Yeah…Elon doesn’t have enough problems right now, time for him to merge his car and his rocket companies and get his cars to become unguided missiles. Next step is Twitter integration to target non verified pedestrians. That will make $8 for verification seem worth it!

Holy shit!
Sometimes unbelievable acceleration and AI driven steering isn’t such a good thing. Yikes!

ROTFLMFAHS!!!
Trump’s team won’t cooperate with their own special master by defending Trump, saying which documents they claim Trump declassified, because they’re saving that for trial….so his defense team is demanding he be indicted for espionage!?!

Of course, since there is no evidence he declassified these documents anywhere, and even the president can’t declassify documents without going through the declassification process and leaving a record they were declassified, this means that no matter what lies Trump spouts and who believes them, he’s toast, he committed treason, espionage, and theft of government documents. Caught red handed with nuclear secrets in his desk that he swore under oath to the FBI he didn’t have.

Also, Trump was indicted in New York today. His children are included in the lawsuits that seek over $250 million and to remove all Trumps from any leadership or controlling positions in any companies in New York State and bar them from any real estate purchases for 5 years.
More to come, because criminal complaints surrounding his “staggering” bank and tax and wire frauds have been forwarded by the NYAG to the IRS.

I wonder if his $3 million criminal defense lawyer has returned to Venezuela with his retainer yet, you know he’s going to before the feds try to recoup those ill gotten funds too.

BTW- the US Senate unanimously condemned Trump today for his public attacks against the FBI and for spurring threats of violence and death against the FBI, it’s agents, and their families including young children by his cultists who have followed through by trying to murder FBI agents and their families up to and including trying to plant dirty bombs at FBI buildings. Not sure why the media didn’t cover that one whit, but they didn’t. So much for the liberal media doing all they can to hurt Trump, right? This time they covered for him 100%.

Hilariously, Trump’s spokesperson came out today whining and complaining that the Biden whitehouse isn’t full of “leakers” like Trump’s was. How unfair that Biden hired trustworthy people and Trump hired sycophants only interested in their own personal gains.

Also came out today that Trump is pissed DeSantis “stole” his idea of shipping immigrants to blue states and Trump wants credit, but at least he didn’t go as far as Trump planned by hand selecting the worst violent criminal migrants to ship to “blue states and cities”, not deport, not incarcerate, but traffic them deep into the US.
Murder, rape, debauchery, death and destruction….the actual Trump plan.

Your Trump descriptor of the day- perfidious- deceitful and untrustworthy. Never has one word described Trump better.

I love it when a plan comes together. 😂

PS- because I know you’re confused, here’s what a real leader looks like. Notice he barely glances at his notes the entire speech because he actually knows what he’s talking about, unlike another president that could barely read a speech and never once read one 1/10 as coherent and thoughtful as Biden gives without assistance. So much for that theory that Biden’s mind is gone, sorry friendo, it’s a steel trap.

https://videosift.com/video/Biden-UN-Address-Russia-Climate-Change-and-Food-Shortages

Edit: Ruh Roe…New York just revised its sexual assault laws to essentially remove statutes of limitations, meaning Eugene Carol, the woman he defamed by calling her rape claims lies and is currently sueing him for deffamation can now sue for rape, and she indicated she intends to file Nov 24, the first day the law is in effect. A new felony case for Trump every day. This is you guy? This is you pick? 😂

His poor overworked emotional support aides, hired to give baby snowflake Trump daily ego stroking and kudos for nothing by surfing the web to find any positive tweets or troths about him.

Um….it’s not a show, nor is it a trial. Derp.

It is about investigating, then handing over evidence for prosecuting, not persecuting those politically opposed to democracy that took actions to end it because they tried to cover up the certified, verified results of the election they lost in a historic landslide to Sleepy Joe. The prosecution comes afterwards, then the persecution.

It’s absolutely about covering up the truth about the 2020 election….it’s about investigating and eventually prosecuting those who tried to do that.

