1
lerm4comptroller 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do you legitimately believe that if she was taken hostage at gun point that she'd be pleading for "cooperation" and not someone to save her?

Because if she calls for help in that situation, she's actually trying to deprive you of rights she herself feels entitled to enjoy. Which makes her a massive hypocrite.

She can be as nice as peach pie--doesn't matter, she's a bad person.

13
lerm4comptroller 13 points ago +13 / -0

In my area, our one hospital is full because it always is this time of year. We have one hospital because the company told the state government they weren't full all the time which isn't profitable, so they shouldn't let any other hospitals be built. The state government agreed. This was a several year battle finally finished last year.

So I don't really appreciate hearing from our state that we have to shut down because we don't have enough hospital beds, nor hearing from that hospital about how tough they have it due to capacity limits.

2
lerm4comptroller 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, you got it correctly. The top poster was trying to point out to the public what the teacher's union was saying without the buzzwords and with more context...

It just sounds really, really bad when you put it that way is the problem.

4
lerm4comptroller 4 points ago +4 / -0

That's an okay metaphor, but I got one more apt to the situation:

The firewatch (not a random citizen) called the fire department, and now Democrats are screaming at the firewatch for proof of a fire. That's not their job: their job is to watch the forest and report if they think they see fire. And if that's not their job, then there is literally no point to hiring a firewatch in the first place. You know, unless you just want them there to be seen to make people feel better.

There you go; legit one-to-one, unlike comparing it to a random dude in an apartment you cover the point that these reports came from poll watchers, while also driving home that there is no legitimate reason to hire them if they aren't doing this.

That said, Tim still thinks this is a political debate and that's adorable. Don't make that mistake: these are the same people who spent years arguing that it was necessary to open a special counsel investigation into noncrimes based on rumors from 4chan reported by a foreign spy paid by the political opponents of the accused. Now, put those pieces together: we can't investigate elections even though all our normal avenues for reporting irregularities are at red alert, but we have to investigate any stupid rumor about our political opponents (and also stay home, don't talk to each other, and don't go to church). They're going full Stalin and not even hiding it. This isn't a political debate anymore.

8
lerm4comptroller 8 points ago +8 / -0

Trump: "I'd rather take a political risk for peace than risk peace in pursuit of politics." <----Not Presidential

Biden: "I mean you've got the first sort of mainstream African American, who is articulate and bright and clean and nice-looking guy. I mean that's a storybook, man." <---Totally Presidential, stunning, and brave

(BTW, the Trump quote has been basically scrubbed from the internet but I made note of it at the time because it was so amazing.)

1
lerm4comptroller 1 point ago +1 / -0

While I essentially agree that this issue can only be addressed by bravery (but I certainly wouldn't smear victims of terror as cowards), that doesn't change the definition of terrorism.

6 U.S. Code § 101 (yes, this is a law, we're just ignoring it 'cause Democrats)

(18)The term “terrorism” means any activity that—

(A)involves an act that—

(i)is dangerous to human life or potentially destructive of critical infrastructure or key resources; and

(ii)is a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State or other subdivision of the United States; and

(B)appears to be intended—

(i)to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(ii)to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(iii)to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.

1
lerm4comptroller 1 point ago +1 / -0

I have no idea, I don't think they ever went that far. Improbable that it would work, considering the makeup of that mountain. On the backside giant chunks of it are falling off, but I don't know how deep the formation they carved goes.

But since you're interested I might as well add there are a bunch of these giant stone formations in South Dakota--this wasn't even the first proposed site for the sculpture. The issue was the locals at the time: they didn't realize how much of a boon it would be, and bought into some bs about how it would "destroy their mountains." I suspect this would be less of a barrier today. The town that turned it down is still a weird little backwater, while the town outside Rushmore is a tourist center that makes millions a year and you can see Washington's face from there.

So, in my own personal opinion, I think we should start carving up those mountains. Make a chunk of the Black Hills our statue park of American heroes, with towering sculptures everywhere of all sorts of people.

2
lerm4comptroller 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oh yeah. In fact, that spot was the original plan for Jefferson until it was discovered that it was too soft, requiring a complete rework of the plan. Those giant cracks there go really deep, which iirc is why Teddy is set back so far as well.

But iirc, it wasn't modern engineers or geologists who determined this though; it was the original sculptor. Basically, to do this type of sculpture you have to be a talented artist, an engineer, and a geologist. The guy was a genius, and if we're being real that's probably the biggest issue with adding on or even finishing this sculpture: modern artists just don't measure up.

11
lerm4comptroller 11 points ago +11 / -0

No, I find it too funny that even though the Democrats are the oldest political party in the world they still don't have a President on Mt. Rushmore, and I intend to keep it that way. Even though I've got a bit of a soft spot for Jackson.

(Seriously, count up the party representation there, and chuckle to yourself with glee once you see it.)

30
lerm4comptroller 30 points ago +30 / -0

NOOOOOOO!!!!!!

