I think a lot, and talk a little.
Sometimes vice versa.
Right now we're living on ~40 as a household, and it's tight but workable.
The statistic reported here must be the average of a broad range of responses. But I actually don't understand your explanation. Could you unpack it a bit?
Right now we're living on ~40 as a household, and it's tight but workable.
The statistic reported here must be the average of a broad range of responses. But I actually don't understand your explanation. Could you unpack it a bit?
I'm not trolling, just researching.
I did find a line in Project 2025 that calls for moving admin and oversight for Title I to HHS. I just can't find a real source on elimination.
Unless you meant reduction cuts? Just realizing this.
I'm not trolling, just researching.
I did find a line in Project 2025 that calls for moving admin and oversight for Title I to HHS. I just can't find a real source on elimination.
Unless you meant reduction cuts? Just realizing this.
I'm curious what role he'll play when facing some of Trump's more aggressive HUD policies.
I'm curious what role he'll play when facing some of Trump's more aggressive HUD policies.
I actually enjoyed it even more than Wandavision!
I actually enjoyed it even more than Wandavision!
Moreover, it could very well define the "future of the Democratic party" everyone's been debating.
Moreover, it could very well define the "future of the Democratic party" everyone's been debating.
I can't stand Kirk — he's a pseudo-intellectual grifter who wouldn't know a good-faith argument if it socked him in the jaw. But attacking your opponent's appearance sucks too.
A tongue-in-cheek "I don't wanna be mean" doesn't absolve one of accountability.
This is punching down.
I can't stand Kirk — he's a pseudo-intellectual grifter who wouldn't know a good-faith argument if it socked him in the jaw. But attacking your opponent's appearance sucks too.
A tongue-in-cheek "I don't wanna be mean" doesn't absolve one of accountability.
This is punching down.
Supposedly this manual is somewhat outdated now, but I still think it serves its purpose.
Supposedly this manual is somewhat outdated now, but I still think it serves its purpose.
But we live in an unfortunate era where every attempt at balanced journalism must dance a fine line between sensationalizing the unremarkable, and normalizing the unacceptable.
I'd love to hear contrasting thoughts on this.
But we live in an unfortunate era where every attempt at balanced journalism must dance a fine line between sensationalizing the unremarkable, and normalizing the unacceptable.
I'd love to hear contrasting thoughts on this.
At our lowest, are we more susceptible to confirmation bias?
And if so, is there an objective rubric that can be applied to incoming information?
At our lowest, are we more susceptible to confirmation bias?
And if so, is there an objective rubric that can be applied to incoming information?
I want to present myself as a real person, but I also prefer some degree of anonymity.
I have no accolades to speak of.
I haven't figured out whether any political/spiritual/social labels really fit me.
But
I want to present myself as a real person, but I also prefer some degree of anonymity.
I have no accolades to speak of.
I haven't figured out whether any political/spiritual/social labels really fit me.
But