Vance, lies so hard we got whiplash.
Walz, made statements that could be misleading if you thought they were representative of this one, narrow way to interpret his statement.
Jesus, really gotta do the "fair and balanced" shit, huh?
You can just call out liars without also calling honest statements false.
Yeah, she's a Nazi. Nothing lost
Illinois, Maryland, Colorado, and Virginia are the other 4. No idea why this article says "fourth", California is the fifth.
Humans, all humans, have a built in ability to not care about other people. This can easily extend to animals as well. That's all it is, they don't want to care so they don't. They want to eat/use animal products and are far enough removed from the gruesome aspects of it that they can just choose to not care.
No, there's no way that any exclusion wouldn't be used to harass people. I'd rather some guilty people get away then let innocent people be harassed.
Remember, any non-guilty ruling that shouldn't have been is due to bad work from cops/DAs.
Three things
- Red scare propaganda. Anti-socialism sentiment is the default in the US. Poling in the US has to find a way to express good policy without making it seem "socialist" in order to show majority support
- Lack of a social safety net. Rioting could mean losing your job, which means homelessness
- Appearance of political division is high. Most Americans agree with good policy (once you ask "correctly"), but the poison pill of conservative echo chambers have made a segment of people aggressively opposed to such sentiments. It makes it so you don't know who you can express and share those ideas with.
Me, a true musician, they're all just sound sticks you hit. Unlike rain sticks (sound sticks you flip) and drum sticks (sound sticks to hit with)
You now have an infinite supply of light weight projectiles. It fits nicely in the hand, isn't too hard to throw, and has a chance to explode on impact. Nice!
Mutually Assured Destruction really does take nukes out-of-play, don't it? Even the threat stretches credulity
"Better make sure I beat up some black guys later so the rest of the force knows I stand with them" -them, probably /s
ACAB
Don't be ridiculous. Some of them just see additional free time of the masses as bad for the health of their gold hoards. When people aren't working all the time, they have enough time to think about your gold hoard. /s
We are all humans, we are all dumb. A smart human isn't one who knows everything, they're one who knows what they don't know and knows who knows that. And, ya know, defers to the people who know about things when they don't.
US, yes. Yes, they do give chase or open fire with surprising frequency, often creating far more dangerous situations. 5 months average training time, additional training given through unions with a focus on "officer safety" (see, how to pull your gun before the other guy does) creates an ecosystem that creates a bunch of fucking cowboys rather than actual peace officers. Yes, a non-zero amount of them think they're playing cops and robbers for real.
Yeah, but you don't always have to be the one to raise your voice. It's ostensibly why the downvote exists.
Doubt. The amount of cops who are either going to A give chase or B open fire regardless of the local laws is going to be far beyond statistically relevant. Maybe even a large plurality.
Never, never assume that a cop knows the law. Their job is to enforce, not to know. That's the DA's job.
If you don't use /s when being sarcastic, I'm going to treat your comment as being earnest
Before downvoting, check the community.
If you fail to use the /s tag or specifically call out that your comment is sarcastic, I'm going to treat it as being earnest. I might ask if you're being sarcastic, but I will downvote as though you are being earnest.
The /s tag not only clarifies, but it also confirms that you're being sarcastic. A thing you cannot ordinarily convey via written text unless you specifically call it out. You can hint at it, readers can infer it, but you cannot convey it. To convey it, sans directly stating it, you would need to include a recording of you speaking the comment, which defeats the whole point of text chats.
"It definitely reads as sarcasm, you're just missing it" So what? I'm neurodivergent. I barely get this shit in its normal, spoken context. Why should I be expected to understand the implied sarcasm in your text comment?
"Telling someone you're being sarcastic ruins it" Unless your definition of sarcasm is just lying to someone's face, you do indicate sarcasm when speaking. Via the exaggerated, deadpan tone you use. Something you can't convey in written text unless you specifically call it out.
"I made it very clear via hyperbole that it was sarcasm" Have you talked to people? Your obvious, over-the-top, hyperbolic sarcasm could just be someone's opinion taken whole cloth. In fact, you probably modeled your exaggeration AFTER a person. Can you see why, if I don't know you, there's no way to tell?
"I forgot the tag" cool, if I see the edit adding it back in, I'll revert my downvote. Consider it the opportunity cost of forgetting.
"It doesn't hurt anyone" Yes, it does. You give credence to your exaggerated position that you would never take because the people who think like that exaggerated position will point to your comment as proof that they have support. It's why 4chan rebirthed nazism.
"I still won't do it". Then have fun with the downvote. You want to make the internet worse? I'll be sure that you don't get the internet points your brain craves.
Minnesota Republicans ask for religious exemption from gender identity section of Human Rights Act
Minnesota Republicans want a religious exemption added to the state’s Human Rights Act.