Sofia_Petrillo

Last week, I was at a friend's birthday gathering at a crowded bar in D.C. and I somehow wound up in conversation with a small group of people about the war in Iran. One of them fully supported the war and fully supported Trump. I politely sipped my drink and waited for the convo to move on. I didn't really want to talk about this during what was meant to be a laidback evening. But then he said this: "The death toll has been surprisingly low for our military." I asked him: "How do you mean?" "Well, we've had a small number of troops killed, less than ten." "Thirteen," I said. "Thirteen troops have been killed in combat." "Right," he said. "That's a surprisingly low number. We've had a low fatality rate." And, you know, I just couldn't let that go. I couldn't. "Surprisingly low?" He said: "Yeah, it could be much worse. We could have lost a lot more soldiers at this point." I asked him: "Can you name any of the service members who were killed?" "What?" "Thirteen service members have been killed. Do you know any of their names?" There was this long, awkward pause. And then he said: "I know some of their names have been published." I said: "All of their names have been published. The last KIA was a few weeks ago. Do you know any of their names?" Another long pause and then finally: "No, I don't." Let me offer some friendly advice for anyone like this gentleman who is tempted to say this was a "surprisingly low" number of service members killed. Don't make this observation if it's just a number to you. Every one of these service members had loved ones, friends, a life back home. Some of them had kids. Some of them had mortgages and front lawns to mow. Some of them had grills in their backyard they would have been using for parties with people they loved this summer. Now they're gone, and their families and friends are always going to feel that loss. You shouldn't be saying something like "surprisingly low" in the first place but especially when you don't know any of their names. If U.S. military fatalities are "surprisingly low," it shouldn't take you any time at all to learn their names. Friendly advice.

Megyn Kelly: I am sick of this shit. Can't Trump just behave like a normal human? "3-D chess." Shut up. We are talking about threatening to wipe out innocent civilians casually in a social media post. This is completely irresponsible and disgusting

Every day I get closer to shutting down Amazon entirely. I've enjoyed the convenience and access to books/music and stuff I want showing up on my doorstep. I don't want to keep supporting their predatory profiteering. I also need to build independence from tech.

As a capitalist- this is disgusting. Capitalism is making more profits by offering great products/services. This is nothing less than predation and theft.

@micyoung75 @SocratesSword I stand with the pope. Also...America doesn't have a billion citizens.

The Avignon Papacy reference is the detail that demands attention. An American defense official invoked a 14th-century episode in which the French Crown physically relocated the papacy to Avignon and controlled it for 67 years - as an implicit model for what happens to religious institutions that oppose state power. That's not a slip of the tongue. That's a studied historical reference deployed deliberately in a room with the Pope's senior diplomat. The message was not subtle. Leo heard it. He spent Holy Week delivering what papal scholars described as a sustained theological argument about the nature of power and imperial violence. On Palm Sunday he said Jesus rejects the prayers of those who wage war. On Easter Sunday - the same morning Trump posted his expletive-filled threat on Truth Social - Leo told world leaders to lay down weapons. On Tuesday he called the civilization threat "truly unacceptable" and asked citizens directly to contact their elected representatives. The White House's response to the Pope's Tuesday statement: "The Iranian people welcome the sound of bombs because it means their oppressors are losing." The first American pope will spend America's 250th birthday on Lampedusa with migrants. One Vatican official told The Free Press: "The Pope may well never visit the United States under this administration." The Pentagon summoned a cardinal and invoked the Avignon Papacy. The Pope responded by asking 1.4 billion Catholics to call their congressmen.

Me: OK, Lent is over and I can get back on Twitter. Orange Maniac:

Every believer needs to understand this is not an encouraging sign; it is the infiltration of twisted theology into state power. Christian Nationalism is heresy, and the separation of church and state is just as vital to religious freedom for Christians as it is for other faiths.

@OurShallowState What's wild is that there was ABSOLUTELY a time when the news media was *at least* left-leaning if not simply left. It seems the media is a whore for whomever is in power. That might be scarier than the Trump regime, in isolation.

I wish there was one TV network that was not beholden to the Right at the top of its hierarchy, and if there was, that this one TV network would counter program against Trump's State of the Union with a Bad Bunny concert.

