Crime is happening somewhere! I scrolled by a carjacking snuff film that looked eerily like Russian dashcam footage but was labeled as "Deep Baltimore." But where I am? Lol no. No crime happening here. Anyway we must stop the crime that is constantly, vaguely happening in any and all elsewheres.
😕🤷🏼
Pritzker: "When did we become a country where it's ok for the US president to insist on national television that a state should call him to beg for anything? Especially something we don't want. Have we truly lost all sense of sanity in this nation that we treat this as normal?"
🐥 need a political break ? 🐥 #Catsky #Dogsky #Kittens ♥️
It won’t fit in screen shots but linking here the full letter of resignation posted by one of the departing CDC officials, Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, who ran the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases and led efforts to fight COVID, monkeypox, and bird flu x.com/dr_demetre/s...
Japan has also suffered through decades of extremely slow growth, precisely because of its anti-immigration policies. Bringing in working age people is quite good for producing work, shockingly enough.
The melted butter level of brain damage it takes to deport all of the lawn care maintenance people making minimum wage and replace them with a $9,000 per person per day National Guard trash duty team lmfao you fuckwits www.thepricer.org/how-much-doe....
Well gee it's hard to argue when you've put so much thought and substance in to your counter position.
How husky do you have to get to be husky enough to take down a man with an assault rifle?
Columbine was understandable, thinking before then was police going in immediately, in 1s & 2s without a plan would likely be ambushed, so doctrine was to wait for numbers and to plan. After Columbine it was learned that was wrong, immediate engagement was best. There is no excuse for Uvalde.
Gee, and before this blunder I was so close to supporting this sex pest.
Litter is definitely a massive emergency that warrants mobilizing units from several states’ National Guard, arming them heavily and sending them into the streets of the capital.
NPR: “A whistleblower says a former senior DOGE official now at the Social Security Administration copied the Social Security numbers, names & birthdays of over 300 million Americans to a private section of the agency's cloud lacking adequate security...” www.npr.org/2025/08/26/n...
"has a concern" doesn't mean it has any basis in reality, and even better - by using passive voice he doesn't even say it is his concern so he doesn't have to defend it, it just remains a 'concern' held by someone, somewhere, who never has to explain how they came across this 'concern'.
I want more people to vote for the Democratic Party, so we pretty clearly have very different goals.
Pritzker: To the members of the press who are assembled here today and listening across the country, I am asking for your courage to tell it like it is. This is not a time to pretend here that there are two sides to this story.
She was made from all the leftovers... and she turned out to be gorgeous! 😊 #cat #catday #bluesky
“I was r*ped sometimes 3 times a day on that island… and I was not the only girl on that island… Ghislaine must die in prison, because I’ve been in hell and back for the last 17 years.” Listen to the survivors.
It was a tragic, awful murder, and you care so little about the actual man involve that you'll ignore the realities of what actually happened to fit it in to your little political fantasy. You care so little you didn't even spell Jonathon Joss' name correctly. Disgusting, miserable and pointless.
Your fantasy of unarmed protesters being killed by nazis with no police response is so silly that the best example you can managed is a man with a record of brandishing weapons killed while not protesting, by a man who wasn't a nazi, who was arrested.
You're so deep in your silly little fantasy you actually think Nazis are shooting counter protestors and that's it, that's the whole of the event nothing else happens afterwards the Nazis just go home. It's just sad, to be honest. You just don't have to be this pointless.
Yep. The defence of confederate statues was always that they wanted to preserve history, they weren't celebrating the confederates. But when the same people want to remove slavery exhibits because they don't show the greatness of America, that shows they think the confederacy was "great".
I think you should definitely keep posting more power fantasy nonsense about how you're definitely the toughest people on the internet. That should fix all the world's problems in no time at all.
You need to consider the possibility that your pantomime tough guy leftism doesn't do anything but make people laugh at you.
Of course you *can*. But when all you manage is turning up 3 weeks late with claim that non-violent protest is a fantasy, then it's natural to ask if you *should* post, and if maybe you and the world at large might be better if you spent your time doing literally anything else.
You waddle in three weeks late, to make a comment pretending that protesting without violence is just a wish with no basis in reality. Just a pathetic effort. Take some time and take a long look at yourself, because something is really not working.
The President of the United States of America raped a 13 year-old girl and then threatened her until she dropped her lawsuit against him.
