Dylan

This coup in Poland is a preview of what is to come in the USA.

My imaginary friend can beat up your imaginary friend

Which is true? I have a solution. The German EU and Russia can split Poland down the middle. The EU can have the left half and Russia can have the right half. That will make everyone happy.

There's an obvious solution to the persecution of Christians in africa

I voted for the green party candidate In my district. There was a libertarian candidate but they joined in the last week so would probably be crumpled up and thrown in the trash.

Jill Stein deserves praise but all she gets is hate from people who steal her ideas. Green is now a spoiler for progressives and DSA. they call her a Russian asset. A traitor. Etc etc while Jill thanklessly puts herself out there time and time again fighting for what she believes in.

Libertarianism was founded in 1971 by a Republican. Popularized by a Republican. Property rights are right wing. Individualism is right wing. Collectivism is left wing. Social collectivism and economic collectivism is both left wing. Our house. Our girlfriend. Our means of production. Etc etc

social security becomes insolvement when there are more sick old people than babies being born. the solution is to make more babies but social security itself disensentivizes baby production. babies used to be the retirement plan. they work your farm. they supplement your income. now they take away your income because nobody owns property. all the property is bought and paid for. we could bring down cost of living and build more houses (would depreciate homes and hurt the economy) but the core insentive to make babies still wouldnt be there. babies take your time and money when they used to give you time and money. some think this is a good thing (for climate change or whatever resource scarcity blah blah blah) but i think demographic shifts need to be gradual or the consequences hit too hard. the consequences manifest economically, politically, morally, etc.

More rules to prevent more rules how about stop asking questions nobody should be answering.

Most people are motivated by grievances against their family and neighbors because they believe what the screens tell them

I would rather America be ruled by shariah law than communism

Yes the governor can't raise taxes! No you can't go to church with covid! Yes no dei!

Colorado and Oregon aren't trying to ban farming and hunting for animal welfare, it's to disensentivize labor and property rights to destroy the country.

I ended up voting 😭 It looks like I put on a blindfold and threw all the darts at the board at once

Wake up slaves. The slave suggestion box awaits.

Pretty sure with the rise of the dsa that the green party is dead. The vultures will pick at their bones.

Probably not voting but thankful the candidates in Wisconsin are all moderates more or less. Might write in libertarians but probably not. Whatever happens happens.

Michigan and texas are super ultra mega cooked wtf

🚨 Canada’s government has just tabled Bill C-41 (the “Safeguards Act”), which would let doctors euthanize citizens based on an earlier advance request after they’ve lost the capacity to consent—without requiring the patient to affirm that wish (or even be told) at the time of the lethal injection. Under the bill, adults diagnosed with a serious, incurable illness expected to cause irreversible loss of decision-making capacity (like certain forms of dementia) could make an advance request while they’re still competent. Later, once capacity is gone, a practitioner could proceed if the person is showing the specified clinical manifestations, is in an advanced state of irreversible decline, and is judged to be experiencing enduring, intolerable suffering that can’t be relieved by reasonable means. Two independent assessments are required, and the request has to be stored under a provincial regime (provinces decide whether to enable this). The government frames it as respecting prior autonomy with “rigorous safeguards,” while permanently excluding mental illness as a sole qualifying condition. Critics, including Campaign Life Coalition, warn the practical effect is that the procedure can advance solely on the earlier document and the practitioner’s assessment of symptoms. The only explicit stop is a demonstration of “refusal or resistance” by words, sounds, or gestures (involuntary movements don’t count; doubt triggers a 30-day pause). Once capacity is gone, a patient who’s changed their mind, prefers care, or can’t clearly communicate may still receive the injection. CLC’s Jeff Gunnarson called it a “slippery slope” and “horror” that trades protection for those with mental illness for expanded risk to those with dementia—literally “trading human lives.” The risks are profound and deeply troubling. People with dementia or progressive cognitive decline are among the most vulnerable in any healthcare system. Their earlier wishes can shift as the disease progresses, or family and system pressures can influence what gets documented. Under this framework, a practitioner’s later judgment of “symptoms matching the request” and “intolerable suffering” could override any present indication the person wants to live or receive care instead. There’s no requirement to inform the patient what’s happening or secure fresh consent. That opens the door to error, misinterpretation of resistance, or quiet pressure from overburdened caregivers or institutions. Existing MAID cases already show how thin consent protections can become in practice—families have alleged elderly patients pleaded against the procedure or withdrew consent yet still received it. This lands against a backdrop of rapid MAID growth (16,499 provisions in 2024, ~5.1% of Canadian deaths) and documented consent controversies under the existing framework. Families have alleged cases in which individuals pleaded against the procedure or withdrew consent yet received it anyway, including an 83-year-old Ontario grandmother (Brigitte Stegemann) whose death is under police investigation, and an elderly woman (“Mrs. B”) whose case drew public condemnation from former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney as “cold-blooded murder” after a same-day process despite her stated wish for hospice and religious objections. When the state and medical system gain the power to end lives of people who can no longer speak for themselves—on the basis of paperwork signed years earlier—it erodes the fundamental principle that consent must be current, informed, and freely given. The historical echoes of “mercy” killings of the incapacitated aren’t subtle. Bill C-41 puts that tension at the center of Canada’s already expansive MAID regime, and the consequences for trust in care, especially for the elderly and cognitively impaired, could be severe.