... Because that side of the mountain is too soft to support sculpture: he's got to be right of Lincoln.

15
lerm4comptroller 15 points ago +15 / -0

We cannot return to the false securities of the political and economic systems we had before the crisis. We need economies that give to all access to the fruits of creation, to the basic needs of life: to land, lodging and labor. We need a politics that can integrate and dialogue with the poor, the excluded and the vulnerable, that gives people a say in the decisions that affect their lives.

This is a direct quote from Pope Francis' op-ed in the NYT the other day.

This is a clear call for the fall of the American way of life and a shift to Marxism. He is a Communist.

2
lerm4comptroller 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oh, ffs. I was expecting it to be a bit harder to dig up, and they just outright admitted it. Good lord, the virtue signaling has gone so far it's undermining their own bullshit.

Thank you. Gonna be a dick about this at my first opportunity. Happy Thanksgiving to you, and I hope you have lots of leftovers. :)

4
lerm4comptroller 4 points ago +4 / -0

We cannot return to the false securities of the political and economic systems we had before the crisis. We need economies that give to all access to the fruits of creation, to the basic needs of life: to land, lodging and labor. We need a politics that can integrate and dialogue with the poor, the excluded and the vulnerable, that gives people a say in the decisions that affect their lives.

That's a direct quote from Pope Francis' op-ed.

Just so we're all clear, he's calling for an end to our republic and free market system to shift into a system in which the government controls the access to commodities and weights political power based on class.

He's just out-and-out calling for Communism in a NYT op-ed.

2
lerm4comptroller 2 points ago +2 / -0

Do you have a sauce for this? I'd kinda like to be a dick about it to someone.

3
lerm4comptroller 3 points ago +3 / -0

lol Yeah, that's not an accurate viewcount. Wanna know how I know?

... Because now it's at 5k views.

3
lerm4comptroller 3 points ago +3 / -0

The long term effects... of a strain of a disease that has only been around for a year?

Do ya see the problem here?

I mean, if we wanna compare it to the usual upper respiratory infection, then we can safely say that yes there are often some long term effects especially with the elderly or infirm... But I'm sure you see the Pandora's box that would open: if we treat it as a normal uri here, the public might try to do that in other areas and we can't have that. So instead they have to turn it into some big Doompornfest that frankly is based on nothing.

(My own grandmother died of pneumonia caused by lung damage brought on by a mild flu she had almost a year prior. It's incredibly common. Hilariously, the CDC reported her death as flu, her death certificate said pneumonia, while we all just agreed our 95 year old gramma passed of old age.)

10
lerm4comptroller 10 points ago +10 / -0

I'm from a red state that's locking down again. We're going carryout and delivery only. We had no warning.

A guy down the road bought like $40k worth of steaks for his restaurant a few days ago. He was saying he assumes he'll have to just give it all to charity.

I'm not sure how that local business owner could have possibly successfully navigated this situation. The very nature of his business relies on the stability offered by bulk purchases and a desirable location accessible to the public: if you remove those things, then there are no more steak houses for the general public.

... So you know, add that to the list of banned things I guess.

2
lerm4comptroller 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yunus was the founder of Grameen Bank, which pioneered the concept of microcredit... Others, such as former Indianapolis mayor Stephen Goldsmith addressed social efforts on a local level by using the private sector to provide city services.

... Well, props to the globalists for tricking the American left into supporting loan sharks and privatization, I guess. That whole page is a wild ride, btw.

But I would suggest this is an older term that is unfamiliar to many because it's a bad term. Just between you and I, the left can in fact sometimes meme; they just haven't been able to lately because they keep sticking on really bad memes like this. It just doesn't make any goddamn sense even as a nuanced concept: they even admit this in the first paragraph of the damn Wiki page! And they expect the public to pick up on it and vibe with it just from throwing it out there?

That's not how that works--you gotta pick clear, concise, understandable messages that aren't cloaked in thirteen layers of socialist doublespeak require reading entire Wiki articles that even admit they can't fully explain it. (Hence, why they've been sucking so much lately--they went full commie retard.)

1
lerm4comptroller 1 point ago +1 / -0

I love how everything has to take longer and be some new, complicated process no one has ever heard of because the varus...

Except this one thing.

This one thing has to be even faster than normal and the process simplified with no delay, because of the varus.

Just commie things, I guess.

3
lerm4comptroller 3 points ago +3 / -0

lol Well, yeah, obviously. And they would know we'd see it, of course.

I'm more wondering what they want normies to think of when they read that, and I can't come up with anything. Maybe just hoping they skim over it and don't notice?

10
lerm4comptroller 10 points ago +10 / -0

social entrepreneurs

... Pimps?

They're just playing with words to avoid saying 'communist' out loud obviously, but... What am I supposed to think this means? At least 'community organizer' made you think of a church lady doing a potluck. This is just mangled garbage, so I have no idea.

5
lerm4comptroller 5 points ago +5 / -0

totalitarian tō-tăl″ĭ-târ′ē-ən

adj. Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›