abraxas @ abraxas @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

780

Joined

2 yr. ago

Which ones? The ones I followed, he invested more political capital in than I ever expected.

EDIT: My own research, looks like the big one is healthcare. He's constantly talking about it and constantly "doing something behind closed doors" about it, but nothing has manifested yet. I wonder if it's because it would never pass the current congress, or if there's bigger (or more dishonest) reasons.

At this point, there's not many things that more than half of Democrats agree on. We're the entire political spectrum of "everything that isn't fascist".

Sure, but don't sit quiet while they fabricate a narrative where Biden is within an order of magnitude as bad as Trump.

There's an opposite-of-Streisand effect. If you're quiet about something and the other side keeps saying it, people start to believe it despite it being a lie.

Some members of the GOP genuinely do seek to trigger the end of the world. They are, however, a small minority.

"Silence is Violence"

Anyone who doesn't vote for Biden could be complicit in a 2024 Trump Regime. Don't like that? Get him primaried by someone who will also be able to beat Trump.

Now is not the time to be an accelerationist.

Folks have been fighting over that area since before we have written history

Sure, but things got a whole lot worse for world politics in the 20th century.

The problem with Presidency. More people approve of his decision than disapprove. Either choice would have fucked him next November.

Lucky for him, Encumbants get a huge leg-up on the reelection bid and need to basically be guilty of treason not to win.

(reading post history)

Ah. I understand now. Enjoy the block.

Not quite sure how this answer is relevant. Childfree, or just too young to have kids yourself? The question stands for your mother, a sibling, a niece/nephew, a girlfriend, or whatever makes no stop and consider for a second that you just said you're okay with random, innocent people suffering and dying.

Would you tell that to your spouse when the dead human was your kid?

Is the Red Cross a torture organization? Torture might not mean what you think it means.

But this is only about the life and death of patients. Nothing important or anything.

Pretty much this. I have made contacts over the years and "done well" for myself. But never well enough to start a wealth avalanche of any kind.

But properly positioned, I can make a company $20m/yr (as can any solid developer with a little innovativeness). If I knew the right people, I'd be seeing a noticeable percent of that instead of just my "cog in the wheel" salary. But also, it's a matter of the roles. I've worked some roles where I don't make a company that kind of money. Not because of a skill gap. It was just a different dev job.

If I had a rich dad with the right friends, I'd be wealthy (probably making them richer). It took me over 10 years in the field to even become a senior, but I've worked for execs that were "just hired that way" in their 20's, with no better credentials than I had, but a different last name. Even if I do spectacularly, I'll still be 15 years behind them with less of a safety net and less leverage.

Last I read synthetic LAL was nowhere near scaleable. Bleeding Crabs is very expensive.

Do you consider giving blood to be torture?

Is the Red Cross a torture organization?

And don't bring up "consent". Horseshoe Crabs are incapable of consenting or not-consenting to anything because they don't have an advanced enough brain.

First off, this isn't testing. We know exactly what we need Horseshoe Crab blood for, and it's incredibly important.

Second, it's probably not torture. The worst-case-scenario level of discomfort from bleeding them is fairly low, like a human giving blood. And that (incorrectly) presupposes them having as advanced pain-sensing as humans. The actual death rate is the bigger issue, but we are talking about saving lives and the medical community is trying really hard to change the status quo on this. Covered below.

Third, what you're seeing in that picture saves thousands of lives per year. How much human suffering, how many human deaths, are you willing to accept to achieve those goals? What if one of those humans that has to suffer or die was your kid? There's no plant-based alternative to this process at this time.

Let me clarify this. Using horseshoe crabs for this purpose is VERY EXPENSIVE. It's only done because we don't have an alternative yet, and the process is necessary for modern medicine. There is plenty of research going into either making this process less expensive (which probably involves a lower death rate for crabs) or finding an entirely different process to achieve the same goals. But none has been found (well, except that they used to use rabbits for this. I don't know the details)

I can understand the desire to spare... um...shellfish some..uh.. pain I guess. But NOT at the expense of human life and suffering. That's just silly.

You wrote all that to just be wrong, what a waste of time

Oh look, you drew a picture where you're a Chad and I look stupid. You win.

Is it not common knowledge that TEA in Tea Party was commonly used as an acronym for Taxed Enough Already? That and a number of their other stances were just like I said they were.

