This kind of (non)thinking is so ridiculous. Equating Covidians with anti-tariff ignores a whole subset (Thomas Sowell, Rand Paul, Peter Schiff, Alex Berenson, etc.) who were against both. It also ignores that the Trump Administration was pro-lockdown!
This page was adamantly against lockdowns and mandates during Covid. What was so frustrating back then was that it was obvious the mandates and lockdowns would not stop the spread. So it was not a dilemma of shutting down the economy vs. stopping the spread, it was a decision between no lockdowns and everyone gets Covid, or shutting down the economy and everyone still gets Covid.
With tariffs, the trade off is equally dumb. They won’t hurt Wall Street but help Main Street, they’ll make things more expensive for the avg worker and potentially cost them their jobs. It’s lose lose. Like with Covid it’s maddening that people can’t just decide not to torpedo the economy, they have this idiotic inertia they just can’t stop. We’ll also see if people supporting these tariffs try to later memory hole it like the Covidians, or if they’ll be open to changing their mind if things don’t work out.
As with the leftist freak out over “banned books” this is not banning books, it’s still easy to get Harry Potter and bookstores should be able to limit whatever books they want for whatever reason. But not only does it show a double standard, the rationale is far less justifiable than removing certain content from school libraries. At least there the justification was the content of certain books are inappropriate for children, clearly not every book should be available in a school library. Here, there’s no argument about the content they just don’t like the author’s politics!
Because news came out about his letter to the FBI, revealing he was a nutcase. The letter was rambling and incoherent, claiming he was trained by the US military off the books, and that Walz had instructed him to kill Amy Klobuchar so he could run for Senate. None of it made any sense (Walz is not running for Senate) and none of the assassinations made any sense, even in a diabolical way.
Nearly all of his hit list was Democrats (including Walz) and abortion clinics, but he was supposedly working for Walz?! Plus, one of the guys he killed wasn’t even on his list, and others were no longer in office or deceased. None of it makes sense from any coherent angle.
Basically, it appears the guy was mentally ill and neither the left or right can use the incident to push their agendas anymore, so the story was dropped.
This is so dumb. First, this means LA began as Spanish land founded to support Spanish missions (i.e. colonialism). Which contradicts their entire premise. But the reality is that Los Angeles is a quintessential American city.
▪️When the US acquired California in the 1840s, LA was a small town of less than 2,000 people. It was basically nothing. It became large only after the gold rush and the railroads completed in the 1870-80s, which brought thousands of new settlers and a booming commercial center.
▪️But LA had a major issue limiting its growth, no water. It wasn’t until Mulholland found a water source and built an aqueduct down from Northern California that LA had the infrastructure to grow into a major city.
▪️Then, a combination of oil, real estate and the film industry caused it to boom in the early 1900s. Post WWII, industries like aerospace continued its spectacular growth. Calling this “Mexican land” is a brain dead take. Neither the Mexicans, Spanish nor ...
