Andrew Parker

Also a flipped version because it looks like a pokemon battle.

Yuki is obviously using Glare.

Photo featuring two cats. The closer cat (orange cat named Simon) is facing away from the camera laying partially on his side. The further cat (white cat named Yuki) is lying on her stomach, mostly loafed, with her front paws curled under themselves. But also staring daggers at Simon who had the gall to jump on the bed which is her domain.

On the one hand, Yuki’s front paws are loafed.

On the other hand if looks could kill…

This is a fascinating thing to write in defense of lauding right-wing nutjobs for saying *one* thing you agree with.

Almost like it's not really worth publicly praising and giving legitimacy to right-wing nutjobs based on a single point of agreement.

Are you this ignorant of what the MAHA movement espouses, or are you playing dumb?

Wait… it was a poll of a scale of 1-10 but then they converted it into a binary of “1-5 = ‘no’, 6-10= ‘yes’”?

I’m not sure it works to present that as if it’s the same number as the people who would say “Democrats are cynical.”

Big “please clap” energy.

I was going to write a joke about how obvious it is that not having principles looks weak.

Then I noticed this poll says democrats are both more cynical and more principled, and both more competent and ineffective.

So I now wonder if people who took the poll misunderstood the adjectives

Nothing says cool like having to constantly and very publicly reassure yourself that you’re cool.

When you have to retreat to “it could possibly help if we also did a bunch of other things the right-wing nominee didn’t say she supported”, you kind of undercut your “I am compelled to agree with right-wing conspiracy theorists because science” shtick.

If you lack confidence about the extent to which banning television ads in and of itself “worked” why does it make sense to “add it to a bundle”?

As a self-proclaimed scientist do you often advocate throwing things against the wall and seeing what sticks?

3. It also coincided with a bunch of other changes to make it less convenient and more expensive to smoke

And, no, you should never agree with far-right conspiracy theorists even if you happen to agree with some small part of what they said. Feeding that fire only gets us (sane people) burned.

2/2

It worked for smoking with some big caveats like:

1. Big tobacco *wanted* the ban, networks were being forced to run 1 anti-smoking ad for every 3 smoking ads, and that was effective.

2. It shifted *who* saw ads, since people in urban areas still saw a lot of tobacco ads via other media.

1/

If Sanders thinks the reason people eat junk food is predominately because they see too many ads for them, he is dramatically overestimating the effectiveness of ads, and underestimating the issues of affordability, time, and access.

Star Wars reference. Order 66 was the order for the clone troopers to turn on the Jedi. I used it in light of recent moves by the anti-Trump right to try to weaken Democrats on the expectation of a victory over Trump they think is in sight.

At some point I thought that the reflexive “whoa, hey, we’re not going to just oppose everything the right-wing wants” was political maneuvering.

After a decade of Trump winning saying “everything the democrats want sucks and fuck them”, I’m forced to conclude democrats are just wimps.

Your periodic reminder that the anti-Trump Republicans still support all of the ideology that led to Trump. They even still support the people who directly advocated for, and now work for, Trump.

They hate Mamdani more than Trump’s lackeys.

And they’re already doing their version of Order 66.

“They’re not worried about the concept of AI just about how it works, what it does, the real world effects that the chatbots and infrastructure needed to run them are having.”

- dude who has never heard anything described as a backlash before

"I have five Justices in my back pocket, at least three of whom are ride or die" seems to be the most consistent legal analysis.

I'm not sure there's a word for "it's not surprising they would do this, but it is surprising they're doing it as unsubtly and ham-handedly as they are."

Do you mean to tell me Clifford "you can't say regime change in Iraq wasn't awesome" May isn't the most reliable source for "should we do an invasion and forever war in the Middle East"?

What he's saying is it's not on *his* "tabletop".

Not an issue worth addressing, not a fight worth having, not people worth protecting And that says a hell of a lot more about him and what he thinks is "normal" than about us.

If "normal" means kowtowing to bigots? Fuck normal.

3/3

I have housing costs.

I have electricity costs.

And any number of other "tabletop issues".

One of those issues is I can't stand watching the government be used as an instrument of hate and spite, and abhor the cowards unwilling to face it head-on.

2/

Republicans are willing to say pretty explicitly that they would trade children being hurt for *maybe* a marginal reduction in fraud.

We are consistently unwilling to say that we adhere to Blackstone's ratio and would rather accept the risk of fraud to ensure no innocents suffer.

The right-wing attempting to strip civil rights and medical autonomy from trans people is a "thing that really matters."

Throwing minority groups under the bus is not spending *less* time on identity politics, it's just a craven and pathetic pandering to right-wing identity politics.

No, man, you somehow failed to understand the court clearly explaining why "I wouldn't have let my kid charge payments to his steam wallet if they showed up on the statement as 'OMG this is for gambling' rather than a payment to Steampowered" was a bad reliance and causation claim.

3/3

I'm not sure what the opposite effect would be, but I currently don't have a word for how much credibility a youtuber loses for me when they describe a legal case they clearly don't understand as "everybody knows looking at this what's going on but the laws have not caught up."

2/

Michael Crichton coined the term "Gell-Mann amnesia" to refer to the experience of seeing a glaring error from someone on a topic you understand (which should raise questions about how reliable they are) and then forgetting that when it comes to an issue you don't.

1/

The number of people who apparently drew a distinction between first-party boobs and fan-created boobs was fascinating in a "how have you never heard of rule 34" kind of way.

I guess it's not really a surprise that the kind of dude who thinks his dick can mind control someone doesn't really understand anatomy either.

How the fuck are NYPD cops softer than I am? Look at me, no one should be softer than I am. I get to say stupid shit about how being hit by a snowball is terrible because if it'd been a rock or worse it'd have been worse.