No shit, Sherlock. And that's why you're helping the fascists with this comparison. You're working in a two party system, being an idiot about how to actually change shit.
You're not changing the one party that can be used for change for the better, you're just whining and making them seek votes elsewhere.
And your own words show exactly what I mean.
There's a marked difference between lazy fucks who didn't properly bring it across the finish line and people actively working to make things worse. Correct my believe if I'm wrong: unless it's a constitutional amendment, laws are fairly easy to overturn still.
And to 'how many years'.... How many years did people have to vote for progressive candidates in the lower levels to change the actual base of the party to where they want it to be? How many years have the voters not used to make it the party they want it to be?
This kinda shit is so fucking often due to progressives wanting things to be a certain way, but not putting in the legwork because "it's a lost cause anyway". With the democrats you have a chance to change the party into the progressive direction. Take an example from those maga assholes - it doesn't take a lot of them to shift the republicans to be even worse.
Criticizing is great, putting it like OP with "they're the same, democrats just put on a hat" is dishonest and reductionist. This kind of thing actively causes harm and plays into the hands of the party that's objectively worse for anyone that's not rich.
It's not just about the afd, but also about them and the need to destroy them.
I think you misunderstood me?
I'm not saying the article is bad or wrong. I'm taking exception to putting kiddie gloves in headlines.
Think about the people who only read this concisely while browsing headlines. The headline is completely ambiguous and easily reinforces the person's heels beliefs instead of laying out the important part of where it comes from.
This is before the author and content even comes into play.
Yeah, I did. The author uses political violence as the term throughout. The problem here is not what the author means but that they're not directly addressing it in clear terms.
You had to guess/ask whether I read the article because the headline makes the source of the political violence ambiguous.
you can bet that an author pointing out a rise on the other side of the political spectrum would not go for muddy terms. This headline seen by a right wing person would just be something they would not click and assume it's reassuring their fox news world view by a different outlet.
It's "right-wing terrorism" not political violence as if the whole spectrum is engaged in the same shenanigans.
I've been running a Chromecast with Google TV 4k almost since its launch and I've been happy with it.
Easy less than the shield would've cost me and since it's only for streaming from jellyfin and YouTube it works great
Incompetent seems pretty spot on since it can't even burn the trash.
HIPAA covers the spreading of medical information by anyone who's not the patient themselves.
Just throwing in that for me it's been a great first season, and I would've loved for it to be even more faithful to the manga.
If there's people out there who like me have so far disliked a lot of the libraries taken by earlier adaptations, this might just be the the version for them.
Overall I'm looking forward to the next season though personally my favourite part, the initial enishi arc, will be after it and I hope they get to that part in a season 3.
Use constructive criticism. Criticize the issues. Don't put false equivalencies first.