u/Enibas

You have the mess hall directly next to the hangar. The hangar will make being in the mess hall miserable for your peeps (hangars and other stuff can cause bad thoughts even through walls). I always found it helpful to have a buffer zone between the two. Eg a (at least) two-wide hallway. You can put O2 producers and gas scrubbers in there, and maybe a spacesuit locker.

Trump said twice now that he sees nothing wrong with the ad.

The president said Ramaswamy had reached out to him to ask for his advice on whether to keep his ad up [...]

“The mother is calling the daughter a terrible person and a liar. Everybody should be so lucky. Why would you shield somebody from that?” the president added. “Why would — why would we do that? So I told him, ‘Leave it up, and look upstairs and say ‘Thank you, God, very much. I appreciate it.’’”

Look up what the Johnson Amendment says. It prohibits organizations, including churches, from endorsing candidates (if they want tax exemption). Pastors who do not act in their official function can endorse candidates. I did not write that amendment, dude.

Here, two examples from the IRS clarifying the rules, from 2010 ie before Trump:

Example 1: Minister A is the minister of Church J, a section 501(c) (3) organization, and is well known in the community With their permission, Candidate T publishes a full-page ad in the local newspaper listing five prominent ministers who have personally endorsed Candidate T, including Minister A Minister A is identi- fied in the ad as the minister of Church J The ad states, “Titles and affiliations of each individual are provided for identification purposes only ” The ad is paid for by Candidate T’s campaign com- mittee Since the ad was not paid for by Church J, the ad is not otherwise in an official publication of Church J, and the endorse- ment is made by Minister A in a personal capacity, the ad does not constitute political campaign intervention by Church J

Example 2: Minister B is the minister of Church K, a section 501(c)(3) organization, and is well known in the community Three weeks before the election, he attends a press conference at Candidate V’s campaign headquarters and states that Candidate V should be reelected Minister B does not say he is speaking on behalf of Church K His endorsement is reported on the front page of the local newspaper and he is identified in the article as the minister of Church K Because Minister B did not make the endorsement at an official church function, in an official church publication or otherwise use the church’s assets, and did not state that he was speaking as a representative of Church K, his actions do not constitute political campaign intervention by Church K

Source: IRS

Listen, I know what the guy is doing, you know what the guy is doing, but the reason why he does it like this (not naming his church, not addressing his congregation) is because that way he is not going against the rules.

It's kind of a moot point anyway if he even needs to do that. The IRS has recently announced that they won't go against churches with pastors who endorse candidates from the pulpit, either.

He's not even naming his church. And it is churches who can't promote a political party etc if they want to be/remain tax exempt.

No, it's not. He has the same right as anyone else to voice his opinion as long as he doesn't do it as the pastor in a church function ie from the pulpit.

edit: just because you do not like it doesn't make it wrong. Look it up!

The president said Ramaswamy had reached out to him to ask for his advice on whether to keep his ad up [...]

“The mother is calling the daughter a terrible person and a liar. Everybody should be so lucky. Why would you shield somebody from that?” the president added. “Why would — why would we do that? So I told him, ‘Leave it up, and look upstairs and say ‘Thank you, God, very much. I appreciate it.’’”

Absolutely vile. Holy shit. I'm not even religious, and I find it offensive that he'd thank God for that. What the actual fuck.

He's back to being one, unfortunately.

They are obviously fringe, but in that sphere they are well-known. And some of them do have an outsized influence just by moving the Overton window. Like for example Dale Partridge occasionally appears on talkshows.

Also, knitting, crocheting, or more "male-coded" forms of crafting like woodworking all have the same draw: You make something tangible with your hands, and you have something to show for it, even if it is wonky. But other than woodworking, you can do knitting in the smallest apartment, on the bus, during a break, and you don't need much money or material to do it.

There's a reason why people still do these things in times of fast fashion, where no one has to knit a pair of socks to keep their feet warm, and that is that it's satisfying to create something.

