WHYAREWEALLCAPS

Tell me you didn’t read the articles without telling me you didn’t read the articles.

While on the one hand, that’s true and has always been true for journalism, if you’d read the articles you’d realize that the content of them does contain truth and informs.

Did you read the articles? There are no polar opposites here. You’d know this if you read the actual articles instead of going off the headlines.

I mean, both are true, they just cover different stats. You can still a large number of layoffs while still having large job growth. They also cover stats available on different days. Indeed, the second article notes that one of the stats in the first article was wrong. It also indicates that predicted stats for December and November were both underestimated. December and January were both underestimated by half. Also, the layoffs came in fields that are different than the ones that saw growth.

These articles are complimentary, not contradictory as you’d seem to indicate. Perhaps you’re just going off the titles and not actually reading the content?

It’s the same pretty much everywhere and anytime conservatives try to use violence. They think people will flock to their cause but don’t get that the vast majority of people, regardless of ideology, do not want to kill people and find murder reprehensible. This leads to these terrorists losing ground constantly and driving people who’d at least been uninterested in their worldview into being vehemently against it. Terrorism like this results in outcomes to the contrary of what the terrorists were trying to achieve.

Capitalism working as intended.

I’ll believe it when I see it. More likely that they’ll just not vote.

Sauer later argued the threat of prosecution could have a chilling effect on future presidents’ decisions, saying they would need to look over their shoulder and ask, “Am I going to jail for this?” when making controversial decisions.

That’s exactly the fucking point, you chode! The president should be weighing that consequence.

The finger guns scene from The Losers comes to mind.

Why the hell would you sign a contract with a company that you know will only be available 6/7ths of the time?

If they find your coded diary, they are just going to torture you until you reveal how to decipher it if they have even a remote reason to suspect you. Everyone thinks they’re a tough guy until they’re waterboarded or they have their fingernails or teeth pulled out with a pair of channel locks. Everyone breaks under torture. The idea that someone can last until they’re killed is a Hollywood fantasy for action films.

The idea that governments are going to expend valuable resources like learned individuals or AI to crack some individual’s code is just Hollywood thinking. If you’re a suspect, the government will monitor you. If you do anything to make them up their suspicion, they will bring you in. They aren’t going to spend untold amounts of money deciphering every suspect’s diaries or writings. They’ll just torture it out of you, either physically(fastest) or mentally.

And let’s just put this out there - if some desperate person fingered you for being whatever, having anything written in code is as good as being guilty to them. You will not return to your previous life. At best you’ll be released and monitored till the government tires of you or it falls. The latter is no guarantee it will end. Just because the government might be replaced doesn’t mean that those taking over will view any more favorably. After all, if you were deemed to be a security threat before, what makes you think they won’t take that to heart. Once deemed a security threat you will always be a security threat, even to those who you may identify with.

I think you’re overestimating what governments like this have. What is more likely is that the government will just snatch up someone who knows the the made up language, torture it out of them, and then go from there. Far less resource intensive than having departments to decipher coded language.

My wife asked me, “How did he live to 100?”

My response, “Because of all the souls he sacrificed.”

He will always be amongst my proof that there is no just and/or loving god.

I’m sorry, her ruling makes about as much sense as teats on a bull. Legit sounds like she tried to legalese herself out of having to make a decision on the matter while knowing he should be excluded. Hopefully the appeals court decision makes more sense.

Oh, they have political views, just not the same as we think of them. They are, as you aptly summed up, about money. They want less taxes, less oversight, etc. Guess which party has been giving that to them? They couldn’t give two shits if the Middle East became the flash point for WWIII and could lead to global nuclear annihilation as long as next quarter’s profits are higher than last quarters. They’d happily run ads endorsing slavery if it would make them a buck. What they have is a lack morals and ethics because those things get in the way of the line constantly going up.

Looking at that poll there’s some interesting things. Like a hair bit more support for Russia from Dems than GOP. Or that, again, both are about the same for support of Ukraine, with the GOP being slightly better. And more. It’s almost like a majority of self identified Republicans do not share views in line with their elected representatives. Wonder if this has anything to do with the consistently poor showing that the Republicans have been having since 2020. Maybe playing to the fringe element of your party might not be the best course to take. Of course with conservatives the fringe tends to actually turn out to vote regularly.

Wow. First verified report of a piece of shit going uphill.

Stick to what comes naturally?

Now? NYT has been this way for years. Also, there exists addons to bypass paywalls. I use https://github.com/iamadamdev?tab=repositories on Chrome and Firefox. On mobile I use Chrome with javascript turned off for paywalled sites. Any addon/extension that allows you to easily turn off javascript will kill paywalls.

Based on what, precisely?