Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is Thad pushing back on some of our criticism about John Oliver's AI chatbot segment and his call for regulation:
Isn't the logical conclusion of this argument that we shouldn't have government regulations on vaccines or antidepressants?
Like, you're arguing that we shouldn't put this particular thing under the control of HHS because it's currently run by a lunatic, but...couldn't you apply that argument to literally everything?
Hell, why stop at HHS? RFK is hardly the only corrupt moron in Trump's cabinet. Carr's corrupt; I guess we shouldn't have any regulations on the broadcast spectrum. Chavez-DeRemer resigned due to misconduct; I guess we should get rid of OSHA. Kristi Noem -
...okay, actually we should abolish DHS; I'll give you that one.
In second place, it's Nimrod with a comment about Border Patrol chief Michael Banks:
Anyone who brags about their sexual exploits clearly lacks the maturity to be put in charge of anything more serious that a lemonade stand. Even then, they should probably be supervised.
For editor's choice on the insightful side, we've got a pair of comments about the latest example of a judge smacking down the DOJ. First it's Ninja asking the all-important question of whether it will matter at all:
So what exactly is preventing the DOJ and the people they represent from doing this again trying different paths? Any meaningful punishment? Threat of disbarring if it continues? Fines to the DOJ itself and those repeatedly doing this kind of persecution against trans people? Perhaps jail time? No?
It will keep happening.
Next, it's Nathan F with thoughts about the future:
In two and a half years the DOJ is going to have an almost insurmountable hill to climb in redeeming themselves in the eyes of the court. I have no doubt the the current administration is going to continue to lie to the court and abuse their power.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is Asst DA BA Baracus with a reply to a commenter complaining about activist judges":
Neat how 10,000 decisions are wrong on the law because they're not YOUR preferred interpretation of the law. And amazing how, without further reasoning from you, you're able to come to the obvious implication that these are 10,000 decisions by the lots" of activist judges. How do we know they're not fair jurists? Because you disagree with them.
The view from your own navel must be glorious.
In second place, it's Bloof with another comment on the same subject:
Every judge is an activist judge, unless they were handpicked by the federalist society or have worked for Trump in some capacity, then they're non partisan champions of justice.
For editor's choice on the funny side, we start out with a comment from Stephen T. Stone, deploying a movie quote in response to Bill Cassidy's primary loss:
Of all the movies I could quote, Ocean's Thirteen has the most appropriate two lines I could think of for this:
You think this is funny?
Well ... it sure as shit ain't sad.
Finally, it's one more comment from Nathan F, this time about Trump's absurdly corrupt IRS shenanigans:
Soooo... Now that Trump is no longer and can no longer be audited by the IRS.. he is going to release his tax returns right? Right??
That's all for this week, folks!