![](/static/23fb711/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/db7182d9-181a-45e1-b0aa-6768f144911a.jpeg)
I don’t know, trickle down always sounded like piss play to me. Not much better, worse? ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I don’t know, trickle down always sounded like piss play to me. Not much better, worse? ¯_(ツ)_/¯
For the group railing against Sharia law the loudest, they sure do love to legislate religious beliefs. I guess the real problem was Sharia just wasn’t going far enough.
What’s the most recent example of “full reset” for a comparable nation with the economic output, military power, or population size similar to America? The USSR? Any examples that are more successful?
I’m not arguing that change isn’t needed, it is, but what’s realistic. Especially when going up against those with the greatest vested interest in status quo, those brainwashed to rail against what’s in their best interest or the greater good, or those too apathetic to engage with any of it.
Heard this one before. How long before we hear about his extramarital affairs and the abortion he paid for. It’s always projection with these assholes.
EDIT: My bad, this guy just paid for his future wife’s abortion. Rules for thee and not for me. Slightly different hypocrisy for this guy.
The voter demographics from the last presidential election has 52% of voters being age 50+, with 52% of those voters voting for Trump.
It’s certainly not all older voters, but it is most of them.
Had to look up the date of the vaccine, looks like it became commercially available in 1984, and licensed in America by 1995. If you’re 30-40+, you were probably forced to have it as a kid.
Same, but they only want grandchildren as facebook sex trophies. No interest in babysitting or being supportive in any other meaningful way.
They were able to raise children on a single salary without leaning on family for childcare, so why can’t we? Surely nothing has changed over the last 30-40 years.
The same flag outside the current house speaker’s office?
Speaker Johnson’s close ties to Christian right — both mainstream and fringe
Flags associated with acts of treason have been normalized now. Good luck pursuing that investigation for more than just show.
I just get really tired of the “why didn’t they shoot the in the leg or hand” comments.
This was not the intention of my “shoot first and shoot to kill” comment.
My issue is with the “warrior mindset” training adopted by many police forces that assumes every situation is a life threatening encounter for the officer and warrants an escalated response in order to preserve their own safety.
You are right, a firearm should not be raised unless the intention is to shoot to kill. I am saying that being trained to shoot to kill is not the appropriate background to respond to mental wellness check.
No one is going be prominent enough to compare to Bernie, especially at the twilight of his political career, and be a natural successor.
It’s like saying where’s the next Obama, when Obama himself was no name, first term, junior Senate candidate from Illinois when he gave the 2004 DNC keynote speech, only four years before becoming president.
What I’m trying to say is, unless you’re already neck deep in Vermont politics, we probably won’t hear the name of the next prominent progressive out of the state until that seat opens up.
I don’t disagree with you. They have been militarized with surplus weapons, gear, and vehicles. All of which they were handed with wildly insufficient training, under a system with little to no repercussions for excessive use of force. It’s no surprise we’re in the situation we are today.
It’s almost as if a militarized police force trained to shoot first and shoot to kill shouldn’t be in charge of wellness checks, mental health emergencies, or even nonviolent offenses.
In fact, we could use some of the budget assigned to police and use it to train non-violent emergency response teams, since the police won’t be doing that work anymore.
If only we had a catchy slogan for it.
Totally agree with you. But this:
this view holds the client up as a victim and the sex worker as some kind of intrusive parasite who has failed to know her place.
Is because their golden god can do no wrong. That every law he broke was somehow not his fault, and clearly the fault of the accuser or corrupt prosecutors. They will shift the focus away from an argument they can’t win, campaign funds being used for non-campaign purposes, to anything they can get the base whipped up about.
But my complaint isn’t even about that. My problem is that this article demonizes these Trump supporters for one wrong reason. That characterizing customers of sex work as weirdos for admitting it, regardless of their presidential candidate of choice, hurts the effort to legitimize sex work. There’s a lot of fish in the barrel of criticism for this group, no need for the author and OP to support a conservative anti-sex work narrative at the same time.
Only in Nevada, in the form of brothels. And they only operate in a handful of counties.
Conservatives don’t like sex work because it ruins the “wife will submit to her husband” power dynamic around sex they were taught is the norm.
Sex work being illegal, and as a result inherently ripe for exploitation, is the feature not a bug to conservatives.
Sex work is work. And if it’s work, there are customers.
There’s probably a long list of reasons to criticize these Trump supporters, including not understanding what this case in particular is about, but being customers of sex work ain’t it.
Demonizing customers of sex work maintains the taboo and hurts the movement to legitimize, legalize, regulate, and provide normal employment benefits to sex work.
I always thought it was a tbsp of maple syrup a day to take care of a canadian problem
All research and successful drug policy
Shows that treatment should be increased
And law enforcement decreased
While abolishing mandatory minimum sentences
Just have the Lorax settle this
Probably easier to stick with “at the very least, freed them”.
Pearl Harbor was the rallying cry that brought America together (mostly) to fight the Axis powers. Prior to that, isolationist (and Anti-Semitic) groups such as the America First Committee were growing in popularity. To say America was fighting for the Jews in WW2 may be technically correct based on who was responsible for the Holocaust, but it was more the byproduct of who America’s enemies were at the time, rather than being a primary motivator. Coming in as the savior to a population being persecuted is rarely the real reason wars are fought.