this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
342 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19127 readers
4271 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 78 points 5 months ago (1 children)

She's banished from Pet Smart too

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Likely not welcome at the Pet Semetary either

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Too many of the guests have a bad history with her

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

The era of the personable politician has gone the way of Haast's Eagle and high-quality programming on network TV

[–] [email protected] 73 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Say what you will about her but I know this much. After a speech you'll never hear Crickets.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I would like to point out that tribal lands are not part of "her state"; they're sovereign territory of the tribes. That's why she can be banned from them.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

20% of the land within the borders of her state, then.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They banned her because she's a racist asshole that thinks the drug issue in tribal lands is because of native American failures. And totally not because of hundreds of years of genicide, land cofiscation, and 80 years of failed drug policy by the US.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

Isn't it strange how groups of people who are disenfranchised always seem to be of weak moral character? What an amazing coincidence!

[–] [email protected] 28 points 5 months ago

It's fine, she'll just label them as untrainable and do what comes naturally. :|

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago

I would think she would be banned from any home that has a dog, too.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

When she doesn't get the VP spot I think she should start a dog-euthanizing service. Shows up and sleeps your dog in only 30m or your money back. Cause no one likes dogs. And we all love killing them, but most of us are too gun-shy to blast them ourselves. What a money maker.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

They say if you do what you love, you'll never work a day in your life.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Noem reinforced the divisions between the tribes and the rest of the state in March when she said publicly that tribal leaders were catering to drug cartels on their reservations while neglecting the needs of children and the poor.

The tribes have clashed with Noem in the past, including over the 2016 Dakota Access Pipeline protests at Standing Rock and during the COVID-19 pandemic when they set up coronavirus checkpoints at reservation borders to keep out unnecessary visitors.

And there is a long history of rocky relations between Native Americans in the state and the government dating back to 1890, when soldiers shot and killed hundreds of Lakota men, women and children at the Wounded Knee massacre as part of a campaign to stop a religious practice known as the Ghost Dance.

Noem appears to be getting tired of answering questions about her decision to kill Cricket after the dog attacked a family's chickens during a stop on the way home from a hunting trip and then tried to bite the governor.

Noem also drew criticism for including an anecdote she has since asked her publisher to pull from the book that described "staring down" North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in a private meeting that experts said was implausible.

With all the questions about "No Going Back: The Truth on What's Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward," no one is even asking anymore about Noem's decision to appear in an infomercial-style video lavishing praise on a team of cosmetic dentists in Texas who gave her veneers.


The original article contains 935 words, the summary contains 260 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!