Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
@blooshky.bsky.social
Easily irritated, but not yet convinced that humans will manage to wipe ourselves out completely. He/him, but yo' gurl is okay too.
John Sayles for President.
Avatar is a piece of artwork called "Evolution of Charles" by Francis and Laurence Minoza.
John Sayles for President.
Avatar is a piece of artwork called "Evolution of Charles" by Francis and Laurence Minoza.
Rocks and leaves are good too!
November 26, 2025 at 7:51 PM
Rocks and leaves are good too!
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
In the short run, this means that the powerful can get their way without consequences — as we know.
But in the longer run, it also means that they become decreasingly knowledgeable about the world. This trend has a breaking point.
But in the longer run, it also means that they become decreasingly knowledgeable about the world. This trend has a breaking point.
November 26, 2025 at 12:34 PM
In the short run, this means that the powerful can get their way without consequences — as we know.
But in the longer run, it also means that they become decreasingly knowledgeable about the world. This trend has a breaking point.
But in the longer run, it also means that they become decreasingly knowledgeable about the world. This trend has a breaking point.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
Understanding the world is intimately tied to acting in the world; you know something to be true because of the coherent activities it supports in the world.
This creates a link between knowledge and power: when you're powerful, *incoherent* actions can succeed from sheer power.
This creates a link between knowledge and power: when you're powerful, *incoherent* actions can succeed from sheer power.
November 26, 2025 at 12:34 PM
Understanding the world is intimately tied to acting in the world; you know something to be true because of the coherent activities it supports in the world.
This creates a link between knowledge and power: when you're powerful, *incoherent* actions can succeed from sheer power.
This creates a link between knowledge and power: when you're powerful, *incoherent* actions can succeed from sheer power.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
Giving money to people IS politically palatable. It depends on who's receiving the money. Some white grifter with big talk and ideas gets money!
Everyday people who need food and shelter? No money for you! Giving everyday people money would have huge immediate, generational, and societal impacts.
Everyday people who need food and shelter? No money for you! Giving everyday people money would have huge immediate, generational, and societal impacts.
People need food. Market won’t provide it. The government can. The government should.
People needing food does not necessarily imply government run grocery stores. Just as it does not imply government owned bakeries or millers or wheat fields.
Direct cash transfers are strong as a policy but not politically palatable.
Direct cash transfers are strong as a policy but not politically palatable.
November 26, 2025 at 2:51 PM
Giving money to people IS politically palatable. It depends on who's receiving the money. Some white grifter with big talk and ideas gets money!
Everyday people who need food and shelter? No money for you! Giving everyday people money would have huge immediate, generational, and societal impacts.
Everyday people who need food and shelter? No money for you! Giving everyday people money would have huge immediate, generational, and societal impacts.
"Then they came for me, and there was no-one left to speak out for me."
I mean, a bunch of senators and military are going to stand up for him, obviously.
But he's not going to be president, he doesn't need you to defend him, and you should never trust him as an ally (unless you're a senator too).
I mean, a bunch of senators and military are going to stand up for him, obviously.
But he's not going to be president, he doesn't need you to defend him, and you should never trust him as an ally (unless you're a senator too).
Also, Mark Kelly gave Netanyahu a standing ovation and condemned the ICC. Fuck him.
November 26, 2025 at 4:55 PM
"Then they came for me, and there was no-one left to speak out for me."
I mean, a bunch of senators and military are going to stand up for him, obviously.
But he's not going to be president, he doesn't need you to defend him, and you should never trust him as an ally (unless you're a senator too).
I mean, a bunch of senators and military are going to stand up for him, obviously.
But he's not going to be president, he doesn't need you to defend him, and you should never trust him as an ally (unless you're a senator too).
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
America, not just the South, is still pissed off about the loss of free labor. You can see it in every move it has ever made.
November 25, 2025 at 3:27 AM
America, not just the South, is still pissed off about the loss of free labor. You can see it in every move it has ever made.
Also worth remembering that genocides typically start with attempts at relocation aka ethnic cleansing
November 25, 2025 at 1:17 AM
Also worth remembering that genocides typically start with attempts at relocation aka ethnic cleansing
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
You can tell, because other than 30 seconds of Walz sound bites about trans issues, the only other time Kamala mentioned trans people at all was repeating "I will follow the law" with a serious face every time she was asked.
May 22, 2025 at 6:33 AM
You can tell, because other than 30 seconds of Walz sound bites about trans issues, the only other time Kamala mentioned trans people at all was repeating "I will follow the law" with a serious face every time she was asked.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
You *know* they'd be crowing about increasing the budget by 2%, changing policies to add 15,000 more eligible people, etc.
Like, policy wonkery and bikeshedding, presented as triumphs rather than putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
Like, policy wonkery and bikeshedding, presented as triumphs rather than putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
May 22, 2025 at 6:31 AM
You *know* they'd be crowing about increasing the budget by 2%, changing policies to add 15,000 more eligible people, etc.
Like, policy wonkery and bikeshedding, presented as triumphs rather than putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
Like, policy wonkery and bikeshedding, presented as triumphs rather than putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
No normal person can look at the dem track record, and think they will have any interest in fixing shit rather than simply accepting the ruined husk of healthcare as an immutable given.
May 22, 2025 at 6:28 AM
No normal person can look at the dem track record, and think they will have any interest in fixing shit rather than simply accepting the ruined husk of healthcare as an immutable given.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
You cannot possibly expect the current batch of octogenarian inside traders to gain power again and even attempt to restore what will have been lost by 6am today.
They'll act like just getting back to yesterday's barely working status quo is a utopian pie in the sky dream.
They'll act like just getting back to yesterday's barely working status quo is a utopian pie in the sky dream.
May 22, 2025 at 6:24 AM
You cannot possibly expect the current batch of octogenarian inside traders to gain power again and even attempt to restore what will have been lost by 6am today.
They'll act like just getting back to yesterday's barely working status quo is a utopian pie in the sky dream.
They'll act like just getting back to yesterday's barely working status quo is a utopian pie in the sky dream.
Don't say you weren't warned
One reason to primary them all, every single one, is that you *know* they would look at the mangled corpse of medicaid and trans healthcare left after today and go "that's just the way it is, what you're asking for is a big change, a huge increase in budget and labor" etc.
A cool thing about the Dems being absolutely useless institution-fuckers is that if they did gain control again, they'll look at the mutilated, broken remnants of the FDA and NSF and such as sacred and reject out of hand any suggestion they need to be changed.
November 24, 2025 at 5:33 PM
Don't say you weren't warned
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
we need to be nicer to everyone tbf. with universal basic income
“we need to be nicer to men” bro they didn’t let women have their own credit cards til 50 years ago
November 23, 2025 at 11:02 PM
we need to be nicer to everyone tbf. with universal basic income
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
“we need to be nicer to men” bro they didn’t let women have their own credit cards til 50 years ago
November 23, 2025 at 10:39 PM
“we need to be nicer to men” bro they didn’t let women have their own credit cards til 50 years ago
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
Engagement KPIs have been responsible for infinite scroll UI traps, RecSys radicalization spirals, public shame brigades, and basically every modern ailment novel to the past decade. At some point, you have to recognize that the problem isn't any one technology, it's the metric.
The company essentially turned a dial that made ChatGPT more appealing and made people use it more, but sent some of them into delusional spirals.
OpenAI has since made the chatbot safer, but that comes with a tradeoff: less usage.
OpenAI has since made the chatbot safer, but that comes with a tradeoff: less usage.
November 23, 2025 at 8:12 PM
Engagement KPIs have been responsible for infinite scroll UI traps, RecSys radicalization spirals, public shame brigades, and basically every modern ailment novel to the past decade. At some point, you have to recognize that the problem isn't any one technology, it's the metric.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
In practice, at least one person -- and often more than one person -- sues and loses, and on appeal the court eventually goes "You still lose. But future people might win now."
It's deeply, deeply fucked. And exists nowhere in the law, SCOTUS invented it from scratch
bsky.app/profile/joei...
It's deeply, deeply fucked. And exists nowhere in the law, SCOTUS invented it from scratch
bsky.app/profile/joei...
How does a right get vindicated for the very first time, then? ISTM every defendant could just assert qualified immunity.
November 23, 2025 at 3:14 PM
In practice, at least one person -- and often more than one person -- sues and loses, and on appeal the court eventually goes "You still lose. But future people might win now."
It's deeply, deeply fucked. And exists nowhere in the law, SCOTUS invented it from scratch
bsky.app/profile/joei...
It's deeply, deeply fucked. And exists nowhere in the law, SCOTUS invented it from scratch
bsky.app/profile/joei...
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
when the real daddy comes home
November 21, 2025 at 9:25 PM
when the real daddy comes home
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
If you use GMail, AI (Gemini) was turned on yesterday by default and now scans all of your content for machine learning. To turn off, go to Settings>General and scroll down. Uncheck the box for "Smart features."
There's other "Smart" add-ons as well, but that's the one that reads your content.
There's other "Smart" add-ons as well, but that's the one that reads your content.
November 20, 2025 at 5:32 PM
If you use GMail, AI (Gemini) was turned on yesterday by default and now scans all of your content for machine learning. To turn off, go to Settings>General and scroll down. Uncheck the box for "Smart features."
There's other "Smart" add-ons as well, but that's the one that reads your content.
There's other "Smart" add-ons as well, but that's the one that reads your content.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
It was one of the most interfered with elections in history - objectively, openly, not just my opinion - which is why I don't listen to any nonsense about "THE VOTERS" and what they did wrong. If you're not looking at this first, your political analysis is worth a wet fart.
We spent a year investigating billionaires for @washingtonpost.com.
We found: the wealthiest 100 Americans gave $1.1 billion to influence the 2024 elections — 140x more than they did in 2000. And almost all of that giving boosted Republicans.
washingtonpost.com/politics/int...
We found: the wealthiest 100 Americans gave $1.1 billion to influence the 2024 elections — 140x more than they did in 2000. And almost all of that giving boosted Republicans.
washingtonpost.com/politics/int...
November 21, 2025 at 6:05 PM
It was one of the most interfered with elections in history - objectively, openly, not just my opinion - which is why I don't listen to any nonsense about "THE VOTERS" and what they did wrong. If you're not looking at this first, your political analysis is worth a wet fart.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
NYT isn’t worth reading because they are in the bag for Trump
November 21, 2025 at 2:04 PM
NYT isn’t worth reading because they are in the bag for Trump
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
The New York Times' story about Trump calling for the execution of members of Congress ran on Page 16 today, with an itty-bitty promo on the front about halfway down the page.
No wonder Trump thinks he can get away with anything.
No wonder Trump thinks he can get away with anything.
November 21, 2025 at 2:01 PM
The New York Times' story about Trump calling for the execution of members of Congress ran on Page 16 today, with an itty-bitty promo on the front about halfway down the page.
No wonder Trump thinks he can get away with anything.
No wonder Trump thinks he can get away with anything.
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
Anyway please enjoy this pumpkin I saw yesterday
November 20, 2025 at 4:46 PM
Anyway please enjoy this pumpkin I saw yesterday
Well sure, there's that
But OTOH you guys need to understand that coming out strongly in favor of police reform, or court reform, or senate reform, or adding states, or adding seats to the house, simply wouldn't be appropriate right now!
Or nuclear posture reform for that matter. Way too dangerous
But OTOH you guys need to understand that coming out strongly in favor of police reform, or court reform, or senate reform, or adding states, or adding seats to the house, simply wouldn't be appropriate right now!
Or nuclear posture reform for that matter. Way too dangerous
The President of the United States just called for Democratic members of Congress to be executed. "HANG THEM", he posted.
If you're a person of influence in this country and you haven't picked a side, maybe now would be the time to pick a fucking side.
If you're a person of influence in this country and you haven't picked a side, maybe now would be the time to pick a fucking side.
November 20, 2025 at 6:36 PM
Well sure, there's that
But OTOH you guys need to understand that coming out strongly in favor of police reform, or court reform, or senate reform, or adding states, or adding seats to the house, simply wouldn't be appropriate right now!
Or nuclear posture reform for that matter. Way too dangerous
But OTOH you guys need to understand that coming out strongly in favor of police reform, or court reform, or senate reform, or adding states, or adding seats to the house, simply wouldn't be appropriate right now!
Or nuclear posture reform for that matter. Way too dangerous
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
When "I won't vote for somebody who doesn't support trans people" is considered a hostage taking purity test
but "I won't vote for somebody who DOES support trans people" is NOT considered a hostage-taking purity test
then we aren't against hostage taking, we're just choosing our preferred hostage
but "I won't vote for somebody who DOES support trans people" is NOT considered a hostage-taking purity test
then we aren't against hostage taking, we're just choosing our preferred hostage
November 20, 2025 at 1:02 PM
When "I won't vote for somebody who doesn't support trans people" is considered a hostage taking purity test
but "I won't vote for somebody who DOES support trans people" is NOT considered a hostage-taking purity test
then we aren't against hostage taking, we're just choosing our preferred hostage
but "I won't vote for somebody who DOES support trans people" is NOT considered a hostage-taking purity test
then we aren't against hostage taking, we're just choosing our preferred hostage
Reposted by Fancy Peyote, Speaker Emerita
'People forget what Khashoggi was investigating when he was murdered. He was writing about Kushner turning over classified info to MBS, who used it to hunt down, arrest and murder his opponents.'
h/t @cocacolakid
h/t @cocacolakid
November 20, 2025 at 11:28 AM
'People forget what Khashoggi was investigating when he was murdered. He was writing about Kushner turning over classified info to MBS, who used it to hunt down, arrest and murder his opponents.'
h/t @cocacolakid
h/t @cocacolakid