Supreme Court Justices among other things.

Does it make sense to nitpick how much they’re getting though? The fact that they’re being denied any bonus is shady as fuck.

Because it’s not only about how much I have, it’s about how much you people don’t have!

I mean, it can be a bit of an issue everywhere.

Hilariously this post was just above this one in my feed.

Those eyes! A master guilt-tripper lol

It used to be that ‘uneducated’ and ‘dumb’ were different things, but boy howdy are the Republicans trying to make them the same picture.

Have you seen Kristi Noem? She’s more plastic and Botox than person at this point.

Either! Both would be better than throwing up from the pain, passing out, and then being sneered at for both.

That wasn’t for the Nazi, it was for other people reading what the Nazi wrote. I don’t want people to get taken in by the poorly structured arguments and the constant moving of goalposts.

There are those who scoff at the school boy, calling him frivolous and shallow. Yet it was the school boy who said, ‘Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.’

-Mark Twain, Pudd’nhead Wilson

That’s an ad hominem and not a valid argument. I know the internet breeds bad habits in people, but you really should try to do better.

‘What the staff says’ has nothing to do with citing and linking to primary sources, which is what is important and the focus of this discussion.

Meanwhile, actual headline I saw in a paper from my city: Trump’s Tarriffs Spell Big Trouble for China!

In case anyone was wondering why there are no riots, it’s because most people are reading drivel like that.

Obviously you’ve never heard of the concept of ‘citing credible sources’.

Keep in mind too that they’re not always accurate. I know of one in my city that regularly takes photos of people going through on the green because it’s a bit of a wonky intersection. And that means a person gets to spend their day in court instead of at work fighting a ticket they did not deserve.

Actually they are remarkably consistent in their principles. It’s just that they know their principles are disgusting, so they claim other principles as a cover.

It’s really quite simple:

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

Their goals are twofold: to make this a reality, and make sure they are in the first group.

So Octarine, basically.

Which just means they want the tariffs to happen. Perhaps a billionaire promised to buy him New Orleans or something?

Hey, I never said it was a good design lol

That and, in my opinion, the constant villainizing of firearms, to the point that many on the left are outright afraid of guns, or so disgusted with them that they’d rather eat rotten food than own one.

Well, that and constantly telling people that polite protests off in a corner are the only way to affect change. Those were often the same voice.

Of course constantly threatening to take away people’s stuff is going to get a person to vote for the guy saying he won’t take away people’s stuff. But the way those right-wing gun-nuts turned it into identity politics and single-issue voting is totally on them.

Honestly not sure. Haven’t been to an arcade in years.

I should go to one again.