I read it, nowhere did it give an estimate of what those protests cost, and it indicated there were multiple other routes for the oil to travel so didn’t even disrupt oil transportation completely, much less ALL commerce.
And it was about pipelines crossing their (or protected) land it seems, a far cry from the truckers. Yes, the validity and severity of your cause matters, just like the damage you do and to whom.

Billions worth of goods stuck temporarily…but no actual estimated cost for their delay, this cost billions in lost production and salaries that won’t be recovered.

That protest was targeted against the offending entity, not the populace. I have no issue with natives blockading their own land and preserves that feed those reservations against permanent destruction for some private profits. That’s a far cry from the truckers blockading the main border crossing for industry and tourism because they’re afraid to get a poke.

The numbers I saw were special. Hundreds of millions-billions lost (your billions in goods delayed doesn’t have a price tag). That was before the bridge was reopened. These protesters weren’t satisfied with that damage and continued to close your capitol with ever shifting demands. Since regular measures had failed, I support emergency measures, seizure, even forfeiture after trial, of any funds or tools used.

Perhaps they became only as localized (but certainly not as targeted, and localized in a city not the unpopulated country), but they had already done exponentially more damage and showed no sign of end or even demands.

Let’s ignore someone personally supporting a grass roots movement outside their country and control, please. I find it a red herring totally unconnected to how he governs.

Yes, some Floyd protests were more violent than the truckers, some weren’t, remember how they were all violently smashed, tear gassed, rubber bullets galore, run through with police trucks, unmarked vans pulling up and grabbing people crossing the streets, unmarked vans driving through towns full of police shooting tear gas at any moving body, etc? Don’t pretend the response is similar.
Also, the Floyd protests lasted a weekend in most cases (occupy Portland really wasn’t about Floyd) and went elsewhere the next march. They weren’t closing down one area for weeks intent on staying. Most lasted hours and were peaceful until police became violent, despite right wing media’s fear-mongering.

I think you’re stretching, putting on blinders, and doing insane mental gymnastics to pretend you believe that. From the actual damage caused, the idiotic reasoning behind it (quickly abandoned), the extremely uncanadianness of the self centered far right rally masquerading as protest, the international damage, the foreign involvement from planning to funding, these are unique “protests” in numerous ways.

Their idiotic beliefs are only one of many distinctions I’ve pointed out, and as I mentioned only color public opinion and the amount of patience they’re given by the public, not how the government treats them. It’s not at all honest for you to pretend that’s the entirety of my position…it’s very Bob of you, and has lost some of my respect.

Pipelines crossing sovereign territory or preserves = bad so blockading those areas to force pipeline movement = good….oil companies didn’t truck the oil out, they increased shipments from other areas by rail. Read the article you linked.

Native cultures and governments are different. Pretending an elected board for a reservation works for the people is naive in the extreme. Read about politics on reservations, who funds the people that get elected in most cases, what happens to opposing candidates…saying the board signed off while so many showed up to fight against it seems a bit at odds, no? Like maybe the board members were bribed, had ties with the oil industry, or other conflicts….just maybe?

And again, those protests didn’t cost a fraction what the truckers did from my research. Delaying delivery of a billion in goods isn’t the same as costing a billion in losses. Neither is delaying or cancelling a billion dollar project. Be adult please….don’t make such specious arguments ….please. They don’t slip by, and they make me think you are being disingenuous.

Allowing people fly so close and risk an accidental smashing with the Pyramids seem not a worthwhile risk for Eygpt's department of antiquity me. Regulated drones I understand, but not these Wingsuit flybys. I mean, if I'm its head honcho, I'd tell these people to f'-off somewhere else, LOL.

They went round the wrong way? Jeebus, Chile is a huge leeward shore to avoid... That bit about having to then fight the current to go 200 miles further west before you can turn north so that you have enough sea room not to get smashed onto the rocks of the Chilean coast when the weather turns rough... We had engines at least as a backup, but just in case of emergency. Plus we had weather radar and modern forecasts so we could plan a route to avoid the worst of what was to come. Respect.

