Beyond Mexico, heavy metal contamination (especially lead) in chocolate is a problem worldwide. The places that grow it tend to be environmentally contaminated by the developing world. Of the most recently tested, Hershey’s Dark is particularly bad.
“Their project 2029 is going to be a rehash of all the consultant-driven, careful nonsense that has put them in this place… in a moment when the Republican Congress is passing one of the most devastating bills that we have seen in this country in forever,” he said.
Was project 2025 consultant-driven?
Obama was one of the most neoliberal presidents we have ever had
Got ACA with medicaid expansion passed: neoliberal?
Protip: the editor includes a link to help & a nice button to convert highlighted text to lists.
It’s the deep seeded knowledge
physics too hard: nonphysical things can’t kill? preposterous
Basically: the denialism here is unreal. Lemmy confirms the premise that this discourse & the people spouting it are broken & senseless. Can’t even grasp the difference between physical & nonphysical.
I don’t know: it’s inherently ambiguous. How do you know which is the man & which is the woman? Maybe they’re the same person.
Are you possibly misgendering & being racist? 🤨
(I thought the message had more to do with the words than the images.)
How do you control the course of a failing rocket? Are you claiming such misdesign is impossible?
The fact remains that unlike with words, a physical potential of death & injury exists in what is technically a missile of significant weight carrying enough explosive substance to escape orbit. The difference between non-0 and 0 possibility of death/injury.
Unless magic exists, words are incapable. Do you claim magic exists? How do mere words cause death without the personal responsibility of something else culpably choosing to take several steps of its own? Or are you arguing the sight of words have deranged you into a mindless killer? If so, maybe you’re the real threat.
Seems like you’re arguing society is dangerous to life: I agree. That’s not a valid argument against words, though.
Again, total lack of perspective & sense.
Not in favor of helping dumbass humans no matter who they are. Humans are not endangered. Humans are ruining the planet. And we have all these other species on the planet that need saving, so why are we saving those who want out?
If someone wants to kill themselves, some empty, token gesture won’t stop them. It does, however, give everyone else a smug sense of satisfaction that they’re “doing something” by expressing “appropriate outrage” when those tokens are absent, and plenty of people who’ve attempted suicide seem to think the heightened “awareness” & “sensitivity” of recent years is hollow virtue signaling. Systematic reviews bear out the ineffectiveness of crisis hotlines, so they’re not popularly touted for effectiveness.
If someone really wants to kill themselves, I think that’s ultimately their choice, and we should respect it & be grateful.
Seems more like a dumbass people problem.
Not sure where everyone gets vegan from this. I’m sensing more neurological dysfunction.
Anyone curious what this king of comedy considers funny?
experience empathy
Is there some term for the weaponization of empathy in a shitty argument? That word gets overused. Whenever I see it come up, it’s almost always a shitty argument. Definitely not the trump card they treat it as.
reading comprehension: none
Don’t know, man: kinda think the potential loss of life from a failing rocket crashing into people matters somewhat more than words. Maybe?
Musk himself seems to abhor guardrails generally—except in cases where guardrails help him personally—preferring to hurriedly ship products, rapid unscheduled disassemblies be damned. That may be fine for an uncrewed rocket, but X has hundreds of millions of users aboard.
In this discourse, anyone else find a broken sense of proportion & consequences at stake?
Ted Cruz is a dick, but really, what is he actually going to accomplish by being there?
Performative photo op everything to shit, probably.
Maybe unlearn that or learn to throw it back?
Letting the other camp “own” signs like fake news, 👌🏼, or facts over feelings is basically cooperating with them & validating whatever they decide those signs mean for the rest of us. Yet the literal meaning of those words (& signs) can serve anyone. Language can be creative, no?
Instead of ceding to them like a bunch of feeble losers (and implying we only argue with feelings), maybe we should reappropriate what was given, stir confusion, apply some creativity to make those signs serve us against the “dickwads” we oppose?
That purity mentality of recoiling from anything “tainted” by those we oppose isn’t useful. It’s better to restore, redeem, create.
Opinion pollsters who don’t try to challenge or move voters?
What would be a more direct equivalent: the Center for American Progress writing it? Should they do that?