- 0 Posts
- 81 Comments
Idk, how come we need to fund your wars?
Getting shot is pretty up there in terms of frustration.
How that seperation of church and state going son?
The federal Constitution prevents any state from recalling a member of congress, so your federal reps can not be recalled legally. They would have to be expelled from within the congress, you get to vote and thats it.
I dont believe voting does much, but I know refusing to vote doesn’t do anything, I don’t see why I wouldn’t show up.
Removed by mod
Not just GM, if you tried ro question the safety of these cars on even Lemmy before these revelations came out you would get brigaded by people claiming they were safer than humans statistically and thats all they needed to be in order to be acceptable.
So how much genocide in your opinion is okay to vote for under the suspicion that someone else might also do a genocide?
Because either you’re admitting theres no way to vote ourselves out of genocide or that joes genocides is okay because someone else MAY also preside over genocide. Thats a new one, this genocide is acceptable because if it wasn’t this, it would just be another genocide, do I have that right?
Im of the opinion that I cannot materially support genocide. Call it single issue voterism if you want but to me never again means never again, not never again unless maybe the someone else would also finance genocide. Having boundaries is healthy and just, and if genocide is only a soft boundary for someone then I place no value in what they have to say.
The only thing lobbists like more than someone they already bribed and have on speed dail is someone who too old to realize they’re being conned.
I think the sad fact is many people in the US are okay with financing genocide as long as they don’t have to hear Trump’s name or suffer any consequences personally. As long as some kind of right wing boogeymany exists, you can convince most democratic voters that genocide is permissable enough to not disqualify a candidate.
They’re there to sheepdog the voters into believing progressive candidates a valued part of the democratic party despite the fact that more than most of the good things progressives have accomplished are entirely outside of the chambers of congress. The democrats refuse to work with progressives unless they are forced too, like that time the progressives asked Pelosi to consider stock trading bans and she denied them until it was clear that was horrible PR, then decided to come around to vocally supporting it later, once the political will to pass the bill was dying down. Progressives are there for show.
Fuck, now I’m more interested in finding that out than anything about the article.
“Babe wake up, new way to sort and shop for adopted kids just droppd, just swipe left or right on this orphans face . . .”
Nothing legal we can do.
Removed by mod