I especially loved the part about how sailors on the upper yards like the royals or the masthead being "as close to heaven as a sailor ever gets".

We tried evicting him, moving in a new, much more pleasant and rational tenant, even having him prosecuted for trespassing but Trump keeps breaking back in and smashing up the place then skulking off to squat in the garage closet until his next outburst.

Now, why is Hillary still living in your “brain”? Just because it was empty wasted space?

@JiggaJonson I agree yesterday was definitely celebrating an attack against America, but I think the same could reasonably said of a float depicting the capitol smashed and ransacked, covered with with stop the steal graffiti, and with a gallows out front, which I think is more analogous. If they excused that by saying it's intended to memorialize the dead officers, I think that excuse would seem ridiculous and hollow....but that's just, like, my opinion, man.

Absolutely not, why are you lying? I stated that contraceptives aren't perfect, and fail at much higher rates than most think. There is no contraceptive that's 100% effective, and on average the most common are well over 8% failures according to the CDC, but there is abortion that's 100% effective. I never said anything approaching an implication that people are too stupid to use them, it's insanely stupid to think what I said was assigning blame to end users for not using other contraceptives.

They do use contraception, and still need secondary methods when contraceptives fail, which some do for over 1/4 of people who use them. No contraception is 100% effective....not even abstinence if you believe the bible.
BTW, the church has repeatedly tried to stop contraception from being available....Don't try to pretend you're still sticking to your religious arguments when you say that, the church/Christianity opposes contraception just like they oppose abortion, clearly because they like having power over others, not because we need more people.

Maybe she paid them, it's not clear nor is that relevant. The passage listed sentences for crimes done to her, but says if violent abortion was the totality of the "harm", then there was no harm and no crime. They couldn't be more clear that the unborn child wasn't capable of being murdered or harmed.

No, it hasn't been smashed. You claim it was, you look it up and prove your own position if you can. It's already been asserted successfully by people much smarter than you.

To kill something it first had to live. To live, it has to breath. No breath, no life, just a potential life.

"please don't try to impose your ignorant misunderstandings on others." Your the one implying woman and men are to stupid to use other forms of contraceptives.

"power grab over reproduction rights." Lol again if the woman don't want a child use contraceptives. Its her choice... You are the one saying they for some reason are to dumb to do that.

Did the woman pay those men to beat her ? Was it her choice to take the life of her child ? That argument of yours have been smashed to pieces countless times by people much smarter than me and you. Look it up.

"thou shalt not kill"

Uh oh….the border “wall” in Arizona has been destroyed in many places by monsoon flooding. This during a major drought. This happened because they ignored environmental laws, construction regulations, and common sense and just built them across arroyos and washes without preparing for water. Now they’re smashed to bits.

I wouldn’t expect them to be replaced. More Trump wasteful spending for nothing but short term political gains and future costs. Maybe Mexico will pay to haul off the remaining garbage.

Neither supports racial supremacy like your ilk, so the leading question is a red herring non sequitur.
I am not an anarchist, not since I turned 16, so I don't support Antifa, but I enjoy watching them make your head spin immensely.
I have always supported equality under the law, so yes, I absolutely support BLM....I would if they murdered a cop every time an unarmed black person was killed by police.

You are delusional.
Do, at some time, most cops act appropriately? Yes. Are you so brain damaged you take much accusations and hear "all cops are all bad all the time"? I've never said that. Pablo Escobar, by all reports, was a quite generous man who helped the poor on many occasions....he was not a good person.
Same for cops.
If you murder one person but do your job well otherwise, you are a murderous thug. If you allow fellow officers to get away with murder but don't participate, you are a murderous thug. If you spend every waking hour tending to the invalid and elderly on your own dime and you only kidnap and rape one child, you are a disgusting child rapist. If you cover for another motherfucker who's a kiddie fucker, you're no fucking better than the motherfucking rapist. That's the norm for American police, cover for the bad ones under any circumstances.

