Sui_Generis
@suigeneris1.bsky.social
The nicest misanthrope
From parts unknown
From parts unknown
Awww, that's disappointing. Geez.
It's unfortunate that sometimes the extremely bright folks are also the most socially maladjusted. I only wish his issue had been in some other area. Bleh.
🤮
It's unfortunate that sometimes the extremely bright folks are also the most socially maladjusted. I only wish his issue had been in some other area. Bleh.
🤮
February 6, 2026 at 11:04 PM
Awww, that's disappointing. Geez.
It's unfortunate that sometimes the extremely bright folks are also the most socially maladjusted. I only wish his issue had been in some other area. Bleh.
🤮
It's unfortunate that sometimes the extremely bright folks are also the most socially maladjusted. I only wish his issue had been in some other area. Bleh.
🤮
Couldn't pay me enough to see it, even if it really did have this. 😂
February 5, 2026 at 7:13 PM
Couldn't pay me enough to see it, even if it really did have this. 😂
Yup.
Although they *will* happily spend 45 billion on a social media network, in order to control narratives...
Although they *will* happily spend 45 billion on a social media network, in order to control narratives...
February 5, 2026 at 6:55 PM
Yup.
Although they *will* happily spend 45 billion on a social media network, in order to control narratives...
Although they *will* happily spend 45 billion on a social media network, in order to control narratives...
"kick back"....?
a cartoon of batman with the words i see what you did there
ALT: a cartoon of batman with the words i see what you did there
media.tenor.com
February 5, 2026 at 6:49 PM
"kick back"....?
Expecting a pure, grade-A sociopath like JD Vance to understand when and why an APOLOGY is appropriate is like expecting a fish to climb stairs.
Even his owner, Peter Thiel, doesn't have enough humanity left in his entire body, to explain it to Vance in a way he could understand.
Even his owner, Peter Thiel, doesn't have enough humanity left in his entire body, to explain it to Vance in a way he could understand.
February 5, 2026 at 6:45 PM
Expecting a pure, grade-A sociopath like JD Vance to understand when and why an APOLOGY is appropriate is like expecting a fish to climb stairs.
Even his owner, Peter Thiel, doesn't have enough humanity left in his entire body, to explain it to Vance in a way he could understand.
Even his owner, Peter Thiel, doesn't have enough humanity left in his entire body, to explain it to Vance in a way he could understand.
Normally I'd agree with you, but I just have to get through two more days (of dealing with idiots) before I get to my two weeks off, so I'm gonna tough this one out. Wouldn't look good to call in sick a couple days before a vacation. 😂
February 5, 2026 at 6:41 PM
Normally I'd agree with you, but I just have to get through two more days (of dealing with idiots) before I get to my two weeks off, so I'm gonna tough this one out. Wouldn't look good to call in sick a couple days before a vacation. 😂
More likely, they did so because they want her to influence coverage on the "news" channel she now runs, not because of her specifically. Which she can, unfortunately, do to some extent now.
February 1, 2026 at 6:30 PM
More likely, they did so because they want her to influence coverage on the "news" channel she now runs, not because of her specifically. Which she can, unfortunately, do to some extent now.
Okay, you have a good day too, "Scotty"....
January 28, 2026 at 5:16 PM
Okay, you have a good day too, "Scotty"....
You not understanding how the basic functions of Congress work is not synonymous with me stating the requirements being "doing nothing".
Helping Trump by mounting another failed impeachment before having the votes to REMOVE him is actually WORSE than "doing nothing".
Helping Trump by mounting another failed impeachment before having the votes to REMOVE him is actually WORSE than "doing nothing".
January 28, 2026 at 5:15 PM
You not understanding how the basic functions of Congress work is not synonymous with me stating the requirements being "doing nothing".
Helping Trump by mounting another failed impeachment before having the votes to REMOVE him is actually WORSE than "doing nothing".
Helping Trump by mounting another failed impeachment before having the votes to REMOVE him is actually WORSE than "doing nothing".
I literally already GAVE a "concrete example" in my VERY FIRST reply. Are you slow? We need at least 67 votes in the Senate TO Impeach AND REMOVE from office. THAT's the solution. Not a toothless impeachment that does nothing.
January 28, 2026 at 1:59 PM
I literally already GAVE a "concrete example" in my VERY FIRST reply. Are you slow? We need at least 67 votes in the Senate TO Impeach AND REMOVE from office. THAT's the solution. Not a toothless impeachment that does nothing.
You need to pay more attention to which responses are to whom. I corrected YOUR strawman response in the other reply. The one you're talking about was to the other guy who did it.
January 28, 2026 at 1:56 PM
You need to pay more attention to which responses are to whom. I corrected YOUR strawman response in the other reply. The one you're talking about was to the other guy who did it.
