It would be so horrible it might answer the question. If people were born blind and schizophrenic, it might drive everyone to suicide or other stress-related deaths before it can be diagnosed.

They both mean the same fucking thing. Changing words for shit because one became "derogatory" is the most futile endeavor ever. When I hear "unhoused" I hear "I'm a virtue signaling teenager who's never met a homeless person"

...How weak is your self-control, buddy? You're definitely one of those people who should never get a credit card.

"Aw, holding military tribunals for your political rivals is tight!"

You joke, but I think we need to seriously ask if they are throwing the election on purpose. That is ridiculous, of course, but if someone jumps in front of a bus it's pretty obvious they're trying to off themselves.

This was my exact reaction when I read this. It's such a bizarre, off-script, self-destructive decision at EXACTLY the wrong moment. Years spent arguing that Hunter is just his Black Sheep of a son he loves and he's not involved and "That settles it, I'm not voting for Hunter" jokes, and now he's working in the White House? AS A CONVICTED FELON!?!?!??

This is so surreal I'm starting to question my own sanity. Everything happening is like a surgical attempt to throw the election. I am completely lost.

It cost less because economics 101. It didn't even have to do with Musk or Bezos... NASA wanted to privatize space flight since at least the Columbia disaster, because they knew it would be cheaper. 

You're chasing a blind conspiracy cuz you just wanna believe in it. 

I got linked here by a fellow Musk critic to point out that anything can become a deranged echo-chamber. Instead of focusing on ACTUAL problems with the guy, it becomes a blind tribal hate circle. Some of these comments are so bizarre and disconnected with basic sense and reality it's frightening. 

What??? If the "onboard thrusters" had the delta V to completely and ACCURATELY deorbit the ISS, that's what they would do. But deorbiting something that weighs about a million pounds requires a lot more energy than some small thrusters meant for orbital thrusters, and also it needs to be done quickly or the ISS will skim unpredictability across the outer atmosphere and land somewhere controlled.

This has nothing to do with being in a cult. You're just reaching wildly for anything to hate on anything tangentially related to Musk. Economics have nothing to do with Musk, there's no grand conspiracy to make them rich, please step back and consider what you're saying.

This is a component of capitalism, it's true in most any competitive industries. NASA is driven by projects, which typically require a small number of rockets up, while private industry can create a standardized product that reaches a broader market and produced at a larger scale. Plus they aren't held up politics like NASA is (congressional members will only vote to find the product if their state gets to produce some of the parts, which makes things more expensive).

This is economics, not "propping up a company". In the same way that the government not building cars isn't "propping up Ford".

Name a rocket company that doesn't survive on Government contracts. I'll wait. I mean at least StarLink is a revenue stream for them. What's Boeing's revenue stream for space?

Yes, he's really goofed up SpaceX...

Seriously? SpaceX has been a phenomenal success, and the Mollusk--insane grifter he may be--has been attached to it since forever. But now he'll screw it up because... ? Do you think or do you just get on subreddits to blindly yap about how much you hate some guy you've never met.

Why not spaceX? How many other US-based rocket company has a reliable rocket program? You want to use Boeing?

Separate the man from the company. SpaceX has done incredible things for US-based space launch.

Remember when that was extremely expensive to do, so we outsourced it to private industry, lowering the cost of space flight by orders of magnitude?

Who else is going to do it? Boeing? A Soyuz rocket? An Ariane 5? A Falcon is cheaper.

I'm very critical of Musk and much of what he does, but immediately jumping to hate anything he's tangentially related to is rabid tribalism. SpaceX is a solid company with very talented engineers operating it, it's fine to recognize that. In the same why haven't sworn off water because I saw a picture of him drinking it.

I think it's entirely a subconscious thing. If you grow up in, say, France, city-to-city travel is a 1 or 2 day trip max. Americans do the same thing with states--if I need to go to another city in my state, I automatically "know" I can do that in a day.

