ewsieg

Depends on how you define mass shooter. Based on how the federal government is defining it, there are more mass shootings in Chicago on most weekends then there are "mass shootings" based on how it sounds like you describe it in a year. And I do agree that a lot of the minority population are looking for gun control. Many are looking for more police as well, despite louder voices saying less cops or no cops at all. Can't believe i'm blanking on the name of the podcast, but I remember one where they looked at a minority community that was pushing to have traffic laws enforced more as pedestrian deaths were too high. The police began to do it and deaths and injuries significantly dropped, but more tickets and arrests were made based on the more strict traffic enforcement and the police backed off, resulting in the pedestrian injuries and deaths returning to previous norms. I'm just saying I think it's a good tool for prosecutors, but I won't be surprised if there is some pushback someday from the same folks cheering it on today.

Fairly confident he legally purchased it from a pawn shop after the local prosecutor skirted the law to allow themselves to charge him with a misdemeanor when he was first found illegally carrying a gun. While I don't disagree with you either, this gets back to my next concern. When prosecutors start using this new tool to go after parents and we find it's being used in inner cities more regularly and there is a demand from the democratic party to move away from it because it affects minorities disproportionately.

Just wondering out loud here. From a foreign policy standpoint of weakening our enemy, propping up Ukraine to continue fighting and making Russia look weak, how much of the decision making was on if we try and find a peaceful end to allow middle aged Ukrainian men to live and repopulate what's left of their country and allow some stability versus, we've already made Russia look weak, now we can pull weapons out of Iran and China and allow them to be used in Ukraine, further weakening them. For all I know, production could have just been ramped up, allowing Iran/China to sell and make even more for themselves down the road. Actually now that I say it, it probably was a specific reason we allow this war to continue and Iran/China have made money allowing them to increase for themselves to and it's a lose/lose.

I thought it was a mix of both until she did the obligatory "let's make some noise" that everyone does and everyone gets a reaction too.

This is the correct answer.

I heard an interview from a democrat that is running against Wasserman-Schultz in her primary that "from the river to the sea" was first said by some right wing party in Israel, so therefore you 'need to learn your history' before you claim it's used by Palestinians/pro-palestine folks in a disparaging way. Can't believe I now have to root for Wasserman-Schultz....this world is so messed up.

I was just pointing out that depending on who you heard it from, she was booed mercilessly or the fans loved it. Sounds like a mix of both to me.

Makes sense, It's much more important when you have a view you care about so passionately, that you only share with like minded individuals and avoid anyone else, especially those that could actually present that view to a larger audience.

Probably not the best thing for an ambassador of a neighboring country to say, but I definitely got a laugh out of it. I suspect he's not entirely wrong either.

I guess like most things, you'll hear what you want to hear.

I was just trying to respond with it and was surprised it was not allowing that either. Listening to it now, No Code in its entirety, nice!

Sounds about the same for me, although I'll defend the No Code album until the day I die. Since the 2000's, seems like I'd try every album and would find at least 1 song I liked, but often not much more than that. I've only played this album once and enjoyed it straight through. That said, I can't identify any one single song that I think i'll prefer over the rest. Not sure if that just speaks to the entire album being better than I expected or if maybe I just liked the overall song but maybe in the end I won't enjoy this one as much as I think I will. Guess time will tell.

What is going on in this forum? I try and take a step back (away from news/politics) a bit over the last few months and most of you are complaining about what's going on with young people on college campuses? Just like that and Pfife is the only non-Trump loyalist. The rest of you are just fine talking GOP talking points? I thought we weren't allowed to criticize anything that could potentially make the left look bad to ensure Trump doesn't win? 🙂

Sounds like the US knew about a "limited" response. I don't know. I wanted Israel to 'take the win' and see if we could find a way to deal with Iran in less public ways. That said, almost wish it wasn't 'limited'. If you're going to do it, do it. I keep hearing that US intelligence says Iran is close to a nuclear bomb again. If true and they just did a 'limited' response, it only hurt the situation.

For several years, I worked on a team where my customers would email their request to us and that would create a ticket for us. We were the last team in my company (large telecommunications company) that a customer could reach us via email, versus having to call into one of our call centers or open a request/ticket online. As such, the email would eventually get shared on reddit or some other forum and we'd get someone that found the email address and would reach out to us for stuff not related at all to our role. For instance some kid on reddit didn't understand how to read a traceroute and found our email address. We'd get complaints that we were the cause of their World of Warcraft being slow. Some of them would share information which either didn't show any issue at all, or showed trouble before they even left their home network. Management decided to have all of our tickets send out surveys and it went bad. Nearly 100% of our bad survey responses were these non customer complaints that shouldn't have had our info anyway. Mgmt was furious and of course never took the time to understand this, just harped on us to 'fix the numbers'. We eventually found out if we closed a ticket a certain way, a survey wouldn't get sent out. Add in the fact we had so many repeat customers we asked a few of them to fill out a survey monthly and soon enough we were consistently the best rated team. Absolutely nothing changed in terms of the service we were providing, yet mgmt touted it as a huge improvement that they drove. Gotta love corporate America.

I have no problem with an aggressive defense strategy, but if you want my support, I hope you follow international laws even if your enemies don't. But if the defense of "that's just what they do" is valid, them what are we doing in Ukraine with Russia? That's just what they do. Lastly, if Israeli truly will kill anyone that kills there own, why didn't they kill OJ? I would have been perfectly fine with Israeli dropping a jdam on a foursome with OJ on a golf course in there last 30 years.

You're just looking at this as black and white....just sayin' I am not upset about who was killed by Israel in that attack, simply felt it crossed a line. I have no qualms with anyone saying they think it was worth it, but if the way it was carried out doesn't at least give you pause, I won't put much value in your opinion.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say Iran probably sanctioned both of those. But if Iran tortures prisoners of war, does that mean we should do the same to their troops?

I'd argue Israel taking a small crew into Iran and killing this general in his home would be less of a line crossed then killing him in an embassy in a different country altogether.

I certainly don't want to get into moral high ground statements when we're talking Iran, but Israel bombed an embassy in an entirely different sovereign nation. That just doesn't sit right with me, even if I'm not sad about the loss of life of the Iranian military members and acknowledge their sins.

We could go for ever if we want to trade 'who started it' stories, but Israel hitting an embassy was grounds for war from Iran. Israel crossed a line. Iran, as stated, would prefer to let their proxies do the dirty work, but by launching everything at the same time, giving Israel and it's partners time to address each wave separately, that indicates to me Iran didn't want to create great damage. Would they have preferred a few get through? Probably, but I think they expected most to get knocked down. On paper, they can still tout they fired so many to make it look impressive, but they wanted to no part in this, but felt they had to respond to a unprecedented attack on their embassy. I agree with Biden's response to Israel, with multiple Muslim countries stepping up to defend Israel, Israel needs to accept it as a great win and see if it can't build from it with it's local partners.

Another entry for 2024, solid name recognition as well.

**** yeah!

I suspect the overlap was too much.