rhcom2

I guess this could be speech integral to criminal conduct but seems like a stretch.

> It even went so far as to prohibit websites from offering instructions on how to use a VPN to bypass these checks

How is that not a blatant first amendment violation?

A solution in search of a problem.

I'm not sure that's true. Surely doormen, janitors, and security guards are not "irreplaceable" and can't "halt critical operations beyond their industry".

I don't think I follow why your examples contradict the argument. A draft will always be unpopular.

I think you could argue the draft forced the war to be real for more families (and the expansion of TV), intensifying the resistance to it. Quick googling says almost 10% of the population served in Vietnam in some capacity. Less than 1% served in the War on Terror.

This was part of Charles Rangel's (D) reasoning to propose bringing back the draft. [1]

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_National_Service_Act

Republicans in Utah are also trying to remove the power from ballot initiatives because they're upset the Utahans passed an anti-gerrymandering initiative.

He is also Catholic himself.

NHL is similarly frustrating. I pay for ESPN but some games are on TNT, NHL Network, or a broadcast channel. I'm not paying for two different $60 a month services so now they just don't get any of my money.

One crew member rescued, other is still MIA and being actively searched for https://www.axios.com/2026/04/03/iran-us-fighter-shot-down

Of course it isn't the same, but it does show it is just a matter of you not agreeing with the rational

Is jumping on a grenade to save another person suicidal? Or is it just a matter of you not agreeing with the rational?

DNC emails weren't fake either but dumping them all right before the election was certainly intended to be election interference.

It's a crazy airspace. Add to that Teterboro, 12 miles from NYC and Republic ~20 miles from NYC, along with all the heliports on the Hudson.

Past performance is not indicative of future results

The most obvious and expected outcome to everyone except Zuck.

> voting requiring proof of citizenship

Isn't this just a solution in search of a problem though? Multiple investigations have discovered absolutely minuscule amount of non-citizen voting in US elections. It's something that seems reasonable on its face but lacks any purpose and comes with an ulterior motive that it is part of the made up GOP talking points of a "stolen election" and "illegals voting".

> last I heard they give themselves the permission to parse your emails and serve you targeted ads based on contents of emails you receive.

Stopped doing it in 2017 (according to them). https://fox59.com/news/google-will-no-longer-read-your-email...

The targets for the AI are still set by humans, the data the AI was trained on is still created by humans. Involving a computer in the system doesn't magically make it less biased.

While I accept that this is how it is done in practice, I think the unintended consequence is it raises the partisan temperature and further ruins the already abysmal trust of Congress.

Unfortunately, I think it's hardwired in our brain to anthropomorphize something with this level of NLP. We have to constantly remind ourselves, this is a machine.

I always felt like Congressional debates should begin with each side trying to explain the opposing position, with debate only beginning when each side agrees with the opposition's framing of their PoV. I also recognize how naive and idealistic this sounds.

Orwell said something similar.

George Orwell - What is Fascism? https://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/e...

Would have been nice if the interviewer pushed back more than "lol I don't think they would agree". Spineless.

Interesting you went in the opposite direction of my assumption, which was "another member is tired, perhaps we should all pack it it"

Because it was never a judgement about who is bad vs. good, but who would be best for American/British interests with zero regard for Iranians.

It doesn't have to be the original trigger, you asked "what is the outrage about?" and those deaths are part of it.

> And 'different tactics' doesn’t explain the reaction gap, as i said, under Obama there were 3.1M+ deportations and at least 56 documented deaths in ICE custody

You continuously ask this same question, get an answer, and ignore it. ICE enforcement was not the same under Obama and Trump even if Obama had high deportation numbers. The deaths in that report were from medical issues or neglect. Horrible, absolutely, but not shootings, not American citizens, and not protesters.

Maybe instead of assuming everyone is a stooge that can only do what the media tells them, consider they may actually have some legitimate grievances?

Dragonwriter has already laid out some of the differences for you to research further beyond the single data point of number of deportations. You've asked the same question multiple times but seem to not want to actually engage with the answers so I'll leave it there.

There were contemporary criticism of Obama's deportation policy on both the right and the left. I have no idea why you think that is some sort of gotcha that somehow makes the equivalency between Obama and Trump's immigration enforcement valid.

Their deaths are an outcome of the heavy handed immigration enforcement that has caused the outrage. The raw number of deportations is not the only metric. The enforcement tactics of the Obama admin are not the same as Trump's, this is obvious and incontrovertible.

You don't have to agree with the criticisms but to not even be able to understand why people are upset stretches believability.