Headlines that signal that the story will be misleading and/or stupid

[President Bush]

Promoting the false perception that Trump’s 2020 election subversion case is the subject of wide controversy and debate within the American community?

You really need to step out of your bubble.

No me quedo en burbuja. Estoy en Bolivia.

[stanky]

Trump's supremes have added a new level of absurdity to the playing field...Presidential immunity. Bush went far with the post 9/11 empowerment of the far right agenda, giving elections to the whims of billionaires, basically.
Advertisements, oddly enough, seem to work, and they cost money. Who's got it? Soon the vote is more of a tax than anything meaningful. Free speech is up against the wall. Not money; it is free speech. All predictable directions, and evidence of the overall intent, which is stuck in the dark ages. Politics becomes a tool for corruption. You need money to play. TA was right. Mamon is king.

My optimism lies in the potential of those beyond the political. Scientists, essentially.
Eventually, one (a team) will come up with a cure for psychopathy.
That would prevent its influence from spreading.
Both parties vehemently agree that we have the right to kill others. The responsibility to do that!
So it continues...an expression of extreme sociopathy...at the very core of our society.

It's not worthy of our attention. It wants to suck you dry; needs your money, desperately. Same like god. Always broke. Fuck 'em. Maybe do something positive, independant of it. The cumulative effect of those, imho, usurps the other game; politics...designed to work at a snails pace...and oddly enough, being a pawn of the technology du jour.



that's why i believe in science

[Admin]

that's why i believe in science

Until you don't.

[sparks]

Besides, it's counter intuitive to 'believe' in science. You can know it works, or not. It still works either way. Or as Dawkins once put it: "Because it (science) WORKS BITCHES!"

[Meadmaker]

Trump's supremes have added a new level of absurdity to the playing field...Presidential immunity.

I finally got around to reading the opinion of the court in "Trump v. United States", the ruling on Presidential immunity.

I found two things to be true that are frequently true of Supreme Court opinions.

1. They are difficult to read.
2. The media accounts are almost always wrong, or at least misleading.

In reality, it's not as bad as it has been made out to be.

I don't particularly like the way it's written. I think it is even more prone to misinterpretation than most other opinions.

[arthwollipot]

Besides, it's counter intuitive to 'believe' in science. You can know it works, or not. It still works either way. Or as Dawkins once put it: "Because it (science) WORKS BITCHES!"

I don't think that was Dawkins.