I think it’s funny that investigating Jan 6 is portrayed by the right as going after Trump, but you guys are so dumb you don’t realize that’s admitting Trump was leading the treasonous coup attempt. If investigating the Jan 6 attack is going after Trump, the two must be connected.

Right, CNN reported it, so it must be untrue. So stupidly ignorant, bob. CNN gets it right 197 times for every time your biased sources tell the truth. Not only that, the 2.5% they get wrong they report and offer retractions….without having to be sued for billions to get them to not lie. Not a single right wing propaganda outlet can say the same. Such sad infantile stupidity you show at every opportunity.

I guess you forgot, Trump actually admitted most of her testimony publicly, all the important parts, saying he wanted to go personally lead the attack but his secret service wouldn’t let him. Does the specifics of this tantrum of the dozens we’ve seen him have publicly make any difference? He’s not being charged with attacking them, he’s being charged (eventually) with leading a violent coup to overthrow the government, something you and everyone else knows quite well that he did. Leadership matters!

The Federalist?! Aaaaahahaha!! Truth..nope. News…nope. Try again traitorous loser. The Federalist is poorly written fantasy fiction compared to CNN, which isn’t the only source for this information by far but I knew a CNN report would trigger your stupidity. Mission accomplished.
You, on the other hand, have what to discredit her story? One anonymous claim from someone saying an unnamed someone else might say it didn’t happen? From the far right, racist, factless, conspiracy theory rag…The Federalist!? LMFAHS!! OMFG, you ijit! Bwaaaahahahahaha. Why not just quote Mike Pillow?

What part does the federalist deny anyway (I’m not going to read it). Do they just deny he grabbed the wheel? I would certainly believe his excuse, that he’s too fat and out of shape to grab the wheel, but also that he TRIED to, lunged for it but failed, yes, I believe that, does that change anything? Does that even contradict her testimony? No.
Do they deny he was outraged that they wouldn’t take him to personally lead the attack (and lynching of Pence)? He admitted that on national tv, so it’s too late to deny. D’oh!

More tears, they’re so yummy! Keep ‘em coming!

Just a reminder, Republicans didn’t want a non political investigation, they utterly refused, then they refused to be involved in the bipartisan investigation. The only investigation they were interested in was of Clinton, even in 2021. Now they whine they aren’t involved in the investigation (Trump now complains they should have been a party to it because he wants people inside who can warn his people of subpoenas and warrants so they can flee and destroy evidence).
No crying about it now, you chose to not be represented well on the panel.

Yeah, they did. A broken clock is right 2 times a day as well.

What do real scientists say?
...the one's he worked with all said Lindzen is totally wrong, and his views are not held by the vast, VAST majority of other scientists that actually work in climatology. He's a political shill now, working for 'conservative think tanks' to deny climate change.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06032017/climate-change-denial-scientists-richard-lindzen-mit-donald-trump

Note, his graph at the beginning that appears to show no significant rise because as usual they start in late 97-98, a super hot El Nino year (the hottest on record) typically used as a starting point to pretend that temperatures aren't rising as fast as they are. Start at any other time to see how different the results are. This graph contains the hottest 15 years in recorded history over a period of the last 19 years. That's pretty telling by itself.

1)the climate is always changing-but according to natural cycles, we should be in a cooling period, not a warming period.
2)so at least in his mind, everyone agrees CO2 is a greenhouse gas that causes warming...that's better than most deniers.
3)"little ice age"-During the period 1645–1715, in the middle of the Little Ice Age, there was a period of low solar activity known as the Maunder Minimum. The Spörer Minimum has also been identified with a significant cooling period between 1460 and 1550 (it was not caused by low CO2 levels), and CO2 is produced more in warmer temperatures than cold, so starting shortly after then you can claim the CO2 levels have been rising since well before the industrial revolution...which cherry picked like that may be technically true but is again misleading by starting at an unusually low level following a low level solar period, but the level of that rise has consistently risen since the industrial revolution, and is incredibly higher than any natural mass releases besides rare massive super volcano eruptions that caused mass extinction events.
4) just plain not true, and not agreed on by scientists.
5)What they actually said-
Improve methods to quantify uncertainties of climate projections and scenarios, including development and exploration of long-term ensemble simulations using complex models. The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible. Rather the focus must be upon the prediction of the probability distribution of the system�s future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions. Addressing adequately the statistical nature of climate is computationally intensive and requires the application of new methods of model diagnosis, but such statistical information is essential.

