It seems like it was just yesterday some would bring up some millennial kids bullshit and someone else would respond; "you know they're all adults now, right?"
Now it's starting to happen with zoomers?
I don't know where I was going with this. I'm going to go take my Geritol now.
Exactly. I get the frustrations of the son and grandson of factory workers that finds it hard to imagine anything more than working at Walmart wanting to tear it all down. What I don't understand is my neighbor in Dana Point.
I assume that's a gif because I remember that line and it's a perfectly hilarious response, but I just see a pic.
Gifs don't seem to work for me. Is that a problem with Jerboa?
Yeah, insta-fail is just lazy design. Becoming undetected again is fun.
And Mel Gibson. When they were lobbying to get rid of the regulations, the supplement industry did commercials that had Mel's home getting raided by SWAT-looking guys for having supplements.
I don't know what "very little" means to you, but I have friends that are married with children, unlikely to face violence motivated by bigotry (location dependant, YMMV), and have legal protections from discrimination in housing and employment.
When I was a kid they could get fired or evicted with no recource, and if they had the temerity to poke their head out of the closet someone could kick their ass with impunity unless they were seriously injured or killed, and sometimes even then.
But sure, "very little," let's go with that.
Right? The tone really took a turn there. There I was, having a sensible chuckle, and suddenly I was sad
I don't know if they're still around, but when I was a kid and ATMs were still kind of new there were drive thrus at banks where you interacted with a teller using a speaker and a pneumatic tube for sending/receiving.
My mom would let me operate the tube from the back seat, I thought it was cool as shit.
Google images of "oasis band members."
As I understand it, that's some Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson shit.
Back in the 70s liberal/liberalism meant pretty much the same thing in the U.S. as elsewhere. Nixon even called his reelection something along the lines of "a victory for western liberal democracy." Part of liberalism is a focus on rights of the individual, including civil rights. Civil rights and many other liberation movements of the era used the language of that aspect of liberalism.
Enter a bunch of religious assholes of the time. They loved all the pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps, right to private property, greed, etc. of individual rights but had a big problem with women wearing pants and expecting to be able to go to work without being sexually assaulted, gay people existing openly and breathing, and probably the civil rights movement too but it was going out of style to be open about that. They started using liberal/liberalism in a denigrating way to describe feminists, LGBT people, and any other group that got their puritanical knickers in a twist.
After a couple decades the terms were completely divorced from their original political theory definitions which would, I think, have Republicans considered more liberal than Democrats. But I suppose that could depend on which aspects of liberalism you give more weight to.
Shit, I don't even think it has to be subtle. People emigrate all the time for a variety of reasons. And most of them are much less compelling than "I'm surrounded by people who might decide to murder my entire family any day."
They have no responsibility to stick it out and take the risk just because other people, including myself, don't want to see the settlers win.