I disagree. Good people love bomb. People that love bomb don’t always do it for nefarious (from their perspective) reasons.

I’m a former mormon, and I can tell you that love bombing (from a cultists perspective) is never from ill intent. They are just trying to share “the truth” and they believe that if you adopt “the truth” everything about your life will be made better.

If someone is love bombing you for an organization, first thing to do is investigate that organization. Read the stuff they don’t want you to read. Particularly, don’t pull that information from their media/materials. You should seek out the opinions of ex-members of the organization to get a real feel for what it’s all about.

For example, imagine if the rotary club was trying to recruit you. What do you think an exrotarian would say? Well, you can google it. And, surprise, it’s mostly “Yeah, I moved and just sort of lost interest”.

Now go visit /r/exmormon and see the miles of shit they have to say about previous membership.

That, to me, is the acid test. Are exmembers that way because it was just sort of a “meh” event. Or did they get there because the organization was abusive?

The supports also need to withstand being rammed by drunks in dodge rams.

2 tips.

1. Negative air pressure is your friend. If you open the windows upstairs and down and blow air out of the house it’ll suck air from the downstairs to the upstairs cooling the entire house.

2. Bernoulli’s principle is your friend. Rather than having fans right next to the windows you’ll move more air if you back the fans a meter or so from the window. https://youtu.be/BhWhTbins_A?si=9LGd0_EmfPFBNnDJ

I’d rather an easy to manipulate person in office than an explicitly corrupt suit.

But beyond that, wealth and prestige isn’t granted to people based on intelligence or capability. There are plenty of smart capable people that have had lives far more relatable to the average person.

We have more than a few examples of idiot million and billionaires.

Anyone who’s name ends with “the third” should not be allowed to run for office.

Also anyone that calls themselves The X king should be banned from office… Heck, anyone that’s ever owned a business of any sort should be banned from office. These are people not representative of the general public.

English got fucked… hard… because so many of the spellings came from people that had weird goals.

Consider phial. Why do we spell it that way? Because some jackass decided that english needed to be more latiny and ph is more latiny than v. (or maybe it was greek? I don’t remember the exact etymology)

Yes and no.

Some salts are easier to work with than others. Kosher salt, in particular, is fairly hard to over season with because you can visually see just how much you’ve thrown onto a steak or such. Fine salt, on the other hand, is a lot easier to over season with.

But then it also depends a lot on the dish. Sauces are really hard to over season. The sea of fluid can absorb a fair amount of salt before it’s noticeable. Meats are similar. A steak can have a snow covering of kosher salt and it won’t really taste super salty.

Bread, on the other hand, will be noticeably worse if you throw in a tbs of salt instead a tsp.

But salt wasn’t specifically what I was thinking when I wrote that. Herbal seasoning garlic, rosemary, thyme, sage, etc, generally won’t overpower a dish if you have too much of them. Especially if you aren’t working with the powdered form. (Definitely possible to over season something with garlic salt/powder).

I’m pretty much the same way, though I do throw in a bit of fine salt on occasion for the iodine content. I don’t eat a ton of seafood which makes getting the rda of iodine difficult.

Salt :D

Lots of home cooks are shy with seasoning in general (but especially salt). While not impossible, it’s fairly hard to over season stuff.

That’s why if you ever look at “miracle season alls” the first ingredients are usually something like “Salt, pepper, garlic powder, onion powder”.

If you want to be amused, look at these ingredients lists. Often the only difference is what food coloring is used.

For example.

https://www.heb.com/product-detail/tony-chachere-s-original-creole-seasoning/172479

Not all will, but that’s why expanding the narrative to these tricky situations and making it a talking point is so important.

When the only discussion is only around rape and medical problems, it creates people that think “ok, we added a rape/medical exclusion in the law, that’s good enough”.

The goal, IMO, is to force pro-abortionists to admit the real reason they hate abortion is it let’s women escape godly punishment. They’ll admit it privately but we need to make their politicians say it publicly. Calling fetuses babies is a soft selling way to make things more palatable to constituents that never think about the why.

Abortion is popular and should be the thing Democrats run on more than anything else. But then, having a devout Catholic president as leader of the party really sucks at this moment. Pretty much any other dem would be willing to hit the abortion note harder.

The narrative is just broken.

Pro-abortion folk like to focus on medically necessary abortions, but they shy away from the myriad of valid reasons to get an abortion.

For example, A mother of 3 that can’t afford a 4th child. You can’t expect someone in that situation to put the 4th child up for adoption.

And when later term abortions happen, pro abortion folks need to be ready with the why. The why is simple, abortion access. How is someone supposed to get an early term abortion when there’s only one clinic in the state, constantly under protest, that’s booked solid for the next 3 months?

The evidence for it is overwhelming. We can watch it happen with bacteria. We can make it happen with food and fruit flies. We have fossil records of it happening with pretty much every species.

The only way you disbelieve it is you are taught a strawman version of it that Jesus can easily knock over.