Confident prediction of future weather is not possible, weather predictions are based on statistical probabilities too. Because they aren't perfect doesn't mean they're wrong, useless, or should be ignored until they're 100% right every time. More funding for more study will improve the predictions consistently, but we are intentionally defunding them instead.

Religion channel? As in the religion of climate change denial? That's not what that channel is.
Philosophy channel? What?
Learn channel, only if the viewer looks into his BS elsewhere to learn the truth.
Lies, yep...controversy, yep....politics, yep....conspiracy,OK. His ilk are steeped in those, but you left out money, the driving force for all the deniers controversial, political lies and crazy conspiracy theories. ;-)

They're gonna do it right this time. It will be a by-the-numbers hit of every beat from Alien and maybe a little Aliens in there for good measure since they've got guns.

It will be a standard modern blockbuster. It will be exactly adequate but probably get a few bonus points for cool visuals to bring it up a quarter of a notch. I will rent it and probably enjoy it and forget everything except the visuals within 72 hours.

I already defined bigoted farther up the thread.

But again, back to the Oxford:

Bigot: A person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.
Bigotry: Intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself.

Even dictionary.com gets it right this time. I don't know where you got your definition of "bigot".

1) It wasn't any of those though.
2) It wasn't bigoted innuendo though.
3) Not wanting to allow radicalised muslims who will engage in criminal behaviour into your country (which is what this is about) is not bigoted (just as you aren't considered bigoted for not wanting criminals engaging in criminal behaviour in the community). Making a temporary ban until you can institute a more rigorous vetting process is not bigoted. I.e. he accepts non-radicalised Muslims and their views, but they will have temporary visa restrictions until a better vetting system is in place.
4) Assuming the worst about a group is not bigotry. Being intolerant of the group's views is.

No, since they aren't bigotry, they couldn't be used as examples in a dictionary.

Saying disparaging things about a group is not bigotry. E.g. someone could say "I fucking hate Australians, they suck". That's not bigotry. Or, "All Australian's are dicks". Also not bigotry. Now on the other hand if they said, "I don't accept the views or opinions of Australians", then that is bigotry.

Ahhh, okay, so did I do it right this time?

This.. this on vr/google cardboard would rock. This looks like the many FPS movies we've seen but on a more hollywood level. And with VR out this year it is right on time.

Yeah, I do talk about it a lot, I like talking about them - rarely do them. The moment has to be just right and just like Doug Stanhope says about DMT - there's hardly a "right" place/time to do it, it's just that amazing.

You should check out a new study about the topic: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/290461.php

"In fact, on a number of factors, the study found a correlation between use of psychedelic drugs and decreased risk for mental health problems."

Remember, just because you ingested a random drug and had a bad experience doesn't mean that many in the tryptamine family pose any health threats - which has been proven many times that they do not. I mean who knows maybe you smoked a shit load of PCP. No one should ever take something that they haven't tested on low doses, know exactly what it is that they are taking and then follow the set & setting rules. Otherwise, obviously - yeah there is potential that you could be doing something harmful to yourself - so don't do it.

Same thing to me.
Constitution based republic...according to Bob's definition that's a bit redundant.
Strong democratic tradition/tendencies = representative democracy (in my eyes). Not a true democracy, because the founding fathers did not trust the masses to get it right every time because masses are reactionary, but did trust those educated gentlemen they elected to do the right thing (a mistake, but understandable considering the morals of the time).
I did ignore the 'federal' part, but I thought it didn't need saying, since we were only talking about the federal government. Of course, our government is a confederation/federation of the states. An important part of that is the agreement by all that that rules of the federation always override the rules of the constituent parts.