Once again, if someone has to stand up strawman arguments -- like to suggest I said to "give up", in order to make their point, it reveals how fundamentally dishonest and fraudulent they are at their core.
Fighting smarter isn't "giving up". It's fighting to win, instead of showboat.
Fighting smarter isn't "giving up". It's fighting to win, instead of showboat.
January 28, 2026 at 1:54 AM
Once again, if someone has to stand up strawman arguments -- like to suggest I said to "give up", in order to make their point, it reveals how fundamentally dishonest and fraudulent they are at their core.
Fighting smarter isn't "giving up". It's fighting to win, instead of showboat.
Fighting smarter isn't "giving up". It's fighting to win, instead of showboat.
Fighting smart & strategically -- to ACCOMPLISH your actual goals -- is always preferable to swinging blindly, as if you just wanna put on a show & have the APPEARANCE of fighting.
Especially if that blind swinging only ends up accomplishing the opposite, like Trump's 1st two impeachments did.
Especially if that blind swinging only ends up accomplishing the opposite, like Trump's 1st two impeachments did.
January 28, 2026 at 1:18 AM
Fighting smart & strategically -- to ACCOMPLISH your actual goals -- is always preferable to swinging blindly, as if you just wanna put on a show & have the APPEARANCE of fighting.
Especially if that blind swinging only ends up accomplishing the opposite, like Trump's 1st two impeachments did.
Especially if that blind swinging only ends up accomplishing the opposite, like Trump's 1st two impeachments did.
Strawman arguments are super fun, aren't they?
Except, I didn't SAY I was in favor of "giving up" or that I supported "strongly worded letters". What I said was that conviction of impeachment requires 67 votes IN THE SENATE in order to remove them from office. So it's going to take more than Dems.
Except, I didn't SAY I was in favor of "giving up" or that I supported "strongly worded letters". What I said was that conviction of impeachment requires 67 votes IN THE SENATE in order to remove them from office. So it's going to take more than Dems.
January 27, 2026 at 11:45 PM
Strawman arguments are super fun, aren't they?
Except, I didn't SAY I was in favor of "giving up" or that I supported "strongly worded letters". What I said was that conviction of impeachment requires 67 votes IN THE SENATE in order to remove them from office. So it's going to take more than Dems.
Except, I didn't SAY I was in favor of "giving up" or that I supported "strongly worded letters". What I said was that conviction of impeachment requires 67 votes IN THE SENATE in order to remove them from office. So it's going to take more than Dems.
Yeah, those first two Trump impeachments *without conviction* REALLY stopped him in his tracks, destroyed him politically, and made him LESS popular, didn't they....?
....oh wait.
....oh wait.
January 27, 2026 at 10:14 PM
Yeah, those first two Trump impeachments *without conviction* REALLY stopped him in his tracks, destroyed him politically, and made him LESS popular, didn't they....?
....oh wait.
....oh wait.
Impeachment in the House without conviction and removal in the Senate also "does absolutely nothing".
See Also -- Trump's first two impeachments.
See Also -- Trump's first two impeachments.
January 27, 2026 at 10:09 PM
Impeachment in the House without conviction and removal in the Senate also "does absolutely nothing".
See Also -- Trump's first two impeachments.
See Also -- Trump's first two impeachments.
For the same reason the most incompetent and inoffensive people rise to the top in the corporate world, as well.
January 27, 2026 at 8:19 PM
For the same reason the most incompetent and inoffensive people rise to the top in the corporate world, as well.
Yeah, she was often terrible in front of the cameras, but she was reportedly one of the best of all time, behind the scenes.
January 27, 2026 at 8:18 PM
Yeah, she was often terrible in front of the cameras, but she was reportedly one of the best of all time, behind the scenes.
Yes, he appointed Homan as the replacement because he's another criminal who is literally only not in jail because Trump's DoJ is refusing to bring charges on his bribery case, so Trump knows he will do whatever he says...
January 27, 2026 at 8:17 PM
Yes, he appointed Homan as the replacement because he's another criminal who is literally only not in jail because Trump's DoJ is refusing to bring charges on his bribery case, so Trump knows he will do whatever he says...
Agreed -- Jeffries can impeach all he wants in the House -- if they don't have 67 votes to actually CONVICT and REMOVE when the Senate votes, then there's no point in even starting. You just get another failed impeachment, like the first 2 of Trump. Which HELPS him, not hurts him.
January 27, 2026 at 8:15 PM
Agreed -- Jeffries can impeach all he wants in the House -- if they don't have 67 votes to actually CONVICT and REMOVE when the Senate votes, then there's no point in even starting. You just get another failed impeachment, like the first 2 of Trump. Which HELPS him, not hurts him.