…if that’s true I’m gonna go talk to my boss. We need a CNC.

There is no world in which that machine is under a million dollars.

To be fair I have asked in the past and at times gotten a cryptic message back that confirmed nothing or an ew no.

It’s the fear of that ew no that keeps from from asking.

Luckily, one of those is the government that just requested the fine…

Watch him dip into GOP funds, croak, and leave the GOP holding the bag.

My first thought was good, he deserves it.

My second thought was what is a church drag event?

These people and whoever organized this needs to be be tried in the Hague. This is straight up a war crime.

I had to call

Just hear at all

But in the end

I just was undesired

I feel like millennials have a “It is what it is, guess ill work til I die” attitude whereas Gen Z have more of a Bartleby the Scrivener “I’d rather not” energy.

It isn’t that they don’t want to list previous names it’s that the law was buried and not made apparent to the candidate. It wasn’t on the candidate requirement guide, the petition has no space for former names, many people weren’teven aware of the law’s existence.

While I don’t disagree with the law in theory (listing previous names in normal for things like background checks) it’s clear this law was dug up specifically to try to disqualify the candidate in bad faith.

That case at least seems more like user error than the science itself being wrong. Third party blind corroboration should be required though.

It feels like everything that isn’t DNA evidence has been made up bullshit. Blood spatter, fiber analysis, profiling, truth serum, polygraph, hair comparison…

Though fingerprinting has a place. Even though it has never been proven that no two people have the same fingerprint there’s enough variation to single out a person from a list of suspects. Although even fingerprinting can be subjective analysis.

Three fifths compromise was an attempt to determine how to count the population in terms of representation. Free men of any race were counted as a whole person.

Leads to the question, was it racist because a slave should be counted as whole person and thus give slave owning populations more power in government despite the fact that the slave would not have their representatives advocate for them? Or should they not be counted as a person at all and thus be reduced to property with no representatives accounting for their population? Is being in the middle any worse than the extremes?

There is no morally right answer on the subject (because slavery itself makes any decision on the matter inherently immoral), however it needed to be addressed in terms of how representatives are distributed to the states.

Then after that the segregation, lynching, shootings, fetishization, housing bans, zoning laws…

Really racist every step of the way.

Race and color weren’t referred to in the constitution until the 15th amendment, which granted equal protection. You can argue parts talk about slavery in the abstract but could refer to any non-free person (prisoners for example).

Racism was institutionalized in many, many other ways but to say the constitution specifically is quite racist isn’t really correct, it’s more than race was left out.

Now the confederate constitution, that’s an example of won’t shut up about race.

It still started it. Just because you throw a match onto an expanding pool of gasoline surrounded by candles doesn’t mean you didn’t start the fire.

It’s not that dangerous, I only get stabbed once, maybe twice, when I get groceries, and usually they don’t even nick an organ.

I was so confused in 2016 by everyone who was excited for Trump, and I didn’t quite get why.

Now those same people feel a lot more comfortable saying horrible opinions in public and I’m like oh, that was why.

Yeah, the get over it in this context is more of… an attempt? At empathy. Instead of “we have to get over it” it should have been something like “we will get through this”.

He’s said worse things though.

That was Roy, not Moss.