oystermonkey.bsky.social
Who was this man? And why did he have deer horns?
He/him
164 posts
94 followers
295 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Problem is lots of us fuckin suck.
comment in response to
post
But what if you’re a CONTENT PRODUCER for a world suffering from a debilitating paucity of CONTENT?
comment in response to
post
Based on pickup trucks I’ve seen, he peed on a rival team’s logo.
comment in response to
post
Not parsing this sentence. Can’t make me.
comment in response to
post
Oh, a bib goose.
comment in response to
post
Planned the order of my son’s college visits so our route would take us by the giant Sweetwater guitar store with the least amount of extra mileage possible. Played three guitars identical to ones I already own.
comment in response to
post
There were “thousands” in Clifton!
comment in response to
post
Drew Dileo appreciates guy remembrance.
comment in response to
post
He’s got the hydrophoby.
comment in response to
post
Like my whole family I went to College University and I vote with The America Party
comment in response to
post
I had the same thought once about John Wall - Jean Wahl.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
Overtime rules.
comment in response to
post
Spent two days on the road with my 17 year old son visiting colleges, hanging out, talking about life and stuff.
comment in response to
post
The more this administration puts stresses on the framework of our government, the more I feel like Bart throwing the “at least you tried” cake in the trash while staring right at James Madison.
comment in response to
post
I guess my thought is just that Robert’s Court isn’t famous for their evenhanded concerns about representation, so this feels more like “encouraging harassment of a trans kid is cool” than “depriving people of representation is bad”
comment in response to
post
I guess we’ll see.
comment in response to
post
That’s what I’m saying. If a similar case arises where the politics are inverted they’ll just refuse to take the case.
comment in response to
post
I hope you’re right, but I see little evidence this court will be constrained in the future by the logic of their decisions today. Precedent matters until it doesn’t, separation of powers matters until it doesn’t, federalism matters until it doesn’t.
comment in response to
post
I.e., when a Democratic state congressional rep is censured for speech a Republican majority disagrees with the Supreme Court will defer to federalist principles or some shit to refuse to take up the case. It’s all bad faith power politics.
comment in response to
post
The court won’t apply a general rule for protected speech. The court will employ contorted logic to arrive at the decision that aligns with their political preferences.
comment in response to
post
Sounds like she named a trans minor on social media with the -if not intended- very predictable result that a kid just trying to live their life was a target of harassment. Given that there is a zero percent chance this court will be even handed in their interventions, I’d rather them stfu.
comment in response to
post
Legislative bodies have been able to set the terms for being a member in good standing for a long time - congress can refuse to seat people in certain cases. States that want to be able to replace ineffective reps should institute recall measures.
comment in response to
post
Maybe her constituents could vote for a less odious person next time whose actions wont be subject to censure. Seems like a democratic remedy exists that means Supreme Court intervention is unnecessary.
comment in response to
post
Internet’s weird but that seemed clear. My comment wasn’t intended to criticize you.
comment in response to
post
It takes takes to take the takes machine to the level it takes to get an AI to take care of your family for you.
comment in response to
post
Also these dweebs act like committing to picking a black woman means you’re not picking a qualified candidate. They live in some dumb mental space where every open position at any level has a single unique “best person” rather than a range of qualified people to pick from.
comment in response to
post
Yeah he’s made they picked her and then… [checks notes] … won by 7 million votes.
comment in response to
post
The one right under it, too. He thinks this is a to-do list.
comment in response to
post
Gotta shovel more takes into the takes machine.
comment in response to
post
Just some bros around a microphone taking DMT and talking Rawlsian theory.
comment in response to
post
I also love how the articles with their worst brain dead takes have the comments turned off.
comment in response to
post
How hard is it to say “Trump embraces discredited fringe theory in order to strip citizens of their constitutional rights”?
comment in response to
post
Kind of wild to see republicans more trusted on economic issues (rated as most important!) despite their manifest incompetence on that front. That does feel like an opportunity if dems can break the media maxim that Republicans are “fiscally responsible”.
comment in response to
post
It’s the heart that matters more, Norm.
comment in response to
post
Better coached, too.
comment in response to
post
I too think we should credulously accept and parrot as plausible the flimsy legal rationales provided by the most bad-faith, corrupt administration in US history.
comment in response to
post
Outside the vibe that it seems like you’re into there are:
Tom Petty Wildflowers
Dylan Love & Theft
Sturgill Simpson Metamodern Sounds in Country Music
John Prine Tree of Forgiveness
comment in response to
post
Counterpoint: I guess you can?
comment in response to
post
Ok, yeah gotcha. I think we just disagree about strategy tonight. first quarter they looked more like themselves- Mitchell got some catch & shoot looks he doesn’t when he’s dominating the ball. Just thought with DG’s foul trouble and Jerome being basically unplayable you gotta do what you gotta do.
comment in response to
post
Oh, I don’t disagree they need better balance. They aren’t winning a title if Mitchell has to go get 40 every night. I’m just saying tonight they did what they needed to do because the bench gave them nothing. I don’t think it’s a strategic failure to lean on what’s working in the moment.
comment in response to
post
I don’t think wade/hunter/jerome went 3 for 16 because Mitchell took 39 shots. I think the causal arrow goes the other way.
comment in response to
post
Cool condescension. Cavs being too dependent on Mitchell is different than Cavs not playing their bench enough. Your original point was that you thought Atkinson was making a mistake not playing the bench. The bench got eaten alive tonight.
comment in response to
post
This one.
comment in response to
post
The bench is getting killed tonight. Merrill has been the only plus player off the bench.