It’s because it’s basically an Onion skit. Fox started a rumor and then got outraged about the rumor.

Wooooosh

I was watching Fox News and I think they might not be fair and balanced.

They have a video ad first that doesn’t transition to the headlined video clip. The clip is at the bottom, and it sucks. Here’s the article.

Ted Cruz rages against non-existent Biden beer limit in viral clip The Texas senator engaged in a beer-swigging on-camera stunt this week in response to a made-up federal policy limiting alcohol consumption.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz railed against the Biden administration earlier this week for imposing a strict limit on Americans’ alcohol consumption in a now-viral clip—even though no such policy exists.

The saga began when Fox News correspondent Peter Doocy asked Biden’s White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre if the president planned to “limit Americans to two beers a week.” Jean-Pierre, who appeared baffled by the question, laughed and declined to comment.

The question apparently came from comments made by Dr. George Koob, director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, during an interview with the Daily Mail last week, in which Koob said the U.S. might change it’s recommended weekly alcohol intake to two drinks per week. Current recommendations advise men to limit themselves to two drinks a day and women to stick to one.

For Cruz and the conservative mediasphere, however, these comments were enough to conjure the right’s latest hand-wringing, they’re-coming-for-your-freedoms moral panic.

“What is it with liberals that want to control every damn aspect of your life?” Cruz raged in his Newsmax interview. “Now these idiots have come out and said, ‘drink two beers a week,’ that’s their guideline,” Cruz continued, before reaching for a bottle of beer and taking a drink on camera. “Well, I’ve got to tell you, if they want us to drink two beers a week, frankly they can kiss my ass!”

Cruz cranked the top off a Shiner Bock beer and chucked the cap on the ground in theatrical defiance before taking a swig. Behind him, a huddle of men dressed in cowboy hats and plaid flannel shirts followed suit, drinking their beers.

On Wednesday night, the senator posted the clip on X, formerly known as Twitter, repeating his own lines from the interview in the caption for his 6.1 million followers. “What is it with liberals and wanting to control every damn aspect of your life? If they want us to drink two beers a week, frankly they can kiss my ass.”

Cruz appears to have stepped up his misinformation game on X in the past few weeks: Wednesday’s nonsense diatribe against a non-existent Biden beer limit comes a few days after the senator reposted misinformation about the southern border wall, presenting a Trump-era policy as a Biden-imposed change. About a week before that, Cruz shared a well-known fake image from 2011 of a shark swimming in California floodwaters.

Hey now, we have to have a US III, IV, and V, before we get to VI.

They’re solid in my book.

Who cares? Like really.

kind’a

I can’t believe I’ve never seen this before. “Kinda” does not mean “kind of.” “Kind of” is not the proper way to write “kinda.” They aren’t interchangeable.

Kind’a is a contraction and specifically means kind of. Brilliant.

You uncultured swine. Ain’t is a contraction of am not. Am only goes with I. I ain’t going to accept illiteracy.

Everyone gets y’all. It fills the dumb gap in English where the plural of you is you. Now if we could only get a singular neutral 3rd for people that isn’t also the plural.

E: Or we could start pronouncing They singular like latchkey, for a thee sound. So we can get fun words like they’s (thees). It will also make English even more confusing for newbies. What’s not to love?

y’all is second person plural. First and Second person aren’t gendered. Therefore, I is also woke

I thought I would be safe if I hovered and read the URL. Nope. Nooooope.

Is that anything like

?

E: TW - This one, if any video were to exist of it, would be a suicide video. Not every silly story has a happy ending.

You misspelled doo.

Nope. It’s a murder.

I managed to skip that one in middle school when it dropped. I was not so fortunate with 3 guys 1 hammer.

It came up in the Lemme-Shitpost update post. It seemed like a kind of spam, but an extra bad spam that was nearing on repugnance to csam. After an inadequate warning about 3 guys, 1 hammer, I try to err on the side of caution.

I have no follow up questions.

E: I have no follow up questions I want answered.

Oh that makes more sense.

You two were made for each other. If you were both dolls, now is when you’d start kissing.

This subbranch starts with a “/s” comment; it isn’t clear what is supposed to be sarcastic and instead reads like earnest illogic. There’s no spacing distinction between sarcasm and not, so is the entire comment sarcastic?

Then you jump in with a serious reply that immediately starts providing evidence for an unstated claim, which you presumably believe is “obvious.” The first girl is introducing the context of schools. Are you sticking with that or switching to the different context of public? If you’re pivoting to the general public, then you’re off topic.

Then the first girl replies as if she made an argument. She also doesn’t acknowledge you (maybe) changing the context to public. She seems to be fixated on exposing children who are in school to material unrelated to the curriculum.

As a note, the first amendment is context dependent. For example, shouting “Fire” in a crowded theater is not covered; this is because it would likely lead to injury via a stampede. A realistic re-enactment of a Jew being tortured and executed by a foreign government being performed for children at school might not be covered.

Then comes hurling of insults.