -- Matt's co-host talks about him constantly, mentioning him by name at least a few times every episode.
Irony…Kirn and Taibbi outraged at Hollywood elite being on the fence with their defense of free speech until the Kimmel fiasco…but it’s okay to be on the fence with Gaza until…?
I love Walter's perspective, but I do wish he could let Matt finish a thought more often.
His own thoughts are far more important to him than anything Matt or anybody else has to say. You don’t understand. If Walter lets even ONE of his invaluable thoughts slip away, its absence has catastrophic consequences not just for America, but for humanity.
Such is the burden of gypsy wisdom.
As a spinny brained person it's not that. When someone else's thoughts gets your brain going, you can't stop it. The smarter the other person is, the more I interrupt--but it's really my brain trying to catch up with their brain.
One way to think of all the interruption is if a very dumb person kept asking you to explain things in a simpler way--it's not meant as an insult or interruption.
Now that's doesn't make it any easier to deal with--and frankly I use a safe word with my friends--and it really helps a lot.
But it's just a spinny brain trying to catch up with very interesting ideas.
There is an argument to be made that the value of what we say is in what we make other people think--and by that measure the spinny brained interruption is biggest compliment you can pay.
Now that's still doesn't make it any easier to deal with.
Safe words for the win!
I have a friend who does similar behavior when we chat, but only when she has had a few drinks. Inhibition and social etiquette go out the window. What does Walter have in that vaporizer? Would he, like my friend, be a better collaborative conversationalist when not under the influence?
Is there any way we can hear everything Walter has to say and everything Matt would have said if Walter hadn’t cut him off?
A tip for Walter, when someone says something you want to respond to during a conversation like a podcast then instead of interrupting, MAKE A WRITTEN NOTE, and refer back to it a moment or two later. In a sales scenario not rudely interrupting but not losing your train of thought is essential.
Yes, we occasionally remind him about being interrupty, and he's been backsliding more lately.
Poor Matt has enough trouble articulating a thought sometimes and I usually find his thoughts very interesting. But I think we only get to hear about half of them.
I'm delighted, contra Matt, the ACLU and the millionaire bubble-heads are "standing up" for free speech.
Why? Because the ACLU and the signatories rallied to action in a week to defend? - a multi-millionaire attention-whore on his way who inflamed a dangerous situation and acted like an asshole.
Matt needs to not be angry, Matt needs to start thinking and stop reacting - coz I'm just human and "I feel really, really, really, really strongly about this." They couldn't give a fuck and they just fucked up.
Without an ACLU and Kimmel 400 rally to free speech, shouting from the rooftops America would never know what a contemporary ACLU reaction might actually look like if they actually give a shit. Now the world knows.
The ACLU Kimmel 400 demonstrates concretely what the ACLU priorities are. Now, when Matt and others confront the ACLU over each specific case of not acting, the ACLU get to explain why they didn't lift a finger to help anybody who was censored over the last decade.
The ACLU Kimmel 400 is a huge win!
Matt and Walter are right - the Jimmy Kimmel Free Speech tour - brought to by Raytheon and Moderna - champions of free speech, MAHA, and peace throughout the world TM.
One of the great things about listening to Matt and Walter whine about getting censored by the security state is their inability to grasp that they're getting fucked for exactly the same reason Charlie Kirk got shot - they deserved it, had the fucking coming. Coz the constant in all this is unthink will be punished. Always. Get it?
Stop pretending that the threat of violence is about “controversial” speech, the left has no fear of getting shot by conservatives.
I was super surprised living in CA my boss was 💯 truly afraid of herself and me being shot by conservatives for taking a pro-choice stance.
Can't share pics, but look up @naval on Twitter and check his replies.
One reply says it all: (paraphrasing) there is no leftist worth shooting
FF'sS...
Oh man...you're ALL such fools...
Within a week, we had:
- a psycho black dude stabs a cute blonde to death and not a single person lifted a finger to aid her until it was too late
- TWO children, at prayer, were slaughtered by a tranny nut case who shot up a church, blasting the brains out of other children as well
- Charlie Kirk was ASSASINATED
AND YOU PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT A SUSPENSION OF JIMMY FUCKING KIMMEL?
What shallowness. And you can't even see you were played.
You’re not wrong.
Thanks, man.
