Where's the petri dish thread?

[ousdahl]

100 years from now, the way we presently treat the elderly, the imprisoned, and those who help make food available to us, will be among the greatest sources of the nation's moral embarrassment at our era.

<sigh> a sadly prescient post, imo.

I bear my share of the shame.

Unfortunately just about every 20-year chunk of our nation’s history is spent being embarrassed for how we treated blank 100 years ago. Sooner or later everyone will have their turn

100 years ago the blanks had no rights

[sdoyel]

[Deleted User 289]

No comment.

[Deleted User 289]

Priest shoots child!
With Holy Water.
Not too sure how I feel about it but I admit I smiled.

https://www.irishpost.com/news/priest-p ... _EaHzMtA88

[Sparko]

Demoted/replaced: HHS IG Grimm angered Trump after she released a report in March that said there were "severe shortages" of testing kits in the US, "widespread shortages" of masks and other personal protective equipment at hospitals across the country, and significant delays in getting coronavirus test results. The deficits hampered the US's ability to respond effectively to the coronavirus outbreak and curb its spread, the report found.

[imzcount]

Finally! Realizing Big Government has this all wrong!

[DCHawk1]

Finally! Realizing Big Government has this all wrong!

I'd go somewhere else.

[DCHawk1]

Huh.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cuomo-gave-i ... soc_trk=fb

[Deleted User 289]

Finally! Realizing Big Government has this all wrong!

"Big Government" has it all wrong and yet isn't the store doing exactly at least one of the things you are finding fault in Big Government for doing?

[Shirley]

Huh.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cuomo-gave-i ... soc_trk=fb

smh

Yet another argument for getting the money out of politics.

[Shirley]

If any of you are using insulin to treat a disease for which it's actually indicated, you might want to call your doctor and ask them to help you stock up on it before the rush. Because



Dr. Trump is opining on yet another medication he knows less than nothing about:

(And, in the process, he's announcing price controls, because "conservative" republican.)

[jfish26]

Huh.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cuomo-gave-i ... soc_trk=fb

smh

Yet another argument for getting the money out of politics.

But then there's this mobius strip (of, I acknowledge, overgeneralization):

The money in politics is in large part due to Citizens United, in which the Supreme Court found that the First Amendment prohibits the government from limiting corporate funding of "independent" super-PACs.

In other words, corporations are entitled to free speech protections.

Yesterday, Twitter exercised its free speech by fact-checking Trump.

Trump, wrongly, believes he has a right to free speech on Twitter. This would be just as wrong as me saying I have a right to speech on here; I do not.

So: money in politics is good, but the way you get there (corporate free speech) is bad. And also, the first amendment means some people can say what they want on any medium, but others can't.

Of course, I've now spent five minutes more on analyzing and unpacking these issues than Trump has in digesting the Constitution. So joke's on me I guess.

[jfish26]

If any of you are using insulin to treat a disease for which it's actually indicated, you might want to call your doctor and ask them to help you stock up on it before the rush. Because



Dr. Trump is opining on yet another medication he knows less than nothing about:

(And, in the process, he's announcing price controls, because "conservative" republican.)

He is flailing. "Lower prescription drug prices" is just a chord he plays, not unlike "blame Obama" and "people that don't look like me are bad" and "respect the flag," and so on and so forth.

His polling numbers are shit. He knows the GOP senators are smarter and savvier than he is, and will cut bait in a hot second if they think their majority is threatened.

[Deleted User 89]

wait, why is money in politics good?

[Shirley]

Huh.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cuomo-gave-i ... soc_trk=fb

smh

Yet another argument for getting the money out of politics.

But then there's this mobius strip (of, I acknowledge, overgeneralization):

The money in politics is in large part due to Citizens United, in which the Supreme Court found that the First Amendment prohibits the government from limiting corporate funding of "independent" super-PACs.

In other words, corporations are entitled to free speech protections.

Yesterday, Twitter exercised its free speech by fact-checking Trump.

Trump, wrongly, believes he has a right to free speech on Twitter. This would be just as wrong as me saying I have a right to speech on here; I do not.

So: money in politics is good, but the way you get there (corporate free speech) is bad. And also, the first amendment means some people can say what they want on any medium, but others can't.

Of course, I've now spent five minutes more on analyzing and unpacking these issues than Trump has in digesting the Constitution. So joke's on me I guess.

It's hard to accept money as free speech, and, the wickets on the way to removing money from politics are many, and sticky. Unfortunately, any hope that public pressure could discourage politicians by the appearance of potential conflicts of interest involved in accepting large corporate or private donations is unrealistic in this day and age, but more transparency would help.

[CrimsonNBlue]

So: money in politics is good, but the way you get there (corporate free speech) is bad. And also, the first amendment means some people can say what they want on any medium, but others can't.

Of course, I've now spent five minutes more on analyzing and unpacking these issues than Trump has in digesting the Constitution. So joke's on me I guess.

I'm not by any means calling Trump a constitutional scholar, but I do believe he knows what he was doing with that tweet and does not necessarily believe Twitter is infringing on his 1A rights.

[Shirley]

So: money in politics is good, but the way you get there (corporate free speech) is bad. And also, the first amendment means some people can say what they want on any medium, but others can't.

Of course, I've now spent five minutes more on analyzing and unpacking these issues than Trump has in digesting the Constitution. So joke's on me I guess.

I'm not by any means calling Trump a constitutional scholar, but I do believe he knows what he was doing with that tweet and does not necessarily believe Twitter is infringing on his 1A rights.

^^^

It's just another shiny object. More of his grievance white politics: "Look how the elites are holding us down!"

(Which is not to say that Hunter Biden shouldn't go to prison for the rest of his life.)

#obamagate

[ousdahl]

perhaps also worth noting is that, despite the myriad of pleas to do so sooner, this is Twitter's first time ever of issuing a fact check warning against potus.

[Shirley]

perhaps also worth noting is that, despite the myriad of pleas to do so sooner, this is Twitter's first time ever of issuing a fact check warning against potus.

Trump is twitter's cash cow, so I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision because


A twitter that's not on fire isn't news.

And, coincidentally, it's on fire again, now.

[DCHawk1]

perhaps also worth noting is that, despite the myriad of pleas to do so sooner, this is Twitter's first time ever of issuing a fact check warning against potus.

So fucking dumb.

Everything NOT fact-checked now is, by the new standards, true.