Or maybe just NotCare for short.

Agree 100%. It’s naked hypocrisy.

So is Matthew Lillard. The whole thing feels oddly personal. Like if he had said “I didn’t like Dano in There Will Be Blood” you could understand that’s just a professional opinion. Maybe he thought someone else could have done better. But making it insulting undercuts his credibility as an impartial critic.

Maybe this time we try literally any cohesive attack strategy? Like instead of just silently gesturing broadly at everything, hoping voters will be inherently riled up about the audacity of conservative fascism.

I think we can stop calling it Obamacare.

On the one hand, yeah maybe he was operating as a propaganda agent for Iran. But they deleted his whole account, his email, his drive contents, and every video he uploaded. His life’s work nuked from orbit.

You can’t swing a dead cat on YouTube without hitting 1200 different propaganda agents working for various political wings. When was the last time Google obliterated a joirnalist from Newsmax or Xinhua?

Criticism is fine, when you’re talking about someone’s work and how to improve it. Calling someone “weak” and “the worst actor in the SAG” is deeply personal and insulting.

Revealing a personal bias in a professional setting belies unprofessional attitudes and prejudices. Tarantino isn’t a critic, he’s a filmmaker and an influential voice in the industry. Taking pot shots at a couple of B-list character actors is hurtful on a personal level, and wantonly destructive on a professional level. The power dynamic between producers and actors is massively unbalanced. It would be like the CEO where you work talking shit on LinkedIn about project managers at a rival company. If he’s saying this publicly, what is he saying behind the scenes? Is he trashing actors to casting directors to influence their careers?

He has every right to say “I don’t want these people in my movies.” It would also be professional to say “I did not like this specific performance for these specific reasons.” It’s extremely unprofessional to say “I hate these people because of who they are and anyone working with them is on my shit-list.”

He also took some totally unnecessary shots at Paul Dano, saying he was the worst actor in the SAG. That’s a bizarrely personal attack out of nowhere on a guy you never worked with.

The mask is off.

She learned this lesson, but is she actually a better person? Is she rethinking all of her odious stances and actions? I’m ready to applaud someone becoming a better person, even if she still has work to do on herself, but I’m also skeptical of any politician who sees the writing on the wall and makes a strategic course correction.

“No one will ever replace my husband, but…”

-words uttered by no faithful widow, ever.

Those kids are not pure enough for his constituents. He will deliberately lose custody and then whine ahout how the system is biased against fathers.

deleted by creator

A crime. He’s prepared to commit a crime.

Regan was corrupt, selfish, racist piece of shit who was terrible for the economy. But he would have vomited to see what Trump is doing.

I think it’s one of those apocryphal quotes that gets misattributed to different people. Most commonly Ledru-Rollin, as Pumpkin Escobar mentioned.

“Check where my people are going so that I might lead them there.”

I would just think you’re trying to be funny. If you keep a deadpan face, you might succeed.

There have been several high-profile systemic failures in the past few years that give us a glimpse into the hypothetical you’re describing. Most interruptions have lasted mere hours, if not minutes, before causing mass panic and devastating economic catastrophes. Planes are grounded, banks stop operations, global trade shuts down, and hospitals can’t access patient records.

The question isn’t how long before it would be a huge problem. That starts immediately. The better question is, how long before people adapt to a world without the internet? How long would it take to build an alternative?

She’s never been important enough to be protected by the people who will be named in the Epstein files.