CoggyMcFee @ CoggyMcFee @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

533

Joined

2 yr. ago

It’s just my prediction bro! But there is a 100.00% chance. That’s right, it’s definitely going to happen, but I can’t say why. But we’ll just have to see what happens! It’s called science, ever heard of it?

Don’t you think you could give a shred of evidence for why you feel you can both-sides this? Though I have a feeling your supporting argument for this will be a painfully bad take.

Trying to emulate Mein Kampf as much as possible

Han sarcastically calls Jabba “a wonderful human being” in the special editions of ANH

You’re saying that trying to motivate people positively to move on from meat is “push the blame away” behavior. But I think tut-tutting individuals who eat meat is pushing the blame away.

While there are some people who believe that eating meat is an absolute moral wrong no matter where or when it takes place in human history, a lot of people who feel eating meat is immoral feel this way because of what the meat industry does, both to the animals and to the planet. Five thousand years ago, people weren’t supporting the meat industry and all its wrongs by eating meat.

So considering it to be pathetic to try to effect real reduction in people’s meat consumption because the methods shift blame away from the individual meat eater seems really ironic to me, as well as completely counterproductive, if your goal is less meat consumption in the world.

You have to be an exceptionally shitty person to be one of the richest people on the planet

The context in which it is used makes sense, but the extra “is” is just there. By all rights it should be ungrammatical, but people pretty frequently have that extra “is”, and I do find it absolutely bizarre how pervasive it is.

If they looked exactly alike it wouldn’t even be interesting. You could just photograph actual twins

Manchin has his post-Senate career ahead of him and he’s not going to throw that away just to help people.

It's the container that count, not the content

That’s not what Mr Rogers taught me

I would agree except I don’t think it would be out of cowardice, though for many other Republicans it is that. From what I see Mitch makes his choices based on what gives the optimal outcome for himself, and being consistent simply doesn’t play into his calculus at all because being inconsistent basically never harms him.

Bill Maher would never admit to being duped

I’m very suspicious of what you guys are saying but don’t want to check

And you clearly can’t recall the good things he did in the previous years, thereby exemplifying the goldfish memory that incentivizes doing big things in an election year

Laughter can’t melt steel beams!

I think you make a valid point that it’s extremely difficult to avoid buying from companies or CEOs you disagree with on political or moral grounds.

However, in the case of Tesla, I’ve lost faith in the product. If I bought a Tesla, I don’t know if I will discover that corners were cut, that features will be removed over the air, or that the company has suddenly crashed and burned.

So, the erratic, narcissistic CEO is the reason I won’t buy a Tesla anymore, but it’s not a sacrifice because I consider it to be the pragmatic choice as well.

I’m no fan of organized religion at all but:

“None of you has faith until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.”

Sounds pretty similarly chill to me.

The problem is that these texts have so many contradictory statements that they can be used to justify anything anyway.

This is the real thing here. It feels to me like going after him about changing his stance on the ACA has the effect of making him seem more coherent, not less. If you asked him to give his stance on the ACA today, within about two minutes he would probably say he was for it and against it and that he created it and that it’s illegal and that he’ll make it better or already made it better, while also making it clear he doesn’t actually know what it does

That appears to be exactly what they are doing.