Palimelon

If the ones who were forgiven have been trying their best and working as much they can to pay off their debt, then sure.

By permanent ceasefire, I guess that means issuing stern warnings, redlines that were constantly crossed, and vetoing UN resolutions. We're still waiting for Biden to honor his pledge that he would begin limiting arms to Israel after the US election if the situation in Gaza didn't improve. I have a feeling we will keep waiting. Nobody is made to feel stupid for that. People are called out for ignoring people's pronounce choice though. Again, I'm not really where and how people are made to feel stupid about something that is also an individual choice. Different people have different pronouns. But it isn't coming down so hard on straight white men. Its coming down on certain straight white men.

The whole system of campaign donations also needs lots and lots of reform. But that needs a lot of work.

Yes, a convenient way to ignore the pain and suffering of one side. Even for stuff that had happened before October 7th.

Because every people deserve a country of their own. By your logic in project 2025 happens and the US becomes an authoritarian Christian theocracy, Canada and Mexico would be ok with invading it. So? If actual action had been taken to support a viable Palestinian state, then your question would be irrelevant. It's no secret that the majority of Gazans and other Palestinians would rather still live in their homeland and not have to emigrate. The problem is people shouldn't have to emigrate. As for what happened in Amsterdam, well that was started by Maccabi fans to begin with. If you want to see a real pogram taking place, maybe a visit to the West Bank is in order European government officials. Actually, most Palestinians in Gaza, even the ones who aren't crazy about Hamas, would say the present plight that has befallen them is due to the occupation more than anything else, and that even if Hamas disappeared tomorrow, the occupation would still continue. They would also ask about the 8,000+ Palestinian hostages being held in Israeli detention centers, most who haven't been charged with anything yet... Given that settler movement (AKA Israeli MAGA) and it's leaders have a huge influence on the current Israeli government, I'd say Israel's re-annexation of the Gaza strip (as well as the West Bank) is a full possibility. The same thing that is happening now. AIPAC pretty much runs the US's Middle East policy these days regardless of who sits in the Oval Office.

Heather didn't make the calls, but she told *someone* to make the calls. That gives her plausible deniability of sorts. This way, she can say that she didn't call the paparazzi, and she isn't really lying.

Yup. Kyle wants the Birkin, not the knock-off.

"Went with the Wind" is such a classic.

Many incel men are blaming women because they feel they are entitled to have sex with that woman, and her saying no pisses them off, because they are owed sex.

Given the break up of the Fox Force Five and what seems to be I would imagine that Kyle really wants Teddi back, just to have another close friend/ally on the show.

One could say it's the fault of the Democratic party for allowing the Republicans and the right to dominate the conversation and control the narrative. I'm sorry but what determines what is an excess of woke culture? Why do pronouns seem to trigger certain people on the left as much as it does on the right? Pronouns are no different than someone getting an abortion or a marriage between queer people; nobody is forcing them on you or expecting you to use them, but just asking for people to respect their choice if they do use them. I myself use traditional pronouns and I don't announce them to anyone, but if someone else uses ones that are different, I just shrug my shoulders and accommodate them. And it doesn't cost me a thing. Yes and many people on the left don't agree for all those things either, but rather see those things as issues that need to be discussed with nuance and how they can adapted to society as things stand now. But again, party leaders have allowed the other side to dominate and co-opt their narrative for their own ends (the way "woke" has been co-opted and is now being used as some kind of pejorative, and not just by those on the right). It's up to the Democratic party to should louder and better on the nuances of the topic, to raise their voices to the level of the Republicans and even louder to get that message across. Ok, but what exactly does that mean? Should people ignore issues that are important to them? Should we be like the less fascist Republicans and compromise on issues that might offend people? Back in the day, the idea of women voting offended a majority of the population and people who supported it were probably derided as the "woke" of their day. Back in the day, the idea of women working outside of the home or even getting an education offended a majority of the population and people who supported it were probably derided as the "woke" of their day. Back in the day, the idea of women getting abortions offended a majority of the population and people who supported it were probably derided as the "woke" of their day. Back in the day, the idea of freeing slaves offended a majority of the population and people who supported it were probably derided as the "woke" of their day. Back in the day, the idea of black and other non-white people earning the same salary or attending the same educational institutions offended a majority of the population and people who supported it were probably derided as the "woke" of their day. Back in the day, the idea of letting queer people get married offended a majority of the population and people who supported it were probably derided as the "woke" of their day. Back in the day, the idea of letting queer people adopt children offended a majority of the population and people who supported it were probably derided as the "woke" of their day. It was the "woke" of their day that kept shouting louder and louder that kept pushing for these changes and kept pushing for these ideas to become mainstream which is what led to the changes we have seen on many of these issues. A "woke" issue - whether it's gay marriage or women getting an abortion of equal rights for all citizens - only stops being a "woke" issue once more and more people start accepting it.

His tax dodging is also something some of them admire.

