SaltSong @ SaltSong @startrek.website

Posts

3

Comments

699

Joined

5 mo. ago

That is . . . Distressingly accurate.

The very one.

I like most of their work.

I know all the words in that sentence, but they don't cake any sense, strung together in that order.

This strikes me as a terrible idea.

My what, now?

Because we built a system where only 34 people in the entire nation get paid too look as far as six years into the the future. The president, and 1/3 of the Senate cap out at 4 years. The House of Representatives and 1/3 of the Senate can see 2 years ahead. Most CEOs and industry leaders are limited to 3 months.

Extra History did a good video on her.

Bloody well done, that woman.

I have specific interests.

Not on my browser they aren't. They just started offering to make groups one day, and while I want to tear out someone's tongue for it, it would require far too much effort, and might just be a bit of an overreaction.

Thank you for this. Now I know hire to turn them off.

I'm just there for the porn, these days. Any sort of meaningful interaction with people happens elsewhere.

Attacking any remaining trust in the US government, I see.

Contrary to the narrative, you don't become a billionaire by taking risks.

They will balk at the cost of owning/operating even a single Arleigh-Burke destroyer.

They don't need one. They need a sniper.

they have been too cheap thus far.

I'm pretty sure that Bezos had enough money to bribe moderate chunks of the army.

Primary them. Vote them out. Better a known evil turn an ally that betrays you.

Not for me. I hope those given the opportunity will take it.

These things happen. My father served on a CV long ago, and he claimed that they pushed several aircraft over the side if they were deemed unreparable out of ship resources.

EDIT: Also, I think that's the first Houthi kill of an F-18.

That will be helpful, but for ducks sake. . .

Can we please get some sanity in the white house?

Chattel slavery is incompatible with liberal democracy. There’s no fuzzy area to debate the point.

I would agree with that. Can you point to where we were discussing liberal democracy?

For any policy authored by the enfranchised majority that impacts the disenfranchised minority, its passage and execution is categorically and indisputably undemocratic.

So no laws involving children or immigrants, then?

You're doing exactly what I'm arguing against. You're attributing a bunch of other qualities to "democracy," and demanding that they be treated as part of the actual definition.

I think we are done here. You're arguing against things I'm not writing.