Out here on the “extreme right,” some of us actually do oppose the government. I would be genuinely worried if I thought Washington was capable of persecuting dissident intellectuals. One way to see where America is going is to look at where its satellites in Europe are, and Britain and other countries certainly treat jokes on the train and casual anti-Party tweets much the same way the Czech authorities in 1971 or the German authorities in 1937 treated unconstructive public comments about the Party or the Leader.

But really, these fools are easy targets. Yo, don’t be an easy target. Don’t blow shit up and don’t try to found any tax-exempt organizations, and you ought to be fine.

[I'm looking at you, Old Glory Club. That was a really stupid thing you did.]

Lol

100%. Deodorant is for insecure people who care too much what others think, and they're so insecure that they hurt themselves. It's sad.

Meet me in the woods

Every new generation, in this century, comes in shouting that has something new to do and goes out saying it only has something new to regret.

Let's check in on Illinois:

According to court records, Will County Judge Derek Ewanic informed Rodriguez on Thursday that she would not be kept in the jail because her criminal charges related to accusations of spitting on multiple police officers are not detainable crimes under the SAFE-T-Act.

hell yeah

People gonna be talking about this one for years

Why aren't you in a book club?

parenting be like

Using these six rules and natural deduction, prove that [C > (C > C] entails C > C

Here's another one. Use any rule system you like:

1. (W ∨ X) ∨ (Y ∨ Z)
2. X → Y
3. ¬Z
∴ W v Y

A solution using a Frege-Hilbert system:

01. (W ∨ X) ∨ (Y ∨ Z)
02. X → Y
03. ¬Z
04. | ~(W v Y) - Assume
05. | ~W & ~Y - 4 DeMorgan's Theorem
06. | ~Y & ~W - 5 Commutation
07. | ~Y - 6 Simplification
08. | ~X - 2,7 Modus Tollens
09. | ~W - 5 Simplification
10. | ~W & ~ X - 8,9 Conjunction
11. | ~(W v X) - 10 DeMorgan's Theorem
12. | Y v Z - 1,11 Disjunctive Syllogism
13. | Z - 7,12 Disjunctive Syllogism
14. | Z & ~Z - 3,13 Conjunction
15. ~~(W v Y) - 4-14 Reductio ad Absurdhum/Indirect Proof
16. - W v Y - 15 Double Negation

A solution using a Fitch system:

01. (W v X) v (Y v Z)
02. X → Y
03. ¬Z
04. | ~(W v Y) - Assume
05. | | W - Assume
06. | | W v Y - 5 vI
07. | | ⊥ - 4,6 ⊥I
08. | ~W - 5-7 ~I
09. | | Y - Assume
10. | | W v Y - 9 vI
11. | | ⊥ - 4,10 ⊥I
12. | ~Y - 9-11 ~I
13. | | W v X - Assume
14. | | | W - Assume
15. | | | ⊥ - 8,14 ⊥I
16. | | | X - Assume
17. | | | Y - 2,16 →E
18. | | | ⊥ - 12,17 ⊥I
19. | | ⊥ - 13,14-15,16-18 vE
20. | | Y v Z - Assume
21. | | | Y - Assume
22. | | | ⊥ - 12,21 ⊥I
23. | | | Z - Assume
24. | | | ⊥ - 3,23 ⊥I
25. | | ⊥ - 20,21-22,23-24 vE
26. | ⊥ - 1,13-19,20-25 vE
27. ~~(W v Y) - 4-26 ~I
28. W v Y - 27 ~E