Removed by mod

We donʻt end up in a position where fascists are able to come to power without liberals paving the runway. And its what’s happening. Trump doesnʻt come to power if not for the liberal tendencies of Obama. Their failure to hold the banks accountable. Their refusal to bailout homeowners instead. Trump doesnʻt come to power when the preferred candidate of the people isnʻt being sabotaged by the anti-democratic tendencies of the Democratic party. Trump gets a mulligan in 2024 because the Democrats held yet another coronation and yet again ran to the right of their voters when their voters had made it clear as day that they wouldnʻt be voting for a pro-genocide candidate.

You are doing the thing liberals do to absolve themselves of accountability. And its a precise component of the song and dance that liberals use to simultaneously empower fascists but also absolve themselves of sin. Trump doesnʻt come to power at all in a context where Democrats take the task of delivering for their constituents seriously. Trump doesnʻt exist if not for the perpetual failure and the permanently apologetic state of the American Liberal.

Removed by mod

Youʻll pry my Xanax and tequila from my cold dead hands

Reigniting? It hasn’t stopped even a little.

Democrats threw an election in their effort to prevent Israel from being accountable for their actions. And everything about our current experience is defined by that decision. Global fascism was allowed to persist so that Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden primary donors could continue the extermination of the native populations of the holy land. We’ll live in the shadow of those decisions for decades, if not centur, just like the period preceding it was defined largely by the defeat of Nazi Germany in WWII.

…and tequila!

I think you’ve misunderstood the antibiotics argument… the actual argument is almost always about animal agriculture where the scale of antibiotics use dwarfs that of regular humans.

Why not just let them use whatever drugs they want?

I mean that honestly. Because I do believe that adults should be allowed to do whatever they want with their own bodies. And with this act, we’re basically removing the excuse we ever had in the first place for doing so.

So I’m just. Fuck it. Open the gates. Big pharma should love that.

Always a fan.

Its a fundamentally reactionary tautology. Laws serves to protect but does not bind. Because I’m the one engaging in the behavior I have a problem with others doing, its fine.

I don’t know what else to call it then, when a society collectively engages in a behavior we would individually characterize as sociopathic. And sure, there are degrees to these things, but the woman isn’t roaming the streets continuing to kill. She’s already behind bars and has been for decades. If you believe such a thing as justice exists, it was served long, long ago. Whatever this society is engaging in, its not justice, and its closer to what the accused did that it is to whatever could undo what the accused did.

She tortured a girl for hours, bashed her skull in with a rock, then carried a piece of the skull in her pocket, showed it to friends and bragged about the murder

Seems sociopathic.

I also think this weird “tit for tat” obsession with what amounts to a medieval concept of justice is also sociopathic. That because someone has killed, that some how killing them undoes the initial injustice, well, its sociopathic. There is also ample evidence that it doesn’t accomplish any of is purported goals. A society, the response to a killing is to create more killing?

Seems sociopathic.

Jesus fucking Christ this is a country of sociopaths.

Man and they finally stopped being such dicks the past few years.

Jesus fucking tap-dancing, “I’ll do whatever it takes to enable fascism”, shitliberal christ.

The federal Flag Code, 4 U.S.C. § 8(i), says: “The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever.”

How much state violence should I be allowed to enact upon you, should you violate this Federal law, since you so desire to not live in a lawless country, liberal? How about shock-gloves and indefinite detention? This seems about right for your level of candor.

This 👆 but times 100. Even discussing this means you’ve accepted the framing that “some” use of force by ICE is acceptable, and now we have to have this discussion about where along the spectrum of state violence the use of force should no longer be considered acceptable.

ICE existing is unacceptable. Accepting that “some” use of force by ICE is acceptable presupposes that ICE existing is acceptable. You are not obligated to accept that framing.

edit: because I just noticed the use of “illegal” and “legal” and didn’t realize who I was responsive to.