I like the “formally” vs “formerly” suggesting Elon is never going to get away from Twitter in favor of X
I like the “formally” vs “formerly” suggesting Elon is never going to get away from Twitter in favor of X
My mind is blown. This is very well written. Thank you
Being self righteous about doing nothing is worse.
Despite your own brand of defeatism in insisting the outcome is the same no matter what, one side actually is better. Even if the metric of “better” pales on the grand scheme of what we deserve or should be doing.
I’m not trying to project self-righteousness by recognizing that there are only two real choices. I’m asserting that advocating non-action or pointless action is such a tired trope that what you’re doing is circlejerking for dopamine instead of applying what little influence you have as an individual to work toward the avoiding the actual worst outcome.
When the American populace as a whole is brainwashed into believing the only choices are red and blue, you have to accept that whining about it and voting green (or not voting) is going to accomplish nothing.
So make your colorful allegory and feel good about yourself on the internet. In the end, you are accomplishing less than the people you look down on who recognize the shitty reality of our situation.
Any response other than “I already have” or “I donate resources” paints you as an armchair hypocrite who doesn’t have the credentials to understand, let alone have an opinion about this conflict.
You my friend, are the one who is adorable.
World War is not the solution you think it is
You can die of cirrhosis from drinking too much for too long, but it’s still culturally held as a stress reliever. You can die from diabetes if you eat too much sugar for too long, but it’s still sold to children as edible happiness. Hell, you can die slowly and painfully from taking too much Tylenol, but it’s still the world’s most popular painkiller by far.
Too much of anything kills eventually. That doesn’t bare any significance to whether or not it’s good for stress in some amount.
Dude, thanks for posting this.
Yes. Our country is run by geriatrics who, among other things related to modern society, legislate on technology they don’t understand. We need younger members with more flexible minds who have at least spent some part of their younger lives dealing with problems we have a modern variation of today.
But especially SCOTUS members. Any kind of term limit on them would be better than what we have.
There is at least an entire sub dedicated to hating on pit bulls. I think multiple subs. During its time a few years ago, one specific sub could make it to the top of r/all with 10,000+ upvotes.
Reddit really doesn’t like pit bulls.
most of the time for no reason at all
Not for no reason. It’s a form of control. If you genuinely believe that the opposing party is going to bring the country to ruin, you’re a lot less likely to consider their position in politics.
Look at the affordable care act. Conservatives hated/hate it because “obamacare” was portrayed as giving free health care to the lazy poor that you have to pay for as a hard working conservative. When asked if we should repeal Obamacare, conservatives poll something crazy like 95% yes, simply because it’s a bad word they learned.
Many of those conservatives have health care through the ACA and get mad when Republicans take it away because they need it. Those same conservatives mostly aren’t even aware that what they have is literally obamacare.
It’s control all the way down.
Politics is fundamentally different for conservatives. They have to have someone to hate. It’s drilled into them by their media outlets.
The tactic is a form of fear based control that conservative media has been working on since Nixon, and made into effect with the birth of Fox News in 1996.
Seriously. Nixon’s think tank conceived the conservative media outlet as a catch-all, exclusive source of news that as a primary function would steer conservatives to not trust other news sources.
They did this because they did not want another Watergate, where conservatives turned against Nixon because of hard evidence laid out by popular unbiased news, which at the time conservatives still were informed by.
The Frankenstein’s monster of a party that that tactic has turned conservatives into requires manufactured rage to fuel the fire. If the outrage ever simmers, you begin to see smarter conservatives recognizing what their party has become and it begins to fall apart.
So there’s your answer. It’s because the hate is necessary to continue the control. If you don’t believe me, turn on Fox news. There’s always the manufactured rage-of-the-day filling the air time.
It’s the only card he’s still holding that means anything to the western nations he’s in a proxy war with.
Nobody wants a nuclear war, which is why he’s betting on western nations erring on the side of caution when he does shit like this.
Removed by mod
I mean, he did one better. He defined genocide in describing the explicit war crimes of Israel. I think it’s a little unreasonable to be angry that he didn’t use the term when he outright stated that Israel killed and injured 100,000, 70% of which are women and children, rendered a million people homeless and created famine conditions.
I’d be more upset if he just said “genocide” and didn’t clarify the rest like he did.
what happened on 1/6/21?
Not what t-dump wanted to happen. If that loser-in-chief couldn’t pull off 1,000 guys storming capital hill, what makes you think that he could pull off selling states with a combined population of about 44 million to our sworn enemy?
Even his best “allies” and his own vp left him out to dry after 1/6.
deleted by creator
“Give me all of your money and god will cure your cancer!” obvious scam and a lie.
“Give me all of your money and god will make your credit card debt vanish” is another thing I’ve seen mega-church types say.
Incidentally, there’s a conjecture around Christian circles I’ve seen that says these kinds of actions are what the phrase “thou shalt not take the lord’s name in vain” actually warns against.
Not cursing, as it has become commonly associated with, but the literal act of using the lord for vain purposes. Like saying “Give me your money and god will cure your cancer”
I think it’s not necessarily a contradiction to hold your pro-choice and anti-death penalty stance, but it’s still a contradiction to hold the pro-life and pro-death penalty stance if your reasoning behind the pro-life stance is that all life is sacred.
I agree that a person’s body autonomy and the state’s power to execute citizens should not overlap, but I still think that giving the “all life is sacred” line to justify pro-life and then being pro-death penalty “because some people deserve to die” amounts to hypocrisy.