Anecdotally, I’m seeing a lot of normie liberals get radicalized by watching Democrats approve Trump’s nominees, pass his legislation, and cave on their own government shutdowns. Turns out, if you pitch yourselves as the only opposition to fascism, people expect you to actually oppose fascism.

Yeah, Jonathan Frakes had an old hip injury that caused him pain when he sat down normally, and he’s, like, seven feet tall, so stepping over the chair was just easier for him.

The Captain Planet super villains are actually pretty accurate. Looten Plunder still looks like the average Fortune 500 CEO (minus the 80s fashion sense), and Hoggish Greedly is basically just the President.

This is what is really dangerous about the right-wing right now. The savvier fascists have figured out that support for Israel is a bipartisan loser, so they’re staking an anti-Israel position, and some of them (Tucker Carlson, for example) are starting to integrate their antisemitic dog whistles into it.

The left-wing should counter with any anti-zionist, anti-colonial position that explicitly rejects antisemitism, but unfortunately, the defacto left-wing party is the Democrats, who have essentially staked out the same pro-Israel middle east policy as the neocons. Right now, Trump’s support for Israel is keeping the right pro-Israel for now, but when he’s gone (and his health makes that appear imminent), the right may outflank the Democrats on Israel, leaving us to choose between antisemitism and genocide. I would guess that’s what Vance is doing here.

It better be to roll around in a cumbersome wheelchair, beeping at people.

Ah yes, I’m sure Buddhists find desecrating a corpse abhorrent. They believe in forming strong attachments to the impermanent physical form of the self, right?

They have so much guilt over the holocaust that they’re enabling the next holocaust.

The fact that the stock photo used here is of a white woman says a lot as well.

Sylvester Stallone is Clark Kent.

Even Elon’s initial statement is a logical fallacy. “All squares are rectangles, therefore all rectangles are squares.” Was he making a joke? Responding to something? Really that dumb?

The Politico reporting is extremely damning, and these accusations really can’t be described as anything other than rape. He’s gotta go.

I’m sorry, but it really wasn’t:

The term originates from the 1984 movie C.H.U.D. In the film, the acronym refers to a group of humanoid, flesh-eating monsters that were once humans, but mutated due to radioactive waste. While the word may have started pejorative use in 2003 to describe any repulsive person, its usage shifted as it became popular in the 2020s on sites such as Twitter and Reddit, after the podcast Chapo Trap House frequently used it to describe those who are ignorant or far-right. Source

I mean, if it’s Telegram, then it’s probably a bunch of chuds trying to shift the meaning of, “chud,” because they’re tired of being called chuds.

Yeah, but that doesn’t mean it was used regularly as slang, or that it carried the same connotations. “Lowkey,” has been around for ages, but it wasn’t slang until the late 90s, and it isn’t even used the same way. (“Keep it lowkey,” vs., “that was lowkey brilliant.”)

Oh, I haven’t heard it used that was. I still see it used pretty much exclusively to mean, “right-wing dumb-ass,” but sometimes more broadly as, “online dumb-ass.”

Yeah, the casual way, “f*g,” was used, even into the early 2000s, is pretty shocking in hindsight.

Look, Gen Z has some stinkers (“that’s fire,” sucks, and that’s coming from the generation that gave you, “hella,”), but their use of Chud is spectacular. A perfect encapsulation of every grubby, right-wing freak from incels to groypers. A near perfect onomatopoeia.

Yeah, well, maybe we shouldn’t have our government ban athletes from competitions because you don’t understand something.

I’m not qualified to answer that, and neither are you, but I don’t give a shit because it’s a goalpost shift… IOC is looking at one study, while studies that analyze multiple studies indicate there isn’t enough data, but what data there is points to there not being an advantage. I’m also curious as to whether they mean trans women or trans women and cis men when they say, “biological men,” have an advantage, but it’s neither here nor there because A) you’re still cherry picking the data that conforms to your worldview and B) you’ve very clearly conceded the initial argument that the government should be in charge of this. Anyway, you done yet, or do you still want to be wrong at ne a little longer?

Note that other studies, including meta studies that analyze multiple studies, have concluded that there trans athletes don’t appear to be at an advantage, and that their results are, “low confidence,” meaning their isn’t enough scientific data to make a determination either way. I actually shared the most recent of those studies earlier in this thread, but you ignored it because it didn’t conform to your beliefs. Which isn’t very scientific.