It's so simple that you can read anything you want into it.
Parenthood, Jesus, men giving their all to country, anything that involves a positive take on self-sacrifice. Or just take it as a pro-industrial allegory. Natural resources want to be used by mankind. The tree takes joy in being harvested. The ore takes joy in being smelted. They exist for mankind's benefit and are fulfilled by their purpose.
If Impy weren't banned, he could tell you that the child represents women and the tree is a simp.
You can be born to a drug addicted mother or you can be born to billionaire parents
It's not a statement trying ignoring genetics or parental impact on a child and saying it's all random. It's a framing that only really works if you believe in a soul as the defining feature of a person. The "lottery" aspect is looking at it as if you're a soul about to be born onto earth. Then which parents and their circumstances are the random part.
It's just saying you didn't pick your parents and have to work with the opening hand you were dealt.
If you don't accept the framing then the sentiment doesn't make sense. The crack whore's kid could never have been born to the hardworking parents and vice-versa. In that case there's no possibilities because there's nothing comprising "you" before birth.
Bullseye is a make believe characters guys. There's no person on this planet who is a good enough shot that you would trust enough to instruct with, "nick just the tip of my ear at 140 yards while my head is moving."
We don't know why he was allowed to stand back up for 9 seconds during an active shooting
Yeah we do. Diversity hire agents who weren't capable of fulling their duties.
The correct holding amount was 12 contracts, or 1,200 shares— not 12 million shares, as was filed in error.
In submitting the required report for the second quarter of 2024, a multiplier was applied by a third-party vendor that increased the number of the shares by a multiple of 10,000 for all options contracts (not just DJT).
Lol. They're not even claiming one error. They're claiming two. A normal options contract is 100 shares. Typing 1,200 instead of 12 (neglecting the 1:100) for 1,200 shares is understandable if you were brand new to options - which no one at a fucking wealth management firm should be. But then they're also claiming that some third-party vendor made it 1:10,000. So they wanted 12 contracts for 100 shares each and instead asked for 1,200 contracts of 10,000 shares each.
The first "error" is hard to evaluate either way. The second one though... were all their options trades in that filing off by a factor of 100 (10k vs 100)? Or did it mysteriously affect only the one trade?
BUT if that option position never actually existed and everything in that filing just misrepresented their actual positions by x100... partially plausible, but still looks awful bad.
The 1st Amendment also protects freedom of association. Which means not wanting to be associated with idiots is a 1st Amendment right as well.
Unfortunately, that part of the right has been gutted over the years.
The problem with cancel culture isn't when two parties don't want to be associated. It's when an outside force causes that state by interference. "Fire them or else," is issue. And it's a moral issue, not a legal one.
as a concept
It's just a on-demand print shop specializing in stickers and packaging, isn't it? Or is there something strange about it?
why does a sticker company need 79 support staff
Agree that seems like a lot. Maybe they're using a liberal definition of "support staff." Or maybe they've actually got enough customers to justify doing a 25 man 3-shift call center. IDK.
Symptoms:
Dry cough.
Shortness of breath.
Extreme tiredness.
How can they even tell? But seriously, get well soon Joe. I want you to have a nice full life of sitting in your easy chair and watching Trump on TV repair the damage you caused and investigating your family's links to Ukraine while it becomes more and more apparent that you'll be recorded in the history books as a national embarrassment.
I get where your analogy is going but let me flip it on you. You're a soldier in the War in Afghanistan and you see insurgents strapping explosives to a child and sending him towards your position. How disgusted are you that they would do that?
In your example, it's soldiers with similar notions of war, with similar values. You and the Chinese guy both consider shooting machine guns at soldiers to be within the bounds of what is acceptable. But that's not what this is. This is decent people with one notion of war/politics against a group that will cross every line if they think it benefits them.
The right is continually shocked and disgusted at the left because the right has ideals and one of them is placing value on morality.
We're not shocked and disgusted. We're used to it. But sometimes it's not a bad idea to act shocked and disgusted anyway. There's always someone encountering leftist bile for the first time and our side saying it's no big deal sends the wrong message. Having like-minded people who dislike them and haven't descended into apathy is a plus.
4chan might work it out?
They already had I think. I remember them laughing that a middle-aged woman seemed like an odd obsession for a him. Give me a couple of minutes and I can probably recall it.
Edit: "QTsnack" (Thanks 4chansearch.com) I guess 28 isn't quite middle-aged. She's just fat.
Also the shooter was wearing a Demolition Ranch t-shirt. So expect some leftist finger waving there. They're already revving it up.
which boasts 11.6 million subscribers, 2.4 billion page views, and features, on its home page, a video titled “The Most POWERFUL Sniper Rifle vs. Solid Rock of Bronze!!!”
They really don't care. Vast majority of crime is intraracial. Which means when a city "over polices black neighborhoods," they're allocating extra resources to specifically protect the black people in those neighborhoods. Race is just a convenient rhetorical tool when the demographic the left is actually sympathetic to is "criminals." They don't give a damn about black victims of crime.
We talked about it 8 months ago when it was more noteworthy and a montage of the one line in a post with no context is just noise? And if one is more cynical, noise intended to draw attention from the current political conversation.
While your first paragraph is retarded because it's obvious what they stand to gain in the short-term, you're right about the deep state being more competent than this. Besides no social media presence? Locked phone? Those are absolutely squandered opportunities to steer the narrative. I don't think they'd be so wasteful.
Vance was anti-Trump back in 2016.
I won't hold that against anyone. Prior to being elected and us getting to see what he was actually made of, it would have been easy to consider Trump as a gimmick candidate running as a publicity stunt.
I don't know if it's accurate, but I've seen it being said that since the Biden donors contributed to a "Biden/Harris" ticket in the first place, they can. In fact that might be the main reason why the Dems are pushing her: because she was the only one who could use those existing donations without legal risk.