TheGarbageBin

1. Reiner’s tweets about Trump represented the worst of humanity towards Trump

2. He glorified every bit of violence, arrests, and lies. Every last one.

3. No reciprocal outrage for any of the lefts similar response eg Charlie Kirk or when they held Trumps simumated decapitated head.

4. And this is the big one…no one is asking “the why”. Legitimate accounts on X are saying it was because there’s a history of abuse there:

But you get the point. Trump was actually kind to him in his post. There a ton more of the below but you get the point:

And furthermore, even if he would have done that, it doesn’t excuse other people reacting that way to his murder. You can’t justify your own behavior by saying what you believe someone else would have done in a different situation.

Also, people calling out Trump’s insensitivity don’t need to be reminded of those things because we haven’t forgotten them. We’re aware he was rabidly anti-Trump. YOU ALL need to be reminded that it doesn’t matter in this context. Who cares what he thought or said about Trump? This had nothing to do with politics. He was brutally murdered by his son and thinking it’s ok to shrug it off and be callous about it because he said mean things about the President of the US is disgusting.

All these screenshots mean nothing. We all know he hated Trump. That’s not news to anyone. But the fact that you think you’re showing that Trump’s comment on his murder wasn’t inappropriate because “look what he said about Trump” is really disheartening to see.

And accusing him of being a pedophile? That’s also disgusting unless you have strong evidence.

Reducing everyone down to their opinion on Trump or the other side of the political aisle and using that to determine whether or not we care if they are murdered or if the president’s response to their murder is inappropriate is a practice that needs to done away with.

This isn’t about politics and everyone making it about politics, Trump included, have really lost the plot. Trump took the murder of a man and his wife that was clearly the result of internal family issues and made a public post claiming it was his “TDS” that got him murdered. That is despicable and so is trying to excuse it.

There was already a program providing free lunches to those who needed them, you just had to sign up. The data from those sign ups is also was used to calculate support needed for schools and paid a big part in how much funding we needed to support what was a very low income rural area for my district.

2. Parents weren't complaining about paying for lunches. They didn't mind paying, and the money gained from that those who could afford to pay was a big factor in providing quality meals for all students. It allowed many districts to buy higher quality items and opt for more nutritious foods.

3. Post-free lunches, Walz didn't change how they calculate funding, so when parents stopped signing up for the free lunches, the number of reportable low income students who we needed extra funding to support went down drastically, cutting our funding dramatically. Walz also put the funding of these free lunches mostly on schools, so we have more expenses, but less state support to make it happen.

4. What support was provided by the state for these programs resulted in food that was either processed garbage, or inedible. The kids literally refuse to eat what's served, they think it's disgusting. Thousands of dollars is wasted every week on food waste. Kids are just eating bags of chips and cookies, ultra processed stuff that affects their development and overall school performance because everything else is either too moldy, too greasy, or inedible mush. You think I'm joking, but i saw what they had to feed these kids and it was genuinely horrifying.

5. Multiple districts have proven that by charging for lunches at a price point families were fine with paying, they could easily provide for students in need of a free meal, and give them them real, dignifying food instead of cheap slop. Walz and his crew have sued these schools and persecuted them for doing what they can to protect their children.

I am in shock. Pray for his family.

Rachel came out swinging right out the bat, so there was no time to like her and assume the best about her before she started mocking the movie. Additionally, while a lot of people probably don't like snow white, they don't hate it and want it to fail. She didn't just offend fans, she offended a neutral public by being too negative about a big opportunity at a time where many people are feeling the stress of a lack of opportunities.

Lastly, people are getting sensitive to Disney's habit of remaking movies that don't live up to the original, so any actor or actress who starts stirring the pot when they're involved in a remake is less likely to receive any grace from people. "You're ruining a classic AND acting like it's a bother to do so? Then just DONT. " Even if how bad the movies get isn't the actor's fault, they're the face of the project so they're who per ple will associate with the project and blame.

"Weep and howl, you rich, for the gold you have hoarded and stolen from the workers will eat your flesh like fire." -Bernie Sanders

(Just kidding that was the Apostle James)

To paraphrase the Gospel of Mark:

Jesus/Scripture (one and the same since Jesus is the Word made Flesh who dwellt among us) advocate for charity out of love for the neighbor. Communism cannot exist on a large scale without taking by force. That is the opposite of charity.

Communism is the compulsion to give to others as dictated by the state. You don't choose to give the shirt off your back, you must because it is the law. The Bible is very clear that works without conviction are like filthy rags, and that it is the heart behind giving that is good, not necessarily the act of giving itself. Performative or compelled giving is empty and meaningless because there is no real care or understanding behind the act, meaning it will most certainly be corrupted because it's not a choice someone truly believes in making.

It's not a sin or condemned to have more than your neighbor. Nor is the Bible anti capitalism. In fact the Bible consistently paints industrious workers participating in a capitalist society in a good light. What is sinful is to deny your brother or sister decency, to leave them unclothed and to abandon the most vulnerable in favor of personal comfort. The sin is not having the money, it's not caring for people enough to help them, and holding personal wealth and abundance to a higher degree than you do the well-being of God's children.

On the other hand, so much of our (even recent!) history was written in cursive, and having a whole generation of kids who can't read letters written by their grandparents, momentos saved by their great-grandparents, or even photo albums from theur immediate family seems like a dangerously quick way to detach us from previous generations.

And on the third, related but slightly malformed hand, I feel bad that yet another form of small, everyday art that brings joy in the middle of mundane tasks, which celebrates personality and individual style and self-expression, is about to fade into obscurity because it wasn't efficient enough for today's world to put up with.

Like... if we continue to whittle away the small arts out of every day life, what's going to be left except stark, ruthless pragmatism?

Reading cursive is one of my most valuable skills as a historical professional.

But it's also not a one and done thing! Scripts came in and out of fashion as they were taught in schools, and each one has a learning curve as you get used to it, along with nuances of the individual writer.

I don't think you necessarily need to know how to write in cursive in order to read it, but it certainly helps. My advice if you find yourself in a situation where you're struggling to read something is not to give up, which is often the impulse when you encounter a barrier to something that usually comes easily.

Public K-12 schools actually do have tuition, but your local government pays for it usually through tax collection and sometimes the state lottery. (I do not live in a state that does the latter, but I know others do) In order to give a child an alternate education, the government may have to divert at least some if not all of that child's tuition costs (if you live in a place that does school vouchers, it is likely all of the cost) even if there is an additional out-of-pocket cost to the parents for the alternate education. A loss of enrollment means a loss of funding that puts further stress on an already underfunded school system. If enough kids get pulled, that turns into either higher taxes to try and bridge the gap and/or less ancillary programs like the arts, or summer programs, or free lunches or other things that would benefit all families but also low-income ones who otherwise couldn't afford access.

It's insane to suggest that we fix a shitty school by increasing its enrollment. Schools are allocated boatloads of money by the government and massive amounts of it are embezzled by administrators. We don't need to give them more money, we need to fix the embezzlement. You cant change my mind because I come from an alternative school that did way more for their students than the standard school system does, on less money than the regular system is allocated per student.

But let's get to the more salient point: In no other circumstance do you fix a system by trapping people inside it. If you have nothing of substance to threaten the system with, you cannot force them to change anything. These people don't give a shit if you go to the school board and yell, they give a shit if you pull your kid out and take their paycheck with you.

Meanwhile, in countries with universal healthcare:

These three children, Alfie Evans, Charlie Gard, and Indi Gregory, all died after court ordered removal from life support despite parents wanting to pursue treatment in other locations that had offered it.

And you know why? Because the government decided it wasn’t worth the cost.