Damn, sometimes (because I’m a miscreant) I like to jump into convos or make a comment on them if someone is being really loud about it especially if they’re on the phone with another person.

I mean, I rarely do it because people are crazy but sometimes I can’t stop myself.

There’s a reason it ends with a ? And not a .

Hey, I’m driving a manual trans don’t be putting that on my whole generation.

The problem is: nobody wants to die, we all are fed and fat, our education system has been being weakened for 40 years now, did I mention the whole not dying part?

I’m hopeful that our institutions are strong enough to hold until the midterm elections, Dems will take Congress with a strong majority and we can avoid mass bloodshed and actually impeach the guy and get him convicted. No doubt that may be a long shot and people will suffer but I’m not violent revolution is anywhere in the cards anytime soon.

Edit: just to be clear, I do wish we were and kind of could do more. This is just my realist take

McDonald’s would be a hell of a lot cooler if they were funding Satan worshippers. Can they bring that rumor back and confirm it this time please?

Dude definitely has some type of Alzheimer’s or Dementia going on. That’s on top of how much of an idiot he already was and is.

So that tracks.

That AI isn’t going to let you get away with posting beach photos with (I’m guessing) mild nudity or skimpy clothes that are perfectly acceptable attire.

No sir, how dare you!

Is it though? Because evolution is only really concerned with a thing living long enough to reproduce. It’s not planned like eugenics would be.

That’s why there’s tons of examples of dumb as hell stuff in biology because as long as an organism is “good enough” to keep reproducing and spreading their genes that is fine and that species will continue to evolve.

Eugenics would be more like if evolution somehow could select only for specific traits and then made sure to only let things with those traits reproduce. Evolution is much messier than that.

Oh, well my bad, I didn’t realize mumbo jumbo God land gets a fucking wave off for protecting pedophiles because it’s been that way for a long time.

The state saying, “hey you can’t hide behind the veil of religion to protect the people doing horrible things to children,” is definitely something to argue in court regarding the first amendment.

I’d argue it’s not a restriction of the practice of religion to compell someone with knowledge of child abuse or similarly heinous crimes to share that with an authority (the state) that can take action to protect people.

Setting all that aside. How is it not just wrong on some fundamental level to have the power to halt but still let abuse and pedophilia occur? It just seems wrong.

Maybe that’s why religious participation has been declining. Because they’re busy telling you that it’s sacred to protect pedophiles.

Quick edit:

That’s dogma and the practice/form is in large part a matter of unchangeable doctrine

Emphasis mine. Ok so you’re saying that there is a possibility that dogma and the practice/form can change and has changed. So… Let’s do that.

Bro it’s breaking Catholic canon. They can change that shit that’s what the Pope is for.

Maybe God would be chill with revealing child abuse even if it comes from confession. Just carve a little exception out there. Crazy that the clergy would rather protect pedophiles than reinterpreting some doctrine.

Kamala lost because people got poorer for four years under Biden and she very publicly affirmed she’d change nothing about his policies.

Well I think the problem is people perceived others as getting poorer or worse off but the economy was humming just fine and unemployment reached record low numbers iirc.

Like, in general terms, people did not get poorer for four years under Biden - but if that’s what people think, regardless of the actual truth, that’s what they’ll act on.

I don’t think you understand “the way the economy actually works” if that’s your take on how our money works and how govt spending works.

Also, if we’re talking about the USA, every state has some legal provisions regarding a balanced budget (except maybe VT?). So the state governments do account for having the budget balanced>

You’re right we run deficits in our budget but that doesn’t mean there isn’t debt being accounted for. You’re basically saying that our money magically ceases to exist when it’s collected as tax and that’s just wrong full send.

Yeah I mean, it’s not like Catholicism is the only flavor of Christianity.

The whole reason the USA even exists today is because a bunch of shitty religious people got ousted from England.

I know a lot of people still view the Pope as the head of Christianity but there are many Christians who would not see it that way. Many who would dismiss the Pope with a wave of the hand and not a care in the world.

The evangelical right wing Christian movement in America certainly does not give a fuck about the Pope based on what I’ve seen.

Do you think there is a fundamental difference between you spending $20 at the grocery store vs the government spending $20 (through EBT/SNAP/WIC benefits) at the same store?

The only difference is how the money gets accounted for, it’s still circulating through people’s hands. It doesn’t just magically cease existing because it was collected via taxes.

No I don’t think it’s the case everywhere in the world. I think in the context of this post clearly I am talking about the United States of America.

I never said I’m cool with people doing it and I’m not opposed to more restrictions on hate speech in general but I didn’t write our constitution.

Oh boy, an ad hominem fallacy in the wild, it’s been a whole 5 seconds since I saw one!

Oh God is that something someone can do … How …uh … illegal is that? Like would I get in trouble from the police? I’d love to go on that platform and just make up stupid racist shit to get (horrible people) to give me their money. That’s gotta be the most positive form of grift possible.

Bro if it was a hate crime to openly support racist ideals in public do you think the KKK and Nazis and whatever other hate groups would be able to march around in public espousing their horrendous views?

You are very much allowed to stand around with a Nazi flag and shout hateful shit into the air. It’s when you start directing it at individuals and saying things that could be construed as a threat or hate speech that it becomes a problem.

For the most part though you’re free to say and wear whatever you want for better or worse.

And listen, I wish it was a crime to openly support racist ideals in public but that’s just not the country we are.

Who the hell do you think these mythical Democrats should vote for? Some third party that won’t win and will have a spoiler effect? The GOP whose policies help create the problems you’ve described?

What Republican is running on popular leftist policies? That’s news to me.

You’re right we shouldn’t have to settle. Unfortunately we live in the real world where should doesn’t matter and actions dictate our reality. I’d much rather take a milquetoast centrist that wants to preserve our democracy and important institutions vs a right-wing radical that wants to burn it all down.

Why can’t Democrats do the same, but in the other direction?

They kind of are with AOC and Bernie Sanders on tour but it takes time. Not to mention, for better or worse, there are people trying to do the math of winning/losing voters and who is more or less likely to vote. For now, the DNC “professionals” are betting that they’d turn off more voters than they’d get if they ran further left candidates in more races.

I’m not sure I agree with them or the overall DNC strategy the past decade but the strategy and who they plan to back with money does seem to be moving further left so that’s good.

Oh yeah I won’t pretend he didn’t move crowds to coalesce around the Nazi philosophy, he was obviously popular enough to pack stadiums.

Hitler and Goebbels, hell the whole Nazi party, we’re really good at the propaganda game. I’d say they really were one of the early pioneers of the use of mass media to steer people into alternate reality. Much like how we see social media being taken advantage of today.

He wasn’t that eloquent honestly. Just … Boisterous, loud and probably about on par with Trump when it comes to just packing stadiums and getting people riled up over social problems. Problems that were complex but he had simple answers to.

I’m really tired of all this “Hitler was a genius” bullshit, not only did he make terrible military decisions but he ran a government that was in disarray all the time. Constant turmoil followed him and many changes in personnel in important offices oftentimes just seemingly at a whim.

Not saying you’re making that argument and honestly I get what you’re saying but my God I have met too many people IRL and online that would suck Hitler’s dick in an instant. You’re right though, this timeline is dumb as fuck.