Exactly. Basically "I want to address your concerns, but it would be better addressed in the upcoming Q&A portion, so could you please hold your concerns until then? Thank you."
Thats what passes as "chaos" for Democrats, while MAGA Nazis are literally deliberately destroying the global economy for the benefit of Putin, and the world's Sociopathic Oligarchs.
That's Stephen "PeeWee Himmler" Miller.
You don't know that they haven't made that claim, just that the media hasnt reported it. Local media tend to be very pro-local police.
Besides, thats not the point. The cop who shot him claims he saw the kid point a gun at him, even though he was on the scene for only seconds before firing. I've seen the bodycam footage, and the kid was running, not aiming. That cop wasn't responding to the kid pointing the gun, he was responding to the other cops hollering that he had a gun, and he just started firing at a running suspect.
Bottom line: the kid stole an insured car, which was recovered. There was no reason to be killing anyone over that.
The fact is, BOTH sides are fully committed to nothing less than the total annihilation of the other side. They both support genocide, its just that Israel has more weapons and richer friends, so they are winning.
In reality, neither POLITICAL side deserves respect. Unfortunately, it is the innocents on both sides that feel the consequences the most.
Where does that put someone like me, who is pro-People, but anti-Both Political Sides?
I'm 100% convinced it definitely was a hoax. I was sure of it the moment it happened. I wasn't even surprised - "Oh, here we go! An 'assassination attempt?' Of course!"
Then his ear, which should have been nearly torn off, heals entirely in about 2 weeks?
AND they barely mention it, because they don't want anybody looking too closely at it, and realizing that they blew an innocent (okay, MAGA, so not that innocent) man's head off in front of his family. Someone, probably more than one, on their side is responsible for murder.
So?
Gambling is also big activity at Quark's, something that costs money, but can't be replicated. Also, real liquor, not Synthehol.
I get the feeling that replicated food is the equivalent of frozen dinners. Its edible, and for many people its good enough, but those with more discriminating palates occasionally want something real.
I decade ago, I would have thought it was impossible, too. I no longer believe that. There are people in our government who would love to nuke a blue city like Portland, just to prove how scary they are.
nobody ever changes their behavior on the strength of the evidence alone.
Simply not true, at all. People change behavior based on evidence all the time.
Critical Thinking requires a totally objective perspective, and emotion has no place in it.
The Scientific Method includes a step in which you state your Hypothesis - an educated guess, based on information you already know. There is nothing wrong with that, because it means you are already familiar the established science.
The issue comes when the experiment uncovers unexpected data and/or conclusions. The proper scientific response is to adjust, or even reject, the hypothesis based on the new data. Someone with good Critical Thinking Skills would have no problem doing that, because a subjective approach, coming up with a truthful conclusion, supported by the data, is always the objective.
Unfortunately, too many people have a personal desire to make their original hypothesis the truth, either because of their ego, or because they have some sort of personal or economic investment in that hypothesis, etc. These are people who are only using the promise of Critical Thinking to add credibility to their conclusions, when in reality, they were always looking to confirm their own bias.
And sometimes the research DOES confirm your hypothesis. That's not necessarily confirmation bias, as long as your hypothesis was always based on accepted scientific principles. Scientists often have a pretty good idea of the outcome of an experiment. A person looking for confirmation bias goes into an experiment hoping to prove their hypothesis correct, while a true scientist goes in hoping that something unexpected will happen, because that gives them something new and interesting to study.
Yes, it is. They use these "Wars" on issues to increase their control of the population. The "War on Drugs" encouraged the militarization of local police, the "War on Terror" encouraged the intrusive surveillance of citizens, the "War on Illegal Immigration" allows the president to invoke the Alien Enemies Act.
Characterizing these issues as "Wars" sends the message that they will go to extremes to achieve their oppressive objectives.
They've got a deal to send Latinos to El Salvador, and now they need a place to send the blacks. They'll probably cut a deal with North Korea to send Asians to them.
American whites will be sent to the new 30,000 bed concentration camp currently being built in Guantanamo Bay, out of the view of the media and courts.