FriendOfDeSoto

I kind of get it if she's around and cannot tell if your chat is work-related or not. You could be telling your colleagues to go cut the red wire but she knows it ought to be the blue wire. She could've jumped in at that point to correct you, had she understood. But the bomb went off already and everybody died. I'm exaggerating the stakes here obvs.

I would try to keep shit in English when she's within earshot. And if she sneaked up on you while you're practicing your Spanish, apologize, acknowledge her wishes, and tell her you were just talking about the weather or the game or whatever. She might just be nervous about you talking about her behind her back - while she's in the room. So put her mind at ease. Don't piss off the higher-ups unless you're willing to lose the job.

Why would they extradite that person? The murder took place in country A and the leader of country B got killed. That's a problem for the courts in country A.

Some countries have a legal proviso that can activate their court system for crimes that didn't happen within their jurisdiction. Some Syrian torturers that ended up fleeing Syria too found themselves in courtrooms in the EU. So if the perpetrator was able to kill leader of B in A but then fled the country, if B somehow got ahold of them, they could prosecute their leader's murder on their own turf. That's assuming they wouldn't just send a hit squad.

All the headlines would just say things along the lines of "B-born naturalized citizen of A killed B leader." I think it's similar to all the al qaeda or IS terrorists who often held passports of the countries they terrorized.

The relations between these countries would obviously be strained. But how strained would depend on more factors. Where did security break down, who fucked up, and how did everyone react to this assassination? If B was indeed Russia and the shooter was Russian-born, you can bet they will come up with a media narrative how the culprit was long sought for gulag internment for their wild ideas but managed to flee from the glorious motherland. And then duped the hapless people of A to give them citizenship, the stupid, naive fools! If only they had listened to us, who are always right, before! Then this tragedy could have been averted.

"They" don't like the term "woke" because like all good music it has Afro-American origins. It started off as describing somebody who was aware of racial discrimination and over the decades broadened in meaning to include a host of other social issues. And then it was thrown into the culture war meat grinder.

I like the parallel to the "wake up, sheeple, do your own research" crowd. I hadn't noticed it before. It's funny how two uses of this inoccuous verb that can probably be traced all the way back to the Proto-Indoeuropean language have ended up on opposite sides of the aforementioned meat grinder.

I think 47 and his cronies will manage to blame it all on Bill Clinton and sweep the rest under their carpet, along with his conviction in court and the impeachments. It's a media war. It's hard to play the game against the reality-tv-schooled incumbent to keep anything in the headlines. He'll just throw a dead cat on the table and take all the oxygen out of the room, i.e. annex Canada or Greenland, 100% tariffs on everything, ICE jackboots raids, national guard in all cities run by Democrats, any late night tweet while he is constipated. It's hard to keep anything in the news that is not conning from him. And this story is one of the few with staying power and the potential to be damaging to him before the judiciary has entirely lost its independence and maybe some of his followers rediscover their human decency in the attic. As such it is the only recruitment tool with oomph for Democrats to mobilize opposition to the fascist in chief. And, boy, do they need it!

It is there to give men an idea of what childbirth is like. (Tongue very much in cheek)

So what did the dog find? What? WHAT DID THE DOG FIND? TELL. ME. I HAVE TO KNOW!

That's just YouTube speak. The implied drama gets them more clicks. It's how to frame the ancient medium of public debate for millenials and genz. It's like YouTubers pulling the dumbest, silliest possible face on the thumbnail. It'll have more views too.

It's also a sign of the times since Y2K that you couldn't just have an enlightening discussion. Somebody has to get owned. Hitchens was forthright in his rhetoric but I never heard him be disrespectful. I've only ever seen him tracking the ball, not the players. But that's boring so people add their own spice to it. And they tend to cut out any counter arguments if the footage was from a public debate.

You should add your age for context. You're either a normal adolescent/young adult figuring shit out like all of us have to. Or you can consider yourself part of the spectrum, maybe in aceflux. You can do that at any age to be fair. I would just wait until maybe ~25 before you make your own identity ruling here. And keep in mind stuff changes over time still even after you've reached that age, maybe just at a slower pace.

In the end, you do you. I would recommend honesty with your partners. They could be pretty pissed when they find out by accident that you've been more like holding your proverbial nose to enable intercourse.

Having info on the heliocentric solar system could land you in a dungeon or worse back in the day.

This is too simplistic. I know conservative voters who didn't vote for 47, many not even for 45. Conservative is a value set and the Venn diagram of that with MAGA is far from a perfect overlap. If you replace "conservatives" with "47's cult-like followers" I would come closer to agreeing with your take. I do take issue with "everyone else" though. I think that doesn't hit the mark either. I think there is more purple between this red team/blue team thinking than there are both extremes of this scale added together. Stop digging deeper trenches. And don't shoot your political opponents.

Lol I read that as "first responders or 911" as in nine one one. I would say the addition of a / might have clarified it. But that doesn't diminish my failure at reading comprehension.

I'm fairly confident that you are generalizing this a bit and that there are police and fire fighting departments on this planet that employ nurses. In general though, first responders who get injured end up in the same system than the people they save and need medical attention: hospitals. If you are in need of nurse aftercare, you are probably off on sick leave - so what would the nurse actually do? Especially in the smaller bf-nowhere operations, I don't see how you could justify the cost. Plus, most firehouses have paramedics already. They're not the same as a nurse but bring a lot of similar skills.