“No matter how much time you spend fasting, no matter how much you sleep on a hard floor and eat ashes and sigh continually, if you do no good to others, you do nothing great.” Pope Leo’s guide to Lent. thelettersfromleo.com/p/heres-what-p…

@micah_erfan I'm old enough to remember when it was the left who wanted it to be enforced & the likes of Rush Limbaugh made merciless fun of them for it. The current klan calling themselves Rs/conservatives would probably call Limbaugh a RINO. (p.s., Limbaugh wore thin quickly, for me)

Talk Shows have been exempt from this rule since the 2006 Jay Leno decision.

@neoavatara It's a bot. Delete it rather than help spread the nonsense.

This is totally false and an ignorant statement.

💯💯💯

@facetedcarapace 💯 Do not doubt it. Even the "not for profit" hospitals are DEFINITELY focused on making a profit.

every hospital in the entire country has the same 4 priorities. 1. Avoid legal risk 2. Maximize Reimbursement 3. Keep labor costs as low as possible 4. Provide good patient care. It is important that you know you are number 4 on this list.

@AndyOstroy Wilsoooon!!!

What the hell is happening here??!’

@theliamnissan They were counting on cowing Colbert into not mentioning it.

CBS cancelling the Talarico interview at the behest of the Trump FCC just brought more attention to it. Dumbasses

@WollastonWntr63 Well said.

We're often in agreement but there might be some variance on this one. I'll share with you my perceptions of Rubio and Vance: Little Marco is a pathetic spineless jellyfish who needs so badly to remain politically relevant and will do anything to remain so. He's a come to life Shakespearean tragedy right before our eyes. But he does have some ideological beliefs that are more consistent with the GOP of days of yore, and little Marco continually tries to intertwine them in some cohesive fashion with the more fascistic reactionary blood and soil ideology of Trump. If Rubio is more dangerous it's only because he might come across to the everyday American as more sincere than he actually is. That might be what you were arguing and I wouldn't disagree. Vance on the other hand is a highly intellectual but slimy as hell chameleon with no evident moral core to his being that's visible to me at all. Owned, quite literally, by the oligarchs, and an adherent of tech authoritarian high priest Curtis Yarvin, who thinks we should all be subjects to the tech bros around the globe. If Vance is in fact less dangerous than Rubio, it's only because he might be less likeable than Ted Cruz, and that kind of lack of charisma is might hard to come by. So, In Summation: Rubio may be more dangerous than Vance because the general public might find him acceptable enough to elect. Vance, in my opinion, may not be as acceptable to a wider breadth of the voting public but if he ever did get in, I mean, my God, I don't know if humanity would ever be the same. I think it would be all over, actually.

Exactly. It's almost sad to see as it has some degree of desperation to it but also a willful blindness. I get that Vance is more dangerous than Rubio. I get the argument for Rs to vote for Rubio in a primary to be a check on Vance/Thiel advancement. But in a general election? On what planet is Marco Rubio deserving of the presidency after all this smooth talk aimed at mediating Trump's pro-Kremlin inclinations while sticking a knife into the backs of our traditional partners in liberal democracy on the continent? You're right Tom, even the good ones who mean well are grasping at straws here and are completely off the rails. The old days aren't coming back. And there's less than zero potential for any kind of viable coalition between MAGA and authentic conservatives. None! Meanwhile our republic needs to be saved because it's in graver peril at the moment than most are even close to realizing.

@vicki4088389843 @nocontextmemes I've had friends who worked for dental practices in a couple different states (not CA) fir many years & their experience is the basis of my assertion. Their trips were definitely all fun. Their benefits generous. So, it seems there is variability. OP's claim though...

@GrumpySofia @nocontextmemes The paid trips are mandatory CE units and a write off. Dental practices rarely offer best salaries, but will if pressed when it comes to a hygienist. The benefits are non-existent in most practices but some will offer paid vacations/holidays. Almost never medical/retirement.

@VetsForRL A long time ago.

Rubio sold his soul

@NewReaganCaucus The fact Rubio is still there says all we need to know about him. He lacks anything approaching integrity or character.

If Rubio resigns, he'll be replaced by Big Balls or the equivalent. So it's not an easy choice for Rubio, but if he chooses to stay, he has to embarrass himself periodically.