deleted by creator

I don’t care about the 25th because this joker will let Congress go back to business-as-usual, pretending they’ve fixed anything. No. you morons own Orange man and the office you’ve inflated to insane levels of power over the last few decades.

If the 25th fails, there’s a chance they walk any of the various expansions of the Executive Branch’s power back at all. Otherwise, Congress is perfectly happy to let one man have the power to bomb other countries without so much as a nod to Congressional Authorization; To their way of thinking, its plausible deniability, when really its little-if-any short of saying “The King Must Crusade, after all”. Basically a declaration of on-going war against the world, and they’ve gotten by with pretending otherwise for too long.

belatedly realizing you tried to use never having heard of watching youtube at triple-speed as a flex, and why not a peer-tube link? ^chef’s kiss^

Right. Refusing to read is the obviously-superior stance. Having experiences, in queer spaces no less, that don’t jive with your own, makes me aligned-with incels.

One of us wants women free to dress how they please, not feel bad about it, and not need to tell other women how to dress or put them down in order to feel good about it. Then there’s you, courting a bunch of NLOGs and female-dating-strategy burn-outs. Not wasting the time on that makes me the loser.

If you’re seeking a compaion for your former-incel-now-simp recovery group, ask someone else. I don’t associate with any of those crowds, least of all the celibate of any gender.

I think I’ve seen the things I’ve described happen with my own eyes. Yes, all of them, including gay men getting “shot down” only to reply to the other girl beside them “what? but she does! she has really nice tits!” …

… but as far as what the comic was ACTUALLY portraying, I made no claims besides the obvious fact that we don’t really know, beyond that details were specifically left-out or included for no other apparent reason than rage-baiting. Its a mad-lib/roll-your-own-humiliation of a scenario where even IRL participants usually have no idea what just happened, what the other parties’ thoughts were. They just tell themselves a story where they were the hero or at worst, victim.

Also, people are inherrently contradictory. Its really amusing watching people claim strangers they don’t know, and fictional characters no less, are more consistent than that.

If she shot him a nasty look, I won’t argue that’s unwarrented or inappropriate, but that’s not what’s portrayed. I also tried to impy that most straight dudes don’t distinguish all that much between positive and negative attention from attractive women; Like, holy crap, she turned towards him and gave him an excuse to look again, and he’s somehow expected to actually feel bad about it? The woman with him feels worse, promise, than if nothing were said, whether she’s the judgy-type or not, but society says she should keep any male companions on a leash(which society again?).

That’s a big part of why I said its more than he deserved, and that the protaganist is working against her own intentions, even when it comes to shooting him down. She can be working-against her own intentions at every step of the way - Life is often painful like that, and a lot of us call days that turn-out like so “well crap, I failed to die in my sleep yet again, didn’t I?”

I’ve also spent enough time around women who get upset with attractive and/or “under-dressed” women just for existing(IME, most of them), but only take it out on men and gossip behind closed doors, that I can promise you, no-one who pays-attention cares all-that-much about/for their verbal or visual disapproval. They are in the room with us right now, by the way, and this avoiding-their-ire-by-mansplaining to me look is winning you points with people you were better-off avoiding, but if that’s what you are into…

Dunno. I’ve never been turned-on by heterophobia before either, or so I thought…

At the point killing them would seem merciful, exploit them relentlessly until the people who actually make shit work burn the building down with us inside in utter disgust.

Wait, was I not suppose to channel “the man himself”, and everyone he collects like little toady-action-figures?

Also, hi, I am my own boss, and yes its an abusive power-dynamic.

Ask him to stay and enjoy my house for a minute, maybe fuck my wife if she’s game, while I snuck-out to cut my brake-lines. For the record, he didn’t ask nicely, he stole it, and wouldn’t listen when I told him its un-suitable for one of such august prestige.

I find the fixation of randos(most of us, apparently) on assuming “you” is referring to them and only them off-putting, myself. I can be having an on-going conversation, start a sentence with “you” and get interrupted by a third-party going “WHAT!?” …

I’m such a paragon of getting this right, and a successful parent, that it happens in my own house, when they know good and well I’m capable of shouting names across the house at volume sufficient to make the whole neighborhood understand what I’m saying, so why do they assume a barely-audible “you” from two-rooms over is meant for them? Is it me?

For your second point: That’s precisely why I default to addressing counter-arguments to the collective “you”. Can’t expect anyone to digest the arguments if every scathing word anyone might not like is addressed to specific individuals. I won’t pretend to be happier and more content with having to make such arguments than anyone else should be, and if anyone wants to claim a specific piece to take personal offense to, that’s their perogative.

I do try to lay out a path away from such outcomes, but the road involving any concessions or self-reflection is narrow and treacherous versus the highways full of land-mines that somehow look more inviting. Apparently the “toll-gate” hands you a beer and a blind-fold with pretty flowers on it or something.

/end-rant/pontification: I myself am lost in the woods, and the land-mines are really pretty some days.

We already reconciled, thanks.

Not to back-track everything I just said, but the fact its only the crazies and greedy mercenaries firing the bullets is itself almost as bad as all the dead kids resulting from all the inaction on the part of the rest of us.

