Let's take a moment to remember the question you asked:
November 30, 2025 at 7:33 PM
Let's take a moment to remember the question you asked:
No matter how awesome you are personally, Rep Crockett, we Ds have crap leadership w/no messaging skills & until that changes, Ds'll get blamed for all kinds of bad stuff & Trump'll keep shreding the Const. Just walk out. Sit on the steps with signs until the GOP shows up to end the Art 1 crisis.
October 1, 2025 at 6:52 PM
No matter how awesome you are personally, Rep Crockett, we Ds have crap leadership w/no messaging skills & until that changes, Ds'll get blamed for all kinds of bad stuff & Trump'll keep shreding the Const. Just walk out. Sit on the steps with signs until the GOP shows up to end the Art 1 crisis.
This Barbie has serious knees.
September 28, 2025 at 3:07 AM
This Barbie has serious knees.
I'll wait for an answer to this. Maybe someday you'll grasp the point.
September 28, 2025 at 3:04 AM
I'll wait for an answer to this. Maybe someday you'll grasp the point.
Click through to Leupke's thread; he's talking about this moronic skeet which is monstrously disrespectful to the people being threatened in Portland and totally misses the moment.
September 28, 2025 at 2:36 AM
Click through to Leupke's thread; he's talking about this moronic skeet which is monstrously disrespectful to the people being threatened in Portland and totally misses the moment.
Did you read the whole Pritzker thread? He very quickly moves on from "what I'm doing"; it's a very robust defense of Constitutional protections.
It isn't about "the issue in Illinois" at all.
It isn't about "the issue in Illinois" at all.
September 28, 2025 at 2:32 AM
Did you read the whole Pritzker thread? He very quickly moves on from "what I'm doing"; it's a very robust defense of Constitutional protections.
It isn't about "the issue in Illinois" at all.
It isn't about "the issue in Illinois" at all.
Tom will surely disagree but I'm sticking with Paxton on this question. He's as expert as it gets.
September 26, 2025 at 6:09 AM
Tom will surely disagree but I'm sticking with Paxton on this question. He's as expert as it gets.
Prosecution is "cooperation with conservative elites", stage 3.
September 26, 2025 at 6:06 AM
Prosecution is "cooperation with conservative elites", stage 3.
Facts:
The definition isn't amorphous.
It isn't "properly" what you say.
Be wrong if you want, free Internet!
The definition isn't amorphous.
It isn't "properly" what you say.
Be wrong if you want, free Internet!
September 26, 2025 at 5:22 AM
Facts:
The definition isn't amorphous.
It isn't "properly" what you say.
Be wrong if you want, free Internet!
The definition isn't amorphous.
It isn't "properly" what you say.
Be wrong if you want, free Internet!
But in fact it's not partisan, and any and all legal organizations should absolutely be stepping up to defend the rule of law, from the ABA and state bars to law schools and smaller groups perhaps led or run by individual lawyers or firms. It should absolutely 100% be the expected professional norm.
September 18, 2025 at 6:45 PM
But in fact it's not partisan, and any and all legal organizations should absolutely be stepping up to defend the rule of law, from the ABA and state bars to law schools and smaller groups perhaps led or run by individual lawyers or firms. It should absolutely 100% be the expected professional norm.
This is literally five skeets up. You don't actually know anything about Tyler Robinson's politics. So why are you pretending you do?
September 17, 2025 at 3:35 AM
This is literally five skeets up. You don't actually know anything about Tyler Robinson's politics. So why are you pretending you do?
Did you forget to re-read the context after you went away for awhile? You brought up words and things Democratic politicians say; I directed you to research things Republican politicians say, and you feigned ignorance. Don't argue in bad faith.
September 17, 2025 at 3:27 AM
Did you forget to re-read the context after you went away for awhile? You brought up words and things Democratic politicians say; I directed you to research things Republican politicians say, and you feigned ignorance. Don't argue in bad faith.
That statistic is accurate although 70% is more of an average: Cato's # is in the 60s and ADL's is 76.
September 16, 2025 at 9:42 PM
That statistic is accurate although 70% is more of an average: Cato's # is in the 60s and ADL's is 76.
The page on the left is from Oprah magazine; this is not obscure. The pop culture references here cut against the historical referent.
Does that mean "we should assume it's meaning is the opposite?" No. Does it introduce doubt? Absolutely.
We need more evidence to decide.
Does that mean "we should assume it's meaning is the opposite?" No. Does it introduce doubt? Absolutely.
We need more evidence to decide.
September 15, 2025 at 8:18 PM
The page on the left is from Oprah magazine; this is not obscure. The pop culture references here cut against the historical referent.
Does that mean "we should assume it's meaning is the opposite?" No. Does it introduce doubt? Absolutely.
We need more evidence to decide.
Does that mean "we should assume it's meaning is the opposite?" No. Does it introduce doubt? Absolutely.
We need more evidence to decide.
So the Utah Governor said his source was the FBI, but the FBI says their source is Fox, who says their source is the FBI. Those sources are circular. Do you have a source other than hearsay?
Meanwhile from the Forbes article:
Meanwhile from the Forbes article:
September 15, 2025 at 1:55 AM
So the Utah Governor said his source was the FBI, but the FBI says their source is Fox, who says their source is the FBI. Those sources are circular. Do you have a source other than hearsay?
Meanwhile from the Forbes article:
Meanwhile from the Forbes article:
Occam's Razor: the Republican justices are acting in bad faith.
Is there truly no process to force them to act in good faith? Why are only wonks on Bluesky talking about this problem?
Is there truly no process to force them to act in good faith? Why are only wonks on Bluesky talking about this problem?
September 8, 2025 at 6:53 PM
Occam's Razor: the Republican justices are acting in bad faith.
Is there truly no process to force them to act in good faith? Why are only wonks on Bluesky talking about this problem?
Is there truly no process to force them to act in good faith? Why are only wonks on Bluesky talking about this problem?
I'd tell you to read the article but you should honestly read your own post that is the thing I actually responded to.
Neither GOP electeds nor voters care what NYT says; speaking to/about them wouldn't help NYT achieve any goals at all, not even the ones you think they're chasing. It's pointless.
Neither GOP electeds nor voters care what NYT says; speaking to/about them wouldn't help NYT achieve any goals at all, not even the ones you think they're chasing. It's pointless.
September 8, 2025 at 2:42 AM
I'd tell you to read the article but you should honestly read your own post that is the thing I actually responded to.
Neither GOP electeds nor voters care what NYT says; speaking to/about them wouldn't help NYT achieve any goals at all, not even the ones you think they're chasing. It's pointless.
Neither GOP electeds nor voters care what NYT says; speaking to/about them wouldn't help NYT achieve any goals at all, not even the ones you think they're chasing. It's pointless.
Um. See the blue circle. But perhaps the second screenshot is actually what you need?
August 27, 2025 at 7:25 PM
Um. See the blue circle. But perhaps the second screenshot is actually what you need?
I hope not a derpy tiger.
August 26, 2025 at 2:07 AM
I hope not a derpy tiger.
This is the 2024 PULSE, showing 2 populations preferring an ethnostate *without rights for their 75yr adversary*.
2ss is both the most popular democratic option & a separation which reduces opportunity for conflict; each will live under their desired ethnostate, but without their desired territory.
2ss is both the most popular democratic option & a separation which reduces opportunity for conflict; each will live under their desired ethnostate, but without their desired territory.
August 12, 2025 at 4:28 AM
This is the 2024 PULSE, showing 2 populations preferring an ethnostate *without rights for their 75yr adversary*.
2ss is both the most popular democratic option & a separation which reduces opportunity for conflict; each will live under their desired ethnostate, but without their desired territory.
2ss is both the most popular democratic option & a separation which reduces opportunity for conflict; each will live under their desired ethnostate, but without their desired territory.
Here you go, sweetie. The point, spelled out for you.
It's a separate thread, btw, so that serious people can talk about the serious topic without wading through the boring part where y'all act like whiny adolescents who can't cope with criticism LOL.
It's a separate thread, btw, so that serious people can talk about the serious topic without wading through the boring part where y'all act like whiny adolescents who can't cope with criticism LOL.
July 19, 2025 at 3:19 PM
Here you go, sweetie. The point, spelled out for you.
It's a separate thread, btw, so that serious people can talk about the serious topic without wading through the boring part where y'all act like whiny adolescents who can't cope with criticism LOL.
It's a separate thread, btw, so that serious people can talk about the serious topic without wading through the boring part where y'all act like whiny adolescents who can't cope with criticism LOL.
In fact, it is. The OP specifically contrasts "actual reporting" with "disciplining the left."
If the left were on top of reality rather than so malleable by punditry and ego-aggrandizing internet schlock, the Times' schtick wouldn't have the same traction.
If the left were on top of reality rather than so malleable by punditry and ego-aggrandizing internet schlock, the Times' schtick wouldn't have the same traction.
July 19, 2025 at 2:54 PM
In fact, it is. The OP specifically contrasts "actual reporting" with "disciplining the left."
If the left were on top of reality rather than so malleable by punditry and ego-aggrandizing internet schlock, the Times' schtick wouldn't have the same traction.
If the left were on top of reality rather than so malleable by punditry and ego-aggrandizing internet schlock, the Times' schtick wouldn't have the same traction.
That may be another place where he just gets historical reality wrong, but the comment implies there's some other punishment that is set aside because of the sacrifice: it's "buying a pardon." Which is "avoid consequence a, which is harsh, by consequence b, which is effortless."
July 19, 2025 at 1:04 AM
That may be another place where he just gets historical reality wrong, but the comment implies there's some other punishment that is set aside because of the sacrifice: it's "buying a pardon." Which is "avoid consequence a, which is harsh, by consequence b, which is effortless."
If you see this, quote with a robot that isn't from Star Wars, Star Trek, Doctor Who or Transformers.
July 11, 2025 at 12:28 AM
If you see this, quote with a robot that isn't from Star Wars, Star Trek, Doctor Who or Transformers.