👇🏻
It isn't about personal bias, but just how the model works. MSM chases 'breaking news', which means an important story with no new angle drops out of coverage. But conservative media just runs whatever best attacks their enemies, happy to repeat the same info day after day.
It's also a good example of why there's such a massive advantage to the right wing in media coverage. Had anything a tenth as damning existed for someone just connected to a Democratic president, it would have been run 24/7 on FOX and all the copycats. But MSM basically slept on this.
makes you think
LOL the meeting that was planned and leaked, and then denied to be planned and called "fake news," and then leaked as canceled for having been leaked, WENT AHEAD LAST NIGHT LOL.
I really have to wonder how many voters there are out there who would say 'I was gonna vote for the serial sex molester, but now he's dropped out I'm gonna vote for the crook that took a corrupt deal from Trump to avoid federal prison'.
Yep, its very hard to be pure and self-righteous when you have to deal with the messy realities of actually governing. Much easier to sit above everyone telling them how they're doing everything wrong.
I have watched a lot of my family swing hard right in their politics, and talking to them its amazing how many justifications for their positions link back to nasty experiences they had on on-line with leftists. Doesn't excuse my family at all, but it does show the impact the toxic left is having.
Trump's team claimed they didn't want to release anything because they didn't want the victims to suffer any further. Now they're trying to rerelease transcripts with the only change being the publication of the names of victims. It's all just shameless lying.
My brain misfired on "black comedy" and so I sat there for a second shaking my head, thinking "I really don't think that's the right material for Tyler Perry".
I expect the next jobs and inflation data to be written with a black sharpie, show 0% inflation, 0% unemployment, 100% labor force participation rate.. In addition, all releases from the Bureau of Labor Statistics will end with "THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER," in all-caps, of course.
Trump is so stupid. He wants an interest rate cut and has threatened to fire Powell to get it. Now the weak jobs figures will likely to cause the Fed to cut rates. But Trump is upset about that as well. He's a toddler that's upset because he's hungry, then gets upset when he has to put his bib on.
They cut taxes for the richest, and now they're so proud they're putting a tax on middle class Americans.
I explained it so a child could understand it. Whether you failed to get it could either be because of bad faith, or some kind of learning difficulty. Whatever it is, I have neither the time nor the patience to get you through your issues.
You asked me why I'm still replying, then you still keep replying when all you can manage is nonsense that weak. Remember when you were upset that some guy wasn't responding your attacks on his brunch post? That was about 10 insane rants ago.
Attacking Medvedev for thinking he's still president? Medvedev knew he wasn't president and Putin was even Medvedev actually was the president.
Ask your tutor.
Guy replying to my posts asks me why I'm replying to his posts.
But... you're not. You're attempting to quibble about the meaning of 'phrase' and getting it wrong. That isn't being mean. That's attempting debate and being hilariously bad at it. You're so weird and so dishonest you don't even know what your own posts are. God damn you need to change some things
You got upset at guy because he didn't reply to your comment on his brunch post. When I mocked the other weirdo for trying to coin a phrase, you tried to argue what a phrase was despite having no idea what a phrase is. But you call me 'debate bro'.
We've been through me explaining you that a phrase is two or more words, and the phrase was based around brunch, but because you're a lying weirdo you're now trying to pretend the phrase it just one word. Do you think that pathetic dishonesty will work? Or do you not even know you're doing it?
To help you understand, "lying weirdo" is also a phrase. It isn't a new phrase, as its been used to describe many people. It also didn't have any kind of wordplay or other notable feature, but was just a straight descriptor of you. So it isn't it an attempt to coin a new phrase. Get it?
Yes, 'new phrase' would indeed be a phrase. Well done on catching up to year 4 english. You're being a lying weirdo again when you pretend the issue is about using phrases, though. The issue was the sheer lameness of trying to coin a new phrase to describe a guy for making a brunch post.
You're so desperately, bizarrely weird that you're just making up some fantasy story about my life. It's all completely wrong, as any random guess made as a desperate coping mechanism would be, but that's beside the point. The point is your behaviour is just deeply, hopelessly broken.
When the words chosen are alliterated & the phrase is an attempt to mock a guy who made a post about brunch, its obvious it was an attempt to coin a phrase. It failed because the wordplay was pathetic and it was about a brunch post. But the fact it failed dismally doesn't mean it wasn't an attempt.
You can, of course, just write OP, or any other generic term for the person who started a thread. And when someone does something actually worthy of note, they can be given a funny name. You, because you've been broken by the internet, thought a brunch post was a big deal. It was a bit sad.
