Being on Twitter must be exhausting
Id rather slam my penis in the door of a luxury sedan than ever go back on twitter.
Tits! We can make that happen for you!
LOOK AT MY LITTLE TEETH
it very much is
@pizzaiolo @epicspongee I used to use Twitter all the time before it got to a point where I couldn’t stand it anymore, and I felt like a weight had been lifted off of me after I deleted the app.
There’s a reason she’s got drug problems and Twitter is part of that reason
People are still using that dumpster of a platform?
People who have a large following and magic emojis next to their name will keep using it because it gives them their validation. Twitter celebs are really in a sad state of existence
Elon Musk is an actual Nazi and anyone who still uses twitter is sus imo
I got so confused reading this, my brainy hurt :(
I have an issue when the same people who were cheering during the Bush years, gave grudging acceptance at drone strikes during Obama, and were silent during the Trump years, pipe up and say drone strikes are bad now.
Progressives have been saying this the whole time.Also, a reminder that Obama tried to write regs limiting the use of drone strikes at the end of his presidency. Trump promptly threw them out on entering.
As always, when a Republican does something, it’s good and just. When a Democrat does literally the same thing, they’re the devil incarnate.
Loyalty over principle.
Drone strikes are the holy grail of the military-industrial complex. They are cheap to run meaning that the air force doesn’t have to give them a huge budget yet consume precision bombs and missiles at a steady rate meaning that the weapon industry get a secure revenue stream. And they can be scaled up almost infinitely since there is no bad news coverage of wounded veterans or crying widows on us television.
Also, a reminder that Obama tried to write regs limiting the use of drone strikes at the end of his presidency
That doesn’t sound good.
it’s such an unfunny joke I had to read it three times to even understand what she was trying to say
Some people are unfamiliar with Obama’s drones.
or the genocide in Yemen, or his role as the deporter in chief, or that he engineered the largest transfer of wealth from the Black community to capital interests, or, or, or
Tell me more about the wealth transfer.
Some people are. This particular people has absolutely no excuse for such ignorance lol
Crazy, isn’t it?
During his presidency, Obama approved the use of 563 drone strikes that killed approximately 3,797 people. In fact, Obama authorized 54 drone strikes alone in Pakistan during his first year in office. One of the first CIA drone strikes under President Obama was at a funeral, murdering as many as 41 Pakistani civilians. The following year, Obama led 128 CIA drone strikes in Pakistan that killed at least 89 civilians.
I didn’t post it because her joke was funny lol
I figured, it just had me
It’s a common liberal take on Obama.
Cheeto man = loud, uncouth, vulgar.
Your Excellency, Barack The Obama: classy, polite, trivial controversies, last ‘boring’ president
It’s pointing out hypocrisy. But people have forgotten that or are just ignorant? I can’t see how you’d come to that conclusion unless you were very “both sides”.
I’m a level seven enlightened centrist. I wait in line at polling stations just so I can fill out a blank ballot.
twitter is really good at making words and phrases meaningless through extreme hyperbole rule
Oh you are saying we shouldn’t communicate and instead rely on aesthetics to signal each other? Thats literally fascism but you do you.
Some people really need to fucking log off and find a lesbian to marry
Yes.
Is contra going lib again?
She’s always been lib, sadly. I still love her content tho! But her political takes are def a little ehh
Can you elaborate? Love her content, wonder if I’m missing anything about her I’m not aware of.
Some internet leftists are anti-jokes and our greatest insult is to call someone a liberal.
our greatest insult is to call someone a liberal
What do you mean by this?
In the US, we use liberal to describe a person who is left of center on the political spectrum, who is not a socialist. And we use conservative or neo-liberal to describe someone right of center.
Is the goal to make fun of people left of center or to make fun of people right of center? I honestly cannot tell from the above conversation. This may simply be regional based confusion on my part.
so, liberalism is decidedly right of centre. it requires buying into capitalism, but it’s not as far gone as the GOP. The US dems are left of the GOP, but right on a more absolute political meter.
Bernie is leftist, but Biden & co are properly right of centre. Your Overton window has shifted so far to the right that a leftist politician will have a harder path than a snowball in hell.
I say this as someone that has a neolib prime minister (Trudeau).
Suffice to say, liberals and conservatives have the same goals, liberals just prefer a sustainable labour class.
Based on this, I think this is a regional issue. In the US, liberal means left of center.
Here is an example of regional differences.
I would say Bernie is democratic socialist. I would call myself a social democrat, so slightly to the right of Bernie, but slightly to the left of a liberal. I would also say liberals are to the left of moderates who are to the left of conservatives/neo-liberals who are to the left of fascists.
The US Overton window is way to far to the right though.
That’s fine, just understand that you’re using a US-centric framework that differs from what socialists mean when they say “libs”. From our perspective, if you’re pro-western-capitalism (and thus pro-neoliberalism) you’re a lib. Democrats, Republicans, doesn’t matter.
Liberals can claim the word means whatever they want it to to make themselves feel better, but as long as they are pro-capitalism, liberals today are not on the left, since leftism is anti-capitalist by definition.
