Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)T
Posts
1
Comments
933
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • This isn't a hypothetical. We had literacy tests in the USA and they were designed to discriminate against minorities and newly freed slaves. And we have current politicians in power passing ID requirements with the explicit intention of preventing minorities, immigrants, and people of lower socioeconomic status from voting.

    My examples were hyperbolic, but the underlying phenomenon already happens every single day. How many districts are gereymandered? How many polling places have been closed to limit voting in specific areas? Disenfranchisement is already part of the battle, and we the people are not winning it at the moment.

  • The trouble is that barriers to voting will always be manipulated by the people in charge to exclude specific people. In the case of the USA, they are used by far right mouth breathers to exclude their neighbors on the basis of the color of their skin.

    We see it with ID laws already, but imagine if the Republicans could write exam questions to select who is patriotic enough to vote. They would include questions like "Name the Confederate hero who selflessly defended his state from Northern aggression" or "Which Nascar team has the fastest pit time?" or "Under penalty of perjury, write down the names of all the illegal immigrants you know of residing in your community."

    That's why literacy tests for voting were ruled unconstitutional.

  • As I understand it, rapid flood waters will likely crush you to death with debris, or you'll get stuck underwater. A vest won't save you from either of those.

    But if you have one, wear it. Swimming ability won't help you if you're unconscious or exhausted. Ideally, you stay out of the water, but if you can't, you'll be better off with a life jacket on.

  • SHE'S GETTING A FUCKING PARDON!!!

  • That depends on how you play the game. Stopping corruption begins with calling it out and demanding it end. You can't cower in the corner because you "lack the votes" or because public opinion isn't behind you. Doing what is right means you will lose a lot of battles, but you're always fighting.

  • The short answer is gerrymandering California, but you don't stop corruption with equal and opposite corruption. I'm afraid we don't have an opposition party willing to do what is necessary to actually fight corruption.

  • "Legal" is just a label the people in power put on the things they want to do. We don't have a functioning justice system, and I'm not certain we ever did.

  • I believe the original quote was "Reality has a liberal bias." It's attributed to Stephen Colbert, but I believe he was quoting someone else, because I remember using the quote in a term paper in high school back in the 90s.

  • Actually this is pretty upsetting, because we know he wants to distract everyone, and we know he has essentially unlimited authority with the corrupt SCOTUS in his corner and the GOP majority in congress. We know that he is a sociopath, and does not give a shit about literally anyone or anything except himself.

    So what would an all-powerful narcissist do to distract the public from his crimes? Or, better question, what wouldn't he do?

  • I believe Trump and Epstein were friends, and that Trump is a rapist, and that Trump knew Epstein was trafficking and raping children, because those are all things Trump has admitted or confirmed out loud into a microphone on camera. I don't need additional proof of any of those things, but I would not be surprised to learn that it exists in the Epstein files.

    Trump also denied all of those things, but that's not he said/she said where you have to present both sides as though they are equal. A man who constantly changes his story is not a credible source of information, and his denials can be dismissed outright.

  • Politicians lie. People seeking positions of power and influence should be treated with heavy skepticism and scrutiny. Whether they are ideologues or charlatans, their motivations should be measured against their actions. Some ideologues may hide their extremism to gain power. Some charlatans may hide their indifference to gain power. But anyone who's actions don't match their promises shouldn't earn your vote, regardless of whether they wear your colors or not.

  • Except the accusation came from another celebrity, and started a very long time before the lawsuit. Going public hurt the accusers career, and after Rapp lost his court case, 14 other victims came forward. They all described, independently, the same pattern of behavior.

  • Which he wouldn't have done at all if there had been no "incident."

  • Does someone in the room with Trump understand that California provides more federal taxes than they receive? A high-speed rail line would almost certainly pay for itself ten times over.

  • Spacey was disingenuous at best, and was trying to clear his conscience and avoid self-incrimination at the same time.

  • Different circumstances and different crimes, and especially different victims.

    Also, Weinstein and Cosby were openly assaulting women for decades. They victimized hundreds of women, and Cosby isn't even in jail anymore.

  • Right, like if I were on a jury, I don't know how I would vote given the evidence against him. But his reputation as a sleaze preceded the accusations. I wouldn't leave my kids alone with the guy.

  • The court found that it couldn't be proven to have happened. Did you ignore the part where Spacey apologized to Rapp for the "incident" before the lawsuit?

    Real fucking weird to go to bat to defend the reputation of a serial sexual predator, but do go on because we're learning a bit about you today.

  • When it comes to matters of judgement, I use my own. The courts don't have to be corrupt for them to fail sexual assault victims, but yes there is plenty of corruption, too.

    Are you suggesting economics don't affect putcomes in the courts? Are you suggesting that there is no corruption within the judicial system? Are you saying that sexual predators always go to jail for their crimes?