bostonbananarama @ bostonbananarama @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

385

Joined

2 yr. ago

More like "I have been exploiting my child for so long, why would I stop now".

So incredibly disturbing.

In a normal civil case once judgment has entered you receive an execution, which allows you to seize property in the state.

In order to seize property in another state you would have to domesticate the judgment in the new state, then get an execution from that state to seize property. Domestication of a judgment is typically straightforward and simple, but it depends upon the state, some are more arduous than others.

The included insult, however mild, must be seen as an attempt to denigrate QUESTIONING the police

No it doesn't. That's ridiculous to insist it must be viewed in that manner. That's your reductionist view.

He might have not meant it that way,

So he may not have meant it that way, but we must view it that way? Absolutely insane take.

but even then it's an example of the moderate being the true enemy of the oppressed. So it's either a tactic, siding with a fascist system or at best inconsiderate.

Here's the real issue, you've created a litmus test that no one is pure enough to meet. Rather than accepting allies for trans rights, you want to push them away. If they aren't as reactionary and reductionist as you then they must be the enemy. Truly alarming. You're the problem, you allow the "moderates" (as you call them), who might otherwise support trans rights to oppose them by pushing them out and calling them transphobic.

Here's my issue, when you call someone a transphobe (or racist, or pedophile, etc) when they haven't actually been transphobic, you water down the meaning. It just becomes a thing you say that lost it's meaning, rather than the big deal it is.

that the police aren't even going to consider whether or not a crime was committed until after they get the toxicology report, despite knowing that the person in question was assaulted like the day before.

Why would they before they finish investigating? What's the charge? Simple assault, assault and battery, manslaughter, negligent homicide, second degree murder? If you don't have all the facts you can't charge them properly.

Maybe the police have an interest in burying the charges, but if you don't know that, you shouldn't claim it. Because the best way to secure a conviction is to thoroughly investigate first, then bring charges once the information has been gathered. Anything else is laying the groundwork for a defense attorney.

Like the cops, focusing on the toxicology report alone is an easy way to erase everything else about what happened. Having a toxicology done isn't transphobic, but focusing only on that and when it comes back clean, ruling it as a freak accident and not following up on the assault? That would be transphobic as hell

Ok, agreed. But that hasn't happened yet. Reacting to something that hasn't happened just allows other people to ignore you and your concerns about trans rights. I would caution against that approach. If they don't take action once the info is in, or blame the victim, then you get mad as hell. Best of luck!

Can you point out what that person said that was transphobic? From the reply it just seems like that they were pointing out that a toxicology report is something that's fairly routine. What did I miss?

I want you to tell me how, so I blocked you!

Eisenhower was always seen as aloof, sort of a figurehead, during his presidency. However, years after, once his papers were made public, a much different view of Eisenhower started to take shape. He was seen more as a hands-on leader. I believe he was in the 15-20th range in the 80s, but by 2000 was up to 9th, and recently up to 5th (8th in current poll).

Here's a preview of a journal article that touches on it a bit.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1901942

Honestly, if you talk to most presidential historians they will tell you that you need about 20 years to pass before you can accurately assess a president. There's too many unknowns that will come to light only years or decades after a term ends, Eisenhower is a great example of this. So these rankings are likely to change over the years.

Although, having seen Trump's predilection for fraud, decit, and self-serving, I'd be shocked if he rebounds as more information comes out.

you're failing to take into account how many people are told and believe that since Texas is a red state that what they're doing doesn't matter. That breeds a group of apathetic folks.

This is why Dems need to do more groundwork, knock on doors and get out the vote drives. Need to increase turnout numbers.

Everything is easy if you're not the one doing it. If you can't share the secret of how you've personally done what you call easy then maybe you shouldn't assume we're just not doing it

This is where reading comprehension really helps. If district A used to be 75% Republican and district B was 40% Republican before gerrymandering, and after gerrymandering district A is 55% Republican and District B is 60% Republican, guess what math tells us? It is now easier to flip District A! You don't need to turnout 50,000 Dems (as an example), maybe now you only need to turnout an additional 10,000. Gerrymandering makes safe districts much closer to contested districts.

I'm not trying to be rude, but come show me how YOU do it or go fuck yourself.

Seems like you are trying to be rude. But you're saying that gerrymandering affects statewide races, so I can't possibly care about rudeness from a moron with poor reading comprehension.

