Llamalitmus

Are you suggesting there should be a statute of limitations for statutory rape/abuse of a minor, esp from a person in a position of authority and a religious/community leader. Would you want someone with that kind of power/influence to have no kind of public accountability? Should people like that be able to just wait out the clock and get away with it? I'm not sure I'd want to have to wonder if my community leader got away with something like this due to a technicality [or because they were able to successfully intimate, bribe, or otherwise dissuade a victim from going public]. I'd want to know that the proper checks and balances are in place to keep the public safe from someone who would take advantage of a child in this way. And I'd wonder and be concerned about anyone who doesn't want that.

How is that not a start? In a world where we are fighting just to agree that a problem exists, acknowledging the problem is a step in the right direction. Is it worth celebrating? No. But saying it's not even a start is intellectually dishonest. [To say nothing of invoking the harm caused by a mob, incited by grifters, and assigning the responsibility to an individual]

And who said anything about being sympathetic? Do you have to sympathize with a person to not go out of your way to be shitty to them? [If so, that might be something you want to interrogate in yourself]

And again, I'm not saying your anger, frustration, and/or indignation is unwarranted. But none who breathe are wholly innocent. I don't know anything about you, but I think it is a safe assumption that, if you live in a western country, your family history does not go back more than 4-5 generations wherever you're living. You likely live on colonized land. [And if not that, then some other industrialized atrocity you are complicit in?] What work have you done to fix that harm? What sympathy should be granted to you, should you ever be called to account? I'm not suggesting you need to do anything other than have some restraint and decency. Is that such a radical or outrageous thing?

Given what they said regarding disagreeing with Trump's current actions, why did you feel like your response was the best way to engage?
After the repeated examples over the last decade, I think everyone in the world should have learned by now that shame, aggression, and shade dripping with schadenfreude doesn't change opinions or actions.
If you are truly concerned about making things worse for others, you might want to examine the way you interact with other human beings. Because the short term dopamine isn't worth contributing to the division that's been made worse by targeted, algorithmic influence.
We are all being fed a curated version of reality designed to appeal to our biases and stoke fear and outrage. I think we need to learn to show some grace to people who we don't fully agree with, who are trying to reach across the divide, and who might be coming to terms with the ways in which they may have been misled or caught up in an enticing movement.
And I'm not saying this is easy. It certainly isn't satisfying. I love barbed and bitter witicisms. Being shitty to someone who I feel deserves it scratches this itch in my brain that I am neither proud of, nor can deny. But it's also the definition of being selfish, since it helps no one. So idk, you do you I guess?

In this economy?

Someone should tell him that the best way to get back at Elon would be to start taxing billionaires.

The problem with "they're just incompetent", is that it let's malicious people feign stupidity. And if it is a combination, it doesn't matter which aspects are one or the other. They are dangerous all the same and shouldn't be allowed to continue hurting people. But a combination of apathy, indoctrination, and infiltration means they'll likely never see any real consequences. Or if they do, they were likely expendable and their excision doesn't accomplish anything. People need to, at a minimum, vote. And preferably get more involved. Organize. Start local.

More of them, but no plan or resources towards maintaining them

"It sets a shitty precedence.." is a gross minimalization to attach to effectively making the US be a dictatorship. And saying you're ok with a dictatorship because you happen to agree with the dictator is the kind of sentiment that cannot be left unchallenged/unexamined

It's almost like it is in the best interests of one of the political parties to have a less informed populace and that party tends to limit or dismantle that educational infrastructure

You've misapplied progressive language in such a way as to make me suspect this comment is an example of astroturfing. I almost hope that is the case, because the alternative is that you have allowed ignorance and implicit bias to lead you down a path of self justified racism/bigotry. As the dominant culture, it is not our place to decide to exclude groups of people based on a preconception. Every culture has blindspots. But none of them are absolutes. You tolerate the culture, and try to discourage behavior that is detrimental to the whole. Otherwise we'd ban most religions. Even western ones.

I think Bev Keane was based off this woman