Andrew Parker
@andrewparker.bsky.social
Formerly of the birdsite as Apark2453, but staking my claim to the full name!
Lawyer, overanalyzer of godawful subcultures, always up to dunk on some chuds.
If you’re into all of that too… I’m sorry, but welcome friend!
Lawyer, overanalyzer of godawful subcultures, always up to dunk on some chuds.
If you’re into all of that too… I’m sorry, but welcome friend!
I think the key is “investments… to be made.”
He’s trying to imply that if an extortion deal with a country like Korea or Japan includes “$20B/year in investment for 10 years” it constitutes $200B in immediate losses.
He’s trying to imply that if an extortion deal with a country like Korea or Japan includes “$20B/year in investment for 10 years” it constitutes $200B in immediate losses.
November 11, 2025 at 6:03 AM
I think the key is “investments… to be made.”
He’s trying to imply that if an extortion deal with a country like Korea or Japan includes “$20B/year in investment for 10 years” it constitutes $200B in immediate losses.
He’s trying to imply that if an extortion deal with a country like Korea or Japan includes “$20B/year in investment for 10 years” it constitutes $200B in immediate losses.
Somehow that’s the less depressing explanation than the one I fear is true: the old guard of democrats are just… like this.
November 11, 2025 at 5:26 AM
Somehow that’s the less depressing explanation than the one I fear is true: the old guard of democrats are just… like this.
I'm baffled by the attempts to give a Senator, much less party leadership, the "UwU smol bean just a lil' guy" treatment.
November 11, 2025 at 4:49 AM
I'm baffled by the attempts to give a Senator, much less party leadership, the "UwU smol bean just a lil' guy" treatment.
I'm fully on board with people who give him more benefit of the doubt than I do. His careful focus on "I can't vote for it" without saying Democrats shouldn't, and the deal being one he's made before leave me unsure
Much less so sure he had nothing to do with it that it's antisemitic to say he did
Much less so sure he had nothing to do with it that it's antisemitic to say he did
November 11, 2025 at 4:17 AM
I'm fully on board with people who give him more benefit of the doubt than I do. His careful focus on "I can't vote for it" without saying Democrats shouldn't, and the deal being one he's made before leave me unsure
Much less so sure he had nothing to do with it that it's antisemitic to say he did
Much less so sure he had nothing to do with it that it's antisemitic to say he did
It's entirely fair to say you don't find the evidence sufficient. I take no issue with someone who can look at the facts as they exist and not draw the same inferences I do.
The leap from that to "there's zero basis for this and it's antisemitic" is where I call foul.
The leap from that to "there's zero basis for this and it's antisemitic" is where I call foul.
November 11, 2025 at 1:49 AM
It's entirely fair to say you don't find the evidence sufficient. I take no issue with someone who can look at the facts as they exist and not draw the same inferences I do.
The leap from that to "there's zero basis for this and it's antisemitic" is where I call foul.
The leap from that to "there's zero basis for this and it's antisemitic" is where I call foul.
If you assume Schumer was fecklessly asleep at the wheel and impotently betrayed by his own whip, he acted completely differently.
If you assume the caucus leader had some hand in… you know… leading, the deal brokered is identical to the deals Schumer has made.
If you assume the caucus leader had some hand in… you know… leading, the deal brokered is identical to the deals Schumer has made.
November 11, 2025 at 12:18 AM
If you assume Schumer was fecklessly asleep at the wheel and impotently betrayed by his own whip, he acted completely differently.
If you assume the caucus leader had some hand in… you know… leading, the deal brokered is identical to the deals Schumer has made.
If you assume the caucus leader had some hand in… you know… leading, the deal brokered is identical to the deals Schumer has made.
Yes, except for the part where he was aware of the negotiations, did not oppose them, had his whip involved in them, and the deal they made is identical to how Schumer caves.
But please tell me more about how claiming the caucus leader had a hand in leading the caucus is antisemitic.
But please tell me more about how claiming the caucus leader had a hand in leading the caucus is antisemitic.
November 11, 2025 at 12:13 AM
Yes, except for the part where he was aware of the negotiations, did not oppose them, had his whip involved in them, and the deal they made is identical to how Schumer caves.
But please tell me more about how claiming the caucus leader had a hand in leading the caucus is antisemitic.
But please tell me more about how claiming the caucus leader had a hand in leading the caucus is antisemitic.
Schumer’s vote was worth nine votes in March?
Or was the trade for “enough democratic votes for cloture”, not his vote specifically?
Or was the trade for “enough democratic votes for cloture”, not his vote specifically?
November 11, 2025 at 12:12 AM
Schumer’s vote was worth nine votes in March?
Or was the trade for “enough democratic votes for cloture”, not his vote specifically?
Or was the trade for “enough democratic votes for cloture”, not his vote specifically?
He ended a government shutdown in exchange for being allowed debate and a vote on the DREAM Act.
And prevented a government shutdown in exchange for being allowed to offer amendments on the CR.
Do you really want to claim “literally nothing” is similar except the outcome?
And prevented a government shutdown in exchange for being allowed to offer amendments on the CR.
Do you really want to claim “literally nothing” is similar except the outcome?
November 11, 2025 at 12:03 AM
He ended a government shutdown in exchange for being allowed debate and a vote on the DREAM Act.
And prevented a government shutdown in exchange for being allowed to offer amendments on the CR.
Do you really want to claim “literally nothing” is similar except the outcome?
And prevented a government shutdown in exchange for being allowed to offer amendments on the CR.
Do you really want to claim “literally nothing” is similar except the outcome?
I, for one, am shocked that a game so unconcerned with civilian populations or their politics that the entire non-military economy is represented as “% of factories must be civilian” simplified politics.
November 10, 2025 at 3:44 PM
I, for one, am shocked that a game so unconcerned with civilian populations or their politics that the entire non-military economy is represented as “% of factories must be civilian” simplified politics.
Trump will 100% claim credit for ending the shutdown and getting people SNAP back. Then a year from now Dems will have the shocked pikachu face that they’re not being credited with being the adults.
November 10, 2025 at 3:33 PM
Trump will 100% claim credit for ending the shutdown and getting people SNAP back. Then a year from now Dems will have the shocked pikachu face that they’re not being credited with being the adults.