1115
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] zeezee@slrpnk.net 187 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 69 points 1 month ago
[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

They’re not sending their best.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Opisek@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago

And she's the secretary for homeland security of all things now?...

[-] 97xBang@feddit.online 33 points 1 month ago

Ok, news break! The President of the US is the most obvious foreign actor the country has ever had. This is like if Benedict Arnold was actually President while trying to overthrow the government, then running again and winning. His main goal is to weaken the US as much as possible for his daddy, Putin. If this appointment surprised you, get ready. It's gonna get a lot worse.

load more comments (1 replies)

“less than useless”

Hey, that's the same type of language my mother use against me, a human being...

🙃

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

She "dragged him" to the gravel pit and killed him with two shots, having to go back to the house to reload after she botched the first attempt.

A pure untrainable idiot, through and through.

[-] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Shooting a hunting dog for hunting, in a state with plenty of hunters that would take it, is messed up, especially messing it up.

[-] pewgar_seemsimandroid 6 points 1 month ago

he didn't trust herself

[-] renzev@lemmy.world 89 points 1 month ago

Interesting how these types of people seem to have a set of phrases with their own fixed meanings that don't necessarily correspond to the literal meanings of the words that make them up. "Can't trust the government" in this context really means "can't trust liberals/progressives". You can see that in her response if you watch the video. She's not stumped when the reporter points out the apparent contradiction. She expect everyone to make the same mental substitution, under which there is no contradiction.

Another good example is a 5 minute youtube video about homelessness from a fake university with an orange logo. They cite an example of a bridge between Los Angeles and Culver City that has a major homeless encampment on one side, but not the other, due to different laws in the two cities. To quote directly:

the Los Angeles side is full of tents and the Culver City side is empty. Why? Because the two cities have different public policies. Los Angeles has effectively decriminalized public camping and drug consumption while Culver City enforces the law.

If Los Angeles has no law against homelessness, then what law is it supposedly failing to enforce? This seems like a contradiction, until you realize that "Culver City enforces the law" has nothing to do with actual laws, but with the "law" of the moral framework that the authors are trying to propagandize.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 70 points 1 month ago
[-] lemon@sh.itjust.works 85 points 1 month ago

Holy shit, I wasn’t expecting it to be word for word the same. Wow…

Points for honesty… I guess?

[-] callouscomic@lemm.ee 35 points 1 month ago

To be fair, it was like 2 overlapping conversations interrupting each other.

Still, though, she can go fuck off.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Wow CNN "journalists" really can't interview worth a damn.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago

In equally current news, that Back to the Future sequel looks very promising!

[-] 97xBang@feddit.online 10 points 1 month ago

Elon Musk is part of the administration that is helping us identify where we can find...savings.

I wonder what she almost said

[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 55 points 1 month ago

Everybody can reply

Pictures taken moments before diaaster.

[-] distantsounds@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago

It’s Bluesky, not x

[-] chemicalprophet@slrpnk.net 41 points 1 month ago

They need to stop hitting themselves in the face with the ugly stick. Holy shit.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Is there a name for this phenomenon for when people start to look inbred due to having all of the terrible plastic surgery? It's like the Habsburg jaw but within a single generation because the deformity wasn't a product of breeding.

[-] vulgarcynic@sh.itjust.works 32 points 1 month ago

Brian Posehn called it "Hot Girl Down Syndrome" several years ago on a special. While I understand that is problematic, it's so spot on it does work as a fantastic shorthand.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Odd_so_Star_so_Odd@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Laminated face ~ Bill Burr

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 37 points 1 month ago

When someone tells you who they are, listen.

[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 33 points 1 month ago

Literal, actual retards are running the show now.

Placed there by literal, actual retarded Americans.

Wild that our country became so pathetic.

[-] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 25 points 1 month ago

It would be great if you could avoid using ableist slurs to refer to people you don't like

[-] Oderus@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

It's not a slur as much as it's a definition. To be retarded means delayed or slow. It has nothing to do with mentally handicapped people.

