4 ms·

Is this story fiction or non-fiction? It seems utterly absurd

by ctenb 1y ago

ActorNightly 1y ago
[flagged]
- bobthepanda 1y ago
  Small government (for me) and big government for thee.
  - ratelimitsteve 1y ago
    "A government so small I can drown it in the bathtub" has become "a government so small I can keep it in my pocket and throw it at anyone who upsets me"
  - ActorNightly 1y ago
    Funny how you talk small about small government, meanwhile the current administration has shown that it has no problem in going full authoritarian, ignoring the law. But that is not a problem because you personally aren't affected. This example in the OP post aligns pretty clearly with conservatives encroaching on other peoples freedoms. Also in general, given the Epstein stuff, you basically lost any sort of right to talk about what is good politically considering you actively support child molestation.
    - bobthepanda 1y ago
      I meant that as a criticism of the small government types. I am not one.
- glitchc 1y ago
  And Orange County is Kamalaland. Is everything political for you?
  - ta1243 1y ago
    Do you think this type of behaviour not political? Do you think politics is just some people coming out with soundbites on infotainment channels or talking in congress?
  - ActorNightly 1y ago
    Its not about what is right politically, its about the quality of the moral character of conservatives. It should be pretty clear at this point that if Trump came out and admitted to his actions with underage kids at Epstein's parties, his approval rating wouldn't even drop that much. Which just shows that the majority of modern conservatives are perfectly with child molestation. So its probably not far off to say that those people are somewhat mentally ill.
    - glitchc 1y ago
      This moral zealotry in the absence of any evidence just goes to show how Democrats believe in dogma, not facts. Let me provide you with a source [1]. You'll be pleased to know that conservatives do not have a monopoly on child molestation. Some of the highest number of cases are in Maine, Massachusetts, New Mexico and Oregon, all firmly on the left. [1] https://nyrequirements.com/blog/which_us_states_have_the_highest_rates_of_child_abuse_cases https://nyrequirements.com/blog/which_us_states_have_the_hig...
      - ActorNightly 1y ago
        This is inescapable for you. Democrats are completely irrelevant in this case. If you agree that child molestation is bad, then you have to agree that the modern conservative leadership and all the people that vote for them are also bad. If you don't agree... well we don't need to talk about that.
chuckadams 1y ago
[flagged]
- SilverElfin 1y ago
  Reason is pretty neutral and factual in my experience. They do have an ideological stance that affects which stories they cover, which is a focus on protecting people’s rights (individuals) and minimizing abuse by governments or corporations. Personally I don’t have a problem with biasing towards individual rights, or at least I appreciate that someone covers these things, as long as they’re doing so at a high quality.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - staticman2 1y ago
    Clicking around for a bit I certainly wouldn't call their article positively reporting on a proposal to eliminate social security neutral and factual.

Is this story fiction or non-fiction? It seems utterly absurd

by ctenb 1y ago

Is this story fiction or non-fiction? It seems utterly absurd

ActorNightly 1y ago

[flagged]

bobthepanda 1y ago
Small government (for me) and big government for thee.
- ratelimitsteve 1y ago
  "A government so small I can drown it in the bathtub" has become "a government so small I can keep it in my pocket and throw it at anyone who upsets me"
- ActorNightly 1y ago
  Funny how you talk small about small government, meanwhile the current administration has shown that it has no problem in going full authoritarian, ignoring the law. But that is not a problem because you personally aren't affected. This example in the OP post aligns pretty clearly with conservatives encroaching on other peoples freedoms. Also in general, given the Epstein stuff, you basically lost any sort of right to talk about what is good politically considering you actively support child molestation.
  - bobthepanda 1y ago
    I meant that as a criticism of the small government types. I am not one.
glitchc 1y ago
And Orange County is Kamalaland. Is everything political for you?
- ta1243 1y ago
  Do you think this type of behaviour not political? Do you think politics is just some people coming out with soundbites on infotainment channels or talking in congress?
- ActorNightly 1y ago
  Its not about what is right politically, its about the quality of the moral character of conservatives. It should be pretty clear at this point that if Trump came out and admitted to his actions with underage kids at Epstein's parties, his approval rating wouldn't even drop that much. Which just shows that the majority of modern conservatives are perfectly with child molestation. So its probably not far off to say that those people are somewhat mentally ill.
  - glitchc 1y ago
    This moral zealotry in the absence of any evidence just goes to show how Democrats believe in dogma, not facts. Let me provide you with a source [1]. You'll be pleased to know that conservatives do not have a monopoly on child molestation. Some of the highest number of cases are in Maine, Massachusetts, New Mexico and Oregon, all firmly on the left. [1] https://nyrequirements.com/blog/which_us_states_have_the_highest_rates_of_child_abuse_cases https://nyrequirements.com/blog/which_us_states_have_the_hig...
    - ActorNightly 1y ago
      This is inescapable for you. Democrats are completely irrelevant in this case. If you agree that child molestation is bad, then you have to agree that the modern conservative leadership and all the people that vote for them are also bad. If you don't agree... well we don't need to talk about that.

chuckadams 1y ago

[flagged]

SilverElfin 1y ago
Reason is pretty neutral and factual in my experience. They do have an ideological stance that affects which stories they cover, which is a focus on protecting people’s rights (individuals) and minimizing abuse by governments or corporations. Personally I don’t have a problem with biasing towards individual rights, or at least I appreciate that someone covers these things, as long as they’re doing so at a high quality.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- staticman2 1y ago
  Clicking around for a bit I certainly wouldn't call their article positively reporting on a proposal to eliminate social security neutral and factual.