Of course that's common knowledge. And it fits all-in with what I'm explaining. But it's also perfectly-tuned to be palatable by the mainstream Republican. That's why the old discussion between Libertarian and Tea that slowly turned into one part of the Libertarian side "melding" with it and the other absolutely hating it.... And then Left-Libertarianism slowly collapsed into a shell of what it used to be. And Right-Libertarianism just isn't what it used to be.

I met members of the Tea Party too when they were active in my area

Members or leadership? Tea is like Pro-Life. The members are preaching a very different thing (many very different things) than the leaders. There are established anti-tax groups in the GOP. When you can join two anti-tax groups, one with white hoods and one without them, taxes might not be your issuse.

They told me what they were in it for, and what they told me is as I described.

So they told you they were actually Rank and File moderate anti-tax Republicans and you believed them? So why be part of a fringe group that's endorsed by extremists if all you want is just what Noem wanted? He didn't need the KKK to back his message. He didn't need to go all-in anti-abortion or all-in anti-homosexuality.

And interestingly, I cited evidence of the "not in any way related to tax" part, and you kinda brushed that aside like it doesn't matter that Tea is primarily different from the GOP in extremism on non-tax-related issues. And the KKK endorsement.

EDIT: Just a thought. Maybe "I also talked to a couple members of the Tea party" isn't sufficient evidence to belittle an interlocutor and call them a 16 year older? One thing I'm not is ignorant about this topic. There may be a middleground whjere we can agree to disagree on things, but an idiot I am not. And you only make yourself look like one when you treat people that way.

EDIT2: Have a reference. Here's a book I found by a well-respected Professor explaining the Tea Party's KKK-like roots, concluding in part that racism is foundational to their ideologies.

EDIT3: This reference is innocent on its own, but repeats the Billionaires part of my description.

EDIT4: (this one is a gamble, since you'll really show true colors if you reject it), the NAACP reference page on the Tea Party with regards to racism. Kinda all on-board with what I've been saying.

So...are college professors, researchers, and the NAACP all 16 years old?

No he didnt what?

Didn't blanket-pardon people in prison for possession? Didn't order the stop of federal possession arrests? Didn't formally request the DEA change the ranking for Marijuanna?

Didn't shock me?

What didn't he do?

killing gays and owning people. No

The Tea Party has been rabidly anti-LGBTQ and historically pro-Confederate-Identity.

Yeah, there was a little hyperbole there. But not by very much.

I knew insiders in the early Tea movement (not leaders, but those with contact with them). They largely combined a few members of the ultra-wealthy with some of the fringe Libertarian elements. The whole goal was about manipulating politics for profit while giving one of the Third Parties with a lot of potential "a way in".

Deep down inside, I think some of the early Tea folks thought it would be a fair deal if they got richer by negotiating a deal between the Chomskys and the Pauls since deep down they wanted a lot of the same things.

But that wasn't enough. Chomsky and Paul didn't buy a majority when the Republicans were getting sick of Chomsky and Libertarians were getting sick of Paul. So they had to find another marginalized group that was "tired of gov't bullshit". The problem is, that marginalized group was the secular extremist. Proud Boys, KKK, UDC, etc.

No. I'm not 16. I was in college when Libertarians hit their early ceiling. The Libertarians were "tired of gov't bullshit". And I didn't like them, but I could look them in the eye and respect them. But Tea was never Libertarian. That's what they want you to think. Classic Libertarians would never support "States Rights" like Tea. You know why? They were "tired of gov't bullshit".

To be CRYSTAL clear. The Tea Party has always been reactionary and populist. Neither of those things jive with "tired of gov't bullshit".

Per Pew. 64% of Tea party members oppose gay marriage (they couch it as government growth, but they don't actually support dismantling CIS marriage or deregulating the things that gay marriage legally solves). 59% of Tea Party members support a federal ban on abortion (small gov't, YUP). 51% of Tea Party members want stronger border security. Members of Tea or Christian Conservative parties only disagree between 5% and 10% of the time.

The Tea Party never really had anything to do with being "tired of gov't bullshit".

And if I can say all that at "16 year old", boy wait till I hit 40...

NOTE: Yes I was exaggerating on slavery position. I've only seen one or two members of Tea defend it actively, but boy did they passively defend Confederate Identity for years.

I dunno. The crazy shit in Florida is that it's a clearly purple state with solid "liberal industry" (disney world, major colleges, etc) that finds itself SOMEHOW passing laws like it's Kentucky and being a bastion of Republican Criminal Bullshit.

Indiana isn't purple (pretty Red). It doesn't have as solid a "liberal industry". Sure, it wants to be Kentucky. One outta 3 :)