Xhieron @ xhieron @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

371

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

What she actually said (from the article):

“We rely in South Dakota on the fact that I am pro-life and we have a law that says there is an exception for the life of the mother, and I just don’t believe that a tragedy should perpetuate another tragedy.”

If Trump wins and she's his running mate, it's statistically more likely than not that she'll be president.

Long is the list of jailed and dead ordinary people who wrongly assumed that by association with the privileged class they would enjoy the same immunities.

Trump may die a free man despite his crimes, but journalists are working people.

A lot of us have noticed that Trump gets away with things that normal people would not, and that's not an accident. Trump can run his mouth about everyone forever, and he may never be held to account--and there are a lot of sometimes complicated reasons for that--but the same privilege absolutely does not apply to courtroom field reporters.

If I were covering this trial, I'd violate the court's instructions at my own peril.

That certainly does not mean that some folks won't be pressured to violate the order to save their livelihoods, but I would expect no less than swift and heavy consequences for people who anger the court and whose names aren't Trump.

It floats.

Workers of the world unite. Sit in. Strike. Seize the means of production.

Eventually enough will be enough, and that will be a terrible day.

No war but the class war.

... Are you for real?

Aaand it's gone.

He meets the kids and hands them each a Coke as a way of presenting himself as friendly and generous--and it looks like a marketing money shot; I wish I could find a gif of it. Those Cokes look like ambrosia from heaven.

And then a few scenes later he's putting out kids' eyes to make them more effective beggars.

I can't ever think about Coke marketing anymore without being reminded of the most evil thing I've ever seen committed to film.

https://screenmusings.org/movie/blu-ray/Slumdog-Millionaire/images/Slumdog-Millionaire-0272.jpg

Oh FFS. I just read Sotomayor's statement, and the Vox article is just a flat out lie (and apparently nobody else in the comments bothered to fact check it). You're doing God's work, Buelldozer.

If the Republic plunges into a dark age, for example because democracy ended, and you stayed home when your contribution could have prevented it, you're still sharing in the blame. No amount of smug self-righteousness will wind back the clock. You already have one previous devastating administration and an insurrection worth of warning.

Do you want to keep the Republic, or not?

But asking a party to amend the contract after you're in breach and the other party doesn't know it is a good way to get your contract rewritten by the court or worse.

Do people think women's care only means hysterectomy and radical mastectomy? Does elder care only mean euthanasia? The problem isn't that the term obfuscates particular procedures, because the particular procedures any patient receives are none of your fucking business. It's that it's used to hide assumptions that support demonizing the target group.

There are absolutely biological differences that influence what the standard of care ought to be, but that distinction only matters in policy because bigots and fascists need lines of division so they can restrict target classes from accessing healthcare.

If you want to have a conversation about puberty blockers, you can have that conversation. I think it's a complicated subject. This issue is a problem because you want "trans care" to mean the least credible, most socially objectionable course of treatment for a target class of "less than" citizens you can imagine, whereas others just want healthcare. And whatever care that is is up to the patient and their doctor.

There absolutely is. Trans care is whatever care Trans people get. Just like women's care is the care women get, children's care is the care children get, along with elder care and care for the disabled. Unqualified "care" is the province only of white, gender conforming, AMAB men, preferably WASPs. You don't hear as much about it now, but "black healthcare" is what gave us the Tuskegee syphilis human experiment.

Anything these bigots and fascists can use to distinguish the kind of care the "other" receives from normal care is a way to demonize the other and justify making their costs higher and their services worse, less, or outright illegal.

Water, meanwhile ...

We have not created the heavens and the earth and everything in between except for a purpose. And the Hour is certain to come, so forgive graciously.

15:85 Quran

"Take that, face!" says man cutting off own nose.

I'm incredibly fascinated by the ghost comparison. Is the probability that ghosts are a real physical phenomenon higher or lower than the probability that aliens exist or have visited us? That's an extremely interesting question, and I'm sure someone could do a statistical meta-analysis comparing the incidence of, say, UFO sightings with the incidence of paranormal experiences (if such an analysis doesn't already exist). Both questions seem like the things that should be generally empirically falsifiable (and indeed, specific instances certainly are), but humanity's curiosity about both has proven remarkably durable despite centuries of curiosity and myriad efforts to settle (negatively) both questions once and for all.

Hear, hear. It's easy for all of us armchair patriots to criticize from our nice, safe homes, but whistleblowers, like union organizers, protesters, and conscientious objectors, are actually exposed to genuine risk to life and limb. It takes serious, real world bravery to do that.

Oh you.

Oh shit, you're right. Russia doesn't want that, so I guess we should just let them have what they want.

What are you on about? This is a war in which Russia, unprovoked, invaded its neighbor to grab land, bodies, ports, and food. Russia is going to share multiple borders with NATO when this is over; the question is just whether the border is the Ukrainian border or the Polish border. If either of those scenarios results in World War 3, odds are pretty good both of them do. There's simply no universe in which NATO allows Russia to take over all of Eastern Europe (again). Even if the fascists take the US in November, Europe will pour everything it has into stopping Putin's advance.

Sure, Ukraine probably "loses" in the end, in one way or another. By many measures they've already lost. But it's not a binary proposition. The point of propping up Ukraine at this stage is as much about forcing Russia to spend its fighting ability on Ukraine now, instead of in WW3. This desire is part of the reason that capitulating, conceding some land, and letting Russia regroup for a decade before doing a better job next time is only palatable with Ukraine in NATO. The threat of a world war is the only thing that would stop Russia from repeating this bullshit every ten to twenty years for another five generations.