Keep in mind, these are almost certain to be the same people who complain about how political everything is these days. What they mean is that they don’t want to see leftist/progressive memes, but they’re fine shifting the Overton widow to the right.
I don’t know; during the Bush Jr. Era, I would have agreed with you, but I think the powers that be have figured out that religion is more useful for creating wedge issues than actually governing.
If the goal is simply controlling the population, then oligarch-controlled media and social media seems to be perfectly adequate with just a little bit of religion to give the conservatives bad-faith plausible deniability when it comes to the racism, misogyny, and homophobia (both the politicians and the voters).
“Why should I change my name? He’s the one that sucks.”
~Michael Bolton, probably
seconded
If I’m being honest, I don’t expect to see a penny of social security. I’m making other arrangements wherever possible
I’m not an etymology expert, but I did see a few sources that all claimed scot came from a Scandinavian word “skat,” which was a redistributive tax (Source)
I do like your explanation, too, though. The other explanation I’ve heard a few times was that it was related to the Dred Scott case regarding an escaped slave who petitioned the Supreme Court in an attempt to gain his freedom (it didn’t work, though, so I’m not sure why people would claim that to be the origin of the phrase “Scott free” anyway)
Like, I’ve been saying it since he was accused, he could very well get off
Scottscot-free
FTFY. I agree with everything you’re saying; I just have this weird compulsion to correct misused homophones. A “scot” is an archaic word for a tax (unrelated to being of Scottish descent, AFAIK), so the term isn’t anything to do with a person named Scott. Pedantic, I know, but I really can’t help myself, so… Sorry? You’re welcome?
Either way, have a nice day.
As a college instructor, it’s difficult sometimes. The dumbest goddamn students I’ve ever had still manage to pass sometimes due to being friends with the right people or getting lucky when cheating in a way that I can’t necessarily prove. I can be 100% certain that someone cheated, but if I can’t objectively prove it, it’s really, really dangerous (to my career) to fail that student, especially when they are as connected and narcissistic as Trump.
Plus, lots of people take advantage of more inclusive accommodations and more forgiving grading or attendance policies to the point that sometimes they do pass despite knowing a tiny fraction of the material. I could eliminate a lot of that by making the tests harder and removing a lot of academic support services I offer to make the class more “sink or swim,” but then I’m mostly punishing the people that need my help the most. I just have to remind myself that it’s better to pass a student that doesn’t deserve it than it is to misjudge the situation and fail a student who legitimately just needed some additional understanding or academic support.
Are we not gonna talk about Kelso’s mug shot? The man’s eyes are so close together that he’s singlehandedly the best evidence I’ve ever seen that humans are descended from cyclopes
On the other hand, if you have the power to help people and you don’t use it, isn’t that immoral, too? Especially when the harm you might be doing is merely subverting the free-will of oligarchs and bigots to ensure the physical safety of marginalized groups?
It’s the trolley problem on a larger scale with hypothetical superpowers
wouldn’t you use that for evil if you could?
I wouldn’t, but I can see the temptation, even for people that aren’t sociopaths.
I’d like to think that even if I was using that power to go around official channels, it would be in the service of the greater good and I would strive to leave the lower and middle classes better off than when I took office (but of course that could very easily turn into a God Emperor of Dune-situation where I’m trying to keep everyone on the “Golden Path” that only I can see, which is of course the danger of any dictator, benevolent or otherwise)
Sure there is, just not a morally or ethically defensible way.
I never thought he’d do it on purpose
Me neither; not because he’s better than that, but because I didn’t think his ego would let him pretend to take the L. Jokes on me! It seems like his handlers and the billionaires he surrounds himself with are (just) smart enough to play his ego to their own advantage.
As someone mentioned earlier, this reeks of a “pump and dump” scheme.
The fact that Trump pretended to be unaware of the effects of the threatened tariffs on the stock market is pretty indicative of him knowing exactly what the effects would be…
Remember when Republicans were whinging about “unelected bureaucrats” and the “shadow government”?
“Wait, it’s all projection?”
🌍 👨🚀 🔫 👨🚀
“Always has been”
Is stating the self-evident truth considered a meme now?
12.99 at my tourist town in CA
It does get legitimately used both ways. In a chemistry textbook, seeing it written as “unionized” is pretty common, and wiktionary says that the hyphenated form is predominantly used in contexts where it might be confused with “having a union” (which matches with my experience).
However, I still assert that it’s just not a word chemists use that much as there are other, less ambiguous synonyms available.
I don’t know; my wrestling coach used to say “you’re never useless; you can always bad a bad example.” So, personally I think putting his charred corpse on display could serve as an effective deterrent on oligarchs that are considering meddling in politics, especially if Musk was loaded into the doomed capsule against his will by a coalition of the proletariat.
Note: I am not advocating for violence. I’m just saying that hypothetically, if Musk was executed by low earth reentry, others might think twice about trying to buy government influence.