Queen of Castle OCD

Same. And I'm with you 100%

'Pretty sure the next step involves hemlock. (Alcibiades, maybe)

At what point does the New York Times get charged as organizationally conspiring to abet human trafficking of minors.

My takeaway from every new Epstein revelation is that some powerful people victimized many powerless young women, many more knew, some actively enabled it--and we're still being told that MeToo and accountability for sexual violence have gone too far

It’s funny that Harvard has been a consistent target for reactionary campaigns, and not one has been dedicated to ousting Larry Summers, an openly political figure who was friends with Jeffrey Epstein; meanwhile, it’s a fine-toothed comb for *checks notes* Black women.

Drawing of a tired puppy with the caption; "this too shall pass but like holy f"

Mood

I'd settle for drug tests, if the polygraphs aren't available.

Conversion therapy for bigots should be a thing.

Bless your heart.

Sure. (But kind of old news)

Not to worry. You've done enough already. Sheesh.

Not. Fuller stop. So there.

What you're assuming is that you know what "this shit" refers to. Apparently you do not. It *is* - in point of demonstrable fact - the 2nd time he's picked a fight as leader that he couldn't or wouldn't win. And either he *knew* he couldn't win it, or he didn't. Either way ...

(If you're right, then the most one can say is that the inductive argument has a weak premise and might therefore be unsound. It is not fallacious. That would require something like assuming the conclusion as one of the premises - among other things.)

Sure. But in that case, don't plan to have the goddamned fight as late in the year as it was - especially if he's just going to go through the same bullshit again in Feb.

I've seen quite a bit of anger at Rs. And the recent election victories suggested that folk were PLENTY pissed. I'm assuming you dislike Schumer because he's a shitty leader. That's all I'm saying. He's a shitty leader. Either he knew he couldn't win the fight he picked, or he didn't. Either way...

(As someone who's actually taught logic, this is not quite what a logical fallacy is. At worst, it makes the argument weak.)

Which patterns actually count as at least *some* evidence. And this is just the 2nd time Schumer has pulled this shit *on this issue*. He's pulled this sort of shit over and over.

Oh for fuck sake. I'm plenty mad at Rs. Hell, the whole country is mad at Rs! But Schumer promised to have the fight 'later', knowing full well everything you've outlined. But, *I'm* the asshole for pointing out that he's a shitty leader. Figures.

I don't think things happen in a vacuum and have not ignored anything. I don't think the things they got were worth what got paid in both suffering of real people, and in damage to future democratic messaging.

Okay. I get that. I just happen to think that needless suffering is worse than suffering that actually produces some kind of benefit down the line. (Although, only in those cases in which the benefit redounds most of all to those who suffered.)

Absolutely not! What I'm saying is that, when the Dems caved back in March, the whole plan was to put up a fight NOW. KNOWING what time of year it was. If they didn't have a plan for how to get this done, they either shouldn't have caved in March, or shouldn't have waited this fucking long.

Later, it likely would have been. But making folk suffer AND THEN HAVING NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT only helped those trying to starve people in the first place. When picking fights with psychopaths, you must have a clear plan for how to handle shit when it gets really hard.

Fair enough. The community deserved much better than they got.

I'm well aware of this, and it's exactly why I think caving here was a mistake. The tide was starting to turn. It looked like we were finally going to be able to trumpet our willingness to champion the public good for once. We are going to have a very tough time making that case any time soon.

This is mostly fair. Not a fight I would have chosen to pick. That was a devastating blow to an historically significant, vibrant community. A horrible loss - even to those who don't realize it yet.

Schumer IS at least part of the problem. All 8 of those folk were needed in order to end the shut-down (without the tie breaker from Vance). Letting Fetterman and 2 retirees break ranks wouldn't have mattered. Hell, even if 5 of them had broken ranks, we wouldn't be having this convo.

I'm not quite *this* cynical yet. You may be right. Just not sure.

Not sure what your investment is in being such a dumb cunt, but I'm done with you. You're insufferably stupid. Fuck off.

In that case, don't pick the fight to begin with. If you're not going to try to WIN the goddamned fight, don't start it. Making folk suffer for nothing isn't just pointless, it damages future credibility, future voter turnout, future voter donations, etc.