When two or more words are formed to create a single grammatical unit, that is a phrase. It is just sad that you didn't know this already, and even sadder that you didn't just double check on google before doubling down on your incompetence. Just understand, you don't have to be this pathetic.
I might as well say whatever I want. You and your weird little friend seem incapable, or at least unwilling, to read the most basic sentences. I mean, neither of you are capable of realising that the brunch related phrase in a post is "brunch bitch" and not "concern trolling", so what's the point?
I pointed out it was lame to try and coin a phrase over something as inane as a post about brunch. Between 'brunch bitch" and "concern trolling", you assume the brunch related phrase must "concern trolling". Funny how bad faith & illiteracy always march hand in hand.
The guy said "the brunch bitch". I pointed out it was pathetically lame to try and coin a phrase about some guy based on a brunch post. You pretend I was referring to an already termed phrase, because you're a shockingly dishonest weirdo.
You're so terminally on-line you want to coin a phrase for some guy based on a post about brunch. I really think you might need to consider a future for yourself that doesn't involve the internet.
I wasn't particularly interested in the brunch thing & was about to click out and never think of any of this nonsense again, but I laughed out loud at the absurdity of your response. So I responded, to see if you recognized how silly your comment was, or if I could figure out why you are like this.
You got pissy that your reply, which was one of 31 made to that post, wasn't replied to. There is no way that you actually think there was some obligation to respond to you personally. Its bad faith fake offense, and you know this, but that's fine because it lets you play your stupid little game.
You're calling people cowards and dicks, and then acting like you're entitled to a response from them. Do you actually know what you are? Or have you deluded yourself that you're not just a clownish little troll?
I'm trying to show you that your means of engagement is meant to create acrimony, and it's pretty obvious that result is intended. Just admit to being what you are, and don't moan when people want nothing to do with it.
If you actually cared for one second about the causes you claim to care about, you'd actually try to engage with people and build alliances, instead of shouting puerile abuse. But you don't care. It's just pathetic.
Just wondering though, how keen would you be to explain yourself to someone who called you a "cowardly little dork"? Is that somebody you'd think was chasing genuine discussion, or someone just shouting angry noise?
Yeah, gee, what a mystery. Why won't the person I'm calling a "cowardly little dork" write some posts explaining to you a simple concept, so you can continue to pretend it doesn't exist while abusing him? I just can't figure out why.
This is so embarrassingly stupid. You don't lower interest rates when you're at full employment. That overheats the economy, and gives you inflation without any gain in production or jobs. This is like saying "it's raining, so we need to turn the sprinklers on."
I don't think they're pushing Trump out, I think this is part of an attempt to put the "libs planned the Russia hoax" fantasy back in to conservative media. All to distract from Epstein.
Do you feel that negative attention is the only kind of attention you can get?
A 17 year old girl that was later sexually assaulted by Prince Andrew.
Yep, what they do to get them ready is huge. Which is why it was always so stupid to think a couple of planes from Qatar could replace the existing program.
They're still being built,be ready in 2027 apparently. Meanwhile they're going to refurbish these Qatari planes to be also ready at the same time I guess. Then at some point the Qatari planes will go to Trump for his post-presidential use.
Yeah, I think they're a useful step forward. Same issue as potential for abuse though. In Australia there was a requirement in the law for people getting licenses to join gun groups & do courses. These were dominated by people who didn't care about educating people & just gave anti-govt propaganda.
Its worth noting Australia has many other police rights that would blow Americans minds. In WA there's a law that prohibits more than three members of designated groups ever meeting together. Its insane, and legal. So yeah, any laws can be abused, not just gun laws. The answer is civic engagement.
Option 1) Trump stuff in the Epstein files was placed there by Democrats in 2019 when Trump was president, but then left there and not used when Trump was campaigning in 2024. Option 2) Trump did some weird shit with Epstein.
Which is why I get frustrated at people with good knowledge of guns refusing any laws to control guns. We need people with knowledge of guns, and especially people like yourself who also have knowledge of minority groups, to be the ones advancing good, balanced reforms.
Sure. And to make it clear - I think guns are great fun, I've loved it every time I've gone shooting. And there are definitely loads of laws that needlessly restrict gun owners without doing anything positive, generally coming from laws being passed by anti-gun people with no knowledge of guns.
