robertstadler.bsky.social
Wrong, but not contumacious.
He/ him
428 posts
159 followers
31 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
There was one right outside my office window (which overlooked city hall), about 100 people. It took me a few minutes to figure out why it looked odd - everyone there was white (after looking carefully, I saw one Asian woman).
comment in response to
post
Dunce cap
comment in response to
post
My worries are that we would get loopholes built into what's currently protected by the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment. For "national security" and the like.
comment in response to
post
I like "Bǫlverkr" - literally "evil-doer."
comment in response to
post
That depends - does "lasting gains" include profits for those trading on inside information about Trump's policy swerves?
comment in response to
post
They want to prove their dominance. The Trump administration is full of people who mistake cruelty for strength.
comment in response to
post
Very
comment in response to
post
It is in the NYT now. www.nytimes.com/2025/06/01/u...
comment in response to
post
Here's a thorough writeup: www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/deba...
comment in response to
post
This is why the House has rules that require the text of a bill to be available for 3 days before it goes to a vote. It's also why Mike Johnson and the House GOP waived that rule in this case.
comment in response to
post
The guidance specifically forbids using AI to help with these applications.
Not that this will actually stop anyone.
comment in response to
post
I remember he was one of those deciding against the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" kid. And he dissented against the potty-mouthed cheerleader.
comment in response to
post
No, but see also this thread: bsky.app/profile/nati...
comment in response to
post
One of the many bizarre aspects of Trump's understanding of economics is that he only considers balance of trade in goods, not services. The US is a huge net exporter of services, and Trump is destroying that.
comment in response to
post
That's something the Amber Diceless RPG did that I thought was great - they had multiple writeups for various characters, depending on which interpretation of them the GM wanted to use.
comment in response to
post
You can look at how words are used in poetry, and how they're transliterated into other languages.
comment in response to
post
Unfortunately, it's hard for me to give examples of what you're looking for without giving spoilers for those books.
comment in response to
post
Oh, look, a chicken fried steak.
comment in response to
post
Almost 40 years.
We're old.
comment in response to
post
Around the same time SCOTUS issued their injunction, the 5th Circuit issued a contrary ruling. It's pretty confusing.
SCOTUS should really wait to hear more cases until they complete the normal appeals process. I don't mind the outcome here, but it's a general problem.
comment in response to
post
It's the student newspaper. They assigned someone to look into this, and they didn't have anything better to print than the results.
comment in response to
post
Plants also use glucose.
comment in response to
post
The problem isn't just which district to file in. The Trump admin is claiming that the suit needs to name the correct defendant, while it tries to obscure who that defendant might be.
comment in response to
post
In fairness, there's really never a good time to have the American defense and national security establishment run by amateurs.
I don't miss the Cold War, but I do miss how it required voters and politicians to approach foreign policy seriously.
comment in response to
post
There's also a good argument that Congress can't legitimately delegate such broad powers in an open-ended way, even with regards to a legitimate "emergency."
comment in response to
post
Mostly judicially. SCOTUS has made it extremely difficult to prosecute anything other than handing over bags of cash for very narrowly-defined "official acts."
That some of them have accepted gifts from people with business before the Court is purely coincidental, of course.
comment in response to
post
For those who are interested, Bret has already discussed this on his blog, at greatest length in acoup.blog/2021/07/30/c....
comment in response to
post
A bloc head?
comment in response to
post
As with literal guardrails, if your car hits one
(1) You're probably better off than you would have been without the guardrail, and
(2) Maybe you shouldn't be behind the wheel.
comment in response to
post
Bret Devereux wrote an essay about how that phrase, at least in its origins, didn't really have that meaning. acoup.blog/2024/12/20/c...
comment in response to
post
theonion.com/vaccine-skep...
comment in response to
post
Sometimes you just need to say, "Fiat justitia ruat caelum."
comment in response to
post
With a little poetic license, 13 of the 26 complaints against George III apply to Trump.
comment in response to
post
Then we need also an inspector general's office that can prosecute cases independently, so that these cases aren't dependent on the prosecutors who are the violators' friends and coworkers.
comment in response to
post
It's also noteworthy that Briones enjoined _any_ agency of the executive branch, since the Trump admin has already tried the "DoD deported them, not the agencies you enjoined" trick in a different case.
comment in response to
post
A couple of the ones that I personally keep coming back to, but which aren't on that list, are your series on practical polytheism (along with oaths) and your essay on "stasis" in Greek city-states. Maybe you could highlight those in some way?
comment in response to
post
There don't seem to be contracts so much as "general understandings," subject to change with Trump's whims.
comment in response to
post
In this case, if I understand it correctly, it may have been done by MyPillow's in-house counsel. This is a lawyer probably acting outside their normal area of expertise, so looking for help in all the wrong places.
comment in response to
post
It's not the time he objected to, but that it was an ex parte communication (talking directly to the judge, without including the other side). In general, there are good reasons why parties aren't supposed to do that, but the emergency here clearly justified it.
comment in response to
post
Some are more crazy than stupid, and some are more evil than either of those.
comment in response to
post
Longest 50 years of your life _so far_.
comment in response to
post
The basic problem is that, by the design of the US Constitution, it's not really the courts that are supposed to be the primary defense here. It's supposed to be Congress, which the Framers expected to defend its own prerogatives by impeaching such a tyrant.
comment in response to
post
And the 13th
comment in response to
post
And, to be clear, even people _with_ criminal records shouldn't be sent to concentration camps.
comment in response to
post
With good reason
comment in response to
post
I think this status report does list every step they're taking to facilitate Abrego's return (that is, none).
comment in response to
post
Germany's declaration of war still baffles me. I get that they were irritated by our providing war goods to England and Russia, but FDR might have had at least some difficulty in getting a declaration through Congress, and their treaty with Japan did not require it.
comment in response to
post
"C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre."
comment in response to
post
Then the question is, with all the cuts to civil service jobs, and with CBP taking on the responsibility of kidnapping immigrants Trump doesn't like, is the US government actually able to calculate the proper tariff rates on various goods?
comment in response to
post
Unfortunately, they probably will be. "It's time to move on and heal from this divisive period."