Okay, troll.
You have answered no questions, and made no statements that can be falsified.
Just insulted and took no position that could be shown wrong.
You’re just a troll, and a lazy one at that.
Okay, troll.
You have answered no questions, and made no statements that can be falsified.
Just insulted and took no position that could be shown wrong.
You’re just a troll, and a lazy one at that.
America doesn’t have Gympie Gympie trees.
This is what I’m using, and required no tinkering.
I use it for VR and step mania, too.
Who supported the Khmer Rouge?
Who ended up fighting and ending the genocide?
Who denied a genocide happened until the 80’s, and continued funding the Khmer Rouge until the late 90’s?
These are all simple questions with simple, factual answers. You just don’t like the picture the answers paint, and want to justify the intentional outcome of Kissinger’s designs and blame the outcome on the victims.
It sickens me to see people like the person I was replying to and yourself try and blame the people who were genocided for their genocide and to blame it on a economic ideology that had very little to do with the outcome.
…
Did you really blame a movement that basically existed for twenty years after relevance through US (and Chinese, interestingly enough) machinations and support, and was actually ousted by the communist Vietnamese, on a ‘kill the oppressors’ view?
Jesus, capitalists will say and do everything to blame the consequences of their actions on everyone else.
Yeah, you’re so liberal.
She waa a terrible fucking Representative who got here seat due to fucking gerrymandering.
That is exactly the way the math works for anything resembling the concept of insurance.
All of those programs are a form of insurance.
You just don’t understand insurance.
Shit guys, no one tell Bronzebeard the concept of insurance!
People don’t like reading genocidal propaganda.
They have the order wrong, demonstrated by their own links as pointed out by queermunist.
Spoken like someone that hasn’t paid attention to the supply chains of places like Walmart.
We already have command economies. They exist and are functional. The owners are simply siphoning away the surplus value.
backups in the 2 times in your lifetime that such corruption actually occurs.
What are you even talking about here? This line invalidates everything else you’ve said.
Your diet is bad.
Have some actual (not instant) oatmeal every morning, and a good sized portion of non fried veggies with dinner and marvel at the change.
… … Haven’t put any words in your mouth. You’re just too ignorant to recognize that you’re arguing for more centralization of power.
You’re still doing. Is this non-existant civil service you want to create elected, or just another branch of the executive.
Just to restate, you actually believe creating an entire new civil service with less public oversight would be easier then just combating corruption in people with elected positions? A civil service that would be less likely to become corrupt with less oversight?
You do realize the founding fathers you venerate intentionally created three Manchus of government intentionally to protect people from the state, right? One of those branches, the one you want to get rid of, is called the judicial branch.
Jesus, you know next to nothing of American civics and you have the gall to completely misrepresent the founding fathers to justify undoing their work to accomplish what they already created for the same person.
I’m amazed you can even spell strawman.
Yeah, cause there is anyone left wing on the city council and like we haven’t had a succession of center right Democrats that used to be republicans as mayors.
The city is the way it is under leadership that aligns with your politics.
The city we have is the city we get if you get everything you want politically. It’s literally your mess.
You’re complaining about corruption in elected positions, and want to replace it by giving more power to the DA, or to remove the human aspect and give everything over a computer assigning mandatory minimums that only ever seem to go up.
If you have a problem with corruption, you fight the corruption. You don’t consolidate power into even fewer hands, with no mercy(not that there is much of that in the first place.)
The founding fathers were a bunch of rich white dudes, that almost to a one, fail every moral standard today. Some of them would and were considered assholes in their own time. Acting like they were incredibly thoughtful/wise elder statesmen is the only Hollywood trope either one of us has brought up. Part of the protections they did try and put into place was to spread power out, and make those positions ones that elected. You know, the stuff you want to remove?
It’s really sad to me that the Portland community is moderated by a center right liberal.
They absolutely should.
This isn’t some small point, either. Your view validates mandatory minimum sentencing and other systemically racist structures.
Judges should make judgments. It’s literally the job title. A judge is someone you’re supposed to be able to trust to take into account all the human stuff and make decisions based off it.
You want a judge that makes the judgment call that a plea deal is okay? Fine.
You want a judge that throws away a plea deal they think is too light? Fine.
You want a judge that adds up minimum sentences and could be replaced by a computer? Not fine.
The seven year war, which is what the rest of the world calls the French Indian war should actually have been called World War One.
It was also started by an incompetent 22 year old George Washington being sent out in his first command who ignored the equivalent of the sergeant put in charge of the new lieutenant advice and executed a French person he shouldn’t have.
The taxes that started the revolutionary war? Those were to pay the war debts on the seven year war. Dude literally led an army to avoid paying the consequences of his actions.
EDIT: it’s also possible to draw “ALL WARS”
You know, Putin’s methods are the same as the US’s when it comes to overthrowing elected governments, right?
Apply leverage to an existing weak point.
Try to make it undistinguishable from a legitimate reason.
The problem, of course, is that none of this requires a Putin or a CIA to explain it. The actions of the health care industry is perfectly sufficient.