And now, class, a lesson on the importance of hyphens.

Giant man eating insects means a man who is quite large is eating insects.

Giant man-eating insects means insects which are both quite large and man-eating.

The More You Know.

It’s almost like rising up against a tyrant is morally distinguishable from assaulting an elected leader.

Where are all the Lemmings who were so quick to blame Israel for this, then? Or are they too busy pretending to be shocked that baseless assumptions are often wrong?

Here’s a paywall-bypassing link to the story.

Trump is, somehow, the worst President we’ve ever had, despite very stiff competition. You have a very sus definition of “goat”.

You’re not obligated to pay taxes any more than you’re obligated to live in a society.

That’s not actually true. As a practical matter you can easily dodge your obligation by getting a job under the table that pays on cash, but the legal obligation remains. If you go without income and property entirely you’ll have the same problems any homeless person does.

You’re perfectly free to go live off the grid somewhere, free of those restrictions and also free from roads, fire services, clean water, sewage, cell service, hospitals, schools, and the rest.

Also false. You can’t just legally flee the country, and there’s nowhere inside the country you can do things like own a home without paying taxes on it.

I’m not defending the tax-free attitude of liberterians here, but I am most certainly emphasizing that your claims are false.

Removed by mod

The Gratch Question is What is 9 times 6?

Even in Case 2, it satisfies the satirical robot’s definition of unity for blue, red, yellow, and green people to all agree that Gratches are the fucking worst. The comic simply does not claim that racism against Gratches will reduce racism against anyone else, that’s you adding meaning where none exists. All it claims is unity.

nation and often race above the individual

America First, yes. Trump’s favorite.

a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader

Right, like using a fake elector scheme to enthrone Trump as unelected dictator, presumably for life. It’s their plan A.

severe economic and social regimentation

Like taxing the middle class and putting kids in cages?

forcible suppression of opposition

Lol.

That would be Russia’s fault, not the UK’s or Ukraine’s - and there is no end to the road of attempting Russian appeasement.

What makes you think any contracts were signed?

A conviction won’t take him out.

Mostly correct. However, race is not only protected by the VRA. Equal Protection applies to multiple protected classes. Theoretically, for example, a gender-based gerrymander would also be illegal - it’s just also practically impossible to do. So would religion-based.

I’m not sure what words you’re advocating for. All of these are slurs, for example:

• Idiotic
• Moronic
• Stupid
• Imbecilic
• Ignorant

And so on, because slur means insult.

Paywall bypass.

I’m sorry, is this supposed to make us OK with Israel bombing hospitals because a rapist might be hiding there?

No. Please master basic literacy. Learning about evil things Hamas has done has no relation to trying to justify things Israel has done.

Friendly reminder your friendly reminder has no observable purpose beyond whataboutism.

You sound like you’re being wilfully ignorant, but from the top:

1. Your claim that Trump is ineligible to hold office is the claim at issue. We don’t assume Trump is at least 35 - someone has verify that. We don’t assume he’s an American citizen - someone has to verify that. We can’t assume he’s committed insurrection - someone has to verify that. That third one has never actually been done before, which is the source of the current confusion about who should do the verifying - but you can bet your bottom dollar we won’t be taking the word of some internet rando on it.

2. Congress having the power to allow an insurrectionist to hold office in no way, shape, or form grants them the power to verify someone as an insurrectionist.

3. Primary and general ballots are distinct things (which has been found to be legally relevant in some of Trump’s cases already). The primary ballot is how each party picks their candidate, and there is a reasonable argument that people who are under 35 or not citizens should be allowed on primary ballots, because parties should be allowed to field candidates who can’t win. But general ballots are how we pick where elector votes should go, and there is unanimous consensus that general ballots should not allow ineligible candidates, as that would cause widespread disenfranchisement of voting rights. Voters have a right to assume that any candidate on the general ballot can theoretically win.

4. Electors who vote for an ineligible candidate are simply not in violation of the 14A and I have no idea where you got the idea they would be.

5. The “whole exercise” is designed to protect your right to vote and is currently geared at attacking Trump, not defending him.

Here’s a link to a less biased source of the same story.

It is not - “main” history classes gloss over “messy” details. You should see what we don’t learn about Christopher Columbus, for example.