It feels like he's just gotten too comfy in his nice little studio, and doesn't want to do the actual journalism work anymore. He's content to just read stories other people have written, and let them do the actual digging. And then he'll compare multiple stories other people have written and call that "research" when it's not. Plus he stutters and stammers a lot, and takes wayyy too long of an intro before he actually starts discussing the topic. It's like he's dragging out the videos unnecessarily.
Which is somewhat understandable, but it's nothing like his early work. I think he's too far removed from the time when he actually was a boots-on-the-ground journalist - that's the problem.
He's too comfy in podcast life, and he's too young to be resting on his laurels, but he is. It would be like if the hero gave up after slaying 1 monster. Like... "Hercules, dude, you're 35. You're still ripped man, like, get out there and slay some more monsters."
That's my personal problem with Tim. He keeps referencing his past credentials & past journalism work but it's like... hey there's real investigation to be done, real stories to cover, and you just want to sit in your studio and read other people's coverage of the biggest story ever? What gives beanie-bro?
Hope that helps give some context.
What's worse is it's just as vaccines are being administered. So now, COVID will drop because of the REAL cure (hydroxy) that they'll be giving, but they'll let the vaccine (which is horrible) take the credit.
So they trick everyone in to taking their poison vaccine, let the numbers get better from real treatments with hydroxy, and boom they solved COVID. It's despicable.
What your differences really come down to is values. There are couples who have different politics and still end up just fine - usually ends up with something like not asking who they voted for, and just respecting each other's privacy in that matter.
What's really important is those core values. They have to be compatible, or else it isn't going to work. You should really think about what your values are, and what the hard lines are, as you seem sort of halfway committed or uncertain on the important ones.
A good exercise is to really think about what you want for your future - and I mean ponder the specifics. Do you want to get married? Do you want kids? Do you want those kids to go to church? How do you feel about abortion? About kids taking hormone blockers to transition?
As you answer those questions for yourself, find out the answers from your partner. These are some common (and sadly newer, but important) values-based questions that couples face, and are the major core value questions to be asking.
Your politics influence your values, and that's the importance of politics. Normally I would say run, and that might be the best answer BUT: This election is like 2016.
In all fairness... My first vote for Trump was not a vote For Trump, but Against Hillary. I cannot be too harsh on people this election if they simply voted against Trump.
So... Her voting Biden? Sad, but not a deal breaker without knowing more. And who each of you vote for might not be a core value to either of you - maybe you have a happy future and just see politics differently, but come together on the important things (like men can't be women).
Biden voting - not a huge red flag. Find out what your values are - the big ones I mean. And find out what hers are, and realize that on the big things, you MUST MATCH. The story of "I wanted kids, but she didn't, and we just kept hoping the other would change their mind" is a common one, and an example of why the big, important values must match. Find your values, your must haves & your hard no's. And there you will find your answer.
Is it too sadistic for me to hope that Trump rounds up all the traitors, and then for execution chooses lethal gas, but makes them all wear these stupid covid masks?
Let them all die, televised, showing how useless the damn things are.
I believe it is this one
To be fair, I need to watch the video. But I was under the impression concrete is basically fireproof as well?
Comparing a concrete-replacement to wood & sheetrock walls is not a fair comparison. Hempcrete to concrete ---> I don't think concrete walls would catch fire either.
This is true, but no reason to fear. We apply the same logic to owning firearms you know - it's not the gun that kills people, it's the person using it. Same goes for all laws - they mean nothing if no one enforces them. There's a certain amount of trust that has to go along with that.
Trump hasn't given me a reason to not trust him so far. We'll see what happens.
Any that aren't from 9 or 10 years ago? If these were recent, I might raise my eyebrows more.
But this is Dwight Schrute we're talking about. The kid stuff is messed up in light of all the Epstein/pedo stuff we've learned about, but I lean more towards this is him making (unfunny) jokes, and just being weird.
I think there was a phase back then with many comedians making rape or dead baby jokes. That doesn't make it any less weird or ok, mind you, but it shouldn't ruin The Office for you.
Question on a topic I admit I am ignorant of: What's the difference between a presidential executive order, and these COVID restrictions from governors or the election rule changes in Georgia?
As far as I know, Executive Orders are basically congress being lazy and not passing anything, so the president just makes an order. And that's what the problem in Georgia was I thought-the rule changes didn't go through the state's congress.
So I was just curious - little bit of cognitive dissonance here, because I like what Trump has done with his orders, but I dislike local government doing the same thing with COVID orders, and then there's the whole Georgia thing
This one is a pretty good point. I'll need to think on that a bit, though I would disagree with classifying those who are pro-regulating adultery as puritans. It's possible to be kinky & raunchy as hell but still be against adultery.
Makes me think of Crimes of Passion in legal work. Death for cheating is recognized as reasonable in some cases, to the degree it gets the murderer lessened penalties. It's the legal equivalent of going "Yeah, Yeah that makes sense - she cheated on ya."
I thought something similar, but thinking hard on it, sleeping around does not actually to anything to help fix the specific domestic victimhood or spousal abuse problem. You could say tangentially it does, maybe, if the sleeping around gets the new partner to help you escape your current situation. But that's a huge stretch, and the cause/effect relationship is more on the new partner helping you, not the sleeping around part.
