iNow

Three days ago: Then this was updated last 18 days ago: I’d say another update to the Russia section is in order. * Section update needed

Beastie Boys

Yeah, books are different from vaccines, but with neither is banning them equivalent to ignoring them. I’m scratching my head a bit at why this even needs explaining

Maybe I can frame the query a new way: If those (or other similarly amazing song writers alive or dead) were to write a new piece about democracy in the form they find most ideal, what lyrics would be included? What words and concepts would fill the versus, choruses, and bridges? We have lots of good judges like that, even some who were put on the bench by ungood appointers. What mechanism could we design to address the ungood judges when they’re found? I believe this is done as a type of impeachment nowadays.

no

AFAIK, ignoring a book is different from banning one

This should be played following each time Trump speaks, especially to large crowds:

I’m not either. I wrote and deleted and wrote and deleted a few times. This isn’t entirely on topic nor a good reply to your excellent comment, but it at least touches on some themes that have been in the aether for me. Voting is secure, but voters minds are not. The electorate has been hacked. I believe the “malware” involves telling more stories about what “better” looks like / could look like… then singing and repeating those stories to EVERYONE within earshot. Even the most blinkered fools among us cemented into echo chambers of their own making can still listen to and hear and engage with a song. Songs that don’t just get sung, but felt. Deep inside. Songs that loosen dormant childhoods and dreams past their Sell By dates. And if sung right and about the right things, those blinkered fools may hear new sounds that break through their chamber of echos. If the pictures we paint with the brush of ideas happens to pop just right, then they might even start tapping their foot along with us, along to the beat of our songs… but even if the songs are not very good, we need to do more singing with each other, proverbially and publicly. We need to describe how the future can be better, how we truly can make “better” a reality if we agree enough is enough, join hands, and choose to share a common purpose. We need to envision how truly far we can go if we’d simply stop flinging feces and actively choose instead to work, sing, and dance… together. tl;dr: Change hearts and minds. Grow the numbers. Organize. Make it happen. It’s been working for the bad guys, and there are fewer of them than us.

Yep, agree with that

Right, those who don't so easily or often fall into the "not affluent enough" category.

Not everyone who wanted to was affluent enough to even have this as an option...

One is passive and lets them continue on unabated and without pressure or influence while the other is active and seeks to halt all activities and remove them from existence entirely

I get the very real sense that he only drinks Two Buck Chuck and NyQuil.

They're not mutually exclusive in this regard. See also: Busch Light, Natty Light, and other similar AB InBev franken-stein fillers.

The clear issue here is the mistake you've made by calling Coors Light a "beer." It's better referred to as beer adjacent swill water. /BeerNerdShade

That’s a helpful insight

You misspelled inspired. ✌️ Just musing…

You know how sometimes we find shapes when looking upward into the clouds and those shapes tend to anchor around and get derived from whatever idea just happened to be percolating around in our heads that day? How maybe we had an encounter with a cat that morning, so see one (or a dog) now when glancing skyward? Well, for some of us, thoughts of violent insurrection and threats of extermination are being encountered far more frequently now and… like the encounter with a cat cited above… that becomes what we see upon looking into those same clouds (storm clouds?). Our minds are primed to find it. My point is really just that we all give our own meanings to words and exchanges all of the time. It’s also uncommon… even here at SFN… when the word “anarchy” comes up to then have to clarify to which subtype of anarchy we’re referring, but certainly not unwelcome. Hard to measure, but one proposed benefit of ranked choice / preferential voting is that it alters candidate behavior. Good for voters who don’t feel like they’re wasting their vote and can vote their heart, but also good for which candidates get elevated, namely more moderate ones. Politicians all certainly want to be everyone voters First choice, but to be someone’s 2nd or even 3rd choice requires that candidate not be too extreme nor too far outside of the mainstream. This approach to voting tends to make more moderate candidates more likely to breakaway from the pack and ultimately to win by simply appealing to a larger portion of the population (as well they should in any system audacious enough to wave Democracy as it’s banner). Suspect you already knew this, but perhaps others reading didn’t and I enjoyed sharing it so thanks for the springboard either way.

More like shooting at old soda bottles on a stump

Agreed

Potato

If you did, then we can add liar to the list of valid descriptors of you (alongside time wasting asshat).

You misspelled delusion again.

Look. Here’s a picture of a refrigerator. I solved global warming!