The gas stoves themselves aren’t the only reason, but they help contribute to a lower lifespan. Also 2 years over the course of, like, 75 years? Yeah that sounds about right

I’ll give you 3 guesses

To be fair, hordes of people believing in the Anti-Christ is also supposed to be one of the signs

I was in Spirit Halloween yesterday and they had a Hawk Tuah costume (it was like a handyman jumpsuit that said something like “Hawk Tuah Lubricants”)

Somebody get this man some ice to fry!

Goddammit that’s what I was gonna do

Hide yo kids, hide yo mice

While I do admit that the latter option is much funnier, it’s probably the former. That or they built all the above-ground rooms perfectly to scale, but didn’t know the exact layout of the service/security tunnels? Idk, but that is definitely an odd choice of wording

Answering both of our rhetorical questions at once: “because they were black”

How the fuck is “acquitted conduct sentencing” allowed and not a flagrant violation of justice? What the hell happened to “innocent until proven guilty”?

Lol wrong SSN, but I think you knew that

Mr Cody has all of Warmbo’s sticky corn cream

You suck, Warmbo!

I also watched the Rachel Maddow expose the other day (not my only source, but certainly the most recent)

Thanks!

Is that inflatable real? (Please for the love of God be real and let me buy one)

In what way? The article mainly presents historical facts, not ideological theories. And when it does present theories, it does so within the historical context surrounding it. That was the whole point of the article, that one’s view of history directly relates to their political leaning. If you want to be fair and balanced but refuse to acknowledge that one side is clearly doing more criminal/immoral acts and/or just straight up lying than the other party, then you’re not being fair at all; you’re giving false credibility to an obvious conman simply because you don’t want to admit you’ve been played

In what way? The article mainly presents historical facts, not ideological theories. And when it does present theories, it does so within the historical context surrounding it. That was the whole point of the article, that one’s view of history directly relates to their political leaning. If you want to be fair and balanced but refuse to acknowledge that one side is clearly doing more criminal/immoral acts and/or just straight up lying than the other party, then you’re not being fair at all; you’re giving false credibility to an obvious conman simply because you don’t want to admit you’ve been played

Did you even read the rest of the article? Or did you just Ctrl+F “Trump” and “Harris”?

I agree in principle, but I feel like I should point out that mindset is very similar to what we all thought back in 2016, and he ended up ‘winning’ because we underestimated his chances. Unfortunately, we’ll just have to let hindsight be the judge