![](/static/790fef6/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemm.ee/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhexbear.net%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2F9c89e07f-7479-47d9-8ede-b183f9ae9137.jpeg)
My performance been pretty good, though that’s after updating my motherboard BIOS, so yeah lol.
My performance been pretty good, though that’s after updating my motherboard BIOS, so yeah lol.
I doubt it’s a moral thing. More that we’re melting our soft power and credibility abroad for an ally of dubious value and stability.
I really don’t think that’s going to happen. This isn’t just a political accident they can bury. This is an incredibly obvious thing that’s only going to get worse. People will rediscover and remember it everytime they see him.
The Democratic leadership likes taking bribes just as much.
Didn’t you say that politicians have to chase votes earlier? To shift their positions to attract voters? Why does that not apply here? Shouldn’t they be courting us by moving away from committing genocide? That would solve the issue cleanly.
Well, yes, the opposition might successfully wrest power back, and pack the court back in their direction. But where does that end up? Right to where we are now. There’s nothing lost by trying. The court is already reactionary. We might as well try to change something.
Considering the Supreme Court basically just legalized bribery, what do you think the odds are that we’re going to get that?
Well, if we vote for the democrats anyway, we’re signaling to them that committing genocide won’t cost them votes. That it’s a free thing they can do as they please. Does that not seem like a dangerous precedent to establish? It erodes the very basis of their “lesser evil” to the Republicans. They should actually have to not be evil, and remember that. There has to be some sort of electoral cost to being incredibly psychopathic.
If you pack the court, the point is to then ram through laws that strengthen your position so that it’s harder for the other side to feasibly challenge it, to pack the court in the other direction. You can’t change things without exerting power, and the court is a tool of authority. You gotta use and abuse that.
I don’t think that’s true at all. There’s no way to intercept an IBCM in its terminal phase. They are incredibly fast on reentry. You have to hit it just after launch, or not at all. They are still just as dangerous as they’ve always been.
Where is AOC triangulating to, on Biden, post debate?
Yeah this is just math.
This is such a giant leap in criminalizing homelessness. Like, this has been in the works for a while, and in a lot of ways municipalities have been making homelessness de-facto illegal, but now they can just ticket or arrest people for a basic part of living, a fundamental need of continuing existence.
Isn’t the whole point of being Catholic that it’s not your job or right to debate this stuff? Stop being Protestant! Go to mass! Listen to what you’re told!
That says stuff about you, not 79F
Ok let’s not over exaggerate lol. 79F is not cold weather lol. It’s not even chilly.
That just opens you up to mocking from the other direction.
It might just be another way of entrenching the imperial beachheads. By tying critical infrastructure there, it makes it much more difficult for future government iterations to back out, or change course.
That said, it also opens up that infrastructure to massive risk if a big enough challenge comes, but I doubt the people pushing these things expect that.
They’re probably trying to make it as cheap as possible, and thus, extra shitty.
Oh yeah I certainly agree. It definitely matters a lot. I just don’t the west has the industrial capacity currently to match that rate. Most of the arms were from deep, old, stockpiles, not fresh production. There’d need to be a pretty big reindustrialization push to get anywhere close.
Me, when I’m dictating as the proletariat