Cops can do good at times, usually when they know they're on multiple cameras, it doesn't ever erase their crimes.

Most, I would say statistically all cops are at best accomplices if not the bad actors. Good policing includes stopping other cops from committing crimes....until BLM pushed the issue, that was absolutely not the case...It might have happen once a decade nation wide, always ending with the whistleblower fired and under threat from police. Now, thanks 100% to BLM, that's slowly changing. Maybe up to .01% of the time...and that's an improvement.

Trump said to hit them harder and more often, cops listened and cheered.

Cops wear cameras. If they followed the law, they could put out ten thousand videos of themselves doing the right thing every day, not one a month, deescalation, not shooting until threatened, stopping other cops from beating handcuffed suspects to death and arresting them, defending the accused shoplifters from the racist store owner's false accusations instead of what we do see, smashing their window and pulling them through it because a racist said they think they stole something, they just don't know what or when. Have you EVER seen one of those? No, but you can see 10 disgusting abuses recorded daily with never another cop intervening, always the entire department forming a blue wall, destroying evidence, publicly pushing lies, testifying to lies, etc. They're a gang, they only protect and serve themselves when the chips are down. This is not a media perception, it's cold hard fact buddy.

Cops went to the supreme court to guarantee their right to lie. They are all professional liars. Liars cannot be trusted. I know, you can't grasp that concept because it would mean questioning daddy Trump, but it's true. When you give people authority, the power of life and death, and the legal right to lie at all times you set up a disastrous situation....it's what we have. Racist liars who kill. No good deed erases that.

Yes, Bob. Cops admit they shoot three citizens to death daily on average, already an abject failure, but hide likely > 95% of the deaths they cause by blaming the victim, claiming suicide by somehow beating themselves to death or claiming they died in a minor wreck that caused no injury after beating them to death. Claiming a cell phone clearly visible that they are talking to 911 on looks like a gun and shooting 47 times, running them over intentionally then stopping 10 ft away but claiming they had to because they feared for their lives, kneeling on their neck for 9 minutes and later saying the people telling them they just killed the man distracted them from knowing they killed the man. Strangling boys for 17 minutes straight while beating their heads with a giant maglight.......Daily. Multiple times daily.

You are such a delusional idiot.

To be totally honest, I'm disappointed the national guard didn't show up 30 minutes in guns blazing, wounding every person who had smashed their way in. I didn't cheer it, but I was extremely relieved when the police finally seemed to start fighting back instead of just stepping aside for the coup....but I certainly don't represent Democrats or any group.

Just like I'm disappointed we are ignoring our treaty with the Ukraine in which we agreed to defend them militarily from any invasion in exchange for them surrendering their nuclear weapon stockpile. We welched on our clear responsibility to defend them with force, just as the police and guard welched on their responsibilities to defend the building and representatives with deadly force, imo.
Many reports indicate that was following an executive order, or really an unofficial order from the executive (a distinction without a difference), but that's no excuse true or not.

That cop's alternative being what, letting the rampaging mob have their way with the legislators he was duty-bound to protect? It's not like the officer was just wandering around and randomly shot her - she was at the front of a violent mob that had just broken through a barrier. By shooting her, he kept the mob at bay for a bit longer, which may very well have saved lives. When people on this site decry police violence, it tends to be in a context where that violence was unnecessary and excessive for the situation. The fact that more of the insurrectionists weren't shot actually illustrates incredible restraint and professionalism, on the part of the Capitol police.

I'd like to add: fucking stop with the "unarmed" bullshit. They were a RAMPAGING MOB. They were chanting their wish to kill the Vice President, who they believed to be in the building. Do you really believe a group of people with only bludgeoning weapons are incapable of causing massive amounts of harm? They had violently broken into one of the core seats of power in the US, in a direct effort to stop the democratic process and what has in *every other instance* been a peaceful transition of power.

