I have never once heard an elected democratic politician (or serious candidate) speak against the 2nd amendment or even allude to repealing it. The only conversation I have personally seen/heard surrounding "gun control" is all about background checks/red flag laws which are supported by the majority of democratic and republican voters in every poll I've seen. All of the so-called "anti2a" rhetoric comes from the right in the form of fear mongering. That is to say (with no intention of being condescending), maybe stop listening to what right wing news outlets and politicians say Democrat's are saying and just listen to what democrats are actually saying.. You might be surprised at how sensible their ideas actually are on this issue.
timmy_dean_sausage
You're dissenting in a thread about Christians hating drag. It's implied you're talking about drag. Further, blackface is a common dog whisle the alt-right uses to attempt to demonize drag.
I haven't mocked Christians in a very long time. Some people are mocking Christians, but the intent of the original performance, and the intent of this thread, is very clearly to mock people that USE Christianity as ammunition against people and things they don't like. Which is (obviously) an exclusionary act.. Which the Olympics is against, given that it exists to bring people with differences together... Hence, the performance..
No no, you don't get it. They don't like drag, and we should've known christian's don't like drag and wouldn't want to go to a drag show. So by us doing them anyways, knowing they won't be there, we're excluding them by not excluding them while they exclude themselves. We're the assholes y'all.
Since you bring up logic, the logical fallacy you're displaying is called the false equivalence fallacy. Blackface is outrageous because the purpose is to demonize and humiliate black people. The purpose of drag is to CELEBRATE freedom of feminine expression, regardless of sex/gender. One is inherently exclusive, while the other is inherently inclusive.
It seemed like you were referring to overall voting trends. I was referring specifically to the vote suppression of city dwellers due to the extreme gerrymandering that has historically happened in Texas. Glad we agree though.
That's just the loose buttholes of all the alt right cum dumbsters singing their saviors personal anthem
The people of Houston are. The people of the surrounding rural areas, who have actual voting power, are not.
Their formatting was dog dukey, but I was still able to parse what they were saying fairly easily. They're saying "good job judge Jackson. Too bad you won't be able to get a free house from insert evil billionaire here (/s)". While I agree with your sentiment, the way you go about pointing these things out can backfire, if done with a rude tone, such as the way you chose to do it. There you go; an unsolicited constructive criticism for an unsolicited constructive criticism. :)
Gross. You really shouldn't eat garbage..
Well, it's very meaningful to continue to support your emotional support corporations. They need us as much as we need them. That's why you need to buy the product, and the "continued use" package. They're not charging extra for standard things just to charge extra. It's about the continued closeness in your relationship with daddy Tesla.
I don't get how you don't get it. I mean that with no animosity of any kind. I'm genuinely curious when people talk about buying a house like it's a common sense option.
As a millennial in my early 30's, the only people I know my age that own a house are people with parents that essentially handed them a fully built life when they came of age. As in, paid for college, bought their first (or first few) cars, floated them after college, paid for their weddings, then paid half or the full deposit on their "starter" home. And that's not a specific person I have in mind. That's every friend I have who owns a house. Their parents had that kind of money. Every other person I know that doesn't have rich parents (I'm in this camp) is working themselves to the bone just to scrape by. After 16 years in the workforce, 14 of those years being in a highly niche (but terribly paid) tech role, I can barely afford to keep a car running doing all of the work myself, let alone scrape together an extra $200 to get a secured card so I can finally start building credit. My pay checks are already consumed by the time they hit my account, and there's a seemingly endless backlog of debt from decades of poverty. My parents are finally at a point were they can help their kids at times, but it's in small amounts and they can only help one or two of us at a time. But, they're boomers who might never retire, so even taking small loans from them feels bad. It's an incredibly disparaging state of existence. I'm leaving out a lot of details for the sake of not writing a novel, but, I'm not financially illiterate, and I'm not giving up. I've just accepted the bleakness of my reality while I slowly grind myself (hopefully) out of it over the next 2 to 3 decades.
I'm not trying to whine, or point out your privilege. What I'm saying is; this is my reality. One in which the concept of "extra money" you can put aside for smart investments is a nice delusion to entertain. The fact that people like you are out there wondering why someone our age wouldn't buy a house boggles my mind, but also shows a very stark contrast in the lives of working/povery-class people and middle class and up. That is a huge problem.
But that's just my perspective. As I said, I'm genuinely curious to hear yours. How are you in a position where buying a house is the obvious option when statistics show that is very much not the case for most people under 40?
Edit: spelling.
One party gets into power and throws shit everywhere. The other party gets into power and cleans as much shit as they can, but it's on the ceiling and seeping into the walls. They never get all of it. Often they only get a small amount of it. It's never the shit thrower's fault though. Both parties are covered in shit.