In other news
In the current news climate we see that some figures and events tend to dominate the front-pages heavily. Still, there a
Ahh, the will of the people....
I wonder how many voters in Missouri will understand what happened well enough to vote against the people who turned over the law.
I agree. There also should be nothing related to religion or religious holidays on city property.
People don’t dislike Snow White remake because of a race swap. They dislike it because it’s a crap movie.
Wicked was a good movie with a race swap, and despite the anti-woke hate campaign did well with critics and box offices.
Would you really call that a race swap? The good witch is still white and the bad witch is still green, right?
I wonder how many voters in Missouri will understand what happened well enough to vote against the people who turned over the law.
They won't vote against those who turned over the law, but they will try to amend the constitution. You don't seem to realize how it works when there is disagreement within a party. You don't vote for the other party anyway.
Think of democrats who want crime prosecuted in californian cities. They don't vote republican. They vote in primaries. Floridians who want legal cannabis but are republicans, vote in favor of legalization on propositions, and they vote republican for the state legislature anyway.
it's mamdani yes. The father though, the marxist professor. It says we cannot claim cultures where they have suicide bombers are inferior objectively (=savages), while we obviously can and should define cultures like that as horrific.He also justifies targeting civilians with no military goals as "enemies" (bombers often did that, with no military goals, no attempt to kill spec
Maybe not so many, but we definitely have suicide bombers in the US (born in the US of European descent).
We also have a hell of a lot of suicide shooters, which is just a slightly different version of suicide bomber.
I think that says that our culture is also full of savages. Do you really think suicide bombers are worse than people who go shoot up a school and then either kill themselves or just hang around until they get killed by law enforcement, instead of going on the run or facing trial and punishment?
They won't vote against those who turned over the law, but they will try to amend the constitution. You don't seem to realize how it works when there is disagreement within a party. You don't vote for the other party anyway.Think of democrats who want crime prosecuted in californian cities. They don't vote republican. They vote in primaries. Floridians who want legal cannabis b
I understand that in many instances, but if I specifically voted for a law, it passed by a large margin, and it was then overturned, there is no way I would ever vote again for the people who overturned it.
I didn't say it couldn't be in the primary though. I can certainly see voting against all those people in the primary, but if the incumbents still won, no way would I vote for them. If I really hated the other side for different reasons I might just sit the election out.
I understand that in many instances, but if I specifically voted for a law, it passed by a large margin, and it was then overturned, there is no way I would ever vote again for the people who overturned it.I didn't say it couldn't be in the primary though. I can certainly see voting against all those people in the primary, but if the incumbents still won, no way would I vote fo
so the governor and the law got voted with the same margins, as per article. The governor and the legislature voted to repeal that law.
Now you care abouthat law more than the sum of *everything else* that the people voted will do for you? normal people aren't single issue voters for medical leave lol. Normal people aren't actually single issue voters for anything.
so the governor and the law got voted with the same margins, as per article. The governor and the legislature voted to repeal that law.
Now you care about that law more than the sum of *everything else* that the people voted will do for you? normal people aren't single issue voters for medical leave lol. Normal people aren't actually single issue voters for anything.
I don't think it would mean I cared more about that particular law than any other. I think that anyone who would vote to overturn something they absolutely knew was wanted by a large majority of voters is just the worst kind of politician, one who could never be trusted to represent the people instead of the rich donors.
Stephen Miller is so evil even the devil thinks he has job competition.
So everyone who points out they are blatantly violating the constitution (by their own admission),
racially profiling and grabbing people without a warrant — is a “communist” and an “insurrectionist”?
Stephen Miller is so evil even the devil thinks he has job competition.
I'm glad to hear that you now believe in the devil (i.e. Satan).
Progress!
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-st...
Is America Breaking the Global Economy?
[....] Amid this deep uncertainty, forecasters have struggled to predict where the U.S. economy will ultimately end up. But two main visions bookend a dispersed and unstable set of individual projections. In the first, the United States is on a bumpy journey that will culminate in an economic restructuring resembling the ones that took place under U.S. President Ronald Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, where it will emerge with less debt and a more efficient private sector and where it will trade in a fairer international system. In the second scenario, the country is slowly slipping into the stagflation and, as happened under U.S. President Jimmy Carter, could end up in a deep recession, perhaps with pronounced financial instability.
