SpaceCowboy

Yup. I think it's fair to say someone driving a gas guzzler SUV needs to make a little more effort to help with global warming... get an EV or better yet, take transit.

But with electrical stuff, there exists green power that's cheaper than the alternatives, it's the industry's fault for not making effort on that. I'm not the fucking power company.

It's gotta be a shared responsibility on this instead of finger pointing. I'm taking transit and fighting tooth and nail against my employer's stupid RTO policies (while looking for a job elsewhere). I'm doing my part on the things I can control and I expect industry to do the same.

Keep telling yourself that Americans aren't the weirdos of the world LOL.

Fallacious reasoning. I could also reference Stalin, breadlines, and the fact that the greatest famines in human history were the result of the authoritarian nature of socialism.

We could discuss the pros and cons of specific policies but instead the "socialist" kool-aid drinkers just tend to rant about capitalism = bad and therefore socialism = good without any grasp of any nuance or willing to do any critical thinking.

For example, with ethanol growing corn pulls carbon out of the air, burning the ethanol of course returns it back. It's carbon neutral, which is significant because Global Warming is a real thing. Pulling oil from the ground and burning it is obviously not carbon neutral. Ethanol is a much better fuel than burning oil.

Amazon was facing an anti-trust lawsuit: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/ftc-sues-amazon-illegally-maintaining-monopoly-power

But something has changed in the last year, so now it's drill, baby drill and corporations like Amazon can bribe the government to look the other way on their anti-competitive practices.

You've probably been convinced "both sides are the same" because that is the belief of your group. But it's in the the nature of cult behaviour to deny reality to conform to the group. Which is what the phrase "drinking the koolaid" is in reference to.

Thinking everything is a "hellscape" and only those in your group are enlightened enough to see a better way (those outside the group are "ignorant") is what most people refer to as "drinking the koolaid".

Modern "socialism" is at best a grift, at worst a cult.

Finding common cause with an enemy of your own country is treason. Nazis are a political group of another country our country went to war with. Canada won and the Nazis lost. The fact the war was a long time ago doesn't change much, they're simply finding common cause with losers from another country.

So they are treasonous losers.

They added chromecast to mine this year which has been useful.

Yeah, the enemy of my enemy is still a fucking asshole :P

I've met many people that have killed people. I didn't think that was all that unusual. I know for sure two people I've met had killed people and there's a whole bunch more that range from maybe to probably.

Bullshit. The number one cause of antisemitism is hateful assholes.

You are showing the abuser mentality by saying it's someone else's fault that abuse happens.

Stop rationalizing hatred. You're part of the problem.

Blowing up boats without Congressional approval, ie. Authorization of Use of Military Force violates the US Constitution.

Executing a second strike on people that are in the water violates international law (it's a war crime) and US military law. And the US Constitution.

Boarding a ship that you have an arrest warrant on is completely legal. If this happened without the strikes that preceded it, it probably wouldn't make the news.

This is the action they want to be asked a lot of questions about, because this action was actually legal. They do not want people asking about the second strike back in September, since that was a war crime. They know people have non-existent memories now, so if they do an action that's legal (but maybe controversial) they can make people forget the illegal action in the past. So by trying to make controversy about the thing they want to be asked questions about, you're actually doing exactly what they want.

The response they don't want is "yeah sure, you arrested a ship, whatever... but what about that second strike?"

Real journalists get the quote and print the quote and let the reader think for themselves what they think about what the person said.

I guess you prefer "alt media" that just straight up tells you how to think? Or maybe an algorithm that just gives you content that always agrees with how you feel?