A suspension that apparently had no government involvement at all, as 1/300th of Jay Leno's audience is about to see one week later while watching the show that got "censored"
The left has simply been on a progression of increased aggression to protect their control. It started with winning elections and infiltrating all other centers of power, including media and education. But, when those controls were challenged by Trump, they moved to the cancel culture phenomenon, to silence or punish speech. Finally, when that failed and Trump was re-elected, they have resorted to direct violence.
Walter, I like you, I do. You often have really interesting things to say. But you interrupt Matt a lot when he’s just trying to lay out the case wrt what he’s trying to discuss. And you make your point and I find myself going “ok, got it”, and then dreading the upcoming “and, something something”, often followed by a couple more of those. With respect, try to tighten it up, my friend.
This episode was on fire, then MT said last week “could have been worse . . .” WTH. Worse than what? Worse than 1A assassination? Worse than thousands of degenerates expressing their joy on-line about the murder? Worse than political leaders proudly smearing the dead man? I Know that is Not what you meant, and context is king. And watching Kirk get smeared is disgusting. Christopher Hitchens. He would not be allowed to open his mouth if he was still around.
But many of us who never followed CK have been touched by this. We saw the Zapruder film, but not in real time. And we are watching the response to this murder. Prayer. Forgiveness. Make fun of it, that is OK. Christians are used to it. “Piss Christ” anybody?
Query: Do all those Hollywood signatories know the ACLU defended the Nazis!!! in Skokie in days gone by? Why hasn’t the ACLU been cancelled?
It could have been worse, surely you understand that, and we're not out of the woods yet.
Say tuned for a new ATW.
Will Matt Taibbi and Walter Kirn throw more gasoline on the Charlie Kirk fire by stoking the culture wars with more cherry-picked quotes?
- Will Kirn call Charlie Kirk’s shooting a ‘trans shooting’?
- Will Kirn double down on his censorship apologetics while Taibbi struggles to formulate a coherent position?
will Wright, Terrance and Karen troll the comments in a flaccid attempt to influence Matt's content?
Here's a free idea. Get your own show. Then you can cover whatever topics you want. Trying to guilt Matt and Walter isnt working out for you.
People think they're entitled to one's agreement, all too often. Fact is, no-one is even entitled to KNOW another's opinion if that other doesn't choose to broadcast it.
You raise excellent points. I would just add that your uncritical acceptance of their partisan claptrap has worked out brilliantly for you.
how do u know i have " uncritical acceptance" maybe I just dont feel the need to try to force my opinion into other peoples mouths?
You’re right, that was a gross generalization on my part. If you’re reading Taibbi critically, then good for you. I don’t see much evidence of that on these pages.
No personal offense intended, but I have read a bunch of your posts and I have no idea what you believe on any issue, except that you don't like Matt and Walter.
No personal offense taken. And I hope that you don't take personal offense if I accept at face value your contention that you don't understand any of my positions.
So, let's take the post in this thread as an example. I put to you, that if you try, you can easily ascertain that I firmly believe the following:
1) It is wrong and unhelpful to throw gasoline on the Charlie Kirk assasination by stoking the culture wars and cherry-picking quotes.
2) We should not blame vulnerable populations in knee-jerk fashion by labeling any of these events as a 'trans shooting.'
3) In these times we should not be apologists for efforts to censor.
I hope this helps. As to whether I have any personal animus toward Taibbi or Kirn, I do not.
Yes, it was, these are the same men who in 2015 sent death threats to my children because I was confused why a trans woman needed a moon cup and that men don’t menstruate on Reddit.
You can cut it many ways. I think Sherlock Holmes would tell you every murders is suis generis, but a theory that is more probable is that, like the Mangione, and Cooks assassinations, this is the result of the toxic brew of religion and rifles that produces toxic masculinity unable to deal with problems other than through violence. Interesting that the trans love interest was the law and order good citizen horrified by the violence who cooperated fully with authorities.
the transvestite radicallized the dud.
Hmm, look it up, most serial killers are white and from religious, gun loving households. Maybe they need more exposure to diversity and tolerance. A healthy dose of sex education would probably help too.
Wright Stuff - For those trying to parse Tyler Robinson's motivation for the murder of Charlie Kirk, 'trans shooting' is by far the most accurate explanation. Throughout human existence, extreme instances of sexual infatuation have left those afflicted devoid of rational thought. Robinson's e-mails to his transsexual lover are evidence of his lethal derangement.
