Like we’ll be eating some rich people and suddenly the rich guy I’m eating is not lefty halal because they aren’t organic or grass fed or some shit.

I think I agree but part of me wonders when the purity testing actually stops…

Don’t worry. We’ll make butter milk out of it lol

Yea no. Try having a nuanced discussion on any (insert heated topic here) on Lemmy and watch the labels fly out faster than the ejaculate of a post pubescent 15 year old.

Just a heads up as of a few hours ago the windows installer is broken.

I think the missing link is viable raw photo management and color space transforms. Photoshop is just built well for that. But in terms of drawing Krita blows Potatoshop out of the water

Sam Reich is the goat

Never heard of Qobuz. Been looking to replace yt music. Their algorithm is trash.

I don’t know how people got that take from Tropic Thunder when they explicitly make reference inside the movie to how messed up and wrong it was. Like, that was the joke. RDJ was playing a character so full of himself that took method acting to it’s extreme. Am I missing something? Id love to be educated

Sort of. It’s a mixed bag is what I’m saying. It’s just not as impactful as we all imagine it to be. Some politicians are very corrupt obviously. But it’s not this prevalent “corporations own congress” kinda thing.

Access to influence policy and legislation. But they seem to get mixed results. There have been a few studies that looked at the actual effects of lobbying. I may have to dig around but i can track them down. It’s very interesting because it upturned what my assumptions were about lobbying.

It seems they find candidates that are already somewhat aligned and work no push the scale further. Like, someone like Latimer wouldn’t need a lot to push the scale in favor of AIPAC objectives.

It’s very interesting to read up on this.

I used to think lobby groups are influential in determining the outcome of these elections but I think the reality is they align themselves with candidates that are slated to more likely win. Sometimes they even fund both candidates. Money just doesn’t seem to translate to effective victory. Look at Bloomberg in 2016. That guy spent an ungodly amount of money on his campaign - - - more than all the candidates combined or something close.

Cory Bowman was already waning in popularity. From your article:

Bowman had several compounding low-level mistakes and scandals that could easily be hammered home to voters, like pulling the fire alarm at the Capitol or his controversial hip-hop lyrics. Beyond that, Latimer is a popular politician who has represented most of the district’s voters for years. Add in more money than any group has ever spent on a congressional primary by an enormous margin, and you have the conditions for a win.

I think it all depends. I’m not saying AIPAC is not influential. I just don’t think it’s so clear cut. I think the money in more to get access. The reality is Israel is popular with boomers, and Dem boomers vote. We are starting to see a shift with younger voters but it’s just not there yet.

Are they still around though? I think they filed for bankruptcy. The jeezus wannabe ceo was a good con artist.

No

Not general omnivores - there’s a specific type for that category. I’m no biologist though so ill have to look it up and get back to you. I could be wrong. Don’t trust a stranger on the internet lol

Aren’t dogs some type of omnivores instead of carnivores?

What other options do the Palestinian people have

That’s part of the crux. Both the Palestinians and the Israelis need better leadership.

Unfortunately, we are never returning to the 68 borders. If I had the power to magically make it happen, I would do it in a snap. But the reality is that it’s never happening. Each side has to concede something to move forward. Palestinians need to accept the Jewish state at this point --whether it’s fair or not. 10 million Israelis are not going to just up and leave as much as we wish that could happen. Israelis need to demolish illegal settlements and restore occupied territories even if they are not going to concede the 68 borders.

I don’t really know what the best answer is but the onus is on both parties. I agree Israel has the upper hand militarily, but Israel does not want another 100 years of suicide bombers either. There has to be a path forward.

We agree a lot more than you think. I’m not saying the Palestinians don’t feel justified in fighting. Hamas still enjoys broad support among Palestinians.

The point where we diverge I think is that it goes both ways. The Palestinians never accepted the establishment of a Jewish state, even before the Peele commission even happened. The issue as I see it, that sentiment never wavered even though the context has changed drastically.

Not that any of that justifies the conduct of the IDF in this current conflict. We agree - all I’m saying it’s not so simple as an occupying force creating an apartheid condition.

I don’t know that Israel closed all diplomatic options. There were plenty of offers on the table that Hamas / PLO walked away from.

I don’t think Israel are good guys and they are effective opportunists with the land grabs / settlements. I also don’t think Hamas cares one bit about the Palestinian people either. I feel like they always seem to get carte blanche to act with impunity because the Palestinians are oppressed --which, don’t get me wrong, they absolutely are. It just seems we always single out one party, but to me they are both culpable of exploiting the suffering of the Palestinians. Just my opinion.

Why were they holding hostages to begin?