kvnkrkptrck.bsky.social
27 posts
1,515 followers
968 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
"Stop doing things that will anger the racists!"
THAT WAS YOUR HOT TAKE.
This is not a "I failed to read the room moment." This was a "I have no fucking idea why I'm in this room. Either I should sit down, shut up, and listen to the people of this room, or I should leave." moment.
comment in response to
post
"You come after poor kids? You come after families? We'll stand in your way. " I cannot *not* hear an unspoken addendum: "Transgenders? Meh."
comment in response to
post
Abandonment works both ways. Fuck off.
comment in response to
post
Adding context, racial demographic map of St. Louis:
comment in response to
post
Thank you, Mr. President, for releasing us from the Zimbabwean economic stranglehold!
At long last, my "Zany Zimbabwean Memes (coffee cups and tees)" line will gain foothold in a once impenetrable market!
comment in response to
post
Bluesky algorithm is annoying. 30% of my wall this morning is one person i dont recognize repeatedly asking another person I dont recognize why they unfolllowed. Im sure this is important to you, but why does bluesky think its 30% of my life interest?
comment in response to
post
Yep, sorry if that came through with any ambiguity. Shooing the trolls away so the grownups can talk.
comment in response to
post
Fuckery clocked and blocked.
comment in response to
post
In heat of battle its easy to lose sight of what a dangerous weapon language can be. Slurs are like hand grenades. Think less about who they're thrown at, and more about who else is standing there. Thank you for pausing to consider this perspective, ultimately I can ask for no more than that.
comment in response to
post
Not sure where this is is coming from but it feels like divisive fuckery. I'm politically left of just about everyone I know. I call out problematic behaviors of those on the left because I deplore those behaviors. Not because I deplore the left or the social progress it is fighting for.
comment in response to
post
YOU (not trump, not jenner) are saying to the transgender community "My respect for transgender people's gender identity is not absolute. It is contingent on their behavior. I will use misgendering to hurt them if I dont like how they act".
comment in response to
post
"Caitlyn Jenner is a horrible person, so it's okay for me to misgender her." Think about this long and hard. Would you publicly refer to Sean Combs with the n-word, or to Ben Shapiro as a k-word? WHY NOT? It's not about respect for the individual but for the community. Stop. Doing. This.
comment in response to
post
"White-collar coup"
comment in response to
post
Hopefully your 40-45 YO kids weren't in earshot.
comment in response to
post
Did you mean to leave "not" out?
comment in response to
post
Great, so we do agree there's a line to be drawn. Your "line" feels deliberately overblown. If a military coup installed Musk as king for life, but there weren't any genocide shenanigans, you'd argue that King Musks laws must be upheld? Can you articulate your actual line (beyond slamdunk examples)
comment in response to
post
To bring this back to Luigi, I would classify his actions as criminal and immoral given where we are today (though it's already a tough call). Would *you* agree that at some point, "legal/illegal" loses all ethical/moral meaning? That under tyranny, the law has no bearing on how people ought to act?
comment in response to
post
It's up to each of us what number is high enough to decide how much, if any, respect for and adherence to the law is merited at any given level. Even at 25, there are some laws I'd consider jury nullification. By 50, I'd readily engage in civil disobedience, and by 70... viva la revolution
comment in response to
post
I'd evaluate state on a scale of 0 to 100, where 0 is theoretical perfection (unbiased laws/judiciary that protect the person, property, and rights of all) and 100 is pure tyranny (state only serves ruling class). I'd say US has hovered from 20 to 40, currently 25, and fear Trump could take to 80.
comment in response to
post
So long as we have a fair and impartial legislative and judicial system, serving the will of we the people, yes, killing people extra-judicially is a crime. But. Lacking that, how would you even define terms like 'crime' and 'extra-judicial'?
comment in response to
post
Congrats!!!
comment in response to
post
This is why I love theonion! Great stuff!
comment in response to
post
^H^Hy
FIFY
comment in response to
post
Awesome!
comment in response to
post
Undoubtedly, the admin will be able to make life miserable for many of its "enemies". But the charges are all built on harebrained conspiracy theories that shrivel up under bright light of court. IMO, the reason Trump never went after HC in 2017: no evidence of (or even theory of) an actual crime.
comment in response to
post
Yes! So many butter knives, so few forks and spoons!