GoddessNoAi

I'm quite sure you don't understand how it works.

Just setting up plausible deniability against accusations of helping trump.

What's funny is that i interpreted the changes shown in the meme as making it softer on Israel. First edit removes the reference to the school, second edit changes the number of people killed from a big number "over 100" to a fuzzy amount "scores" that is easier to underestimate.

It's since added that information back in, but in the meme it looks like it's trying to make Israel look as not-bad as possible.

I'm not deluding myself about anything. The choice isn't "vote for or against genocide" it's "act to get less or more genocide". It's not a false dichotomy; if you're not voting to defeat Trump, then you're acting to get more genocide.

By not acting to defeat Trump, you're enabling genocide more than Biden ever has.

"I'd rather let someone who actively, aggressively advocates, enables, and wants genocide domestically and abroad to win the presidency, over voting for somebody who passively enables genocide to happen abroad because actively trying to stop it could ignite WWIII" is still a bad take.

It's baffling and hypocritical.

Google WPATH Standards of Care and read that document for the truth. It's the actual rules that doctors are supposed to follow for treating trans people.

Until you've read that, you can't have an informed opinion on the matter.

Women's sports are divided out so they can compete equally.

This isn't true at all. Women's leagues were created because men refused to let women play in the leagues that were already created. That's literally all there was to it.

“If nuclear war happens, we won’t be second in line pressing the button,”

Which means you'll be pressing the button first. Which means you're the one starting the nuclear war.

And the worst part is, I think that might actually be what me means.

You misunderstand. A librarian may not know if something is true or not, but they are educated on how to research something to find out if something is true or not. As you said, their job is to manage sources, which includes knowing with sources are reliable and which sources to look at for certain types of information.

The thing is, police and politicians don't care about getting correct results, they only care about results. An innocent person convicted is still "case closed" and "another criminal punished."

Politicians can be made to care by threatening their jobs, but the police still don't give a shit about catching the right person as long as they can put somebody behind bars by any means possible.

I'm their view, the experts are part of the problem and should be ignored.

He's also said that he regrets a lot of that. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I think it's important to note that the solution isn't to not remove the dams, it's to fucking nationalize the power companies.