I didn't know I could get more angry.
I didn't know I could get more angry.
Oh, this should be great. Mumps causes sterility.
Probably just as well she's owning it. Isn't she pretty much its author?
They're nothing on St. Mary Mead and Oxford.
You've fomented revolution. And in the middle of the Olympics too, which is next level. Takes a lot to break through Olympics brain.
Pathetic cowards.
I'm not surprised that the Trump administration thinks that's how scientific findings work, but I'm a little surprised that someone who works for the NYT thinks that's how scientific findings work. (Less surprised than this time last year, but still a little surprised.)
Go look up what country those athletes represented until Russia was banned from these games. We'll wait.
Oops. Didn't work.
And their colleagues framed it like they deserved it.
Multiple reports that ICE is highly active at the Calais Maine border crossing snd they are taking FN folks into custody (if you don’t have a blood quantum letter).
That close to the end it should be fine if it just sits in the oven as it cools down.
I'm so angry right now that I don't even know what to do with myself.
Ya, it's a relief, actually. Now it doesn't even need to be dealt with.
Bet we are....
It's quite difficult to muster up much more than exhausted pity for anyone who "feels betrayed" by this president, with his record running from delusional over-promising to deliberate pathological lying. (Unless their votes re-inflicted him on the world, in which case I can muster up loathing.)
You're currently seeing the reaction of one city in a blue state, and the masked thugs have been unleashing the racist attacks for months. Half of you voted for this monstrous president A SECOND TIME. There is no important difference.
Ya, I think they'll find they did. It just turns out they didn't mean it.
Oh my. That's a game changer right there, that is.
Peak Halifax = knowing the AI picture is wrong and also knowing who the AI picture is being wrong with.
You should ask if they can mildly (heavily?) sedate you, so that you can sleep through as much of the initial awfulness as possible.
Yes, you're right. I shouldn't have jumped straight to aggressive. I think I did so bc from this president's pov, telling him to stop or face consequences would be considered aggressive, due to him being a sociopath with no one checking his power, but you're quite right.
If acting docile is a bad thing then presumably its opposite -- calling him out, ie acting aggressive -- is a good thing.
Explain how acting aggressive instead is positive.
Precisely.
I want to know how your specific suggestion of standing up to the bully is logically more 'right' than NOT doing so, if the goal is to avoid the threat of reprisal.
I know precisely how appeasement fared in the 1930s. I also know that 'standing up to Hitler' wouldn't have changed a damn thing for Czechoslovakia, Poland, Holland, etc etc. So apart from moral high ground, what's the logic?
I don't 'need an explanation' on the theoretical level of principle. I want to hear your logic in relation to how 'not cowering' diminishes the actual threat on the ground. Maybe read less political science and more history.
Explain that logic. Not as a theoretical expression of your favourite playground principle, but in relation to an actual existential threat.