Denys Beecher

When we start letting AI design t-shirts...

It briefly became Edison State College, but ran into problems with NJ already having a Thomas Edison State College, so we now have Florida Southwestern State College.

Everyone still calls it "Edison."

We have a local school which used to be Edison Community College (Edison had a winter home and a lab here). Florida went through a phase several years ago where they decided to have at least a few four-year degrees available at all of their community colleges so they renamed them all state colleges.

I am skeptical but curious.

I do not believe it is possible to respectfully eat such a pile of whipped cream.

Basically every one of the comments was expressing sympathy for the dog, the need for more public awareness of things like this, anger at ICE, and gratitude to the account for sharing the information.

Pleased to see that, on Facebook of all places, today's WeRateDogs post about the dog that was recently killed by ICE agents is not being overwhelmed by "don't be political" comments.
I could find only a single comment like that in hundreds and it was being absolutely destroyed by the ratio.

They use it exactly opposite. Tabling the discussion means to talk about it right now. (Which I honestly think is the more logical interpretation)

Honestly I might have let it go if not for that moniker. I also have concerns with "cisgender" but also "they/them"

Because, unfortunately, "The Smartest Floridian" decided to say something very stupid about the law in your mentions.

Counterman v. Colorado, 600 U.S. ___ (2023) Counterman v. Colorado: Supreme Court holds that in "true threat" First Amendment cases, the prosecution must prove that the defendant had some subjective understanding of his statements’ threatening ...

The current Supreme Court has already created, 7-2, case law making it even harder for something to be considered a true threat than it was in 1969.

I'll give you three guesses as to whether "The Smartest Floridian" was smart enough to recognize a remarkably specific hypothetical question as an obvious rake.

Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969) Watts v. United States

Huh. The Supreme Court will be surprised to hear this, seeing as they found that it was protected speech to do *exactly* that.

Jennell Jaquays was a pioneering creator in both tabletop and video gaming.

She created two immense and now legendary adventures, Dark Tower and The Caverns of Thracia. Nearly 50 years later, both are now beloved by a new generation of players.

Read more: goodman-games.com/remembering-...

So if I were to speak at a political rally at the National Mall right across from the White House and say something like "if they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is the president" you think that wouldn't be something protected by my right to free speech?

Again, see prior skeet. 70% of the public was against gay marriage. 70% of the public was in favor of sodomy laws.

What is your complaint about politics *today* that's different from *then*?

Freedom of choice is bourgeois? I fear I may not have read enough theory.

See prior skeet:

What does that have to do with political strategies?

If you're arguing for a continental plate definition you're going to encounter some immediate problems with your "Central America is part of North America" premise.

I have reconsidered my formatting for this thought:

R(!)ACK

*R*ACK

I am also puzzled by "get back to what worked in the past." Not sure I see substantive differences between now and then.

I also noticed that!

Hasn't Jones come out with some anti-Trump stuff recently? Particularly around the Epstein files I think. Maybe he's just too out of favor at the moment.

It remains bizarre though. They can't manage to find an unenumerated right to protect our privacy or autonomy from the government, but they think they can find an unenumerated right for parents to violate the privacy an autonomy of their children.

What is the constitutional question? They don't read a penumbral right to privacy and autonomy, but they can find an anti-right somewhere?

So, a video game, premised on contemporary reality, replicated the contemporary reality that there are actually women in the military, therefore woke?

Yeah. It’s technically but in no way meaningfully correct