Also, this rings of saying its not murder because transgender people aren’t people.

No, it’s implicitly saying the murderer was ‘right’ to kill her because she was ‘really a black man.’ The jury was ‘deceived, by omission, into thinking this was about a woman being murdered.’

[Single quotes indicate their expressed beliefs, not direct quotes.]

Once is a coincidence. Twice? Basically Gandhi.

…he shares a few proclivities with Gandhi, in fact.

That face reads as abject terror at the thought of the situation happening to her. Did she narrowly lose the raffle to be the obstructionist on this one?

Every one will believe. And the 50(?)% of them that will get ejected will think that their personal case was the only mistake. Everyone else was rightfully stopped from committing “fraud”, but MAGA just has to fix this one, little whoopsie where they got caught in the dragnet on accident.

They wanted “small governement”*.

*government that doesn’t restrict them from doing whatever they want.

“It’s not that surprising.” is what I wrote. It’s the very first sentence.

Not that surprising. A relative phrasing requiring the first measure to be a benchmark, e.g. “yeah, it’s kinda sad but not that sad.”

So hung up on what I “said” when it seems like you misread and misinterpreted it.

“It’s not that surprising” and then I gave examples of how you could reframe “social justice warrior” into the long history of people mocking well-meaning people who were viewed as excessive…

I don’t see where I said you’re “wrong to express your personal experience.”

But you’re a literal stranger to me, and there’s no accounting for “taste”. Such is life.

Like smul key. But beggar.

I’m just surprised he managed that much physical ability.

It’s not that surprising. Language has been doing it for ages, probably forever.

A “bleeding heart”, mocking someone who is too empathetic. A goody-two-shoes. Terms have always been made for people that “indulge” too much into something regardless of whether it’s the polar extremes of acquiring money or donating it.

If you’re just surprised at the name, then idk, shit’s gotta have some kinda name.

And pubes! don’t! count!

I’m tired of fielding this very frequent question, that I get often.

Just the ones on top of your head. And/or a tattoo of hair, if you’re follicularly-challenged.

Implying “evil” is most often used religiously is ceding morality to religion. I say this as someone who is a Christian agnostic. If you have morals and you think things can be morally wrong, then you believe in “evil”. It comes up in religions because religions often discuss morality, but religions didn’t create the idea of evil.

And then Ukraine’ll be criticized by disingenuous dickheads and dumbasses for not being serious about finding a path toward peace. As if peace for the aggressed-upon should be anything less than full restitution.

Every single part of the governmental machine is corrupted. And the root of all these evils is money.

Money bought these spineless politicians, and money guides the major news labels to chase headlines instead of uncovering news.

Accepting my flawed judgements puts you (and everyone else) on pretty thin ice.

Watch. Your. Step.

Me. Send me a home video and I pick based on vibes. If it’s genAI, you get executed.

Anyone who is genuinely fooled or influenced by that video should not be allowed to vote. If they aren’t capable of handling such low levels of propaganda, they aren’t equipped to make informed votes.

Of course, this would also be solved by banning the use of such methods for creating political ads.

Every single person who voted “yes” must be barred from office.

They’re either an idiot, misled on what socialism is and where it’s been enacted, or willfully wasting their constituents’ time on meaningless drivel.

Damn, true.

Wait, so why even go to college?

Self-enrichment? In this economy?