this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
1386 points (99.4% liked)

Microblog Memes

7308 readers
2435 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 32 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Rhetorical, just FYI. I’m an American in Germany and I’ve literally never met a native German speaker who wasn’t a linguistics professor who didn’t say “rethoric” though, so it’s not a big mistake at all. I do wonder if there was a misprint in a popular textbook or something though, because it’s weirdly consistent, even more so than I would expect from a word with a silent (in German) h somewhere.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

It's a lot more unusual to have an h after an r than an h after a t, even in German. So if you vaguely remember there's supposed to be an h somewhere, it intuitively makes more sense after the t.

In German, "th" is uncommon (non-existent?) in words that aren't overtly borrowed from Latin/Greek, so you get overcompensation like "Ethymologie". "Rhythmus" trips me up every time.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] callyral@pawb.social 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

non-american here, what is an "alien" in this context? i imagine it doesn't mean "extraterrestrial"

edit: actually nvm, i just searched it up. why are people being called aliens? does this word even fit that role?

[–] Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 3 days ago

I think it's the original definition of the word alien, but I might be wrong. Kinda derogatory now but still used in legal contexts

[–] AlexLost@lemm.ee 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm an alien, I'm a legal alien. I'm an Englishman in New York

[–] uid0gid0@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are you the guy Sting wrote the song about?

[–] AlexLost@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nope. I like my toast done on both sides.

[–] slingstone@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Could we hear it in your accent when you talk?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 6 points 3 days ago

yes it's the appropriate term with the same meaning dating back to its original latin meaning, well before the concept of extraterrestrials

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Where did you think the scifi term alien came from?

It just means foreigner, people will even use it as a verb

Something is alien (unknown) to me

Alienate is to exclude

Comes from here https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/alienus#Latin

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Bill Clinton used the phrase "illegal alien" to refer to immigrants without legal status like a green card, Regan and Bush were very pro immigration and both gave amnesty to immigrants in the US without legal status so they could stay in the US work, and apply for legal status, Clinton beat HW Bush by attacking him for the right on immigration, stoking racist hate towards Mexicans, Chicanos, and other Hispanics, which beat Bush badly, the GOP has been as hard line anti-immigrant as possible ever since, in fact Bod Dole lost a lot of votes by saying he wanted military all along the southern boarder, and as stupid as it was then it still is today, even though the average racist American views all Hispanic peoples as Mexicans who illegally enter on foot or swimming, the vast majority of undocumented or authorized immigrants enter on planes, with legal status. Staying Legal in the US is like going to the DMV and getting your car registered, except the rules always change, your job at work can lie and say they are sponsoring you, or processing paperwork for you until you are illegal and face zero consequences, the enforcing officers can make up rules on the spot and process deportation and imprisonment against your legal rights, and even if you have a lawyer, you might never get resolution on any matter, you could end up stuck in prison without any way to sort of what got you there as "they were suspected of a crime, so we won't be processing anything" using the unjustified arrest or detainment AS the pretext for the continued legal abuse.

where was I? oh yeah. Clinton used to say it a lot in the 90's was a whole buzzword.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Lucky_777@lemmy.world 30 points 4 days ago (6 children)

I get their thought process. To them, the constitution applies only to US citizens. They are stupid fucks for sure, but I get it.

[–] dharmacurious@slrpnk.net 19 points 4 days ago

Isn't that the entire thought process behind Guantanamo? The constitution applies in the us, move them outside our borders and we can do whatever we want. By the same logic, the constitution applies to citizens (when on us soil), not a citizen, no constitutional protections.

To be clear, I'm entirely against this, and I don't think that's actually how our laws work, just furthering your point of understanding how the stupid fucks get there. The US has been skirting it's own laws and letter-of-the-lawing it to get around whatever it doesn't like + outright ignoring and violating our own laws when it suits us for so long that who the fuck knows what they'll do, and how they'll justify it, and who can blame a MAGAt for not knowing how it actually works

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I mean the us has never followed due process in the way advocates frame it. As well as this originalists like Thomas and Scalia have always opposed it. Look at dred scott for a history of this. Even in theory due process is not the greatest. This person is wrong and almost certainly extremely bigoted but not as " out there" as some of these comments think.

[–] veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The lady said that in retort, but autocorrect, you know?

[–] foggianism@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

She only cares about the 2nd amendment.

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 5 points 3 days ago

And probably only the second half of the 2nd amendment.

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 18 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Judging by the user name, they only care about the 2nd amendment.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] huppakee@lemm.ee 11 points 3 days ago

All she cares about it herself

[–] Sibshops@lemm.ee 6 points 3 days ago

This is why US concentration camps are in Guntanamo Bay and El Salvador

The problem is this is the same answer as the party in power and their cock-slurping media. Bits of paper don't matter if their mandates aren't enforced by anyone.

[–] Guns0rWeD13@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

why are we still pretending that an online argument is going to solve anything?

guns

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›