Sorry, the best I can do is giving Garland a lifetime appointment as AG (* while Democrats control the White House). Think of how much of an epic clapback that would be since they blocked him from a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. They'll be so upset when we continue to empower the guy specifically chosen for being extremely inoffensive to Republicans!
Using "Zionist" as a protected class to fire a Jewish professor. Yes, very good.
While that's often the punishment, this particular event was a repeat of a previous event that resulted in a two year prison sentence. At least that one particular judge is throwing the book at climate protesters for minor acts.
I'm sure that's how you see yourself in your mind. The rest of us read your posts that are definitely not just about historical artifacts and frankly smell of the white moderate concern of not having regular life disrupted by annoying activists. Your examples of valid protest are violence or vandalism against specific wrongdoers, not say the regular stuff like blocking traffic or vandalizing (non-priceless) surfaces in places that are visible to a mass audience rather than comfortably protected behind fences and security checkpoints.
This chain literally started with you responding to someone daydreaming about physically assaulting the young protesters with:
No no, you see, it’s for THEIR cause. The beatings would be happening to raise awareness of climate change, not to support oil companies. Isn’t that the logic, here? There’s no other relevance of attempted vandalism of a painting by a man who died before climate change was even fully understood. The cause is all-important; the act just a detail to catch eyes, apparently.
And paired with posts about how they're only doing it for attention and an activists very symbolic public suicide by a method almost exclusively used as a protest action was probably unrelated to his activism. Yes, very much a level-headed non-disdainful simple art enjoyer who respects protest. As long as the targets deserve it and no one cares.
If you knew someone self-immolated and didn't get coverage, what is your reasoning behind the very stable and very cool suggestion that you would beat them up for publicity? That a self-inflicted death wouldn't get attention, but maybe a voluntary assault would?
You just didn't know, but can't drop the tough guy act to admit it.
If they had the guy whose job it was to figure out how to protect paintings say he didn't do a very good job and the painting wasn't protected, they would have said that. Instead they just used the generic "staff", a descriptor which encompasses anyone from the ticket takers to the people who solicit donations from the rich and powerful who both have no special expertise in the protection systems and a very good reason to both want to discourage further direct action in their establishment and tell the rich people they're on their side.
You cannot realistically protect a painting from its frame.
LOL, what? I have a print in my room right now with glass between the art and its frame. And that's not even a publicly accessible priceless piece of art that's undergone past attacks. The external frame has no reason to actually touch the artwork.
You've come in parading around with smug posts about how dumb these kids are and how pointless the general idea of public protest is. You complaining about people being disdainful is very much worthy of disdain.
Aileen Getty is a philanthropist who inherited money and has nothing to do with the oil company. Her father and the rest of her family sold their stake when she was young. This is just a convenient conspiracy for oil companies to spread because people just fucking slurp it up without the minimum due diligence.
You'll notice how the only thing they can cite is "worry" by "staff" with no qualification for whether the worry was realistic. People worry about a lot of things and are willing to claim they worry about much more when it suits them. "I feared for my life" doesn't actually mean your life was in danger.
They're not mentioning "worries" of the people who actual design the protection, because those people either don't worry or should find a different job. A liquid leaking through to damage the painting is literally the purpose of the protection. Especially after such high profile events starting years ago, including literally this same painting.
A man literally self-immolated to try to bring attention to our lack of effort to confront climate change. It was barely covered and you don't seem to even know it happened. But you're here fantasizing about violence because they threw some soup on a painting's protective glass, so it seems like that's actually working.
You're reading this in a newspaper. It's in no way limited to art enjoyers.
Not that I have any idea why you think art enjoyers are particularly climate conscious. Or that their consciousness extends to actually doing anything rather than just thinking it would be nice if the environment was cleaner.
It also heard that the damaged frame had been purchased by the gallery in 1999 and was valued at £28,000.
Priceless human heritage, purchased in 1999.
I don’t give a fuck about bothering people. I give a fuck about the potential damage to pieces of human heritage.
Ok, then why are you complaining. There was zero potential damage from this act.
I'm glad that only happens in a single small Mississippi city.
I think this is a "college" joke, not a political statement. Enhanced by the joke itself being supported by the teller's implied lack of understanding about what the electoral college is.
This doesn't make the electoral college irrelevant, it just rebalances the votes per state so they're closer to proportional. California Republicans and Texas Democrats are still disenfranchised even if their states get a lot more votes.