K-pop isn't my usual thing, and while I'm probably outside that demographic, I do like a couple of artists and some of their songs, this being one of them. Bit of background info: they're a K-pop group with some non-Korean members (3 Japanese members plus one from Taiwan). This song is in Japanese (it's a thank you of sorts to their Japanese fans), hence me posting a video with the lyrics. And while the title may be...ill-timed given what has happened recently, the lyrics are still positive and uplifting. Regardless, it's just a good, fun pop song.

Ah, remember the early days of HWs reunions (OC, NYC, and Atlanta) when they all were giving us Forever 21 realness?

Yeah, digging up that a HW called the paparazzi to take her pic at a public place is nowhere near as bad as digging up past custody issues a HW may have had.

It has moved right in many ways. Not in terms of social justice, but in terms of foreign policy, the economy, etc. Being a Democrat or liberal isn't just related to issues like abortion, racism, queer issues, etc. The Democratic party as a whole, especially many of it's leaders, are more hawkish now that they were 40 years ago, just as one example. The supporting of banks and close ties to institutions like Goldman Sachs (was Harris thinking her quoting them lauding her economic policies was a good idea, even if they ended up backtracking on that? The same greedy thugs who helped get us into the 2007/8 financial disaster from which we are still arguably feeling the effects of? I mean, it isn't as bad as celebrating being endorsed by Dick Cheney but it did make quite a few side-eye her), etc. Clinton and Obama helped the party move more and more to the center on many issues. Like I said, it's great that women can have abortions, queer people can marry the partner of their choice, people can't be fired from their job based on their race, ethnicity, sexuality, etc. But there are issues beyond the social ones that need to be factored in as well.

That is all fine, but if the center keeps moving further and further to the right, which it arguably has been shifting that way, you end up losing either way. I'd say it was more her trying to protect corporate donor interests more than anything.

One can argue that goes both ways. It never helped to have the Pelosis of the Democratic party demonize the members of the Squad, and ignoring their views and opinions, as an example.

True, but it could have made her scenes less painful to watch.

It's a shame how society has to suffer because of some people's ignorance. One can be both. It doesn't always have to a simple binary choice. If anything I feel the whole progressive versus leftist debate seems to be a way for more conservative liberals to distance themselves from a more liberal movement without calling themselves centrists. Also, leftists can cover a broad range of views and ideals.

People tend to focus on the chorus' of certain songs versus the rest of the lyrics. Which is why many people would use U2's One as their wedding song, making the rest of us wonder if they actually had understood the rest of the lyrics in the song...

Musk's involvement should be worrying people more. As it is, billionaires and corporations, theirs and others, already have a worrying influence on the government and are benefiting way too much as it is. Between the billions in tax cuts and subsidies they are receiving, the contracts they have with governments is also something else they can leverage for influence and power. Two-thirds of the satellites circling the earth are owned by Musk. Amazon controls about one-third of cloud computing (the same amount as Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud combined). By some accounts, Hedge funds account for ownership of a quarter of all single-family homes in the US (chances are for many people, their landlord is actually a hedge fund company). We have seen business in the US and around the world becoming run more and more as oligarchies and monopolies. They are the reason why we have low wages, high costs for housing and rent, and high costs for products. Modern capitalism, like modern politics, is broken, but when people point them out, enough propaganda is filtered to the public via the media (much of whom is owned by billionaires) to shout down critics of modern day capitalism as being Marxists/communists/socialists/lefties/etc and/or blame immigrants for the reasons why you can't afford a home and have low wages, never mind the fact that many of these companies are exploiting immigrants, legal or otherwise, by paying them an even lower wage to begin with. They have us stuck in a trap. Any increase in costs to the companies via higher wages to their workers will be passed off in price hikes to the consumers (or rather, further price hikes to the consumers, as if things aren't already expensive enough), it won't change things that much. We might agree that people should be paid more, but we still want cheap stuff, and companies exploit that. For many, it doesn't matter who is in charge, the left or the right, in the US or other parts of the developed world, the billionaires and corporations have their hooks in many governments and will keep influencing them to serve their interests, not the general public's. And yes, the democrats and other governments on the left have to appease their corporate donors just as much as the other side does. Thanks to dark money and other donation laws which have reduced transparency, you can't even fully keep track these days of who is donating what to who anymore. What's called corruption in the "less developed" world is called "lobbying" in the developed world, as if that somehow makes it less shady. Yes, some leaders are at least willing to try and mitigate the cost and burden on the public (Trump's tariff ideas certainly won't be good for the public). But we live in an era (and have been for a while now) where corporations and billionaires are now able to control things on such a scale where they are almost the real governments, via their donations to politicians, their control of the media, and their control of housing, wages, and prices. And I'm not sure who can save us from all of that at this point. Capitalism in and of itself isn't bad, but we are at the point where the system is only benefiting a select few and the majority is barely scraping by.

I wonder how different it would have been had Winona Ryder been able to play the role of Mary.

She still would have been on the trip though. If anything she could be the designated scorekeeper, which would have included her in the events, and given her something to do besides being the official bone collector. Like I said, other shows have done it and managed OK.

But only as a "Friend of".