Sure thing...I learned some new things from that book. For instance, Franklin was often carried in by prisoners (on a kind of early work release program) in a 'sedan chair'. Not the picture I have in my mind of him.

Yep, and notice Stevie's little head nod just before the replacement guitar arrives, right on time (in the vocal break).

And afterwards, here's what we don't see (but is surely happening backstage) - the roadie rushing to restring and quickly tune-up Stevie's favorite guitar.

The police are not in the right any time they prevent another consenting adult from making a decision about his life, or the life of a dependent.
I can't believe the kid died. I would visit that precinct with the biggest bouquet of roses after I was released. And by roses I mean artillery. Many people live solely for their children, and this was entirely unacceptable.

EDIT: the one thing that does bug me about this, though I'm sure the story can't convey all the circumstances, why would any responsible parent vacate their home before thinking of the safety of their child?

Anyway, yay life!

@sanderbos, yer joking, right? Last time I checked a table fulla candles were flammable enough to ignite grain alcohol at 2600 °F (candle, burning match) and stunt-doubles were still cost-prohibitive for school chums or wage-slaves to afford.
That was a glass coffee table and that inordinately large ass may have had some cuts after that and those not from any editing suite.

Haven't you ever been in a stripper's apartment? They look just like this....cheap furniture, ghetto apartment, candles and bourbon on the table in the afternoon while practicing douchebag mating-rituals, etc.
Judging this fail ISU.....up-card, 9.6

In feminist theory there are many branches. There are two main branches that have sub-branches.

Liberal feminism - the idea that we are all equal through our capacity for rationality. Equality will come about through the practice and recognition of this equal capacity for rationality and as institutions change so too will women's capacity to demonstrate this. The reason that this currently can't be exhibited is because of a patriarchal system that views women as weak and soft minded. This leads lib fems to try to be "man-like" of mind so as to assert their equal status; girly but strong minded, ie. Thatcher(extreme example), Clinton, Rachel Maddow.

Radical feminism - Men are the oppressive class and women are the oppressed. (Try to deny it seriously. If not within the West then within the rest of the world) As a result women must form a opposition to this oppression by mens of taking sides. Women can still be equal of any attribute such as reason etc but none the less by virtue of their biological sex they are relegated to 2nd place based on that alone. The response is to form an equally if not more powerful class to overthrow the patriarchal system. Now this is where the original video things its anti men. It is anti patriarchy, anti a system millennia old that places political capital on birth right/biology. To argue against this risks committing a naturalistic fallacy whereby what IS is what is RIGHT. Through time we can cite all sorts of examples where that is not the case - slavery, pederasty, segregation. One way of addressing this patriarchy oppression is by banding together and attacking overt examples of gender/sex discrinination and oppression as is put forward in the video as reverse oppression (whatever). The other more radical feminism asks that women forgo their own proclivities and become political lesbians. This requires that they become a lesbian not only in solidarity with their sexed brethren but also actively reject men as a necessary part of a flourishing life.

So much of the discourse, on both sides, confuses the aims of which ever brand of feminism they prescribe (sometimes a mix of both) with instances of activism/oppression. Anecdotal evidence can only do so much in a systematic and ingrained norm such as gender roles.

The original video is laughably inane and self-agrandising in its selective use of anecdotes and conflation of one idea with another. It is as worse than radical-radical feminist arguments insofar as it cherry picks examples to highlight that which is unsystematic whereas rad fems point out things that are systematic but their ends are not understandable, or acceptable if understood, by most. That doesn't mean they are wrong.

TLDR; Lib fem, go with the flow and ask for gradual change. Rad fem, form a opposition of power and overthrow current system then restructure from what is divorced from historically contingient oppressive gender description.