specseaweed

joined 2 years ago
[–] specseaweed 10 points 9 months ago (2 children)

you're on the internet too much

[–] specseaweed 6 points 9 months ago

holy smokes that headline sucks

[–] specseaweed 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Oh, when was that, when two people were honestly debating their views and policies? Was it Nixon? Reagan? Bush? other Bush? Which Republican was it?

what bullshit

[–] specseaweed 31 points 9 months ago (4 children)

You can be critical of a politician and still support that politician. Why that's suddenly a super difficult thing to understand is beyond me.

[–] specseaweed 47 points 9 months ago (5 children)

...so then you totally did understand, you just wanted someone to waste their time explaining it so you could immediately come back with jill stein nonsense. that was a dick thing to do.

[–] specseaweed 5 points 9 months ago (2 children)

KillerTofu got it right, I just wanted to post and agree rather than just upvote. Yeasts changed the flavor of my homebrewing pretty significantly as well.

[–] specseaweed 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

He said he could connect to windows and fedora thru bluetooth.

I was having the same problem last night trying to connect an controller thru bluetoothctl on Mint.

[–] specseaweed 27 points 9 months ago

Is this bait? It sure feels like bait.

[–] specseaweed 6 points 9 months ago

Thanks for posting this. I didn't know it existed.

[–] specseaweed 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It wasn't for you. Your posts are banal and amateurish. It was for other people.

[–] specseaweed 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Back in the before times, bills would come to a vote and bills that had virtually total support would go thru with unanimous consent. Now, bills are blocked from being voted on so that Senators aren't on the record being shitbags. As you quoted Vance saying, "“it’s idiotic for us to take the bait” in regards to Democrats using the bill to force Republicans to publicly declare whether or not they support IVF."

Think about that statement from a Senator, then marvel at how fundamentally different he sees the job of a Senator from say, you or me or regular humans.

Duckworth is putting a face to whoever opposes a wildly popular issue, IVF treatment. It causes people to think about the issue, because legislators are in fact advocators (you know, in complete contrast to Vance trying to hide what he advocates for). There's nothing performative about it.

in my opinion, it is the standard democrat cynicism. it is simply something that in the future can be used as a bullet point for her future candidacy. without context, one could write ‘honestly’ she “fought” for IVF.

For Duckworth and for many people, IVF is a opportunity that is basically magic. It changes their lives and it gives them the opportunity to have children. There are few things more powerful than that, and it's tone deaf to an extreme degree to think that something is performative just because it isn't targeted at you.

I mean, usually I'd say you're being a petulant childish asshole, but I'm trying to be better too.

It's ok if everything isn't important to you, champ. It can be important to others and we can support that. There will be Republican supporters of IVF that wanna know too.

view more: ‹ prev next ›