Oregonians as a demographic would be considered “safe” for progressives and “lost” for conservatives, so neither side would give them much effort.
That's now. You're describing the electoral college.
Your state EC vote for a losing candidate is a purely symbolic exercise with zero effect whatsoever on the result. And once the NPVC is in effect even the symbolism will be effectively nil as people no longer care or count electoral votes.
If the Republicans win the popular vote, they've also won the electoral college, but even if they didn't, that's democracy. Trying to overturn the will of the people by reverting to an archaic and undemocratic system is anti-democracy. You have to actually believe the EC has some value to try go to the streets to try to restore it, but it's a bad system that invalidates people's votes, whether or not Democrats are winning.
Yeah, you'd think a criminal indictment against him would warrant a bit more than a casual perusal by his legal team.
The NYC mayoral primary election was very competitive with ranked choice voting. Adams barely won.
In an economic speech in New Hampshire on Wednesday, Vice President Kamala Harris plans to propose a smaller increase in taxes on capital gains, breaking with the policy laid out by President Joe Biden in his 2025 budget, according to people familiar with the matter.
Vice President Kamala Harris proposed increasing the long-term capital gains tax rate to 28% for wealthy Americans during an economic speech in New Hampshire on Wednesday, breaking with the policy laid out by President Joe Biden in his 2025 budget by suggesting a lower rate.
The current long-term capital gains tax rate – 20%, plus an additional 3.8% tax on higher earners – is paid when an investment is sold, or gains are realized. The Biden budget proposes raising that rate to the top rate he wants to levy on ordinary income – 39.6% – for households with taxable income over $1 million. Harris, the people familiar with the matter say, believes 39.6% is too high.
While Harris still supports taxing the wealthiest individuals and corporations at higher rates – as Biden’s budget also calls for – she believes that a lower capital gains rate would incentivize investors to put more money into startups and small businesses. She has also proposed increasing the corporate tax rate to 28%, up from the current 21% rate set by Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.
Progressive Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) announced Wednesday that there are currently enough votes in the Senate to suspend the filibuster to codify Roe v. Wade and abortion rights if Democrats win control of the House and keep the Senate and White House.
“We will suspend the filibuster. We have the votes for that on Roe v. Wade,” Warren said on ABC’s “The View.”
She said if Democrats control the White House and both chambers of Congress in 2025, “the first vote Democrats will take in the Senate, the first substantive vote, will be to make Roe v. Wade law of the land again in America.”
A budget by the Republican Study Committee, a group of more than 170 GOP lawmakers, highlights how many in the party would seek to govern if Republicans win in November.
A new budget by a large and influential group of House Republicans calls for raising the Social Security retirement age for future retirees and restructuring Medicare.
For Social Security, the budget endorses "modest adjustments to the retirement age for future retirees to account for increases in life expectancy." It calls for lowering benefits for the highest-earning beneficiaries. And it emphasizes that those ideas are not designed to take effect immediately: "The RSC Budget does not cut or delay retirement benefits for any senior in or near retirement."
Biden has blasted Republican proposals for the retirement programs, promising that he will not cut benefits and instead proposing in his recent White House budget to cover the future shortfall by raising taxes on upper earners.
"Despite my deep political differences with brother Harlan Crow (who is an anti-Trump Republican), I've known him in a nonpolitical setting for some years and I pray for his precious family," said the presidential candidate.
Harlan Crow (of the Clarence Thomas patronage scandals) donated the max individual donation ($3,300) to Cornel West's campaign, which invited obvious criticism.
Text of his response on Twitter: >As an independent candidate and a free Black man, I accept donations within the limits of no PACs or corporate interest groups that have strings attached. I am unbought and unbossed. Despite my deep political differences with brother Harlan Crow (who is an anti-Trump Republican), I’ve known him in a non-political setting for some years and I pray for his precious family. I find it hypocritical for those who highlight his $3300 donation to my campaign but can’t say a mumbling word about the PAC-driven billion dollars to support the genocidal attack in Gaza sponsored by their candidate! I’m fighting for Truth, Justice, and Love! Onward!
Frankly, the pleasant words make this look much worse than just saying "if some asshole wants to send me money, I'll keep it". Sounds like someone he wants to keep on the good side of, but y'know they're only political differences, not stuff that really matters.