[-] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 month ago

In the context of talking about people, that word has everything to do with the people who it has been used as a slur against, including, but not limited to "mentally handicapped".

OP was clearly using the phrase as a derogatory term for people, and the only dictionary sense that fits there is the one that has ableist allusions. If the context of use were different, we wouldn't be having this conversation. For example, I wouldn't have a problem with the phrase "The PCM responds by retarding ignition timing—either until the knock disappears, or until maximum spark retard is reached." or "The Friar's alibi finds him at the right place but always a moment in retard".

That you're taking such a literal reading here makes me wonder whether your comment was made in bad faith such that I shouldn't bother wasting my time, but I'm hoping that there could actually be some meaningful dialogue here (after all, there's a reason why I didn't just report OP and move on). It might not affect your opinion, but I have direct experience of the r-slur that has been directed at me (not infrequently) when I am people read visibly disabled. I'm not "mentally handicapped", but as a word, it has grown far beyond it's original context of use. I say this to give context on my original comment — I'm not just going about tone policing people for fun: I commented what I did because it hurts to see that word thrown at people when part of what makes it effective as an insult is its attachment to people like me.

Once upon a time, the r-slur was actually considered one of the more appropriate words to describe people who are intellectually disabled. If I were alive in that era, I'd have likely been left to rot in an institution, and allowed only a fraction of the independence I'm able to have nowadays. But times change, and so does our understanding of the baggage that words pick up.

To draw an analogy, it wouldn't be appropriate to call a black person the n-word, on the basis that it derives from the Spanish word for "black". That etymology isn't wrong, but it's still missing the forest for the trees.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] roguetrick@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This my friends is a distinction without a difference. Dude really implied that being "delayed", as in developmentally delayed, has nothing to do with the handicapped. Astounding.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Hazor@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

It has everything to do with "mentally handicapped" people. The word "retarded", used as an insult, derived from the term "mental retardation", which was previously the actual clinical and legal term for a person with what we now refer to as "intellectual disability". The use of "retarded" as a slur/insult is the whole reason why the clinical term was changed. It had come to be seen as derogatory and ableist even when used in a clinical context.

Source: the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The term "mental retardation" was used through the fourth edition, which was last revised in the year 2000. It lasted until the 5th edition, which wasn't published until 2013. Various organizations/agencies changed their terminology prior.

Fwiw, I'm a licensed clinician and I have diagnosed people with intellectual disabilities. I understand your perspective on the word, and I even shared a similar opinion until I learned how it has been used as a slur toward people who do have intellectual disabilities and developmental delays. Because of learning that, I now don't use it as an insult. We do better when we know better.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] samus12345@lemm.ee 30 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

We can't trust the government now. We couldn't trust it before either, but we also can't trust it now.

[-] OneTwoThree@mander.xyz 18 points 1 month ago

The sad thing is, there actually used to be some areas in which you could trust the government. You could trust the CDC for health information, the FDIC with your money, the FDA for food regulations, the USPS to deliver your mail..

Nowadays, everything good about government will be getting axed and everything bad amplified. But what can you do~

[-] samus12345@lemm.ee 22 points 1 month ago

But what can you do

[-] stringere@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago

I used to not trust the government.
I still do not trust the government, but I used to, too.

[-] Lemminary@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

You especially can't trust it now.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

We can trust that they will do the absolute worst thing instead of not knowing if they will or won't!

load more comments (1 replies)

If there's a Covid-25, I wouldn't recommend getting a vaccine from this government. Not without a consensus approval from blue state governments.

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I would wait for a Canada or EU approved vaccine.

Will they require people to be vaccinated to travel if they're explicitly traveling there to be vaccinated?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago
[-] random 18 points 1 month ago

you can actually never trust the government

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
1115 points (100.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

7032 readers
1213 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS