As long as she’s harshly critical, it’s a perfectly valid use of “blasts.” It’s just not the particular dictionary definition many of us would have preferred, apparently. Convenient sentence phrasing like “blasts the heads” does make me think the writer is wanting to create a certain image though. 😄

*Love this, except technically I think that’s a “bombs Lebanon” in the middle (a condition of the ceasefire was for Israel to stop flattening Southern Lebanon and parts of Beirut).

I wouldn’t mind protective, citizen-first regulation like data privacy laws (instead of the current route of surveillance and harvesting our data for inevitable abuse by data brokers or worse), as well as protections against sudden profit-driven EULA changes and other unethical business practices.

“Antifa” branding was embraced by anti-fascist soldiers of WWII. That’s a bit of a while ago now!

My first experience with it was when I learned a couple of decades ago that not all skinheads were nazis and that there were in fact anti-fascist skinhead punks who called themselves “Antifa.” To be honest, some of them openly bragged about beating up nazi skinheads so I suppose there was some violence involved. I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump heard about those folks and they’re the ones he means, even though they don’t totally own the idea of “Antifa.”

I think the silver lining to this is that whatever they do from here can’t be written off as concessions to avoid a non-confidence vote. They own everything from here, including whatever the floor-crossers do next. Perhaps Carney announcing “AI for all” is going to be the start of their downfall if they don’t stop ignoring what most Canadians want prioritized.