thisisdumb1981.bsky.social
Internetting is serious business.
47 posts
71 followers
134 following
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
What should have been the easiest vote in his career, vote against the least qualified Secretary of Defense candidate in our history, was just too high of a bar because the fragrance of a possibility. Pathetic.
comment in response to
post
Because bad faith. That’s the only rational answer, other than MAGA never apologizes, ever. Either one is depressing, and neither are appropriate for an attorney, ever.
comment in response to
post
Respect for this take, didn’t think you were going to take that swerve into the true villain like that with the start you had. Love that intellectual consistency.
comment in response to
post
Yes, the Democratic Party is keeping her from resigning her position, or the Republican Senate from approving her nomination. Just a situation completely out of her, or their hands. Very comparable to anything that’s occurred in the last 7 days. Poor Republicans just democracing everywhere then this
comment in response to
post
The more direct issue — a shortage of air traffic controllers, a freeze / rescinding of all open or pending offers or new hires / and the reporting that an ATC seat was empty in the control tower is less stupid political points and more — this is bad management and a lack of understanding.
comment in response to
post
And here you are flagrantly flapping your stupidity around for all to see.
comment in response to
post
My next band’s name.
comment in response to
post
Hopefully an unexpected septic tank and he doesn’t find his way out.
comment in response to
post
Ever had the cherry Andes? I think they’re only made during the holiday season. I hoard those.
comment in response to
post
It sucks learning that people you thought had beliefs and principles have none, doesn’t it? Sorry for your loss.
comment in response to
post
Yet she still managed not to take a car selfie while driving.
comment in response to
post
You’re a fucking idiot.
comment in response to
post
Commando or thong?
comment in response to
post
It’s for snacks.
comment in response to
post
Since none of the replies contributed substance, I checked their 990s for the past 4 years. They only identified revenue from lawsuits in one year, 2023, for only $215k vs $3.15 million in related expenses. No easily identifiable “results” page. Not great. www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/u...
comment in response to
post
Amen. If you ever find one, please let me know. I think only thing that had some notes (other than the fun of the various Sid Meier’s Pirates games) was Ultimate Admiral: Age of Sail, which had moments (but none of the fun sandbox and other fun of New Horizons)
comment in response to
post
I finished the whole campaign. It scratches the itch, I won’t lie and call it a must play, but I didn’t regret it. They did a good job on updates & eliminated many of the unexplained game crashes I had early. Even if you play without saving in battle, I think it’s pretty stable now & should be fine
comment in response to
post
Uncharted Waters (old school Koei)
Privateer (old Wing Commander universe open sandbox)
Shining Force (and especially 2, old Sega Genesis)
comment in response to
post
I assume you do know the modern sequels, you just disapprove of them.
comment in response to
post
Link to article?
comment in response to
post
LOL!
comment in response to
post
No. Blocked, and blocked the person who liked your uninformed comment.
comment in response to
post
It only takes one.
comment in response to
post
Sovereign Woofizen
comment in response to
post
“We had a bad situation once, so now we want to choose someone to ensure a worse solution for everyone at all times” is certainly a choice humans sometimes make, but it’s usually out of spite or hate for the people they’re trying to harm, not camaraderie.
comment in response to
post
Especially that pirate ass ear ring he has.
comment in response to
post
A pound?
comment in response to
post
When they rest, we pounce.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
… oh.
comment in response to
post
Love it! Thought so, but I’m not cook savvy so I wanted to check first. Thank you!
comment in response to
post
That rec is making me solicit purchases. They gotta hop on fleshing out that website though. The about page 404s, and the FAQ has site developer filler. Buying anyway to support!
comment in response to
post
They really need to fix the “about” section of their website so it doesn’t 401. That’s what going to differentiate people trying them for the first time (like I am trying to do). Would like to support the concept and is local.
comment in response to
post
Physicality
comment in response to
post
Oh! Absolutely nothing wrong w/ that (or self promotion generally). That’s normal and good (or at least not something to judge someone on — we all have to eat). I was focused solely on her reporting on Trump, Biden and “deep state” stuff, which for me, has been horse shoeing more often. Essays good?
comment in response to
post
My cmt bc OP follows her. I did at the bad place too. Here, I think I’ve finally lumped Sarah in with “game theory” level of crazy talk untethered to facts “resistance experts” that was the subject of this thread. Most recent stuff from her about DOJ conspiracy is “poor” and lacking comparatively.
comment in response to
post
So where is Sarah Kenzidor on this spectrum? Seems well into grifter territory for you (and me)?
comment in response to
post
Oh no.
comment in response to
post
These are shoes people actually buy?
comment in response to
post
Gotta check with the wife first to know if you can call the wife. Pro move.
comment in response to
post
Use my junior paper title, “Get That Ho” about the lost opportunity theory in Vietnam
comment in response to
post
Only chunky after you leave it out in the sun.
comment in response to
post
Neat? I’m thinking something in or part of a bloody. But only just maybe for me. Standards.
comment in response to
post
Me
comment in response to
post
Thank you so much! It felt that way, but excited to read and learn. On the “substantive” argument front about ideological drift, it’s hard for me to imagine a worse indictment than “even your own people think you’re nuts”. The 9th critique, even when crazy, wasn’t usually coming from the same house
comment in response to
post
Forgive my ignorance, but on that point, any research on the SCOTUS reverse rates of the 5th in recent years compared to historical data of the 9th during Rehnquist? Reversal from your own “side” is so much more an alarm, and one her gripes about the 9th could have been shown to be (very) hollow