“You have your tax dollars being given in grants to things like the Fringe Festival, which is like a sexual festival where they’re doing all this stuff,” DeSantis said during a Thursday press conference, according to the Tampa Bay Times.

Hmm, I wonder what kinds of “sexual stuff” he’s referring to.

the Tampa Bay Times reports that the governor’s spokespeople did not respond to questions about specific events he found objectionable.

Oh.

Florida Rep. Anna Eskamani (D), who attended this year’s Orlando Fringe festival, told the Times that she saw nothing “sexual” at the festival.

“It does feature drag queens and other forms of artistic expression that DeSantis has wanted to censor despite courts telling him otherwise!” Eskamani said.

So a man dressing in women’s clothes is an inherently sexual act, according to these sexually repressed freaks.

Or the EMF generators they carry around with them in their pockets, A.K.A their phones.

deleted by creator

Biden has been conspicuously avoiding speaking at unscripted public encounters for quite a while now, though, and reading from an autocue at SotU is a far cry from having to react on the fly and put together coherent arguments in response to moderator questions and Trump’s lies during a debate. I have the feeling Biden’s staff knew full well that the debate was going to be rough going into it.

That’s the point - they closed ranks and kept riding the Biden train whilst quietly hoping that no one would notice it was in danger of coming off the rails.

https://theintercept.com/2024/06/28/biden-debate-dnc/

Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves. They stayed mum for three and half years and now they’re reaping the whirlwind.

☝️

I’d say a good-sized part of it is simply the American preference for watching beautiful, weathly people doing beautiful, wealthy people things. Hollywood rom-coms and US TV shows in general clearly skew towards upper middle class settings when compared to the equivalents from, say, the UK.

In other words, I reckon US media prefer their fictional characters to be aspirational whereas other cultures prefer theirs to be relatable.

Calling Biden articulate is being incredibly generous. I mean, what on earth was he trying to communicate here?

Overall, Biden put in a very lackluster, unconvincing performance while Trump did his usual schtick of rambling off topic, lying through his teeth, and refusing to answer any questions on policy. The whole thing was a shambles.

I think Tlaib did a decent job at giving some kind of pushback, but it was particularly galling to see Moskowitz stand up and repeat Israeli propaganda without anyone calling him out on it.

In his speech, he alluded to misinformation that was debunked over a month ago: that the numbers from the Gaza Health Ministry were allegedly unreliable and that the numbers of dead civilians had recently been halved by the UN. Neither of these things were true, and so therefore he was either lying on Israel’s behalf or he didn’t care enough to do the appropriate research.

More frequent kernel updates.

That’s why they’re running the disclaimers now - the trial hasn’t been held yet and they’re bracing themselves for impact.

Unlike Fox News, who could settle with Dominion for $787M and carry on as usual, Newsmax’s pockets don’t run nearly as deep. If the court rules against them in September, they’ll most likely be utterly screwed.

• requires a fair bit of post-installation configuration (suboptimal OOTB experience for newbies)
• Uses btrfs by default but comes with no snapshots or GUI manager pre-configured for system restore
• Less software availability compared to Ubuntu or Mint
• More likely to break than Ubuntu or Mint

Yes, to be fair I now see the LA Times did mention it. Fair play to them, as I’ve read several articles about this incident and this the first time I’ve seen the reason for the protest actually included in the article.

I wonder why the majority of the US news media is neglecting to mention this highly relevant fact 🤔

The Death of Stalin is great.

But isn’t this something you can tweak within your DE configuration? I’m on Gnome and don’t have this issue.

This sounds like a DE thing than a Wayland/X thing.

It’s not so much saying that someone’s religious beliefs are logically impossible, more highly unlikely. When I typically see this rhetoric, it’s generally along the lines of “how on Earth did you weigh up all the evidence (or lack thereof) and come to the conclusion that God exists?”, or more impolite words to that effect.

I personally don’t browbeat the religious, so I’m not condoning it, but that’s why this line of argument generally isn’t gnostic atheism.

If, on the other hand, someone is actually saying that the existence of God is logically impossible, a priori, then that would be gnostic atheism. But, like I said before, that generally isn’t what most atheists believe or argue for.

Gnostic atheists are only a thing on paper; I’ve never met or heard of another atheist who ascribes to this view. As the link you provided states, this academic definition of atheism is not one ascribed to by the vast majority of self-described atheists.

Or, to quote the American Atheists organization:

Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Source

On this basis, any invisible unicorn/intergalactic teapot/flying spaghetti monster argument that invokes “burden of proof” is not an gnostic atheist position. The argument is based on the idea that until evidence for an invisible unicorn exists, there is no reason for it to have any bearing on our behavior.

This is different from saying that because no evidence of an invisible unicorn exists, that we must conclude that it categorically does not exist. You cannot logically prove the non-existence of a non-existent entity.

As an atheist who is not anti-religion, I wholeheartedly agree. The religious do not have a monopoly on irrationality, or weaponizing ideology.

I see many atheists on forums proposing the idea that if we could only just get rid of religion, the world would be a harmonious and rational place. As if human beings wouldn’t still be perfectly able to come up with new and interesting ways to rationalize conflict and division amongst themselves.