Yes, I also strongly dislike the very short video format you can find on multiple social media platforms these days. On the occasion when my friends forward me things, I find it somewhat manageable if the sound is off. Most of those videos have subtitles and if they’re silent they feel less obnoxious.

Somehow I don’t think the Qataris fund the people she thinks the Qataris fund. Also, I don’t think she has any idea what she’s talking about.

William Gibson wrote: The future has arrived, it’s just not evenly distributed.

The herbal remedies / yoga / crystal gems people were always selling snake oil. No surprise that they’d get along with Trump. (Which is not to say all herbal remedies are worthless, but many are, and if you don’t believe me, have fun getting scammed. And yoga can do a lot for your fitness, yes yes, we agree.)

Ask the article’s author. They could have linked to a PDF court filing but of course they didn’t, because they suck at journalism.

How good it is depends on the details, of course.

You have just argued against the article itself. Should we believe you?

This is overly simple. You can’t legitimately believe that an explanation only focusing on one person is sufficient to predict American politics. Nope, no chance. Meh.

No, landlords do not hold all the liability. The real risk is on the renters. Every day I go to work, but if I lose my job and can’t pay rent, I could be homeless in a few months. That’s real liability.

If some rich fuck might lose a hundred grand, hey that would suck, but they’ll be fine. Their life will go on just like it always did.

Does your TV, which you own but neither use nor possess, make life bad for others who actually use it and watch it?

What a terrible headline. All of us? No. Next.

Ah, classic sophistry. If you omit the actor, you can draw a bad conclusion and pretend you didn’t know it was a bad one. But maybe I’m mistaken and you actually don’t know the answer to your question. Why don’t you read the article? It answers it.

Did you just use some made-up term, so that you could deflect from the real issue? In reality, being trans is not a health problem. I know you want to pretend it is one, so that you can say it’s similar to asthma, but you’re wrong.

Lots of people are prescribed pills for lots of things. What the hell does that have to do with anything? You know it doesn’t.

My friend, anyone who watches the news on an occasional basis knows that you’re lying, and that you know you’re lying. I’m not sure why you’re wasting our time, or yours.

We all know who the real criminals are. The people in uniforms with badges and guns, who love to target minorities, who lie every day of their lives, under oath and on the stand, and pretend they’re not the bad guys because it was their coworker who did the horrible action, not them, they only stood by and watched.

Of course any death is sad. My heart goes out to both families. Also, if you want the problem to be solved, you start by locking up the dirty pigs, not by accusing the general public of … checks notes … understanding the current state of reality.

When the cops back the blue, when they lie and cheat to cover up their coworkers’ misdeeds, they all become targets…

And look, my friend, this is old news. We have said for decades that either cops regulate themselves or they will be regulated by the people. Even now, this message is still falling on deaf ears.

You can define it that way, but the problem is that the authors of the article didn’t give a definition. For example, I think they think the term means to do what’s in your job description and contract. And they think that workers should be going above and beyond that. But if they were forced to spell it out, then people would ask why companies don’t change the job description or contract, because obviously it’s ridiculous to ask people to do what you didn’t ask them to do.

“kills” … This is still occurring, let’s use the present tense.

Exactly. Workers are doing their jobs! Gasp!