Seriously - if you support the 1/6/2021 insurrection, you support an attempted fascistic overthrow of the US government. It isn't up for debate, that's what happened on that day. It wasn't a fucking protest, they weren't a goddamned tourist group. They smashed their way into the Capitol, at the behest of a man seemingly incapable of admitting defeat (gracefully or otherwise), with the goal of keeping him in power against the will of the voters of this country. That shit is not at all acceptable, and I hope the lot of them serve sufficient time in prison to act as a warning to all other fascists.

"What on earth are you talking about?"
-newt

The rules for property and income when one or both parties decide they no longer want to be in the relationship.




"not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives"
-newt

Incorrect. If you are on birth certificate, you have the same rights and obligations.
The only pitfalls are that :
- Child support is calculated from the income of the parent with less custody (rather than from the true cost of raising a child).
- Women almost always get custody if the choice is between two parents (like when they live far apart and child can only be at one or the other).



"and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first"
-newt

Negative. Co-parenting does not conflate property.

Shared assets when not married are divided either by percentage of purchase price contribution, or by percentage stated in a contract.




"My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas"
-newt

"My brother won."
-newt

Won by your own definition. Hence I congratulate.




"You assume women take off time to raise the kids"
-newt

No assumptions. Although afaik they still do it more often.




"You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. "
-newt

Top result from a zero effort google of "men working hours vs women working hours"

https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041




"Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that"
-newt

I admit that women [as a group] under 35 out earn men under 35 because of preferential admittance (such as to higher education) and preferential hiring (such as to managerial positions).

I did not say that women earn more in the same position for the same hours worked. Young men are simply getting shut out of opportunities, so their incomes are lower. As by design.

It does however highlight how affirmative action is being poorly controlled.
The target statistic is based on overall population at all ages.
The adjustment is skewed to younger ages (school admission is typically for younger people).
So the system is trying to balance out incomes of older men by trimming up incomes of younger women, with no accounting for the effects on younger men or consequences of older men retiring.
The situation is doomed to overshoot with time.

A natural result is the popularity of people like Jordan Peterson, with messages like : "Young men, nobody will help you, stop waiting for someone to help you, stop lamenting your situation, you gotta pull yourself up by your boot straps. Start by cleaning your room, then go make something of yourself".






"Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk[etc]" -scheherazade "
-newt

Straw man argument.

You know I stated that those marriageability criteria exist specifically due to risk of consequences of divorce.

I never stated that I have personal issues with those attributes.
I have dated women on that list. I didn't /marry/ them.

My only criteria for a relationship that I am happy being in is :
- We are mutually attracted
- We like each other
- We are nice to each other
I don't care what your religion is, your politics, your family status, whatever. It's all just noise to me.





" And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are?"
-newt

Prenups can be negated by these simple words :

"I did not understand what I was signing"
or
"My lawyer was not present".

Poof. Prenup thrown out.




"their husbands are more likely to break their vows first"
-newt

A woman to cheat needs a willing man (easy)
A man to cheat needs a willing woman (hard)

Times have changed. Online dating made chatting someone up in person and make an impression uncommon, and even considered creepy/unusual. Now people are picked on their online profile based on looks/height/social-media-game.

Dating apps and sites publish their statistics. Nowadays, around 20% of men match with around 80% of women.
Most men aren't having sex. Most men can't find a match to cheat with if they wanted to.

The tall cute photogenic guys are cleaning up.
The 20% of men that match the bulk of women are going through women like a mill. They will smash whatever bored housewife crosses their path.

A 2 second google result :
https://usustatesman.com/economics-of-dating-2-the-brutal-reality-of-dating-apps/




"Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches"
-newt

Agreed.

Fortunately, I never say that about women.






" you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks"
-newt

False equivalence.

