GeneralVincent

Even in the event that the article is talking about, he at least had some logic behind it

When Walz was elected a few months later, he did try to halt the pipeline’s development. Early in his first term, Walz continued a legal challenge from his predecessor’s administration against Line 3, which he continued until 2020.

But after that legal challenge was rejected, Walz declined to use his executive powers to stop the pipeline, and his administration approved key construction permits that allowed the pipeline to move forward. He told MinnPost in 2019 that he believed a unilateral decision “would violate principles of ‘checks and balances’ between the executive, judicial and legislative branches of government.”

“If you fall on the side that says, ‘Well, the governor should just stop this; it’s the right thing to do,’ then you would be making the case that the next governor should just build one, without any environmental review, without any process involved,” Walz said at the time

Which I don't 100% agree with but at least see where he's coming from.

But if she is black, they can call her a DEI candidate. And if she's not black, they can call her a liar. Both insults are wrong, but they need to have a consistent message. So that's probably why they're so obsessed with race. That and they're racist.

Be there or

The opening ceremony wasn't mocking any religion, it was an homage to Dionysus.

Saying you can't offend a religious person but then getting offended by a misunderstanding of an artistic ceremony is peak irony.

The rest of your comment reads like a fox news host going for a hate filled misinformation speed run record, so I don't think there's any point trying to point out logical inconsistencies or try to show you that we're not the boogey man (or the boogie non binary people) you hate us being. Hopefully you can stop listening to the rhetoric that actually causes division, meet some real life trans or non-binary people (like me, I'm not easily offended but will call you out for being intolerant) and touch grass.

We don't need evenly distributed emotions! They'll just trickle down from the most emotional to the rest of us

Black Girl Games is one of several consulting companies that promote more diversity in games and other media. Not to exclude white people completely.

Let's see what we can agree on here, please stop me when you disagree with my statement.

1. Racism still exists and is a problem in the world today

2. The best tool we have against racism is knowledge and exposure to other cultures and ethnicities

3. Having more than two or three AAA games with a main character that is a minority will give gamers that first hand experience with the represented culture

4. Therefore, more representation is good for combating racism and as an extra benefit is giving more diverse worlds/stories to play

5. There are still a metric buttload of games with white main characters or character creators that let you be white

6. Minorities will be happy to see themselves represented

7. Diversity is not the enemy, and companies are trying to level the playing field, not erase white people

I want to know specifically what your problem with dei efforts are so we can clear up any confusion.

What an interesting read, thank you for the link!

I'd encourage everyone to read more about his life before and after becoming an interrogator, but I found a tl:dr of his methods

The Scharff Technique was defined by four key components: 1) a friendly approach, 2) not pressing for information, 3) the illusion of knowing it all, and 4) the confirmation/disconfirmation tactic. (The latter strategy is when an interrogator presents a claim in the hope that the prisoner will confirm or disconfirm it—it’s what Scharff used to learn about the tracer bullets.)

Nope, wife works at a hospital and they don't have a paper backup of everything. They were affected by the outage and it was apparently a pretty tough night.

They can still work, but there obviously will be a serious delay switching to paper everything. You might want to look into the legislation that you're thinking of to see what it specifically says.

And I'm pretty sure there are ways to prevent what happened that have nothing to do with having medical professionals chart everything on both a computer and on paper. That just sounds really inefficient.

You're not incorrect for not wanting to be part of this country, but you are incorrect thinking that a violent overthrowing of a democratic process in this country is not against the freedoms of our citizens, the democracy the military swore to protect, or the very basis of our laws, the constitution.

I'm sure some of the military do hold far right fascist ideals and may be sympathetic to any seditious movement or even want to join them. But they would be extremists for starting a civil war, and they would not be the majority.

Also the military would not be attacking fellow Americans. The former Americans would be trying to overthrow the democratically elected government, and the military would be protecting American citizens. When you declare civil war against the United States, you are no longer a citizens and don't have the same rights as a citizen. You are then an enemy of the United States, and by extension, our military.

What? You're the one who suggested the military is Republican and wouldn't fight fellow Republicans starting an uprising. And this is in response to a comment by the GOP senator calling for civil war.

I'm not making any assumptions, I posted a link to a poll showing the military is politically diverse, and I said they are generally pretty strict in following their beliefs in freedom, democracy, and the constitution. I'm really not sure what you're trying to imply.

No liberal is a leftist, liberalism is right-wing, while leftism is Socialist

That's factually not correct though. I understand and agree there is a difference between leftist and liberal, but the rest is just blatantly wrong.

Here's a history lesson on left and right wing;

https://www.history.com/news/how-did-the-political-labels-left-wing-and-right-wing-originate

Left means progressive, right means traditional. Liberals are progressive and left leaning. Less so in the US, but still not right wing.

Your comment is excluding specific progressives and mislabeling them because they're not as progressive as you. That's what I mean by elitist.

Additionally, no one here is silencing anyone, unless you can pull up some proof that a liberal mod is deleting leftist comments in this thread for being leftist. Everything in these comments is just discussion.

Also, I agree. There are some specify anti-leftist liberal comments here and on Lemmy. That is frustrating and my comments aren't meant to support that, just to point out the hypocrisy I saw. Almost everyone here is anti-fascist and anti-maga, we can be a bit more civil in our disagreements

you all

I'm literally a leftist -_-

I just disagree with arguing and insulting anyone who is a bit less progressive than me. I prefer to not see the world as black and white