You know, reading back through this, it almost seems like some people are willing to spend more money to have a class of unhoused people than it would cost to simply house everyone, specifically to have a pretext for opposing public works projects that would benefit all, weird.
The obvious answer to "there are people among us in desperate need" is "let us see to their needs as quickly as possible."
Yet some people think the answer is "punish them harder."
Self-aggrandizing moralistic cruelty isn't a luxury we can afford any more, if we ever could.
False dichotomies like that are designed to prevent aide to anybody, veterans or otherwise.
The argument is "because we aren't taking care of our unhoused vets, we shouldn't take care of unhoused people."
Whenever I write something that critiques systemic injustice, people who defend systemic injustice appear to rebut me ... by making the exact points I made.
But there's never been anything I've written that has demonstrated this effect as much as this.
But by beating Republicans in elections don’t Democrats risk losing the very centrist swing voters whose support they’ll need to win the next elections?
This is why I, a senior Republican election strategist providing Democrats with election strategy in the paper of record, strongly recommend that Democrats lose all their elections; if they insist on winning some elections, they’ll surely pay for it the next election cycle.
By losing all their elections, Democrats will send a clear signal that they are willing to compromise on the issues centrist voters value, such as whether or not Democrats should be allowed to win elections. Complete surrender is the only path that can carry Democrats to victory.
Earlier this year conservatives were fighting the Seuss estate for updating their racial awareness from 1950 and now they’re fighting Sesame Street over basic public health.
Like what even the fuck is wrong with them? Never mind the shitty policy. It’s so embarrassing.
The big tent party of small limited government going to war with Dora the Explorer because of her “woke” scolding of swipes, and burning their cardigan sweaters because Mr. Rogers asked us to be kind.
I’ve been told I haven’t followed the Kyle trial closely enough. It’s true; and as a result my comments haven’t touched much on the details. I’m tired. Very tired of yet another meticulous cataloging of why actually a white autocracy-loving dude killing people is actually good.
I’m pretty new to this awareness of how good it actually is to our power structures whenever a white dude kills somebody. It’s always actually VERY good. Every time.
I can only imagine how tired people are who’ve had no choice but to deal with this knowledge their whole lives.
It’s always actually SO good, guys. Every time. If the guy loves autocracy, it is always magnificently good that he killed whoever he killed, b/c of whatever facts surround the killings and whatever we discover about the not-living people, who aren’t victims b/c they deserved it.