To play devil’s advocate, though, I do wonder what the exact rationale was for this. Was Al Jazeera engaged in legitimate espionage, using their news organization as a front?
Even then, it’s a broadcast that Al Jazeera could just go view somewhere else and get the same info. Its a very thin excuse, and I think it just is what it is at face value. A poor justification for limiting coverage of the the war
You know what, I’m here for it. Anytime I hear about the cicadas coming back it’s always over the top dread. People freak out, and there’s so much acting like seeing a cicada is going to grind life to a halt. Everyone seems to lean into the bit.
The fact that the growing answer to the cicadas this year is a wildly different “fuck it, we’ll eat them and then they can’t get us” could not be more beautiful to me.
There are over a hundred million working adults in the US, and all of them with their own opinions and needs. Many of them completely out of touch with the world outside of their bubble, and some who even approve of the current trajectory. The idea of organizing a generalized strike is a complete pipe dream. I’d love to see it, but we are nowhere even close to that. We must work with reasonable, attainable solutions.
They’re terrified of seeming political, or making a mistake that will let him walk. Republicans have stacked the courts with people who barely grasp US law, and certainly have no respect for it, and the Democrats have put up glorified bureaucrats. We need a judge willing to force the issue and say “if you were anyone else this behavior would land you jail awaiting trial, so that’s where you’re going.”, Or I dunno, maybe stop giving breaks with fines. Let the morons whine and cry about being biased, or an activist judge; make the USSS have to coordinate with corrections to maintain protection while being held. Show this isn’t a game. Prove that you have some conviction when it comes to the rule of law in the US. History would look kindly on the person who chose the make the right call when it wasn’t easy.
I feel like a broken record with how much I’ve said this in the last handful of years, but: someone needs to be the fucking adult in the room.
I never thought “With great power comes great responsibility” would be a lasting principle in my life, but hell if it isn’t. I don’t have a ton of “authority”, but what I have I see as a responsibility to and for the people I delegate to, rather than the step up that some appear to view it as. Thanks, Uncle Ben.
Does she still do Denuvo games? I know she doesn’t work with Empress anymore, so there must be somebody cracking those for the repack if so
I don’t think she’s the only one able, just willing. Isn’t there still someone who consistently cracks Madden games or something similar? Also fitgirl maybe, but I think that’s just repack stuff.
It’s the use of “rigged” that throws me. I agree money in politics is bad, and adds improper influence and incentive into the whole thing. That is not the same context that we have widely seen “rigged” used in the last 8 years. The term brings to mind GOP lies about election integrity, and bogus claims of fraud.
If this was just someone I was talking to I would brush the statement off as bad word choice, and move on if there was nothing else. With it being a statement after an election loss from someone with political experience I struggle to let it slide. Word choice and presenting ideas/policy is a major part of the job she is running for, and I think such poor word choice in a statement she had every opportunity to proofread and consider is worthy of some criticism. Doesn’t make her an election denier, or anything of the sort, but it does warrant a little slap on the wrist from the public.
Overall she’s right, but there were many better ways to say it.
This was the biggest adjustment for me with my last program. I was one of those annoying people that tested super quickly, and I developed some bad habits such as picking out the key parts of the question and immediately moving on as soon as I hit an answer that checked the right boxes. When I came up against “they’re all technically correct, but you need to choose the MOST correct answer” it was a goddamn brick wall. I adjusted and grew because of it, but holy shit do I have a new button to push when it comes to multiple choice (and trick questions, but that’s a whole soapbox).
I say all that to add that there is something to it. It made me learn the material in a more applicable way. I stopped trying to just retain lecture based on what seemed likely to be tested, and starting understanding concepts as a whole. It kind of forces you to work abstractly with what you’ve learned. I still hate it, but I won’t deny that kind of testing had a positive impact.
It’s really about the lack of context. Its fine if the focus was on a minority of idiots, but you should also be reporting how insignificant the support is in general and an objective look at why they’re there. I don’t have faith in most 24/7 media to do that.
I could see it working as an animated “job of the week” sitcom style show about a team of DRG miners. There’s nothing about DRG that ties it too strongly to the concept though. You could just make a show about space dwarves without any mention of DRG, might even be easier without whatever “lore” the game has in place (I like the game a lot, but if there’s a story I haven’t found it).
RULES OF NATURE!
*Throws a whole-ass Metal Gear"
You’re gonna get a lot of different answers. The primary issue we’re facing with the border right now is not so much an unprecedented wave as much as it is an overloaded asylum system. Due to how we handle claims and the lack of manpower, individuals who may eventually be denied asylum are living in the US (still unable to legally work, I believe. Someone might check me on that) for years awaiting a trial date. Republicans are tackling this issue by focusing on solutions to non-existent problems, or are tossing the issue out when it seems the outcome might benefit democrats (i.e. no border bill, because then Dems can rightfully run on progress with the border issue). Dems have kicked this particular can down the road for a bit, and recently made a good faith effort in the Senate to construct a bill that would have addressed the actual pressing issue (the degree it would help is debatable, but it was objectively progress). That bill was killed by republicans for the aforementioned political reasons.
It makes a little more sense when you consider R2 was heavily modified by Anakin, who also had lightsaber needs.
I’m pretty sure “did we have a moment?” got me out of a minor ticket once.
Not a landlord, but I had a similar excuse thrown at me by a dealership. Towed my car an hour for a recall to a college town because everywhere else was booked for a while. They did close to $1000 of unauthorized work and then threw a fit when I told them I would not be paying for it unless they could show me a signed document where I agreed. When they realized I wasn’t a broke college kid after I threatened legal action and to report my car stolen if they were not willing to give it back, I got the “this was a misunderstanding, it never should have went this far” from the owner who had just called me a liar 10minutes prior. Such obvious BS
I don’t get this. I was raised by a cop, and I’m very comfortable with firearms. Flashing your concealed weapon in public is immature at best. I can think of zero reason to flash a concealed weapon in public (unless you intend to defend yourself with it, right there in that moment), even if someone is asking to see it the answer is, “It’s not a toy”. It’s an object designed to kill, the threat is inherent in revealing it.
Not calling out you specifically, but the irreverent attitude of the loud pro-gun group has pushed me way further left on gun control than I used to be. Actions like OP tell me the leaders advocating for it do not have a healthy or mature view of firearms.
They didn’t specify it would be floating in the water…
You know, from the eggshell fragments.
How much force are you people using to crack an egg?
I mean, in context that verse is about being aware one’s belief in Jesus may cause strife with their family/community, and how Christians are meant to endure this strife without denying their faith. The choice of wording makes sense in the context of the time it was written, when affirming Christ is God would have absolutely caused some major animosity with those who don’t believe. It’s assuring the reader that the division and pain that will come from those disagreements is not lost on God, and also not something we can turn away from and ignore.
The Christians that everyone is up in arms about all the time are close to the worst representation of the faith as possible, and you can easily point out their lazy interpretations as well as scripture that, more often than not, outright rejects their twisting of the faith. Modern day Pharisees all the way. Unfortunately the church on a national level is inundated with them, and has done a poor job of separating from them.