If we strip out the massive gains from a handful of tech companies, the underlying economy already looks like textbook stagflation: real wages stagnating, inflation in essentials still hot, and sluggish growth in major sectors like real estate, manufacturing, and retail.
Obviously, we can’t remove tech from the economy but we can look at how much its growth is actually improving everyday living standards. Compare it to the post WWII economic boom. Back then, growth meant homes people could afford, cars in the driveway, appliances in the kitchen, etc. It raised material living standards for everyone across the board.
By contrast, today’s tech-driven growth mostly delivers better screens, faster phones, and more digital entertainment. Enjoyable sure but not really comparable, especially when people measure their quality of life against what their parents had. If the 1950s had looked like today, people wouldn’t have gotten homes, cars and household appliances, instead they’d have better televisions with more channels, more movies, etc.
Good for him !
Priceless 😃
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/new...
He was born in Canada and has lived in the “Granite State” since he was three years old, when his family moved there. But he never pursued becoming a U.S. citizen.
U.S. Customs and Border officers pulled him aside and questioned misdemeanor convictions that date back to 2004 and 2007, he told the Boston NBC News affiliate this week. Under the U.S. justice system, a person can be charged with a felony or a misdemeanor, depending on the offence and its severity. Misdemeanors are lesser offences, resulting in lesser penalties.
However, after three hours at the border, the 46-year-old was told by the border authorities that he wouldn’t be allowed back into the U.S. Instead, he was instructed to return to Canada and warned if he tried again to reenter the U.S., he would be immediately arrested. The only way for him to get back in would be to go before an immigration judge, Landry told NBC10 Boston from a relative’s home in New Brunswick.
As a Canadian citizen, Landry couldn’t vote for president, but he says he supported Donald Trump. Now he blames the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration for his dilemma.
lol.
Only illegals immigrants they say .
I watched the Idaho murders on Netflix yesterday. It was refreshing to hear one of the parents of the victims say that they would not be attending any hearings or a trial. I have always wondered why a parent of a murder victim would want to put themselves through that trauma every day for months. Why would you want to hear awful things and see awful things every day? Why would you want to be in the same room as the killer? She said that "What is done is done and being there won't change anything".
Would you want to attend the trial?
I watched the Idaho murders on Netflix yesterday. It was refreshing to hear one of the parents of the victims say that they would not be attending any hearings or a trial. I have always wondered why a parent of a murder victim would want to put themselves through that trauma every day for months. Why would you want to hear awful things and see awful things every day? Why would
They gonna watch the doc?
mechahitler coming to a government near you
If AI gets any worse, it might become as bad as this Forum.
😀
Lol it's very relevant.
Don't go to court cause don't want to relive gruesome details. Makes sense.
But watching doc = reliving gruesome details
I watched the Idaho murders on Netflix yesterday. It was refreshing to hear one of the parents of the victims say that they would not be attending any hearings or a trial. I have always wondered why a parent of a murder victim would want to put themselves through that trauma every day for months. Why would you want to hear awful things and see awful things every day? Why would
The reason to attend, from my understanding, is to make the victim more sympathetic to the jury. If it gives even a small advantage to the prosecution and you think the defendant is guilty, I would attend.
No, I think they're going to let El Salvador do that.
Lol it's very relevant.
Don't go to court cause don't want to relive gruesome details. Makes sense.
But watching doc = reliving gruesome details
Watching a doc isn't sitting in a courtroom for weeks and maybe months. It isn't seeing the horrific photos over and over again of the crime scene. It's not hearing the gruesome details of what happened. It's not being in close proximity to the alleged killer. The parents who participated in this doc did so to honor their dead child. It was a way to give their thoughts about who their child truly was. Also, this case had an extreme amount of misinformation. The doc allowed the parents to clear this up and set the record straight in a controlled environment.
The reason to attend, from my understanding, is to make the victim more sympathetic to the jury. If it gives even a small advantage to the prosecution and you think the defendant is guilty, I would attend.
This makes sense. I think you still need to weigh the positives of being there with the potential emotional toll it could take on you. I've never understood how a family could put themselves through that but I've never been through what they have.