Cohabitation and Partnership are mutually independent.
Meaning both can exist at the same time.


-scheherazade

Aaaaahahaha.

So that's a great big "no, I still can't name a single one, but I'll keep claiming they were there and in charge". Typical, can't back up your lie (I was going to call it a specious claim, but that implies it's plausible but wrong....your claim isn't even plausible) but won't ever admit you're wrong, no matter how stupid and baseless the lie.

Yeah, no evidence must mean it's been magically erased from the entire internet, not that it never existed anywhere but extreme right wing propaganda sites that put forth liar's opinions as facts. Of course, I'm not going to bother with your propaganda site, it's probably hosting viruses like most far right propaganda sites, and it clearly isn't worth reading based on the title and source.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gateway_Pundit
The Gateway Pundit is an American far-right[8] news and opinion website. The website is known for publishing falsehoods, hoaxes, and conspiracy theories.

Let me ask, what was that former fbi agent doing there. Answer, infiltrating the capitol and trying to overthrow the government for Trump. You really think anyone is going to buy his baseless excuse that all those hundreds of unmasked and identified Trumpists smashing into the capitol, and the thousands outside murdering police on camera were really busloads of masked antifa, I guess in mission impossible masks that facial ID software identifies as Trumpist individuals.

Or is your claim that the thousands of Trumpists were led by a small group of black masked anarchists they want to kill who told them the same thing Trump told them, fight hard, get rid of those representatives and Pence, and while they didn't listen to Trump when he said it an hour earlier, they did listen to their political enemies and committed treason on Antifa's direction?

Just don't look at the thousands of posts made by the Trumptards from inside the building during their hunt for elected officials to assassinate, because you might notice a distinct lack of Antifa and a thousand or more stating that they're there because Trump said to go fight, and they want to murder officials and install Trump as dictator for life, not because this black masked hippy said to.

Jesus, you're so fucking stupid and infantile, trying that insanely ridiculous excuse to try to deflect from the FACT that Donny riled them up into a murderous armed mob and sent them to the capitol to "get rid" of the representatives that wouldn't join their insurrection, and the FACT that they went directly there and followed his instructions, telling anyone within shouting distance they were there at Trump's direction because they are listening to the president and are stopping the steal. It makes you look like a spoiled baby who, after telling everyone she is going to have cookies no matter what anyone says and was caught red handed stealing and eating cookies, tries to blame their imaginary friend for shoving those cookies into their mouth.
Just
So
Fucking
Infantile
And
Stupid.

No one is buying it, even if it were true, and it's absolutely not, it's not an excuse, and it only makes you a brain dead liar willing to say any lie to escape responsibility for your parties actions once again.

Liar.

🤦‍♂️

When your mom told you that it was to protect you from the ones doing burnouts, not the ones who "protect and serve".

Pretty sure vehicular assault isn't in the police handbook. The rear window doesn't seem to have been smashed during that event like the police are claiming either.

On her debut album for Philips, Nina Simone in Concert (1964), for the first time she addressed racial inequality in the United States in the song "Mississippi Goddam". This was her response to the June 12, 1963, murder of Medgar Evers and the September 15, 1963, bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, that killed four young black girls and partly blinded a fifth. She said that the song was "like throwing ten bullets back at them", becoming one of many other protest songs written by Simone. The song was released as a single, and it was boycotted in some[vague] southern states.[31][32] Promotional copies were smashed by a Carolina radio station and returned to Philips.[33] She later recalled how "Mississippi Goddam" was her "first civil rights song" and that the song came to her "in a rush of fury, hatred and determination". The song challenged the belief that race relations could change gradually and called for more immediate developments: "me and my people are just about due". It was a key moment in her path to Civil Rights activism.[34] "Old Jim Crow", on the same album, addressed the Jim Crow laws. After "Mississippi Goddam", a civil rights message was the norm in Simone's recordings and became part of her concerts.