Jackson and Lincoln
Task failed successfully.
Noted liar lies. News at 11.
“We’re going to have some fun too.” GET IT K-DOG.
Oh no. I don’t know how to explain it. It’s just my existence. It just streams out of my brain, through my fingers instantaneously. There is no first half second half.
Although I am a known terrible writer.
Worth noting, this is normal from my perspective. I think all of you are the weird ones.
For an Internet discussion, I really appreciate your open and honest exchange. Good day fellow Internet person.
Ok next question, because I think I interpreted the term differently than you did.
There are two types of term limits right? Quantity of terms, and length of terms.
Status quo: Q - one term, L - for life.
Wouldn’t limiting the length but not the quantity maintain the incentive for impartiality? So there is no concept of a second term?
I’m not trolling btw, I’m looking for an honest airing of the Q.
ELI5, How does no term limits allow for impartiality?
I’m one of the people who doesn’t have a little voice. It weirds me out that other people do.
She will never be that “old.” She has the heart, soul, and energy of a 30 year old.
First Robot Teenage Werewolf President
I’m ready to serve.
I am libertarian-ish, but generally don’t like all the loud libertarian nuts (I register Dem and vote Dem because the things I care about aren’t represented anywhere on the ballot anymore).
For me, it comes to a very simple economics truism: Governments are pretty damn inefficient and tend to waste a lot of money because of the process and bureaucracy. Markets on the other hand, tend to be really efficient at allocating capital when left alone. The times a government should step in is when the market has created a form of externality that breaks things. The old economics example is the people downstream from a chemical plant are paying the price for the plant’s pollution.
From a libertarian lens:
Unfortunately the things I’d like to see from a libertarian don’t actually show up.
Ok I. The interest of an honest conversation these are my thoughts:
I live nearby, I walked by.
I think (I don’t know for sure) that the students were peaceful, it looks like it got co-opted by a few loud neo-nazis who were being assholes.
My thing is the original article was pretty off.
Ok listen, I’m all in favor of Israel knocking it the f*ck off and students protesting, but this article is written with a very specific skew.
Last week, Columbia University summoned an army of heavily armed, riot gear-clad police officers to attack its own students for peacefully protesting Israel’s war on Gaza and the university’s financial ties to Israel.
Couple of notes here.
Should it have been handled differently? Yes. Was the school dumb? Yes. We really don’t need this slanted BS news to see that.
This is some of the quotes from a Newsweek article:
One video posted on X, formerly Twitter, showed a masked protester outside the university’s gates appearing to chant: “Go back to Poland!”
Another video showed a man telling Jewish students outside the campus gates that “the 7th of October is going to be every day for you.”
Top tier roast
This is going to be an unpopular note but . . .
IMO NBC News is right, and the commenter is being histrionic.
Like it or not, but we live in a society that uses money (this is not a strictly capitalist thing). If you recall your microeconomics class you might remember that currency is a unit of measurement (like Celsius or inches). The original story is making a point about how disruptive the eclipse was to our “normal” lives. What other universal way is there to measure changes like that? Utils?
NBC (headline) didn’t say it cost $700M and it was bad. Nor did it say it cost $700M and it was good.
The tone of the article probably went where we think it went.
I was gonna ask if Josh Lyman has a new job?