Alvie, let’s put it this way, if a family of gun-toting Christian nationalists moved into my neighborhood I’d be much more concerned than if a family moved in that had a trans individual in it.
It's Kirn. Everything else you posted is in the same vein.
Yes, I do think Kirn might be radicalizing our youth.
I see why you are skeptical. It’s easy to discount Kimmel as being ‘controlled by big pharma’ — but I think that was a cheap shot by Walt & Matt. There is zero evidence that this was a publicity stunt. There is however plenty of evidence that Trump wants to establish a situation in this country akin to Orban in Hungary or Netanyahu in Israel or Putin in Russia. I think Kirn and Taibbi do a disservice by pretending otherwise.
Last week Walter mentioned looking at these events like a chess game, that is look ahead. I couldn't help thinking that originally (1930s?) the US took over frequency bands, because they needed to reserve certain bands for the military, aviation, and other reasons, including public broadcasting. Putting the rider in about using public airways a certain way was probably unconstitutional, but at that time they were probably thinking the First Amendment only applied to newspapers, public speakers and the like, but I think since then the interpretation has broadened.
We already have countries like Russia, China, Europe, etc. taking control of digital communication, in the name of control. What would prevent the US from doing the same thing, citing ownership of broadcast frequencies as a precedent for also controlling? The argument is, since the government owns the medium, they also have the right to control it, sidestepping the First Amendment. I think it's wrong, and why it's wrong to use the "special case" of broadcast frequencies as allowing government control over what they "own".
I couldn’t have picked Jimmy Kimmel out of a police lineup before this week. I haven’t watched anything on ABC in 25 years. It probably won’t exist in ten more years. The FCC chairman apparently got out over his skis by shooting off his mouth at a time of high emotion. Plenty of people on his own side of the house didn’t appreciate him for it.
Kimmel’s show is not a production of ABC News. I’m drawing a blank when anyone wants to complain that a late night show contains inaccuracies. The broadcasters’ code of decency is as long-dead as Harry Reasoner and Howard K. Smith. I’m chuckling at the fact that ABC quickly had to bring back their money-losing neck-millstone. They might as well. They alienated 80% of the population a long time ago, and none of them are coming back no matter what the network does about their ninth-rate court jester. The happiness of the remainder is the only thing keeping them in business. This episode will change nobody’s mind about anything important. The hyperventilation is already dying down, and it will be over by the end of next week.
Back on Planet Earth, there’s one thing that ought to alarm everyone on both sides. In the aftermath of the Kirk assassination, the right of free and public political speech is now limited to people who have a minimum $3 million annual private security budget. And to howling nutties who have little to lose and less to contribute.
Wish I could post something meaningful about this episode, but I'm still suffering from whiplash after hearing about Kimmel.
Anyone here know any good personal injury lawyers?
babylon bee has been on a roll....... :)
https://babylonbee.com/news/dems-warn-someday-conservatives-will-find-out-what-its-like-to-be-canceled
Thanks! Love The Bee
Can we start a clothing drive for Matt? The only people who wear Adidas Track suits 24/7 are the mafia.
Jimmy is an insulting asshole, period. I know he has friends who he has been good to and they are loyal to him, that's fine, but what he said last week was really awful. As for the American Celebrities Liberties Union goes, they have been AWOL on the free speech issue for a long time. I think you are right, this is a fund raising move for the ACLU no question.
Kimmel is more than an asshole. He’s a disgusting, despicable, miserable asshole.
He is unhuman.
One of these days they have to invite this Walter Kirn guy on ATW -- Matt's co-host talks about him constantly, mentioning him by name at least a few times every episode.
It's interesting to watch Matt Tiabbi being buffaloed by Kern on this issue.
Irony…Kirn and Taibbi outraged at Hollywood elite being on the fence with their defense of free speech until the Kimmel fiasco…but it’s okay to be on the fence with Gaza until…?
That's not irony, that's a false equivalence.
Walter and Matt, as American journalists/writers, and the Hollywood elite are directly affected by the Constitutional protection of free speech.
Please enlighten me on how having an opinion, or not, on Gaza is in any way the same.
People being fired, blackballed, deported on comments about a genocide being labeled antisemitic.