So if instead of saying "Miami to LA", tell them "Florida to California" and the scale will immediately be more apparent.

Completely counterproductive article. It's like saying "Yeah well Cancer kills 10 million people a year, why do you care your boyfriend hit you?" We know Trump is cancer, but that doesn't excuse the Democrats for putting forward someone who is literally senile. Cancer isn't going anywhere, but we can get a new boyfriend.

To be fair, I think that would have been a very rational thing to believe at the time, before political norms imploded. Trump was an entertainer, nobody (not even other Republicans) took him seriously. Unfortunately, we underestimated voters and ... well, I don't want to break any rules.

A very consistent complaint I have with the Democratic party as a whole is that they can't seem to ever get out of their own way. I, for example, do believe Trump is a serious danger to the US and Western Liberalism in general, and do not want him to be elected again. I think that's a very common sentiment among progressives and centrists, and even center-right Republicans that are more concerned with national continuity than policy. It is also one of the key points of the Biden campaign, that "Democracy is on the ballot". Great, the vast majority agrees.

But then, we see things like this that cause the centrists to frown in exasperation. Really? this is the important part right now? The Progressive wing really needs to fall in line for once. I understand these are important issues for them, and that DEI, Palestine, social justice, economic equality, and so forth are why they vote the way they do. But they also need to have some level of self-awareness that the majority of people don't want these things, and the much more pressing issue is that if Trump is re-elected, you not only won't get the changes you want, he will regress many of the changes you've already gotten. I am unhappy with many of Biden's policies, I would like to see certain things expanded or other things removed that will not happen under Biden (or another Democrat). I accept that, because it's a price I'm willing to pay, because there is always (supposed to be) another election where I can get what I want. Why is such a large chunk of the Democratic party completely unwilling to compromise when it needs to?

You're completely right, and I understand why nobody would want to damage their career by jumping in now when they would rather have a "clean" election in 2028. But if the goal is "Keep Trump out of the White House" (which I think most of us here ultimately want), your options are to keep Biden and lose by default, or pick someone else and have some slim chance of winning.

I'm sorry, but keeping him in now is--in my person opinion--a guaranteed loss. Trump is nuts, but even among people who recognize that, having a dying, senile puppet guided by unelected officials and family members is a non-starter.

Remember: people don't need to switch their vote to Trump for him to win. They just need to become so disenfranchised and frustrated that they stay home and drink to the collapse of the Republic.

It's worse than that: right now, the damage is limited to Biden. But as more and more people continue the "he's totally fine and you didn't see what you saw the other night", more Democrats are implicated in what's effectively a gaslighting conspiracy to lie about an unfit president. Now all Republicans really have to do is put out some ads around "Weekend at Bernie's two: Biden's Boogaloo", which will cause even more doubling down from Democrats. Then they can sit back and collect sound-bites from their election opponents while Biden keeps having "senior moments".

It's politically unwise to throw Biden under the bus right now, so maybe their best course of action is to just shut it?

That's not what I said at all. The debate shows clear cognitive decline, I'm referring to the extent that he's being used like a puppet by top officials. The news right now is pointing towards a conspiracy that would damage the entire Democratic party, not just Biden. 

... They're avoiding it because it's a fucking warzone and no-fly zone. You can't swing a dead cat around without hitting a SAM site.

Wtf kind of bot post is this?

Oh I watched it too, and I totally agree he's losing it. The big question for me is, to what extent was there a cover up? Him trying to keep it together with some minor blips, then it all coming to a head during a stressful debate all on its own is one thing; a concerted conspiracy by his top officials to hide and even potentially manipulate an elderly man-- which some of the discussion I'm seeing today is suggesting-- is much bigger thing.

The former is the end of Biden's political career, but the latter is hugely damaging to the people in his administration and the party as a whole. If there really is some conspiracy here, I don't think replacing Biden is going to be enough to beat Trump