And not only are they not on the left, they actively enable and bolster the right:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/10/14/liberalism-and-fascism-partners-in-crime/
https://blacklikemao.medium.com/how-liberalism-helps-fascism-d4dbdcb199d9
I can’t claim to be an expert, and this is strictly in a USA context, but I’d explain it this way: “Liberal” is used to insult someone for having and promoting bad, insufficiently leftward political principles, instead of good ones. The good ones depend on what principles the person doing the insulting holds. The right side of the political spectrum also uses Liberal as an insult, so it can be confusing.
Elements of the far left consider Liberals hardly better than (and in practice indistinguishable from) political centrists, conservatives, or fascists, due to the perception that Liberals support policies that won’t disrupt systems that perpetuate injustice, and will carry water for other liberals even when they commit acts they would denounce their political opponents for doing.
The right uses Liberal as a catch-all term for leftists generally (whom they despise), but it has diminished a bit, being supplanted by “woke” “groomers” “antifa” and “BLM.”
Yeah, I’ve started seeing the far left use liberal to describe anyone to the right of them. And weirdly, people on the far left decry wokeness the same way a conservative would. It has been weird. =/
Fuck off Judean People’s Front! We’re the People’s Front of Judea!
In the US we use liberal to refer to people left of the American center which is already skewed right. Liberals are center right.
I would say that American politicians are skewed to the right, but the American people themselves are not.
Progressive ideas are popular with Americans.
I would use neo-liberal to describe many American politicians, including a majority of Democrats, as they tend to have views right of center. But I would use liberal to describe many of the people voting Democrat as their views reflect positions that are at least center left.
Center to center right. Liberals tend to see themselves as left of center though and the word has very little meaning overall. I was mostly just making a joke though.
Yeah, basically she has in the past talked about how she admires leftists and I don’t think she isn’t one, but that she thinks leftist ideas come from envy of people who are more fortunate, and that leftist ideas are bad cuz they’re ant-consumer. Admittedly tho its been a long time since I remember her talking about politics and my memory isnt the best but those are things I think I remember… Try the ‘envy’ video
She went fully lib like two or three years ago and has not had even a trace of being a socialist since.
Again? I imagine you don’t recover after hanging out with Hillary Clinton. Maybe unless you’re
High off the fumes of patreon dosh she had a podcast episode with
What an absolute dumpsterfire of a comment section
Removed by mod
can someone please explain why the word rule appears in titles so often
its a
thing from /r/196
Ok, so it looks like stormfront is a website that promotes white pride. It sounds like there might have been a subreddit at some point based on that stormfront image.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Stormfront
And /r/196 is a leftist meme posting subreddit that is trans friendly.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=r%2F196
I’m using non-reddit links because I don’t want to direct traffic to reddit.
Can you help me find a source that shows, stormfront, a white pride website, influenced the 196 rule please? This seems like an important point to learn more about. I’ve been googling, but I haven’t found any connection yet.
I think stormfront the user, Stormfront the right wing website, and Stormfront the Apple store are all 3 seperate entities.
I think you got them mixed up. I hope you mixed them up and they aren’t somehow connected anyway.
I honestly know very little about Stormfront, beyond what I’ve googled. I don’t support white pride groups. I have seen people referencing it on Lemmy though.
I am thankful that I touch grass enough to not know what any of this means
why do contras posts always end up this way lmao
It’s her curse.
Observation selection bias is an easy one the GOP likes to take advantage of. Eg: not testing for covid to show covid went down.
Also: drone strike civilian casualties.
Also: drone strike civilian casualties.
When did they change how they count civilian casualties? I heard it was under Obama’s administration, but I’d be happy to be proven wrong.
There is quite the back and forth between Democrats pushing for accountability and the GOP pushing against.
From Wikipedia, which has all the references one might need:
"On July 1, 2016, President Barack Obama signed an executive order requiring annual accounting of civilian and enemy casualties in U.S. drone strikes outside war zones (“Areas Outside of Active Hostilities”), and setting a deadline of May 1 each year for the release of such report. However, soon after taking office, President Donald Trump designated large areas in Yemen and Somalia to be “areas of active hostilities,” thus exempting them from disclosure. The Trump administration also ignored the 2017 and 2018 deadlines for an annual accounting, and on March 6, 2019, Trump issued an order revoking the requirement. "
The executive order:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2017-title3-vol1/pdf/CFR-2017-title3-vol1-eo13732.pdf
Trump recinding the order:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/06/us/politics/trump-civilian-casualties-rule-revoked.html
Plus some other dumb shit by Trump:
"During the Obama administration, proposed U.S. drone strikes in locations outside active war zones (i.e., in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia) required high-level approval. The Obama administration process for approving drone strikes in such locations featured centralized, high-level oversight, based on intelligence about individuals suspected of terrorism activity. Obama’s approval was required for every strike in Yemen and Somalia, as well as “the more complex and risky strikes in Pakistan” (about one-third of the total as of 2012), and insisted on deciding whether to approve a strike unless the CIA had a “near certainty” that no civilian deaths would result.
…
October 2017, Trump abolished the Obama-era approval system in favor of a looser, decentralized approach, which gave the military and CIA officials the discretion to decide to launch drone strikes against targets without White House approval. "
All sorts of references corroborating those summary:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/22/obama-drones-trump-killings-count/
The short version is: Obama demanded accountability and his approval. Which did not exist before and was revoked after. Hence, the different counts of casualties is not representative of an actually difference. Only representative of the GOP being shit.
Well, that escalated quickly
