Why would Hillbilly Elegy have that effect?

Doesn’t seem like it’s advocating violence at all. It’s making fun of someone that did advocate violence when it came after them.

OP, if you use te crosspost feature to post the same thing across multiple communities, users that sub to both only see one of the posts which keeps our feeds cleaner. 👍

Yoooo, there were two incidents in which a Soviet service member saved the world by refusing to fire nukes. One was during the Cuban missile crisis. The USA blockaded Cuba in response to the USSR placing nuclear missiles there. A Soviet nuclear-armed submarine went down under a US naval ship. The ship started throwing dummy charges over to scare the submarine to come out. The sub hadn’t had any comm with the USSR in days and thought they were under attack. Two of the three officers needed to approve a nuclear torpedo strike argued for the strike. The other, Vasily Arkhipov, declined despite the other officers insisting. Arkhipov was able to convince the other two to not strike and bring the sub up to reconnect comm with Moscow. The immediate conflict eventually ended with no casualties or strikes. Had they fired a nuclear torpedo, it could have led to a nuclear war.

The other was pretty close too. Three weeks before the incident, a Korean airliner full of civilian passengers accidentally flew into prohibited Soviet airspace due to a navigation error. The Soviets thought it was a US spy plane and shot it down, killing everyone on board. Tensions were high af. Three weeks later, Soviet surveillance equipment showed that the USSR was being attacked with 5 nuclear missiles by the US. Stanislav Petrov saw the incoming missiles and decided to not report the info further up the command because he thought there was no way an American first strike would only be five missiles. He waited for confirmation of the missile strike from the ground, which never came. After a while, it was evident that the system had a malfunction. They eventually discovered that a rare coincidence between the Sun, some clouds, and the Soviet satellites resulted in the false alarm. Had Petrov reported the incoming strike, it is quite possible that higher command would have ordered a “counter” nuclear-strike because of their view of the US.

Both of these incidents were scary close to ending the world as we know it. It wouldn’t have just destroyed the USA and USSR. Aside from the direct attacks and destruction of infrastructure and institutions in the stated countries, the strikes would have resulted in a nuclear winter and eventual worldwide famine for over a decade.

Maybe

It also says crema de trigo (cream of wheat) under El Negrito

We could argue that Wario is the ultimate anti-feminist since 85% of his exploited labor force is women.

The OP photo isn’t loading for me in Sync, so I don’t know how this comment relates to the post. But still, it is one of the funniest comments I remember seeing in recent memory. 😆

There were several innocent bystanders that were shot. One is already proclaimed dead.

Trump’s going to milk him being a victim and come out looking like he’s super tough and cheated death. Nothing could have been better for the Trump campaign than a failed assassination attempt in which Trump was hit and survived practically fine. I think things are about to get pretty bad. This is terrible terrible news for the country.

I’m not happy with our current standards for President.

thank you!

Ok, so they are different??

Let’s say I want use a a small amount of olive oil to lightly fry pressed garlic, chopped onions and green bell pepper enough to make the onion translucent and release the oil from the garlic into the olive oil. The amount of olive oil used is a little more than enough to wet the mix in oil. That would be considered sautéing, not pan frying, correct?

Ah, thank you! I always found those terms confusing. I learned to cook in Spanish, so when I would describe a recipe that included “sautéing” to Anglophones, I would say that I “fried” it because that’s how it’s said in Spanish, and I guess the context helps if you are familiar with the cuisine. Anglophones would think something like deep frying, which would cause confusion or hesitation. Whereas any Latino would know that no one is deep frying sofrito.

In your opinion, what’s the difference between pan frying and sautéing?

If mice ever become the dominant species, they’re going to start off so overpowered with advancements in medical treatments.

yooooo, i had a hair stylist that went on a date with Vanilla Ice. she said he took her to eat, then a strip bar. supposedly, he got really drunk and she snuck out.

Same! I don’t agree to the change, but I accept that is how society has adopted the use of it. The vast majority of the time I hear someone use the term literally in conversation, they are using it to mean exactly figuratively. I guess I could insist on misunderstanding their message to prove a pedantic point or correct them, but I already have enough difficulty socializing and don’t see the point of making things worse for a futile purpose.

I saw them trip, and then I shit my pants because of it.

This was my thinking:

• I walked outside, and I sneezed. -> I walked outside and sneezed.
• I saw them walk outside, and I sneezed. -> I saw them walk outside and sneezed.
• I saw them trip. I shit my pants. -> I saw them trip and shit my pants.

If they did the thing:

• I saw them walk outside. I saw them sneeze. -> I saw them walk outside and sneeze.
• I saw them trip. I saw them shit my pants. -> I saw them trip and shit my pants.

Crap. I may be wrong, but the grammar seems technically correct, though confusing and depends on context to understand.

My personal hypothesis is that they are people that are generally unhappy with something in their lives, but most people (including me), are generally bad at finding the valid cause of our discontent. Someone comes along and confidently tells them that their unhappiness is someone else’s fault. This helps the unhappy people feel better because they feel blameless, superior, and solves their confusion. They also now can do whatever while blaming someone else for their issues. The person that distracts them gains power because the unhappy grant it to them to fix their made up problem.

The thing with this approach is that it needs continued unhappiness. Otherwise, the whole thing falls apart. So, manipulative news media musy continually sow anger and division to maintain the scheme going. The people you see that are upset over things that are completely trivial to them have lost control of their minds. They have fallen to propaganda. Unfortunately, the people that have been scapegoated pay the price.

In other words, it doesn’t really matter to them. It has no effect on their lives. They’re just made to feel like shit, then told to blame someone else. That comes out as giving a shit about a physical characteristic the main character of a movie.

Edit: For the people scapegoated, the main character means a lot. It validates their existence and places them in a position where they are powerful and contribute to society.