They love to ‘dunk’ on the New York Times until they need to offer ‘commentary’ on some of the actual reporting produced over there. 

Oh for sure. I should’ve been clear that I wasn’t intending to shit on the “it’s cultural” people, though I find the insistence that washing is better w/o providing evidence harmlessly amusing.

The amount of superstition and stubbornness in these comments is nuts. Its like a low stakes version of science denying bullshit.  

“By leaving out Marcus’s relationship to Sarah Lawrence, Marcus and his co-author, James Walsh make an omission that makes a complicated story difficult to fully understand.”

...that opening anecdote though. 

...she was born in florida, dude. 

...no, it was a genuine conversation that stuck out in my mind because it escalated to “global stateless communism” in like 3 comments. I don’t comment all that much so it took me all of five minutes to click back to it.

That intel is way above my paygrade. I’ll have to wait for my handlers back east to feed me my lines. 

I’m really tempted to say yes since it seems to bother you (and I like to reward pedantry with pettiness) but, realistically, no. I just don’t have enough invested in commenting here to stick with it.

Sure, you got me there. I’m not a political science student and won’t pretend that I remembered that nation, state, and nation-state had distinct definitions. 

Also, here’s the comment you were referring to. It’s obvious the conversation is about immigrants crossing national borders:

...really? so when you said global stateless communism you’re saying that you meant...states within the U.S.? Then why did you say global? That’s real weak but I’m not surprised you’re doubling down.

https://splinternews.com/1831987071

I think we had a conversation a while back about you believing in open borders and the arbitrariness of nations and national definitions. Maybe it wasn’t you? I’ll take a quick look through my history but I could be confusing you for someone else. 

Don’t waste your time engaging with You. Yes, You unless you want to hear about how they don’t believe nations should exist. (Spoiler alert: It is not a well thought out or coherent argument.)

i like that after agreeing that everyone—convicted of a crime or not—should get the right to vote you still found a way to carve out a convenient exception.

Are you angling for a buyout? 

Solid conspiracy theorizing. Plus one tinfoil hat. 

No they cannot, the commenter has spoken. /s

You might be the most consistent new writer here since the death of gawker.