With a population of 300 million, 26 million translates into an extra $0.08 in taxes per person per year. An amount, I might add, that isn’t evenly distributed due to the progressive nature of our tax system. Is saving 8 cents per person really worth the added bureaucracy and potential for rollback of social programs? A million dollars can feel like a lot, I get it, but you really have to look at these sorts of social programs proportionally rather than in terms of absolute numbers.

To put things in perspective, the Arlington cemetery is spending 3 million dollars just to remove a statue.

The US gov could easily save 10 billion dollars, tomorrow, by reducing the defense budget by that amount. Buying a few less unused missiles and tanks. If we want to decrease the tax burden, then looking at the 700+ billion dollar military program almost certainly has a billion places to cut.

Or we could increase the tax rate on people earning over $1 million a year to cover the cost of millionaires using unemployment.

IRS data shows thousands of millionaires

There is 1.8 million of unemployed people on unemployment insurance. Thousands is a drop in the bucket. You are looking at saving, what, 0.1% of the admin cost because a couple thousand people use it that don’t need to? You are literally looking at saving around 26 million dollars per year with this measure (maximum payout is $500 per week). That’s nothing for an agency that spends over 100 billion per year.

I don’t see inflation getting so bad that anyone with a million dollars every year need unemployment to survive in the next century

At 3% inflation in 50 years, 500k will be like 100k today in 50 years. In 100 years, 2 million will be like 100k in today’s money. It does not take long for inflation to catch up. 3% is the historic average for inflation in the US.

This is an old conservative trick, don’t fall for it. If we must have means tests, they must be indexed to inflation otherwise they turn into rollbacks of social programs with time.

How much money is actually saved? And what does this do to enforcement? The IRS doesn’t issue unemployment checks, so now we need the DOL (in each state) to work with the IRS and state tax agencies to determine prior year income before sending out unemployment checks?

And for how many people? Is there actually a glut of millionaires claiming unemployment to the point where this is meaningful savings?

And is the bill indexed to inflation? 1 million dollars today won’t be the same as 1 million dollars in 2070. Are you sure congress will keep up with inflation (see: minimum wage).

This bill sounds nice, but isn’t actually solving a problem. I’d much rather millionaires and billionaires benefit from social programs than adding arbitrary tests to keep them out. Because every time we add those dumb arbitrary tests we end up with situations like medicaid where the qualifying income for “low income” doesn’t change effectively cutting out people that 20 years ago would have qualified.

And these checks all add administrative bureaucracy which almost always balloons the cost.

I can speak to this personally. I have a child with a severe disability who qualifies for the katie beckett program. Normally, my income pushes me out of qualification for medicaid, however, katie beckett allows for children with severe disabilities to enter medicaid (fantastic). To get there, however, I had to apply for medicaid twice. The first to go through the system and get denied and the second time with the denial to qualify my child for the program (nuts, I know). After that, I now have to do 6 month qualification interviews with the insurance company the state uses to administer the program and 6 month interviews with a nurse to make sure that, yes, indeed severe disabilities do not go away. Imagine all the paperwork and admin costs going into making sure I’m not abusing the system? It’s not a short process either, it took several months just to qualify.

That’s not the end of the craziness either. Once my child turns 18, they’ll qualify for social security and medicaid. However, that’s only if they have less than $2000 in assets. That limit? Set in 1970 when we allowed people with disabilities to use medicare. We didn’t want “rich” kids abusing the system so we put in a means test. Which would be approximately $15k if it were indexed to inflation, but it wasn’t. This makes it really hard for someone with a disability to function in society. They basically have to live like paupers if they also want medical care.

But hey, it saves money, so good right? /s

As am I, particularly because inflation happens and these means checks are a long-term bombshell. If the means test isn’t indexed to inflation then in 50 years you are looking at a limit that starts cutting support to people that need it.

Never means test, there’s too few rich people “abusing” the system for any means test to meaningfully reduce social program budgets.

It’s mostly a religious belief. There are a couple of Bible verses that say things like “the earth will be rolled up like a scroll” and “spread to the four corners of the earth”.

Biblical literalists cannot handle the Bible being incorrect about anything, so it’s everyone else that’s wrong.

Sure, this is why the American Britain war is still waged today. It’s also why France has been relentlessly attacking England. And obviously, the British bombing of Ireland is what ended the IRA.

Besides peace, genocide is the only way to end Hamas. And that’s what you are cheering for. Israel is creating the next generation of terrorists by terrorizing the Palestinians.

What unending string of terrorism? Before Oct 7, when was the last Israeli killed or injured by Hamas?

But to answer your question, the best response is securing the boarder and asking yourself “what could be the motivation for these attacks?”. It’s to try and seek/broker peace.

I’d suggest reading up on the IRA and the good Friday agreement to see how a government can end an unending string of terrorism. A relentless show of force is how the US created ISIS. That’s what Israel is doing right now.