ThreePointTakedown

I get the exhaustion with having to parse out the nuance in each situation. But it doesn't seem quite so equal to bothsides-ing it as you have done. The last 25ish years Fox (not)News has been the mouth piece of the right and has cultivated a narrative that anyone not with them is against them and you(convenient, right?). Which means all other stations that reports their obvious bias(and it is obvious if you take just the smallest step back) are, themselves, bias because they don't want to report the truth. Keep in mind Fox has been sued many times and their defense is 'we don't report the Truth such as it is, it is our interpretation or opinion of the truth! So you can't hold us accountable for our lies.' So the bothsides-ing argument or 'whataboutism' is a large arrow in their quiver that they pull out in the hopes that you are too exhausted to really look into what their saying. They hope that the laziness we have to change and the strength we have to cling to our beliefs is so much that we refuse to even consider that they could be hoodwinking us for their financial benefit. When GOP wins, they get tax breaks. That's a might fine incentive to carry their water. Other networks would have similar benefits. Why don't they fall in line? To sum up: you did what-about.

Wow. Racist much?

Maybe for the same reason all the people who stayed on at the end of 45. When they knew things were headed in the wrong direction. 'If I quit now, they'll find someone to do their bidding and who knows what could happen to the Republic.' Keeping in mind Pence almost didn't show up for work on J6. If he hadn't, I imagine whoever replaced him would've had no qualms with creating a constitutional crisis. Luckily he made it in and did the only noteworthy thing in his time as VP.

They also have control as to whether the transcript is released and when. Of course they'll release it, but no until they've had time to say about things happening in the hearing that DIDN'T. Until the evidence finally comes out, the lie has already been rooted. Then their on to the next distraction. Rinse and repeat. Does that sound familiar? Then the 'but both sides' crowd starts yelling so they don't have to hold their side accountable because as much as they rail against it, they want the dopamine rush of a dunk as much or more then helping people. The leaders they've elected know it. So they pay no price for being incompetent or mean. As long as they are sticking it to the same people their constituents have been told are responsible for their lot in life; immigrants, Liberal Ivy Elites, HB, and welfare/drag queens. Stop me when I get close.

No what-about-ism please? Address the issue or don't. The person of privilege is HB. The kind of boogie man the GOP loves to attack and paint as the cause for all the issues that the lower and middle class are up against. They're reluctant to have the hearing in public because, I'm guessing, they have nothing and don't want to be caught showing their @$s on tv. Behind closed doors they can say whatever they want with people like you saying, 'both sides do it' rather then holding your side(whichever it happens to be) accountable for doing it in the first place. I sure do. When those that I support and believe in, do something unethical, I say so. This situation is questionable at best borderline harassment at worst.

Did anyone else experience a crash on Saturday? Some brackets still aren't updated. WTF?

Does advising equal force? Has anyone said they will take vengeance on companies or organizations that oppose or have wronged them?

There is an argument that we've tackled before about where and when is it appropriate to limit information to the public. When the government or a government organization limits, by force, the dissemination of information(other than that which would or could be considered dangerous, pornographic, or in other ways objectionable) it is censorship and/or a violation of free speech. ei banning certain books from public libraries. When a business does it, its neither censorship or a violation of your free speech. You have no right to Twitter. If they want to make money by plastering swastikas all over, they can. Its been done before. If they choose not to, kick rocks. That you're trying to frame it as 'they just don't like the ideas' is a bit of a stretch. That their economic policy is different is not the issue. Its wanting hatful views to be considered run-of-the-mill because the only other places they can spout those ideas are tiny corners of nowhere and they want more exposure. Dislike doesn't begin to describe it. Dangerous, yes. If we are talking about economic policy or how best to provide free health care to everyone or the best way to pave over pools so the less fortunate can't enjoy them, then sure lets talk. But your argument seems like a pretty typical straw man and an twisting of the real issue. Regardless of whether or not its censorship. If racists and white nationalists are happy about the direction twitter is going, I'm skeptical of someone who agrees with them. Businesses have at least the sense not to wade too deep into that pool.

Yes. That's the point. Although no one has found a way to make it financially feasible. Just like anything, those that are left out will try to tear it down. Every niche will be filled when and where they can.

Rank hypocrisy at its best. This is another boogie man to rile up the base and keep the donations flowing. 'This person of privilege is what's wrong with the country and only we, with your support can fix it.' (whisper)'pay no attention to the man behind the curtain'

Without knowing what you'd witness, why say you'd prefer a different spot? Seems like there is conflicting information. Why not get an answer to the first question or at least more information before reacting? Making a public declaration of intent makes it harder to change your mind.

