Had to make sure Berghain wasn't an art school. It would explain a lot if it was.

"It's-a me! Mario!"

But they DO have the exclusive right. People want to be told the world is different - that it's better - but if we want to change it we need to see it for what it is. If we say "They don't have the right!" before we've done the work necessary to strip them of the right, then we'll never even understand how to start fixing this broken system.

Yeah, my mom used to be upset that I didn't hold onto my old pokemon cards, but not only did I never have any rare ones that would be worth anything anyway, I used them how I wanted to when I wanted to, and when they stopped interesting me, I gave them to someone who was still interested. I don't regret that.

Most republicans I know believe that their party, like their country and their religion, needs to be followed blindly; if their party supports it, it's good, and if their party rejects it, it's bad. End of story. No more thought will, or should, be put into it.

The people who go on and on about how America is the best because "freedom" are now working out whatever mental gymnastics they need to perform to justify voting for the man who said if you vote for him you won't need to vote anymore. They already chose to support Trump and his party - nothing they say or do anymore will change that decision.

Debbie*

Most republican voters I know, boomer or otherwise, simply view voting differently than most their lefter-leaning constituents. I often hear them say that the point of voting is to simply choose what benefits you the most, and that if everyone simply chooses things that specifically align with their own wants and needs, that the biggest, most important groups will get what is needed. It's not even that they understand that they're being selfish by only voting in their own best interests, they just honestly believe that considering the needs of others when voting undermines its effectiveness.

Now, it's obvious that they're wrong - smaller groups deserve just as much of a say as their larger counterparts, and the country benefits when they do - but they don't think about it that way. I believe it's also why republicans are so concerned about becoming a minority - they honestly believe that voting should specifically only benefit the largest group, and are desperately trying to maintain "their people" as the largest group.

Last time this showed up on Lemmy I sent it to my wife, and she loved it so much that now my pet name for her is Cuto Potooto - playing on Cutie Patootie.

It should be pointed out that Israel is clearly NOT doing this in response to Oct 7th. Hamas was clearly responsible for Oct 7th, and Israel is clearly not attempting to retaliate against Hamas; bombing a building on the off chance that your enemy is within it isn't a counterattack, it's just terrorism, and repeating that action on the scale that Israel is repeating it is not a war, it's genocide.

Correct, but the difference is that it's legitimate AND parasitic. So we can't just ignore it like they want to.

This study is about the immense magnitude of cat predation, and your takeaway is that we shouldn't limit owned cat predation simply because un-owned cat predation is higher...

We estimate that cats in the contiguous United States annually kill between 1.3 and 4.0 billion birds (median=2.4 billion) (Fig. 1a), with ∼69% of this mortality caused by un-owned cats. The predation estimate for un-owned cats was higher primarily due to predation rates by this group averaging three times greater than rates for owned cats.

This study estimates that annual bird deaths by owned cat predation in the US is around a 750 million median figure, and you're just fine with that?

The stripper's name? Albert Einstein.