jj4211

Not sure. There's a full blown white male military guy I know through work. He's an openly hateful and racist person. Like not even pretending he isn't. He still is pissed at Trump over being incompetent and disrespectful to soldiers.

That was the job of reader's digest.

Since his term began, my retirement has probably slipped about a year or so, and so much further to go.

Campaign ads have already started for the Senate race in my state.

But his particular sore loser attitude didn't kick in until he lost the 2020 election. In fact in 2016 he was high on accusing Clinton of being a sore loser, for no particularly good reason. He loved calling out a sore loser until he lost.

He had plenty of bad behaviors, but being a sore political loser wasn't one of them at that point.

It's at least fair to point out that he didn't donate $25M, but he did donate $2M. I'm half surprised that Musk or someone didn't accuse Soros of buying the election with zero whiff of irony.

In practice, I don't see how I would even know someone is a pedophile if they didn't act on their inclinations. I guess they could publicly declare it but that seems unwise.

I would be concerned if the Internet vigilantes ran with unsubstantiated rumors, like if say Elon musk just called someone a pedophile or of the blue.

This thread has been inundated with links to the commenters. Maybe you could take umbridge with the use of the word "communist", but largely that's a label they assert for themselves, and most criticism of them ignores the communist part, since that doesn't even in theory align with Russia, and is beside the point even for China.

The comment said point blank that China does slavery and colonialism. For wars, they refer to recent history and that's largely accurate in recent history (at least directly, indirectly they supply and offset Russian military presence), they haven't used direct military force to get what they want yet. Largely because people would just give them pretty much whatever they wanted for economic considerations. Biggest potential place for things to boil over directly would be if they finally went into Taiwan.

Or you could just acquiesce to any demand when threatened.

But Europe knows that appeasement works against a violent invader. They proved that was a good strategy in the 1930s.

It was a call that plans may be required, and honestly that's probably a good idea. The administration has repeatedly declined to rule out violent invasion when explicitly asked about how far they would go for their stated aspirations for Panama, Greenland, and Canada.

If you have a neighbor that keeps talking about how they want your house and they need to give up your house to them, and they have a whole bunch of weapons that they keep waving at your property while saying that they'll do "whatever it takes" to have your land, then you don't just wag your finger at them and say that's bad and ignore the situation.

It's not saying EU needs to do first strike, but they need to be prepared to defend their interests from violence as seems possible to be started by the US, which is an insane prospect I never would have imagined being a real thing in my life.

It's theoretically possible that the code we are speculating on is more straightforward than we presume, but it's highly unlikely, particularly given how long lived there code is and, well, it's government and they rarely let things be simple.

The bigger question is what is the upside? This core system does the job. There's risk without any apparent benefit other than "this stuff seems old". Sure they can get away from IBM as the sole vendor of the hardware and software stack that can run it, but it's not with it.

This is awfully similar to how, upon getting control of PayPal, he declared they were going to modernize off of that old unix stuff onto slick new windows servers, and it was a disaster that had to be undone, among the various "leadership" moves that got him pulled from decision making at PayPal.