WorldWideLem

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would it matter? If they died living well according to Jesus's teachings they'd be rewarded in heaven. Their mortal death would be inconsequential.

That said, they could probably survive as many homeless do through donations and begging.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

It doesn't necessarily have to, but then you have someone like Trisha Cotham in NC who switched parties to give the GOP a veto-proof majority and has been voting with them in lockstep ever since.

If they weren't planning on acting as Republicans they could just as easily become independents.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

"Person we hired to say things says the thing" more at 11.

Really irresponsible reporting, to be honest.

[–] [email protected] 62 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I was interested in it but at the end of the day Dorsey got Twitter into its initially mediocre state, and he's endorsed RFK Jr. as well as Musk's purchase of Twitter. So should I really expect it to be any better? I'll keep an eye on it but my expectations aren't terribly high.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The goal isn't to create successful states, it's to create politically safe states. Doesn't matter if the state crumbles as long as that crumble is red.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

This principle exists to shield the people from their government. It is not intended to be (and has never been) a protection for someone's social status or reputation.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

The real question is how much would I accept in payment to use Twitter. It's probably not a lot, but it surely is not negative.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't think it's that simple. Heinous allegations can make that business relationship untenable. YouTube has an image to protect as well as other partnerships to maintain. There are people (not just wealthy executives) whose livelihood relies on those things,.

If a person's reputation, fair or not, creates a risk to those things, why should YouTube be forced to assume that risk on their behalf?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

The President can do plenty, they just can't do everything and that's a good thing. Trump did a lot of damage in his short time in office, but he could have done a lot more without the balance of power between branches of government in the US system.

That said, right now the gridlock is because the House of Representatives has a Republican majority. They're the ruling party in that house, and you need that house to do a lot of things. They're the party with "the most seats" while the Democrats have the slimmest of majorities in the Senate.

[–] [email protected] 76 points 1 year ago

Not just US interests, but European and Ukrainian interests as well. There was a multi-national effort to remove Shokin. You think Joe Biden orchestrated all of that to get his son a cushy board membership? It's laughable.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago

"If you work for part of the day you still get the day off" is certainly an...interesting perspective.

 

Somehow this is the only country on earth where this seems to happen. When talking about shootings involving guns, okay, fine, the US is certainly an outlier there, but every country has cars and police.

This is murder.

 
 
view more: next ›