Texas is a cesspool of Republican shit stains. Your school boards routinely try to make textbooks anti-science and anti-history. Your AG has been under indictment for about a decade. And now your state is stripping women of their rights to bodily autonomy. That's just scratching the surface of the fuckery, I haven't even mentioned your electric grid or plans at secession.

If after all that you're too lazy or apathetic to vote, and to organize others to vote, then yes, you're incredibly stupid and you deserve what you've got.

Speaking of gerrymandering, a lot of folks don't realize that it also affects statewide offices like US senators or the governor because it makes people like me feel like our votes don't matter.

This is incredibly stupid. Not trying to be rude, but need to be honest. First of all, statewide elections aren't actually affected by gerrymandering, which you obviously know, so I'm not sure why you all would be discouraged from voting for statewide offices.

More importantly, gerrymandering is accomplished by diluting super majority districts with the opposing party from neighboring districts. This makes the formerly supermajority District much easier to flip, along with the previously leaning minority District. So organize and get out the vote, and you can flip multiple districts.

Capitalism is self regulating

It most certainly is not. The bargaining power of a corporation and individual worker are not the same. It's why labor unions exist. Additionally governments should regulate commerce for the benefit of everyone.

Lastly, please review and understand the differences between your and you're, as well as their, there, and they're. Absolutely frustrating trying to read what you wrote.

I'm not the person you were talking to, but the last 30 years have been moronic off the cuff ideas that were poorly executed. It looked a lot like his presidency. Trans service member ban by tweet, banning Muslims from 7 countries on a whim, etc. No reason to think those weren't his ideas, as they're both stupid and bigoted, they fit nicely within his wheelhouse.

But more importantly, you don't get to claim that he has no hand is developing policies and then ask others to prove you wrong. You made the claim, you have the burden on supporting it or making clear that it's merely speculation.

come up with a solution

But not just a bandaid solution... probably something more final.

Wait...are you suggesting we solve a problem? Or even two problems simultaneously? That's absurd! We need tax cuts, deregulation, and corporate bailouts....I may not know the problem, but I know the solution. /s

Multi-party, new party...maybe...but single party, I'm not sure I've heard anyone advocate for that, certainly not a lot of people.

I just know it happened. Maybe it's not crystals forming in the brain, but that does happen, which was the point of my comment.

For something that totally happens, Google is completely unaware of it. Why can't you just accept you're wrong? Sounds like you confused what you heard.

LSD is one of the most potent, mood-changing chemicals. It is manufactured from lysergic acid, which is found in the ergot fungus that grows on rye and other grains. It is produced in crystal form in illegal laboratories, mainly in the United States. These crystals are converted to a liquid for distribution.

Created as a crystal, not crystals in the brain, seems like the most likely explanation.

She’s a pretty amazing song writer, which is really uncommon for pop stars.

Just because you make pizza, doesn't mean you don't make great pizza. I'm not saying she's out here making $0.99 Mr. P's Pizzas ("fabulous" in their own right).

Then you also have to consider that she’s Gen Z, has been doing this for 18 years, and has managed to stay fairly relevant most of that time.

I've considered it, but it's not true. She may appeal to Gen Z but she was born in '89, making her dead center of being a millennial.

I've never said she's bad, but if you've ever listened to more complex music, her's isn't that. She's great at what she does, and seemingly smart and levelheaded, and that's fantastic. But to say her songs are masterpieces that are like beautifully woven tapestry of lyrics and music, I don't see it. And, in all fairness, if they were, she'd probably have a fan base 95% smaller.

She's smart and not lazy. A lot of people get fame and money and massively shift their focus. Longevity is probably the toughest part, not going crazy, and remaining relatable to young people while simultaneously having millions of dollars.

Think of a dish made by a world class chef, that food is probably exquisitely crafted using unique and fresh ingredients. There probably aren't that many people out there who truly appreciate it, and probably a lot who just think it's weird.

Now think of pizza. It's relatively cheap and broadly appealing. It wouldn't be put in the same class as the food prepared by the chef, but a lot more of it gets consumed.

Taylor Swift is talented, pretty, affable, has a superior work ethic, and makes music that's catchy and easily digestible. Like pizza, her music appeals to the broadest group of people.

Have you considered inserting disc 2?