I applaud no part of this incident more than I do that NO kids were harmed this time, admitedly that’s basically a USian miracle. Thirteen bullets and no kids taken out? US Military stats over recent decades call that “not even one for thirteen shots?” SLACKING.

They seriously went from supposedly avoiding civilian cassualties, civilian casualties equals terrorism, to “one dead terrorist, we promise that one was a terrorist bad bad man, is worth a hundred dead civilians”, but you or I are supposed to be upset about bullet-holes in the home of an elected official, and we should feel bad that our country-men are so un-couth.

Am I supposed to recognize your name or something? I don’t see any mod-flair, but even then “look at my name” is a weird flex outside of pay-per-plate donor parties and, say … Epstien Island.

Oh wait, you think it matters that they only doubled-down on your take, didn’t author it, and you yourself haven’t bothered to clarify your own vague-booking. Sorry kid, the conversation moved on.

Okay, so I went and changed “you” to “they”, twice. You happy now?

Yeah, leaving just the note. Maybe smashing a window?

… but if they had called out just the gun-fire, my earlier reply might have needed such nuance. As it is, they called us out for … doing anything at all? Damaging some property? Boohoo. How the property damage was done is immaterial, besides “guns bad”.

How dare the constituents infringe upon the state’s monopoly on violence?

If I personally went over to shoot an Iranian child, would I then have standing to engage with the man who ordered my tax dollars be utilized like-so as an equal? Mind you, AI data-centers, subsidized by my tax dollars, were literally used to plan the deaths of those children.

Thanks to media fear-mongering, including “why so many GUNS!?” storries, my daughter could easilly feel so terrified as Iranian school-children, and no government officials’ children are entitled to feel any safer. Their parents have the power to stop the threats and killing with a vote. I’mma forgive a citizen for realizing strong words haven’t changed those votes, but some bullets in a wall-or-roof-or-tree-or-whatever might. Didn’t even have to kill or injure anyone? Raytheon may want to sue for missed profits, as their products went un-utilized in this particular “Pro-active Freedom Dissemination^TM” but I call it a fucken’ bargain.

13 bullets don’t cost anywhere near as much as a missile by the way, tens-of-thousands wouldn’t. Sorry, I slipped into “lives=who-cares, but money, what about the money!?” elect-a-critter-speak for a minute.

“Un-related”: Did you know you can make your own shoulder-fired guided-missile for $97 now? Just putting that out there. The problem is NOT the levelling of the playing-field, its people looking at the side that took non-lethal actions and demanding “wHy vIoLeNcE?!”

LEGEND

Not saying the shots were super-necessary, but let’s be real, somehow these elect-a-critters forget that their addresses are public-record, and it shows.

More data centers helps … what, exactly?

For future reference, embedding in the post-body text-box, same as we do for comments, is how to attach multiple pics to a post, but really I’mma just use the excuse to tell you again: NICE WORK!

Wait, you think I’m ALSO not complaining about the author setting up pure rage-bait with the least context possible in order to leave interpretation open to the broadest available set of people who will get upset and pontificate at eachother?

… but at the same time, the audience has seen hundreds of these. How the fuck are y’all not bored of ignoring all but the most self-serving narrative by now?

Lastly, bitches do be that way - I don’t even have a problem with it. Y’all want to applaud both the girl (possibly)trying to make another girl jealous, and the girl getting jealous, but villainize any man who exists in their space with enough spatial-awareness to notice their efforts.

THAT DUDE COULD BE GAY OR SINGLE, notice the one lady’s style, upset her by not giving a specific performative response or keeping his ugly eyes elsewhere, and the girl he’s walking with would still give him shit both for using his eyes as she herself almost certainly has for what evolution put them there for, and for not backing her take that “that thirsty bitch needs to put on more clothes”.

People are allowed to be thirsty. Policing eachother’s gaze is no more laudable than trying to control the competition’s attire, and all fall short next to either the guy or the girl having the sincerity to shout “You go girl!!” The worst barely-concealed thirst offers versus all that is discretion and a lack of effort.

“… and vote for candidates that will make my preferred outcomes happen, like Kamala Harriss”.

… that was calling out hypocrisy and pro-imperialim-so-long-as-its-blue. Surprised it landed flat here of all people, because I know too many tankies who did, in fact proudly vote for Harriss. I voted for her myself, but only so they couldn’t blame me when the obvious happened, as it did. I’m back to being ignored when I complain about children murdered by my tax-dollars in Gaza, Iran, Lebanon and more, either way.

I mean, yes, but I thought you were saying her politics weren’t left-enough to be called such. Justifying a leftist terrorist attack that killed 25 people seems enough to warrant the label on its own, to me.

I might be far-enough left to quote one of said terrorists, but 50 years later, just quoting them saying “we were right because Palestine” without context or qualification of any sort …

… I can see why she would take it down, and I’m not sure I could ever be so impulsive as to go there and retract like-so. Then again, I haven’t been able to find the Tweet itself, and it wouldn’t surprise me to find that the article-spam is misrepresenting it.