We don't know that. Look at the Australian gun laws. They didn't impact indigenous people or recent immigrant groups more. They impacted almost entirely white farmers and (to a much lesser extent) white middle people. Because those were the people who owned guns.
What people don't get is how much modern gun culture, from crime paranoia/fear of minorities to the toxic masculinity of 'defend my own', is driven by gun manufacturers creating demand. Stop future sales, you kill that messaging, and you will see society return to normal.
I thought you would hate the NRA. I can tell from reading just a few of your posts that you have values and principles. Which is why its frustrating to see you accidentally ape their bad faith arguments. My plan is to stop proliferation - restrictions on future sales. Grandfather existing firearms.
Exactly. So opposing gun laws because they are one example of a law that can be abused by bad governments is just bad faith.
Yet another boiler plate, straight off the production line, bad faith NRA line. It sets up this absurd debate structure where the NRA cheerleader can talk about vague and almost entirely false anecdotes, while anyone arguing against them has to detail a specific bill & action plan. Pure bad faith.
Your example is an early 20th century law passed in the last state to surrender to the Union. Are you actually going to pretend that was the only racist laws being passed in North Carolina at that time? Or are you going to admit gun laws are hardly unique in being used by racists? Come on.
No, not even slightly. There's this strange thing where Americans think they are unique in having an oppressed underclass, underfunded mental care etc. Meanwhile there are two things where they are unique, having lots of guns and having lots of gun violence, and they just refuse to see that.
I never said that. Gun control doesn't mean an automatic, immediate ban of all guns everywhere. You're starting to throw out tired, old NRA lines.
The idea that disenfranchised people alone will be impacted by gun control is false. It is possible, and it has some precedent, but there are also many gun control programs that affected all groups equally, or impacted privileged groups more (as they are more likely to have guns).
No, the exact opposite of that. Gun control will not prevent an effective resistance gaining weapons. But gun control does reduce gun proliferation, which reduces the use of guns by people in everyday life. The US has a ridiculously high rate of gun murders and gun suicides for one simple reason.
Yes, he expanded arms for the majority whites, while restricting firearms for Jewish people. And the majority whites who still had access to guns did... nothing to help those other groups. The idea that if you let people keep guns they'll help you when government goes bad is juvenile nonsense.
I would prefer they are shown as separate and outside society because of their violent threats, instead of being merely one of multiple groups present at the event threatening violence.
No, I think its great that everyone turns up to rallies with guns, capable of using lethal violence after a split second decision, in the midst of an emotionally charged confrontation. It is definitely the absolute best way for a society to operate.
Once again, just deeply bizarre silliness. The guy calling himself a socialist making up absolute nonsense to pretend progressive and liberal are distinct, seperate strands of US politics. Just seriously, you don't have to be this pointless. You have other options.
That's because you're playing this stupid game where you pretend liberal and progressive are distinct camps, and then pretend what you like is progressive and what you dislike is liberal. I used terms with actual meaning to give your argument some meaning, which I guess gave you too much credit.
Teddy Roosevelt, May 8 1899; "our attitude should be one of correcting the evils and thereby showing that, whereas the populists, socialists and others really do not correct the evils at all, or else only do so at the expense of producing others in aggravated form..." You staggering idiot.
Great to see you resolved the issue with a threat of lethal violence.
Meanwhile, in 'disarmed' societies with actual insurrectionists, not weekend warrior twits but real groups like the IRA, gun control doesn't stop them. Because when they have the organisational qualities to prevent infiltration while remaining effective, accessing guns is not the issue. (2/2)
That all sounds great but its completely disconnected from reality. Wildly dishonest gun advocates will claim otherwise, but Hitler expanded gun rights - because it was 'his people' that were gun owners. Saddam's Iraq was the same. Its the same all over. (1/2)
Kennedy was much the same, wanting to expand social programs while remaining fiercely committed to capitalism. The guy that started pouring soldiers in to Vietnam to stop the 'dominoes' was not a socialist, and it is once again deeply embarrassing for you to pretend he was. (3/3)
FDR stated his policies were not socialist, but were improvements to the US system. He decried reactionary opponents labelling him socialist for trying improve the lives of people. Its funny that in your ignorance you now label FDR with a term given to him by his bad faith critics of the day. (2/3)
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Both Roosevelts and the Kennedys were overtly anti-socialist. Teddy stated that his party, Republicans, must accept there are issues in US society and work to fix them or they will lose to socialists who at least admit there are problems. (1/3)