I don't know about that. The whole thing kinda felt like a sneak peak at the next Matthew Harris.

(apologies if the link isn't the best, just looked for one quick on mobile).

His L-i-B account shows as self-deleted. But it goes without saying that he likely has alt accounts to replace that one.

>We are the least conservative state out of all 50, with the highest wages, best healthcare, and best education.

This may just be an issue of interpretation, but I do believe the main reason the others are true is because we haven't gone off the liberal deepend in terms of spending. It's one thing I'm definitely proud of that Massachusetts has maintaining a balanced budget as a duty of the governor's office enumerated in our state constitution.

We're still very liberal, but other blue states can still learn a lot from us in terms of fiscal responsibility.

>Last time they tried to hold a “free speech” Charlottesville type rally up here like 100 people showed up, and something like 30,000 people showed up

Now that is proper free speech. :)

EDIT. And without getting too much into it, I'm with you on the gun rights thing too. Although I am more staunchly pro-2A, I recognize the LARPing weirdos you're referring to as indeed being weirdos. Own all the guns you want, but why base your personality around it. As long as you're a lawful citizen you owe nobody any justification.

It seems some people are glossing over the fact you're not actually the owner of the car.

Unless you have a Karen neighbor that reports you to cause trouble, you should be fine.

I see why this was removed before. There's no Stand with Ukraine sticker.

And if he does socialize, it's probably in the form of a circlejerk with his fellow facebook censors.

I'm just here to enjoy this cool flair.

Definitely this. Almost bought a house with an illegal bedroom and bathroom in the basement.

Wait, when did we start talking about Teddy?

^PS. ^For ^those ^missing ^the ^joke^.

That's not a good enough reason why the government needs to be involved in making that decision.

My biggest concern, though, is the slippery slope where people may start being denied care to stay living because they're deemed not worth saving. (And for those who will inevitably say "that won't happen" there sure has been a lot of "that won't happen" happening for awhile now.)

Cranston isn't that bad now that they have the appointment system. No more sitting there waiting all day.

There's one in Seekonk with MA tags.

I see ice chunks come flying off the roofs of vehicles, especially box trucks and semi trailers, traveling at highway speeds all the time.

Also, wipers on, lights on.

Here's a thought, though. While that indeed sucks, it's also possible they were following said truck a little too closely.

Then don't post Globe articles.

Do you pay for access to articles that will take you 30 seconds to read and never look at again?

If I'm gonna pay for news, it damn well better be something above and beyond what else is out there.

Also, remember where you are. If you're trying to share news and you link to it somewhere that makes people jump through hoops to actually read it, you're kinda the asshole.

Byeeeeeeeee

Landlords when wages go up and there's still high demand for housing.

Yes.

Cash register go brrrrrr and very few politicians are actually interested in stopping that.

Actually you're de facto innocent, and must be proven guilty. Which is something that seems to be lost on a lot of people defending civil forfeiture.

The phrase "not guilty" is a technical one because it's only referring to guilt of what you've being accused of, not in a general sense.

As are the clowns defending it.

You buy a nice car with cash you were saving up.

Someone questions whether you could afford it.

The police accuse you of a crime.

They take your car away claiming it was bought with proceeds from the crime.

They fail to prove you committed the crime. You are found not guilty.

You do not get your car back.

In what universe is this fair?

It shouldn't be up to you to prove you saved the cash lawfully. It's up to the state to prove you didn't.

>Out of curiosity, do you keep track of where your assets come from? I believe that if these individuals can prove where the assets arrived from, they’d be released if it was legitimately earned.

The burden should always be on the state to prove a crime was committed, and that the money were earned through its commission, not the other way around. You know, like, by holding a trial and presenting evidence that proves their guilt of a crime, and that that money is connected to it.