In one instance, according to court documents, she told a Black superior that she was “afraid” to talk with him. In another, she told a manager that their conversation was “chastising.” And in a meeting, she repeated a satirical phrase likening her bosses’ behavior to suffering “beatings.”

These coded racist micro-aggressive verbal assaults must be stopped at all costs. ACLU should ban staff from speaking at all times. All communication will happen via a laminated sheet of 12 carefully vetted non-offensive emoji. Should staff want to communicate, they can point at the most appropriate emoji while gesturing to the other party.

Soylent Green. People have no taste these days.

Introducing our newest reality show, “Smile, Ya Dipshit.” It’s the uplifting tale of everyday depressed individuals as they battle their way through life while we prod and cajole them to find that inner happiness within themselves. Watch as these brave contestants attempt to smile against all odds, as our team of experts forces them into stressful situations meant to inspire joy. Will these victims of melancholy be able to overcome their debilitating emotions, or will the crushing weight of their sadness prove too much? Join us every week to witness the struggles and triumphs of those striving to become happier, one forced grin at a time. So sit back and enjoy the rollercoaster ride that is “Smile, Ya Dipshit!”

In an unexpected turn of events, President Donald J. Trump has compared his financial situation with that of famed physicist Erwin Schrödinger’s iconic thought experiment, Schrödinger’s Cat. The comparison sheds light on a peculiar aspect of Trump’s personal wealth: sometimes it exists, and other times it doesn’t – all depending on what serves his best interests at the time.

Trump’s recent explanation revolves around the concept of superposition, which postulates that two mutually exclusive situations can coexist simultaneously until they are observed or measured. In this analogy, Trump’s wallet is both filled with $500 million in cold hard cash and completely empty. It only becomes one or the other when necessary.

“People don’t understand the complexity of my financial situation,” said President Trump during the interview. “The world sees me as a multi-billionaire, and while that may be true, there’s more to it than meets the eye.” He then went on to explain how this complex financial state applies to his recent legal troubles.

As a vivid example, Trump mentioned a fine imposed on him by a New York State judge for failing to comply with the terms of a 2013 settlement regarding his now-defunct Trump University. Despite claiming to have half a billion dollars readily available, Trump argues that this fortune mysteriously evaporates whenever it comes time to pay off his debts.

This intriguing theory has left many scratching their heads. However, some experts believe that Trump’s wealth is indeed entangled with his fines; they exist together in an unstable state, where paying his dues would inevitably collapse the system and reveal the true nature of his bank account.

deleted by creator

These articles are starting to annoy me. There’s no yardstick that says “Economy: terrible <-> great”. It depends on who you are, how much income you make, what kind of assets you hold, what kind of debt you hold, etc. Ask different people and you will get different answers.

If you poll congressmen regarding the health of the economy and then poll the next 100 people that walk out of your local Dollar General, you’ll probably get a lot different answers.

We can talk specifics like inflation, rates of household saving, etc. but just trying to say “the economy is great/terrible” is overly reductive and doesn’t really take into account the country as a whole.

Who cares how well the stock market is doing if we all got mass fired to make it happen

People who hold large amounts of stock 😀 They don’t give a shit how many people get fired as long as their portfolio keeps increasing in value

My interlocutor, for whatever reason, refused at every turn to just say “oh okay the data seem to agree with you,” and kept throwing stuff at the wall until he eventually claimed that it didn’t actually matter if a typical person was better off or not, at which point I decided we didn’t need to talk anymore. But if you want to pick that up and have a data-based disagreement with any of it, we can rap.

The reason is he started with a conclusion and worked backwards. Any data you provide to the contrary is “fake news” from Democrats, irrelevant, etc. You can’t use reason on the unreasonable. That’s why they “gish gallop” from topic to topic, just trying to see if something sticks.

Please close this thread. Our corporate overlords assure us the economy is quite healthy and vibrant. Please maintain your spending on consumer goods, vote Biden, live long and prosper.

I agree. That’s why me and all my friends are on Friendster.

When will we, as humans of all colors, stand up against racism against whites (and especially males) that is strangely being more and more accepted as a normal thing daily?

You get 0 ‘progressive points’ for standing up for white males. One of the last socially acceptable punching bags. Look at the proliferation of the ‘dumb dad’ on sitcoms, totally acceptable.

If the worst you can say about this scheme is: “people may vote randomly” I don’t feel that bad. I assume the amount of people that spite vote(!) would be greatly outnumbered by people that actually give a shit (but who may not be able to vote today, due to work obligations)

One minor twist: the legislation mandates that one reports to the polling center. The uninformed can select “none of the above” if they are not sure what would be best.

That’s why we have separate charges for drug manufacturing and distribution.

Its their job to block that content before it reaches an audience

The problem is (or isn’t, depending on your perspective) that it is NOT their job. Facebook, YouTube, and Reddit are private companies that have the right to develop and enforce their own community guidelines or terms of service, which dictate what type of content can be posted on their platforms. This includes blocking or removing content they deem harmful, objectionable, or radicalizing. While these platforms are protected under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), which provides immunity from liability for user-generated content, this protection does not extend to knowingly facilitating or encouraging illegal activities.

There isn’t specific U.S. legislation requiring social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Reddit to block radicalizing content. However, many countries, including the United Kingdom and Australia, have enacted laws that hold platforms accountable if they fail to remove extremist content. In the United States, there have been proposals to amend or repeal Section 230 of CDA to make tech companies more responsible for moderating the content on their sites.

Are the platforms guilty or are the users that supplied the radicalized content guilty? Last I checked, most of the content on YouTube, Facebook and Reddit is not generated by the companies themselves.

Using “diversity” or “inclusive” as a bad word.

Using 88 without reason (or 1488).

There’s also people using the term “Monday” to refer to black people. (So they can say “I hate Mondays” and stuff without it being immediately obvious).

“Those [kinds of] people” is another pretty transparent one.

In Canada, there was “traditional Anglo-Saxon words”, lol

None of these seem apolitical to me. I would associate most of these with right wing philosophies. I was specifically looking for examples of apolitical dog-whistles.

OK, what’s an example of one?

What’s an example of an apolitical dog whistle that cannot be identified as right or left wing?

Arguably, couldn’t the creator exist in a parallel universe and have created ours?