iNow

It’s hard to disagree with this and I’m confident pretty much every here agrees, except for maybe the implicit suggestion that members posting here to this thread lack willingness to compromise… or vote for candidates specifically bc they refuse to compromise like we see so often in the MAGA crowd. I’m reminded of a political cartoon I saw a while back… P1: Can I burn your house down? P2: No. P1: What about just the 2nd floor? P2: No. P1: Fine, okay… I’ll only burn your kitchen then. P2: No. P1: How about the porch and your back shed? P2: No. P1: You’re refusing to compromise!!! You’re the entire reason everyone hates politics! Some of us who enjoy maple syrup a lot look at this and think P2 is the problem… after all, they aren’t compromising. Isn’t it obvious?! Others of us, however, look at this in context and recognize that P1 is the problem bc they are being unreasonable with their demands and trying to burn things down. Would it be better if there weren’t ONLY two parties and not every square peg was shoehorned into round holes for every single issue in US politics? Yes!!! Abso-effing-lutely! Of COURSE that would be better, but it’s not at all a realistic option on the table from which we can choose right now in the moment. It’s pie in the sky we can’t eat today… maybe in the future, but not in this instant. One may as well be saying pink unicorns would be better senators. It has roughly the same likelihood of being realized. Politics is the art of the possible… We need to stop focusing on what’s not today possible and we need to stop laying the blame for the dysfunction at the feet of P2 who’s simply saying “No, you may NOT burn down my house. Let’s instead build new houses together with each other’s help.”

Unfortunately, one spouse keeps cheating (and I mean that with all of its various meanings) and calling their partner a whore.

I vote. I call and write to those who win. I actively advocate and work to gather support wherever I can. About the only thing I haven’t done is run for office myself, mostly bc it would cost a lot of money, a lot of integrity, and I would lose. What more do you have in mind?

We are humans. That is our race. All other differences can be described by historical cultural differences for attraction and access to mates across regions and families. If Great Danes are not a different species from Chihuahuas, then neither are humans from different regions who happen to have slightly different skin tones.

Crime is a proxy for race in most GOP elections. Urban and inner city are similar. They speak of crime and how they’re the party of crime prevention all while supporting criminals in their ranks. Abusers and pedophiles. Harassers. Crooks. Thrives. Liars. Criminals with white collars and with blue. They punish private businesses and free enterprises for expressing their free speech. They even support obvious insurrectionists who (go figure) are the undisputed leader of their party trying to overthrow free and fair elections and actively working to subvert the constitution itself. Republicans aren’t tough on crime, they’re welcoming of it. They just gaslight us about it at every chance they get bc they know it plays well with those who are paying only peripheral attention.

There are basically 3 groups of people on this topic: 1. Those who know what Trump et.al did was wrong and don't want it to ever happen again 2. Those who know what Trump et.al did was wrong and are totally fine with that / ready to let it repeat and recur so long as their "team" wins 3. Those who are too busy with life and bills and putting food on the table to pay much attention to any of this / those who for whatever reason still don't know enough to have an opinion one way or the other It's really that 3rd group where change will happen on this... if change happens at all.

Next ones will be Monday then Wednesday morning US time, and there will be a few more now through July. I believe 5 in total, but am not certain

It’s a congressional hearing. That’s sorta how they go, but y’all are tuning in thinking it’s another episode of America’s Got Treason.

I prefer getting info from first sources. Doesn’t matter. It’s over for now. Your apathy and lack of interest is the very inertia on this topic they’re seeking to dislodge by doing it this way.

You used the past tense “watched.” It’s still on. And now 5 minutes later they’ve adjourned.

It began an hour and fifteen minutes ago. Is being aired live on all major US networks, except Fox

At least you’re consistent in evading direct questions.

It's okay if you often disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.

Nah. Thx tho

Same is true within religions. Ask 10 people what god is and you’ll get 10 different answers in reply, mostly because all those who believe in god(s) tend to conjure them in their own image.

Maybe. Maybe not. These events also don’t occur in a vacuum. Downstream consequences come with any choice. Like China could open a parallel front with Taiwan while our forces are deployed elsewhere pushing back on Russia. North Korea could open a front against their southern neighbors or Japan. Iran could lob missiles into Israel, or ad infinitum. These are the decisions with which leaders find themselves grappling the world over.

Best I can tell, that was never a possibility worthy of either concern or consideration.

I wasn’t exactly awaiting your permission. On another note, if you don’t want to eat bananas, you don’t have to. This has a weight roughly equivalent to your statement quoted here.

Likelier than I’d like, but it’s military involvement on domestic soils across multiple nations that seem the more near term possibility, IMO.

You might not be doing it as your primary intent…

Yes, some do argue that, and their argument is wrong. Sure, a fractional handful might reach for a knife instead of a gun, but the body count after would be far lower. Also, this argument ignores basic human psychology. The gun tends to make impulse decisions easier. It removes friction from the process and thus makes it more probable. Something that would’ve been little more than a passing ephemeral thought transforms instead into a tragic reality far more frequently once a gun is merely present or nearby amd accessible. Some also argue that the gun is just a tool. Well, okay, but some jobs take far longer or never get completed at all as a direct result of lacking the “right tool for the job.”

No, I know. I more meant they won’t be the only common people rising up against those in power. Of all this mess in current form, it’s the certain global starvation and drought issues coming as a direct result of this illegal occupation that concern me most. Poquito. Gravemente

I’d heard snippets, but not yet watched that in its entirety. Thanks for sharing.

It had potential, but it didn’t move beyond that point. It started there with his very first non-OP reply.

Okay, but you said she admitted in court that she abused him. It’s abundantly clear that you’ve followed this case much more closely than nearly everyone else here, combined. No doubt, We’re asking to benefit from your greater knowledge and have you share where/when in court she actually did admit this? It seems to many others here that she did NOT in fact admit this, and my hope is that you’ll stop lashing out like a petulant child, stop calling people names, and with your next post provide evidence of her doing this or a transcript which demonstrates that we’re mistaken in our current belief that she admitted no such thing. Koti, you’re the only one ranting in this thread.