Stronger legal remedies or social programs to help those in forced marriages or abusive situations might be better.
But normalizing sleeping around just because your husband beats you? Nah. It's not a solution.
Well, the Jews ARE exceptional, aren't they? Higher I.Q. on average, and it's not like they only get to high positions through bribery and coercion. There is some skill & competency there.
But also pump the breaks - I never called you a nazi, and I specifically said it just gives those vibes, while ALSO explaining my confusion about what you said, and admitting you had good points. I clearly have no ill will towards you, but I was confused at why the Jewish thing got brought up, which you still haven't adequately explained. It was confusing for you to drag them in to this, that's all.
Unfortunately, I am no bible expert, and all I could point you towards is some passage in the new testament where Jesus says something like "looking at another woman with lust is adultery against her already in your heart" or something like that. That, and the fact that it is one of the 10 commandments.
However, I point out that using only religious reasoning is not the appropriate way to discuss moral or legal matters. It is useful to a point, but you need more than that. One of Christianity's successes is it's ability to reform over time and adapt to societal changes.
Historically speaking, monogamous societies are more stable. Psychologists and Anthropologists know this - it's not disputed. There's less violence where monogamy is the norm. Adultery serves no positive purpose. As for puritanical sex norms, we were doing pretty good until somewhat recently. And you'll notice, it is the left now imposing new puritanical norms - NOT the religious right. What do you think MeToo is, and all this talk about consent? Remember that YouTube ad where they tried to made asking for consent at every step sexy? That's not a religious right thing.
What about the strict rules about pronouns, and refusing to have sex with a trans woman is bigotry, and all those new rules? That's not the religious right, but it is a form of restrictive sexual puritanism, only it's the non-religious left's version.
Something to think about - all I know is, adultery is in fact bad for society, even if the people involved agree with it.
I got confused on the Jewish thing too though - maybe it's the phrasing of "just" Jewish? Hinduism regards adultery as sinful as well. Buddhism treats it as negative as well, though maybe not a sin. Those certainly aren't Jewish.
The rest of your original comments made some good points, but I'm with MartinLuther2 here - the Jewish thing comes outta left field. Gives Mein Fuhrer vibes.
Bringing other people in, even if they both agree, is bad for society, and it weakens your marital bond. Gonna have to say that's a hard no - even if they both like it and agree to it. It's not just about them at that point.
I was gonna agree but some interesting conversation happening here. More people wanting to sleep around while married than I would have expected, and even more who seem to think if it's private between 2 people it would have no societal effects. Very surprising.
This is a tough one. I know for certain the sanctity of marriage is not taken seriously enough, and it has had disastrous social consequences. This would be a good step towards making marriage a serious thing again. And no, you should NOT sleep with your secretary if you're married...
Mostly commenting because the "government stay out of my bedroom" people are misguided, and I'm sick of hearing that excuse now that everything has a damn rainbow on it. Government is, and has an interest, in being involved in certain aspects of your private life. Pedophilia is one of them. But also, the polygamy/polyamory nonsense is another. "What does it matter what goes on in someone's bedroom in private?"
Well, it matters when that behavior spreads, in private, far enough that it then spills out into the public. And now we have debauchery like the half-naked leather clad men paraded around young children in Pride parades, and Trans Story time in libraries across the country, and people marrying inanimate objects like sex robots. Look at all the gender-swapping LGBT nonsense too - I could argue fairly well it started with legalizing gay marriage.
So anyway... SOMETHING needs to be done to help society re-recognize marriage between a man and a woman as the positive, stabilizing element that it is. Kids with a mother and father do better. Society with intact nuclear homes do better. Single motherhood is not the ideal. Fatherless homes are not ideal.
One hesitation I have is fairly random though, and it's arranged/coerced marriages, and the couple then migrates in to the U.S. Arguably the arraigned may want to sleep around, but that's still bad for society as a whole, and arguably they should get divorced first.
I think they need to prove residence for the recall petition, otherwise you could just launch some internet campaign and easily get signatures from people who have no voting rights in your state. So yes, even if they ask address, still sign.
Plus, being frank with ya, it's your address. It's already out there man. If you have a smart phone, you're already screwed if that's all you're worried about. Unless you've taken extreme steps to mask this info, but living in the modern world and not having your data tracked is damn near impossible.
Your smartphone tracks your daily routine and routes if you take it with you. That's how google gives that little chart of stores and their hours and if they're "busier than usual" or not - they use the GPS in your phone and tracking info to see if you're at the store or not.
Anyway... They just want your address? That's fine.
The point is that neither total should ever go down? Percentage isn't the issue. In a counting exercise, where you're just totaling votes, why would your total count go down?
And then, why would your opponent's coincidentally go up by the exact same amount? Could be coincidence... but very unlikely.
I need that meme of Bender laughing uncontrollably. How many legit anarchists do you think there even are in this country? Patriots would kick their ass so fast.
Even BLM isn't anarchist - they're ignorant commies.
Michael Malice types don't worry me at the moment. Let them larp all day long. If Anarchists were ever gonna do anything, it would have been with the CHOP/CHAZ and the zone they tried to set up in D.C. Or the Occupy Wall Street movement. They lost their chance.