I think you misunderstand what religious tolerance means in liberal societies. It has nothing to do with respect or absence of criticism. It simply means that you are free to believe what you want as long as you are not hurting other people. "Your personal freedom ends where mine begins" sort of thing.

Of course, religious belief is not as unchangable as race, for example. But it should be obvious why a "Jews are not served here"-sign at a business is not any more acceptable than "Blacks are not served here" in a liberal society.

Legitimately a who's who of terrible, dangerous people.

I think I continue to be reasonable. Have you seen the attacks on me for even asking questions?

Saying that while trying to attack a child rape victim is wild.

I can't imagine that Trump has the creativity (for lack of a better word) necessary to come up with the prompts.

Didn't it also came out that his (former? I think) assistant was sending him these memes and vids that he kept posting?

That's so revealing. It's basically a confession that they know they do not have any other issue or policy that would make people want to vote Republican.

I think it's tragic. Kids are knowledge sponges, and you can (and should!) nurture that. Instead, they are trying their best to keep their kids ignorant, and you can't tell me that they aren't unintentionally (or maybe even intentionally) discourage their kids from asking questions. They even seem to know that what they are doing is wrong, but they do it anyway.

I don't understand it, either.

They hide things or plainly lie about them, their kids find out in school, through friends, or in college that their parents told them a bunch of BS, and then these parents blame liberal indoctrination for the fact that their adult kids won't talk to them anymore.

In case the OP gets deleted, this was the rant that inspired these responses:

Rant: My Kids Didn’t Know What Transgender Meant Until the Anti-Talarico Ads

I’m in Texas, and it seems like every commercial break has 4–6 political ads, most of them attacking James Talarico.

I understand the angle they’re going for, but dang. My kids didn’t even know what transgender meant until these ads started airing. Now they’re hearing about it constantly, and not because they went looking for it.

The anti-Talarico ads seem to talk about these issues more than anyone else does. It irritates me especially when I don’t want to explain what they’re talking about to my children.

Constantly talking about the things we oppose is actually giving them more attention than they would otherwise receive. Again I get the angle, keep these people away from influential positions within our government and advertising it. But we’re practically talking the very things we don’t want into existence.

Source

You really don’t think that all the public shaming from the left is what’s actually emboldening and enabling the racism?

This is such BS, every time! No one becomes racist because of shaming. They are racist, whether they get shamed or not. This woman went to a TP event and screamed “Go back to your own country, bitch” at a protestor. Sounds pretty emboldened and enabled already, pre-shaming.

I'm always wondering, how it is to be, for example, JD Vance. Vance is an intelligent guy who 100% knows that he is bullshitting. I'm sure he's justified it to himself. But still, does he have moments when he thinks, damn, who's going to believe this garbage? Like, when he said that Putin is a humanitarian; that would have been an excellent moment to have that tought.

Don't forget the Federalist Society.

The majority of them simply do not want a conservative gf because she expects them to be the provider, because that's the trade-off for being a tradwife. If you don't want to marry, have kids, and live off of one income, you need a (at least somewhat) liberal gf.

One of antivaxxer's beloved claim is that all vaccine testing that is done is invalid because there are no "real" double blind placebo studies. And yes, there are no large scale double blind placebo studies (where you have two groups, one receives the vaccine, the other a placebo, but the receipients are randomized and neither the receipients nor the doctors know who received the treatment and who the placebo, until a predetermined end date) for established vaccines, because it would be extremely unethical to randomly withhold a highly effective and safe treatment, especially from kids, and doubly so if the parents then think they kid is vaccinated when it might have received a placebo.

So ,their "trial" might very well involve some form of randomly "vaccinating" kids with a placebo without telling their parents, and then see if the kids really get more hepatic cancer than their vaccinated counterparts as a result.

You can see how people might be opposed to that.

OMG what can I do to make this happen? Even if it doesn't work, I want to see that. Hegseth needs to be made fun of constantly.