Funny, when I do a similar search. The same website pops up with a graph from November 15, 2023 and the trend is not the same. 2019-24. Different take How do we square this circle? Are you willing to admit there is a chance you're wrong and Twitter is and will continue to be worse then it was just a few years ago?

An opinion column from this rag carries little weight

Show us the number of total users?

165 has been a buzz saw lately. Wouldn't doubt that 3 or 4 non-finalist in the last few years would be top of the podium in other eras. Hope they all stay healthy and can follow it up on the international scene like Tay-Dake-Oughs. Watching these guys tear it up for the next few cycles would be fun! That's wear Hamiti might be able to get over the hump.

Was it all the film or just some carefully curated clips? Because if it was the latter, you could say he's trying to frame a narrative rather then remaining open minded. If that is so, you should hesitate to trust anything he says/does because he has an agenda. Did you consider that before posting? I doubt it.

Take your info from non-wrestling related forum threads. Don't listen to the VAST majority of climate scientists. People coupling their identities with denying the 'truth' from the other side, like men in masks, cannot be trusted.

This goes back to the library discussion. Some people just don't have the resources/need for these things. Watch The Newsroom episode about it. Some jobs don't/won't allow time off to vote. If it was as easy as going to the post office on a lunch break, maybe. But sometimes, in some states, in dense areas, polling places are not of adequate number or staffing to allow for quick or timely voting. Vote or lose your job? If you can answer that question easily you have privilege that some do not. Keep that in mind.

Now its not evidence for or against what you're saying but just the idea of ROI for this crime seems like a strong line of defense. Typically there is tangible goal when putting together a plan to stick it to the man. Usually not something you put the work in to pulling off just to allow the masses and house odds to thwart your efforts. What you would need to do and know about a person to pull it off and what you get in return is hardly worth doing. Which is why we see widows doing it on behalf of recently deceased partners or other family members. They have gotten caught. So, again, not a point against you but its hard to conceive of enough people to drink the Flavor-Aid to get the numbers to accomplish anything that has been theorized by 45 or his/he/him's acolytes, regardless of policy or procedure of voting. So to my questions, what are the deficiencies of the process that would allow you to make your comment? Where can it be taken advantage of? I know each state may have a unique process so pick your favorite. Where are the soft targets?

Sure. This has all been proven to be a lie. You are a liar. Anyone who repeats this has no evidence of its truthiness and is just hoping that their big feels will miraculously become true. Recounts have happened. Some of them actually gave Biden(who is the President) more votes then originally counted. At no point has there been any evidence of mass voter fraud in favor of Biden(more than a few Republican voters were caught with their hands in the voter jar, no uproar about those political prisoners) and with so many people looking I would be hard pressed to think that if there was it would be found. But you know what they say, "conspiracy theorists never met evidence against their idea they couldn't reason away". If you want to hang your hat on not being able to prove a negative as evidence of your point, then you're denser then I thought and not worth the time. To repeat, you are a liar. Who repeats provable false claims. Every time you do, I will have evidence to prove your lyingnissatude. Not going to assume your motivation for doing this but from experience they're either malicious or ignorant. One can be mistaken for the other. Which one are you?

I apologies for asking for any evidence, whatsoever, that you might have for making your case. I will go back to throwing out wild accusations of things that have and never will happen. Claim them as true and waste the time of everyone who reads them. I'll just assume you have none and since you know that, you are deflecting away from the point.

This one is a bit more of a parallel. The Michigan contingent both had coaches that 'retired'. As upset as I was that the assistant responsible for navigating MSU's voyage to the bottom, was promoted to captain, I could not have been happier at the choice from Our Lady of Anne Arbor to bring SB back. Who would take over if/when Bono is let go? Great question. Brad Dillon could test the waters of the B1G and see what he can do. Pendleton gets the nod. Rob Koll could try his hand at a four conference in as many years. Derek Moore, if he can put together a good resume in the next 6 months. Troy Nickerson is near by. Alex Tirapelle is familiar with that part of the country. Trevor Brandvold could head back home. Who am I missing?

Sunken cost is hard to overcome. In some cases, worth it. No bravery without fear.

If its repeated enough and not shouted down, it may be adopted as fact. Every time you try to rewrite history, if I see it, I will shout you down because you are wrong, and I won't let you forget it.

Your post was devoid of information. I felt no need to carry your water. (tipping cap)