By inconsistently choosing when they will moderate supporting murder and when they won’t, they are essentially deciding what murder is okay. And that “should” disqualify them from section 230 protections. It doesn’t because section 230 is too broad. But by picking which third party content to allow they are essentially editorializing using other people words.

Not possible. Nature finds a way.

I agree we don’t owe them anything. And if being uncivil will make a difference, I am all for it. But if it won’t help, then let’s stay civil. In this specific case, if the floor of the house becomes a circus, people will start voting for clowns intentionally. Because it will become a required skill. I would rather it not. We already have too many clowns in there as is. And someday I hope it can go back a bit toward what it is supposed to be. A place for compromise. Though I do admit that I don’t have a lot of hope.

Well a big part of it all is that the interruption doesn’t really make a difference. It’s a show, likely done to get attention on himself. If it were to be something very effective, that would be another story. But it will start us down a path where the chamber will resemble a WWE production. The original point though was that if the constituency of the dems that voted yes, support that vote, then they did thier job in representing thier voters. So that’s okay. If every vote follows strict party lines our government will be even more of a pendulum than it currently is. Swinging wildly to which ever side currently has the power.

I know it feels like it. But you could be in North Korea. That’s pretty close to rock bottom with very little hope of ever improving.

I think an awful lot of people around the world would argue we are nowhere near the bottom.

I’ve read otherwise on the costs of services per person and density. A fire station can only reasonably cover a certain amount of space. So low density housing means you need more fire stations for the same amount of people. And of course you need more road per person in general.

If only publicly traded companies were required to disclose information that would prove this. Oh yeah, they are, and it does. But thier shareholder very much approve of it, so essentially the companies are doing what the shareholders want, which is their job. Maybe it’s the system. And maybe it is time for a change.

There is a case to be made for not joining the race to the bottom. But likely these people constituents would be in favor of them voting this way. And in the end, that is who they are supposed to represent.

Great time to start working on a replacement… if you have several million hanging around.

While I do think there should be some relief for some people as far as property taxes are concerned… living in a town or city gives a person access to many local government subsided services. Firefighters, and ambulances are some simple ones that everyone uses. Roads as well. And the cost of that does increase over time. Basing a person’s contributions to paying for that based on the value of thier property is just easier for local governments, and more stable. But it doesn’t really corelate with the use of those services. Nor with income or ability to pay.
Life necessities really shouldn’t be taxed at most levels. Food, shelter, water, heat, medical care. Most already aren’t. But housing still is. Investment properties should be taxed of course, but an average primary residence really shouldn’t be.

I like to say it has become fashionable not to hide it. Lol.

Hope he distances himself all the way to mars. He should try a ride in the next starship launch.

wrong buzzer noise They don’t have lots of “money”, they have lot’s of assets. In the US they can get loans at very favorable terms based on those assets. Which is how they avoid taxes. What the german rules for this are I don’t know, but probably not the same.

Probably stole the invention from a women though. Lol. But doesn’t matter who invented, only why they are worn.

It ain’t the men’s opinion the women are listening to. We hardly notice when you cut your hair according to most women. It’s other women’s opinion that cause things like high heel to exist.

I don’t think the vast majority of people are pro conscription. Some see it as necessary, but I wouldn’t call that pro. That said, if other countries provided professional soldiers instead of just money, maybe conscription wouldn’t be needed.

All very good points. But it also talks about the search being possibly unconstitutional. The would include the manifesto and the gun. That would be significant. All they have is video essentially from what I have heard. That won’t be enough. However I assume they have prints or something from where he stayed that I just haven’t heard about. That would probably be enough to establish he is the one on the videos. But if he was arrested illegally, would the prints they took from him at booking be admissible?

Overall, I think this needs to be done by a neutral 3rd party. I just have no idea how such a 3rd party could stay neutral. Some with social media content moderation.

Because it has become fashionable not to hide it.
Evil has always been winning. The early homo sapiens attacked the Neanderthals. They kept them as slaves and raped the women. (At least that is the current theories, no one “really” knows the specifics other than they “won”). It is in the nature of homo sapiens to get ahead by exploiting others. It’s why they win, and why we have the technology and such we have today. A person with less morals to constrain them will win out over a moral person. I think our only realistic way out is to let AI take over. But I don’t see any reason why it won’t come to the same conclusion, and then exploit us even more. But one can hope.