This seems interesting. What's the context here?
I take your anti-corporate point. However, I believe pro-doping would totally work if it was a gladiatorial bloodbath decathalon within the olympics itself. And if you get caught doping in the non-doping sports, you're forced to compete in the decathalon with the juiced up killers. Jousting, Barenuckle boxing, Pride rules MMA, Hell in a Cell, no rules water polo, shit like that.
Before this is all over, MS will be charging users to extract their snapshots from a proprietary cloud-only one drive account. The recovery process will take about 3 hours, and involve scrolling through ai-authored help articles that don't lay out clearly and methodically how to access the old snapshots. The comments on the help articles will begin with "Hello sir, can you confirm that you have followed the steps at this link?". The link, before delivering you to an irrelevant solution, will shunt you to a landing page that forces you to log into your microsoft account before you can see the answer.
It's so baffling though. Sincerely believing "these are just left wing accusations" and maga/swamp slogans, maps onto "the judge had a conflict of interest, this was a witch hunt" etc., by the exact same route of illusion.
The only way I can make sense of this, is to assume that we're not really dealing with sincere belief. It's hard to imagine a rational Republican that stood behind the former president through everything since the birth certificate thing, and are now somehow chastened. Maybe they simply think it'll be a bad look for their guy to be wearing an ankle bracelet on inauguration day / in the first 100 days in office, and it will compromise their party's future election chances. A question of 'ick' factor, and not some extension of actual values and beliefs, like we might hope. "Convicted felon" is a soft Dean scream, maybe.
How? What country is going to jump at the chance to take in a 70 year old immigrant?
It's true that sex wasn't paid for. The role of pressure in this case is complicated.
If anyone is curious to read Daniels' own words on this, check out the pdf court transcripts for May 7th and May 9th.
The transcripts are long, but interesting, and worth reading if you have a few hours. As a normie, I was only interested in the sex stuff. The facts surrounding documents seem pretty clear.
"We don't understand. Why aren't people simply searching for Taylor Swift"
I think "they're just words, get over it" is a good argument in favour of pronoun declaration, no?
The moral of the stone soup story is that greedy people can and should be tricked into sharing. Everything old is new again.
As soon as I learned that Crank wasn't cinéma vérité, I couldn't take Jason Statham seriously ever again.
Anyone have a link to the actual police report? Asking for a friend.
So bad it's good. Personally, I like the description text on the video that makes it seem like the teen who was autopsied is speaking:
An autopsy of a Massachusetts teen who died after participating in a spicy tortilla chip challenge says he died from eating a lot of chile pepper extract, and 14-old Harris Wolobah had a congenital heart defect.
Editorially, it's a hilarious article. Though, respect to journalists out there. This might be a situation of, "Johnson, I need that tortilla chip death article on my desk in 5 minutes".
edit: Per the correction in the article, I guess AP style guidelines dictate 'chile' instead of 'chili'. It looks super weird to me!
'Killed her 14 month old dog for misbehaving' is the clicky headline. But the subtext is, this person might be the republican running mate, and her story is presented as a parable about how killing is 'a job that needs to be done'. It's not crazy to put those pieces together and be anxious about the direction they point in.
I can see where you're coming from. You're right that her story is divisive. I think that's the objective. It's an engineered, populist, fascist move to present the story in the way that she does. No one in the public eye writes that kind of thing in a book and expects it to fly under the radar.
You're also right that there's a strong rural/urban ideological division. Best way to fix that I think is to talk to each other more, IRL, and try to honestly understand the perspectives of others, especially if they're different from our own. My 2¢.
Time to dust off the tennis ball walker.
Sort of cheating - flush it down the toilet.
Playing by the rules - turn it into dust with an angle grinder.
I have a sense that you know all this, but, just wanted to chime in- the system in Canada where you have to take a course and pass a screening is costly & a pain in the ass. Bottom line, legally, it's neither fast nor easy to get a firearm in Canada, and on top of that, the RCMP can deny any application that they see fit. But ultimately, I think the existing licensing system is a reasonable management of risks, and overall a good thing.
Unfortunately, gun control here is a wedge issue, and political points are easily scored by banning / confiscating guns from legal owners, who, as you mention, were never the problem in the first place. Actually fixing the gun crime issue here would be difficult, costly, and an optics minefield.
IMO, the penalties for being found with an illegal firearm or using a firearm to commit a crime should be much more severe. Surely people of all political stripes could get behind that? But, no. We're in a situation where, on the left, any policy that doesn't include a sweeping ban is criticized as unacceptable and weak. It sucks, because it means that the actual problem affecting citizens goes unsolved, and nobody seems to care.
all it took to convince them evolution is completely wrong is a couple paragraphs about Lamarck and giraffes and Haeckel and embryos
That's incredibly shocking and concerning.