Curious_Canid

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 14 hours ago

My husky has been reading over my shoulder. I'm pretty sure he just said, "Amen, brother."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

As an American, I would be happy with either Denmark or Canada invading.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

I appreciate this beautifully nuanced response to the previous post's attempt at plausibility.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago

I'm not going to trust any plan the Democratic leadership (or former leadership) put forth until Bernie Sanders endorses it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

It's easy to pick another instance. There are a lot of great Lemmy sites.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

That is an amazingly boopable nose.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

As a practical matter, most or all of these people are wearing body armor. It isn't full coverage, but it would make shooting them effectively a great deal more difficult. They also operate in large groups, which makes attacking any one of them a lot more dangerous.

The first civilian to shoot at them will almost certainly be killed within seconds. Anyone nearby is also likely to be hit, either accidentally or intentionally. Uninvolved civilians anywhere nearby are also likely to be hit. The agents are unlikely to care about their backstops or about collateral damage.

Any attack on possible government agents that is not part of a well-planned group response, using appropriate weapons, is going to result in civilian casualties and is unlikely to have any effect on the agents. That is not to say it couldn't be done, but a few people responding with concealed carry weapons are not likely to succeed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Based on your use of the term Left Wing orthodoxy, I infer that you mean the misogynist, racist, homophobic, and transphobic communities. They still exist but have mostly moved to X.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

I also think the evidence that Jesus existed is compelling, but my point is that it doesn't matter when you're talking about the philosophy that is credited to him. Reading the Gospels makes it quite clear that a disturbingly large part of modern Christianity is in opposition to everything he stood for.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I don't think this really deserves an answer, but I'm going to give you one anyway. If you were actually paying attention to the current Catholic teachings you would be aware that they are extremely progressive on almost every issue except for abortion. That is appropriate, since that is in line with the actual teachings of Jesus, who was a far more radical progressive than anyone currently in US politics.

So what network are you getting your version of Catholicism from? It certainly isn't the Pope.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

AI is so far from being the main problem with our current US educational system that I'm not sure why we bother to talk about it. Until we can produce students who meet minimum standards for literacy and critical thinking, AI is a sideshow.

 

There has always been lying in politics, but the US has entered a new age of untruth. Fortunately, it isn't as difficult to identify as a lot of people think.

The key is to completely ignore what politicians and pundits are saying. Ignore any news article or commentary that is just repeating what a politician or pundit said. Ignore what people post about what a politician or pundit said.

Instead, look at what they are actually doing. And look at what effects that is actually having. Don't take their word for that either. Check actual news sources and check more than one. Try to check at least one source from outside the US.

Then think about why you think they would be doing (or not doing) those things. And don't waste your time worrying about secret agendas and long-range plans. It is not usually all that subtle.

Politicians pass laws that make it harder for people to vote because they don't want people to vote. Politicians make it more difficult to get medical help because they want fewer people to get medical help. Politicians attack education because they do not want people to be educated. They "why" rarely matters. Look at the "what".

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/40446434

There are some movies that don't need any help and there are some that are beyond help. Despite that, I think there are some actors who always make a movie better than it would have been. They aren't always leads, but any scene they're in is worth watching. My list would start with: JK Simmons Rachel McAdams Michael B Jordan Tilda Swinton Jeff Daniels Ming-Na Wen

Who are the actors you feel the same way about? Or do you disagree with the premise?

 

There are some movies that don't need any help and there are some that are beyond help. Despite that, I think there are some actors who always make a movie better than it would have been. They aren't always leads, but any scene they're in is worth watching. My list would start with: JK Simmons Rachel McAdams Michael B Jordan Tilda Swinton Jeff Daniels Ming-Na Wen

Who are the actors you feel the same way about? Or do you disagree with the premise?

 

DEI seems to have taken over from Woke as the all-purpose MAGA terms for "this is bad". DEI stands for diversity, equity, and inclusion. As with Woke, which seems to an accusation of using rational thought, DEI seems like it would be difficult to interpret as bad. Saying that you strongly oppose diversity, equity, and inclusion is a pretty frank admission of your values.

This use of DEI seems to translate directly as "insufficiently racist".

 

I'm having trouble finding information about the Wisconsin part of the national Project 2025 protest that's scheduled for 2/5. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

 

The thing that bothers me most about the Democrats' current arguments over which issues "cost us the election" is the apparent lack of concern about what we think is right.

The hypocrisy of choosing positions based entirely on what you think will win an election is a major part of why so many people have given up on participating in the process. What we are seeing is no longer a matter of choosing which battles to fight, based on an underlying set of principles. The principles have been thrown out, leaving only hypocrisy. We firmly believe in...whatever will get us elected this time around.

It may be necessary to focus on a limited set of objectives, but that can be done without disavowing everything else. We need to stop ignoring, or apologizing for, our belief in the worth and dignity of every human being.

 

A trebuchet builds trust.

"I wouldn't trust him any farther than I could throw him."

"That will no longer be a problem."

view more: next ›