Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Derka said:

like pretty much every boy born in the 80’s, i grew up playing with gi joes, and thinking that all of these suited-and-booted special forces looking guys on my tv were so badass. now every time i see someone who looks like this:

IMG_0402.thumb.jpeg.b592ac42743c548bc5c1de04cb1997ce.jpeg

all i see is a scared little piece of shit pussy who’s LARPing as a hero while carrying out the most vile and cowardly work imaginable. the more tactical gear you have on, the more giant of a pussy i assume you are. fucking losers.

pussies

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Derka said:

like pretty much every boy born in the 80’s, i grew up playing with gi joes, and thinking that all of these suited-and-booted special forces looking guys on my tv were so badass. now every time i see someone who looks like this:

IMG_0402.thumb.jpeg.b592ac42743c548bc5c1de04cb1997ce.jpeg

all i see is a scared little piece of shit pussy who’s LARPing as a hero while carrying out the most vile and cowardly work imaginable. the more tactical gear you have on, the more giant of a pussy i assume you are. fucking losers.

I.e. Kyle Rittenhouse.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

An EO to end the Civil Rights Act.

Screenshot2025-04-23at8_47_39PM.thumb.png.5b311e5dc059dd73371aac24aba339e7.png

That's one he can't end unilaterally. It's a statute, only Congress can repeal a statute, or SCOTUS hold it unconstitutional.

This does, however, direct executive agencies and departments with the authority to pursue discrimination cases based on "disparate impact," as opposed to proof of actual discriminatory intent or disparate treatment not to pursue those cases.

 

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's one he can't end unilaterally. It's a statute, only Congress can repeal a statute, or SCOTUS hold it unconstitutional.

This does, however, direct executive agencies and departments with the authority to pursue discrimination cases based on "disparate impact," as opposed to proof of actual discriminatory intent or disparate treatment not to pursue those cases.

So basically, not enforce the law?

Posted
2 hours ago, Derka said:

like pretty much every boy born in the 80’s, i grew up playing with gi joes, and thinking that all of these suited-and-booted special forces looking guys on my tv were so badass. now every time i see someone who looks like this:

IMG_0402.thumb.jpeg.b592ac42743c548bc5c1de04cb1997ce.jpeg

all i see is a scared little piece of shit pussy who’s LARPing as a hero while carrying out the most vile and cowardly work imaginable. the more tactical gear you have on, the more giant of a pussy i assume you are. fucking losers.

GI Joe's generally didn't hide their faces (outside a few with special reasons) but the bad guys certainly did.

Posted
28 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

An EO to end the Civil Rights Act.

Screenshot2025-04-23at8_47_39PM.thumb.png.5b311e5dc059dd73371aac24aba339e7.png

“restoring meritocracy”, said the most anti-meritocratic white house ever. absolute fucking embarrassment.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 hour ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

I don't know shit about the law, but one thing I find weirdly encouraging is learning that they give enough of a shit to debate how best to argue a case in front of a judge, meaning there's some element left that respects the law enough to some sort of degree to even bother trying.

And that's about the most optimistic thing I could possibly say.

Posted
8 hours ago, Derka said:

“restoring meritocracy”, said the most anti-meritocratic white house ever. absolute fucking embarrassment.

It's insane how the title of basically every one of these EO's is the exact opposite of what they're actually doing. It's like some kind of test to see how stupid people are. The answer is very stupid.



×
×
  • Create New...