yesoutwater

Gene Parmesan

I disagree. And I don't mean to preach, but there is a power in words and using them (or not using them). The fight over the word and meaning of socialism is not what "the people" need right now, that can come later. This has been happening in the US closing in on a century. It's not those tolerant of material reality (as you say) you need to convince, it's those that would benefit from "the peoples" agenda that don't acknowledge material reality. Ride the wave of making billionaires pay.

Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.

Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called social security.

Socialism is what they called farm price supports.

Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.

Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.

Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.

When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan "Down With Socialism" on the banner of his "great crusade," that is really not what he means at all.

What he really means is "Down with Progress--down with Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal," and "down with Harry Truman's fair Deal." That's all he means.

• Harry Truman

Don't swim against this right now. These programs from the new deal and fair deal are not even called socialist by American standards anymore.

Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you're a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it's true! — but when you're a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that's why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we're a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it's not as important as these lives are — nuclear is so powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right, who would have thought? — but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it's four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven't figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it's gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us, this is horrible.

Putin can stop this war today. He rather his people keep dying, his country invading territory as long as the money in coming in. Zelenskyy will own all of Ukraine at this pace. It's clear Putin is not looking for peace!

😂

I call this; the ee cummings

Frozen nutsack cucks made me chuckle. Usually people making these remarks live in the butt crack of tornado alley, near the gooch of hurricane country, or out west where every year the fires of hell burn down a million acres. Different strokes for different folks.

Aviiiiiiii

We have a first amendment. It protects speech. "Laws" against what can and cannot be said in public is not a slippery slope I want to go down, regardless if the person is a lying sack of shit.

As already stated, the voters are supposed to hold these lying sacks of shit accountable by voting out said lying sacks of shit. I think this problem gets dealt with in abolishing first past the pole voting systems.

Always carry pocket sand

Ah, yes. The far away time when "Far Right" just meant ideologically conservative and not the wannabe brownshirts. So long ago, 2012.

A simpler time.

I work for one of these behemoths, and there are a lot of adults in the room. When we began our transition off the prior, well known corporate AV, I never even heard of crowd strike.

The adults were asking reasonable questions: why such an aggressive migration timeline? Why can't we have our vendor recommended exclusion lists applied? Why does this need to be installed here when previously agentless technologies was sufficient? Why is crowd strike spending monies on a Superbowl ad instead of investing back into the technology?

Either something fucky is a foot, as in this was mandated to our higher ups to m make the switch (why?), or, as is typically the case, the decision was made already and this 'due diligence' is all window dressing to CYA.

Who gives a shit about fines on SLAs if your vendor is going to foot the bill.