That's actually a bit comforting

You have now

I always took nonbinery to mean that they didn't identify on the M/F dichotomy at all. My mistake, that is not a community I've much been exposed to.

Dark is kinda sus

I like being yelled at, though

Being an asshole is not a criminal offense. Someone needs to remind people of that.

Poor kid. I looked into it, he's trying to sue the prosecutor. But Covid conditions is making legal defense very difficult. For everyone, but I suspect his case in particular is being dragged out to try and starve him out.

Beat me to it

Never heard of him, where should I start?

Individualism is freedom. And as I've said, the problem in America was caused by the government. Cut them out and costs will become far more affordable.

Ditto, good day to ya

Then keep it a choice. There are public options I'd donate to myself, but volunteering other people's time and money is too easy, and not right.

One of us is projecting, you've got that right.

Of course, a system that allows opting out must also allow for private alternative that the state cannot regulate or coerce. You pay 70 percent taxes for an easy life, I'll pay a few bucks a day to drive in the private speed lane in my wingless jet to report in to my job as a private security contractor on fire response duty.

Technology, space, the ocean, a portal to Hell. Whatever.
Anybody who wouldn't want a system that allows opting out is a tyrant or authoritarian, at best.

My hope is that expansion will bring opportunities to cast off the shackles of government and allow those who want to be under government to live happily while the rest of us can head for the new frontiers to live how we want to.

I forsee star lanes being monitored like freeways, but that would more be staying the course than expanding the government. No, there will never be an existential need for more government, we have too much as it is. But there will never be a shortage of statists who think they know better trying to tell everyone else what to do "for their own good".

So you're fine with keeping a list of political enemies. Explcitly to target them in some manner for supporting the lawful president. Okay, just say so. Glad we established that. This difference is irreconcilable, and I certainly hope you've kept your jackboots polished.
See you when they try to load me into a boxcar.

I'm not fighting against the opportunity. I'm fighting against the notion that the feds can or should be involved. Because they caused the problem in the first place, and it was never a power for them to have.
Are you going to keep putting words in my mouth, or are you going to address my argument?

And you aren't disturbed at all by the fact that it ever got off the ground? And no, their statement explicitly said anybody who voted, donated, or supported him. Try and twist that however you want, but even by your revised standards, it remains a blacklist of people who supported the lawfully elected president, for the purpose of purging them from the public discourse. Keep being an asshole, but know that you are talking about half of the voting population. That same half that is already disinclined to reach across the aisle because of the endless hostility, condescension, and blatant attacks. So keep adding to that, please.

Gonna have to wait to watch that interview.
Currently I do not want to get rid of the federal government, just for them to be reverted to their enumerated powers and original taxing ability.
The feds are great at doing what they are meant to do, which does not and never included education, retirement, or medicine.