netstack
Texas is freedom land
No bio...
User ID: 647
I’d consider myself financially literate, but I can’t tell what the hell you’re talking about.
The goal of housing policy should be something like “getting more citizens into their own housing.” I don’t see how you’d decouple that from real estate.
Would inflicting “swaptions” on the average family of four actually do anything to achieve that kind of goal?
Okay, but there is something in the Constitution which says black people deserve representation. That keeps the VRA constitutional even if subsequent tests were wrong. You’re not going to get a Dobbs-level reversal.
I more or less agree with those points.
I wanted to emphasize that the VRA has a clear basis in the 15th. Even if that’s the motte to a “special representation” bailey, it is enough to keep the Act constitutional. If there’s a reversal, it’s going to be limited to the subsequent layers of tests.
What’s wrong with the 15th Amendment? It specifically mentions race.
I suppose you could argue that it only says “vote” and that “votes” don’t have to mean “representation.” I’d say that’s splitting hairs. The postwar amendments were designed to secure the rights of freed slaves. Then they got a hundred years of stress tests by motivated Southerners. You’re not going to discover some fresh loophole.
I’m saying if he really cared about humiliating them he wouldn’t bother “dangling” aid.
No.
Trump doesn’t actually play 5D chess. I don’t see any reason he’d set up a gambit like that. No, trickling aid to Ukraine lets him score some points without actually committing much materiel.
Quite possible.
Is it the labia theory of value?
The point of articles like this is absolutely to glaze men as truth-seekers. They’re not written for Joe the Plumber, but for the kind of guy who shares anti-feminist thinkpieces.
“Imagine the world run by people who think like you!”
bucketloads
$60M over two decades, according to this journalist. Care to guess how much Elon contributed last year?
I will also note that none of those donors were awarded an entire government department and a broad mandate to purge the others.
Look, I’m not impressed by the article either, but pearl-clutching and correctness aren’t mutually exclusive.
While you’re welcome to argue that you think something is obvious, please refrain from consensus-building.
The test isn’t for denying wrongthink, but for “caring about anything like this from my own side.” More likely here than on the vast majority of forums. ArjinFerman and professorgerm both gave credible, level-headed examples of how they gave something genuine thought.
And I’m not interpreting mental rewards mechanisms. I’m arguing that we’ve gotten “the bottom falling out” on the object level, but not the meta level. People are rightfully upset about Kirk’s murder without coming to the same conclusions as Skeletor.
Begging the question does not violate our rule on consensus-building.
Users are allowed to make controversial assumptions! Then they’re liable to get grilled on those assumptions, as is the case here.
Citation needed?
I don’t think I know anyone who’d be more upset about a Hitler joke than a straight-armed salute.
Nor do I know what you’re talking about for Palestine. 2 million?
I should have known better than to count my gift horses before they hatch!
Finished Merchanter’s Luck. Excellent, vintage sci-fi. I’d rate it quite highly for elegantly sketched characters, understated but effective worldbuilding, and economy of prose. These are enough to turn a borderline cliche premise into an immersive one. Unabashedly genre fiction without straying into pulp.
Next up is Sarah Waters’ Fingersmith, a period Victorian gay heist novel and/or comedy of manners. While I don’t normally enjoy such a hateful protagonist, I’m quite liking the book so far. Unfortunately, the previous owner of my copy underlined random bits and occasionally added margin notes.
Eh, it’s possible. People here are unusually likely to pass that sort of Turing test.
And I don’t disagree that the bottom, so to speak, has fallen out. There are a lot of people who are feeling more afraid, alienated, polarized. What they aren’t feeling is vindication. That’s something you get from people who were already thinking about a CW model.
Damn. I really screwed the shark.
- Only because you included “like this.”
- Both are basically devoid of value. The lower-level politicians are covering their asses against attacks like the one you’re making. Vance is putting his on display to score a couple political points.
- No. There is a vast gulf between speaking and doing, and our violent extremists continue to be uninterested in hiding much of anything.
- Because the (young?) GOP is more receptive to this kind of humor.
Underpinning all of these answers is the obvious point that these people aren’t Nazis by any reasonable definition. Like Key and Peele, they’re putting on a little caricature. You have to be very motivated to find it damning.
…did you ever?
I’ve found the people most interested in policing comments about Kirk are the ones who were already jumping at the bit.
I watched this one recently, too. A vibe indeed.
Good: Long, forlorn shots. Set design which may or may not consist of just finding shit lying around. Haunting use of silence and background noise. Getting the viewer to question the reality presented on screen. Surreality. This is a film where almost every frame is mundane, and yet you are certain that something else is at play.
Bad: incredibly long, forlorn shots. I can’t judge how much of each was actually necessary to achieve the good points. But my God, they just keep going. Much like the character monologues, some of which land, some of which don’t. The delivery is great, at least to my English-speaking ears. The actual writing is much less consistent. There are a couple bits of sound design that fall into this category, too, but I’m willing to forgive them.
Ugly: Anything resembling action. There’s not much of it, which is for the best, because it absolutely deflates the tension. The gate guards? The
I don’t know that I can call it good, but I recommend it.
Bluesky is Twitter for people who hate Elon. I assume it’s a cesspool.
Mastodon is a bit more complicated. It was federated from the start, meaning it was always intended to let groups opt in/out of entire swathes of the broader sphere. This allows blacklisting without leaving the platform. It also supports numerous witch covens. I assume they’re all cesspools.
Truth social is Twitter for people who think Fox News is captured by anti-Trump wreckers. I don’t actually know how it differs in features, and I am okay with that. I assume it’s a cesspool.
I never heard of her before today. But I had elementary school in one of the older states, not Texas. Maybe they were too busy.

The text of the law is here. I don’t carry, but I still find it onerous.
It creates a bubble of misdemeanors around any private property unless the owner adds ”clear and conspicuous signage” at the entrance. How many people are going to go to the trouble of affixing a scarlet letter?
More options
Context Copy link