Didn’t Biden call the dude and enemy of the state on a few occasions?
Impeachment… Colluding with enemies of the state…
I’m being facetious of course, I’d rather they break the tradition of trying to impeach every president on their way out the door, but still, how you gonna have a meeting with someone you yourself called an enemy of the state?
‘I’ve got to do this on my own,’" she said last September. “Because if I take the drug, that’s the easy way out.”
Apparently there’s a perception that it matters… You’ll see it with smoking cessation too. Gotta do shit the absolute hardest way possible or you’re somehow “cheating”…
Wouldn’t want people to have taken the easy way to not fucking dying :/
LG effectively has said that their owners manual and a cardboard box have authority over the courts. Clearly, as the courts have nullified it, they fucking dont.
All I see is a damned good reason to ban arbitration agreements outright. If you want to arbitrate a tort, you should be required to motion the court for it.
That sounds like it’s exactly the point…
Normally I’d chalk your comment up as being a little too “tinfoil hat” to warrant engaging, but half the article implies exactly that, and I don’t think the author was doing it on purpose because quite frankly, I don’t think there are any news authors left with the competence to do so.
This is 100% some shit I’d expect to come out of the red team though… The Biden administration hasn’t struck me as being on the side of corporate interests (generally speaking… I’m not naive enough to think the Biden administration couldn’t be bought, I’m speaking to track record here…), and I don’t think this would impact tax revenue much, which is to say that there’s not much ulterior motivation for blues to trump up a bullshit problem to keep Chinese cars out of the market.
I’m inclined to agree with your opinion, but logically it doesn’t add up, is my point :)
Attachment to either party is waning among younger voters. A plurality (41%) of them call themselves independents.
I swear this is a generational thing. Silent Gen were rebellious bastards, boomers were not, gen x are rebellious bastards, millennials are not, gen z going with being rebellious bastards totally checks out .
My old gen x ass is 100% with you my little dudes/dudettes… Gotta fight for your right to party ;)
Regardless of where you stand on the matter of trump-putin, this has been the narrative for almost a decade, so trotting it back out kinda seems a little tired.
It’s also a little silly that even with all the dragging this shit back out to beat a dead ass horse, there’s zero mention of trump, in an interview, claiming he’d end the Russia Ukraine issue overnight… I’d personally say that’s of much greater relevance than trying to subtly imply financial relations or even the little hint of blackmail she went for.
There’s only one way you end that shit overnight… You hand Ukraine over to Russia.
There’s plenty of people that wouldn’t vote for that… You wanna talk trump-putin in an attempt to influence votes, that’s the sound bite ya want.
The movie companies said they were not planning to go after these people in court
Worlds most prolific story tellers tellin stories;)
In case Apple’s advice doesn’t work, it’s safe to say that you probably need help from professional repair experts and may even need to prepare yourself to buy a new iPhone.
“Don’t do anything yourself, just come give us more money”
I’m reasonably certain that once enough governments jump on the “we need to control the internets” bandwagon, there will be a region specific convention adopted similar to country codes for phone numbers so that they can, in fact, apply customs to it…
I suspect it won’t be in the name of righteousness though, more likely it’ll be taxes, copyright, etc, on internet sales that trigger it.
options include the establishment of a digital ID system or services that can estimate an individual’s age based on a visual scan of their face.
Oh yeah… I’m sure that won’t cause any unintended issues at all…
Ultimately, what I’m asking you is: why would I be opposed to a law that itself is 100% fine, just because the same legislators might later pass a different law that I don’t like?
Ultimately because the basic premise of the law could (in general) be the basis for the government to remove our entire conversation here…
It is potentially a tool to do this
In 1984, the government rewrites history and uses a multitude of techniques that trick you into accepting things that are not true as being true.
I don’t object for the sake of my my benefit, I object for the sake of yours (everyone).
I see it a one degree increment on the proverbial frog in the proverbial pot, being slowly but surely brought to boil and it’s death, and I don’t really care who it affects in the moment.
I absolutely defy the implication that US credibility is in any way whatsoever reflected by trump… Even if he manages to get elected again, he’d still obviously not be representing all of the US…
It’s like saying all Canadians are super liberal because they elected Trudeau… People know better.
I’d go with “reputation”, but not credibility.
There was a time when assuming what you see on the internet was what it appeared to be and not misleading in any way was considered foolish…
I guess I’m old
The symbol isn’t exclusive to Nazis, and the styling suggests it’s something else… Not saying it isn’t Nazis because I don’t know, but I feel it’s not a good assumption.
It pretty clearly was intended to imply it though, based on the lower photo, which is far less ambiguous.
the Katz Group alleges that it shouldn’t have to make the donation because Boyle Street didn’t try hard enough to fundraise on its own.
They clearly did try hard enough if Katz promised them five million bucks… Lol…
Link wants me to download an app and that ain’t happening, is that Nazis, KKK, or something totally benign? What’s the context here?
No, were just apparently on very different wavelengths here (I’m totally fine with this personally, no animosity intended at all, I like discourse and you don’t seem like you’re being a dick about it, so we’re on friendly terms here from my perspective)
Do you not think that government determination of what is or is not acceptable on “social media” (quotes because generalizing) is eerily similar to thoughtcrime? And an orwellian policy? Making a 1984 reference in its defense a little ironic?
I realize I discounted the bulk of your comment and all the “logical fallacy” buzz phrases you threw in, but I generally consider that pedantry and responding to it would bring in bad vibes on my side, so I skipped it, sorry. I can engage it, but I won’t have anything to say on it worth reading, it’ll just be old guy bullshit…
How you gonna reference 1984 while actively defending an orwellian policy?
Sounds an awful lot like sticking your head in the sand.
“Social media” is going to be whatever they decide they want government oversight on… Not being part of the introductory offer isnt a very good reason to accept it in my opinion.
They’ll come for your forum eventually…
I think that’s a little too advanced for Biden, but it wouldn’t surprise me that hear a staffer suggested exactly that… Don’t think much of Biden, but the current white house is doing damned well IMHO.
I do sincerely hope trump opts out. None of his fan base is going to be affected in the slightest either way, because cult, but trump will think he’s god gift for participating, and his head is already way too fucking big.