??

Doesn’t everyone pick their ideals to care about?

Reread A Fire Upon the Deep just a week or two ago.

Amazing SF writer.

He may have PTSD and he may have had 1,000 hours of firearms training, but if you empty your magazine the way he did, under the circumstances he did, you’re incompetent to be a police officer. Period.

And even he apparently recognizes that since he resigned (though whether he’ll just go get hired the next town over is probably a decent bet).

Now if we can just get all the fatties in America to read your post we’ll have this thing licked!

Most conspiracy theories are bullshit, no doubt. But not all of them are, and it’s pretty hard to judge which might be true by the claims alone, because by nature they are pretty fantastical.

In 1974 before the Church Committee revealed it, you’d have dismissed anyone telling you about MKUltra and I wouldn’t blame you.

But it really did happen.

Did Epstein kill himself? Probably? But the circumstances are definitely eyebrow raising…

It’s all good my bro. I understand where you’re coming from.

What you’re saying is a nice thought, but it’s a game theory failure.

In a perfect world, yes, America would not have elected a narcissistic maniac. But in the real world, we did. And Ginsberg, who knew she was in poor health (had cancer like a bazillion times) opted to take a chance.

Maybe she just calculated poorly, or maybe this was a magnificent act of putting principle above pragmatism. Either way, Roe v. Wade was still overturned and so much for RGBs legacy. The smart move for an 80 year old woman with colon cancer is to find an offramp that lets her preserve her legacy.

I get it if you disagree, but I don’t think it’s hard to understand why people blame her at least in part for this mess.

Ironically what you wanted was her to politicize her position. She was above that

That’s great for her and all, but it was a choice that had the disastrous outcome of allowing Trump to replace her with Barrett. Ginsberg doesn’t have to live with that, but we all do. Thanks RBG.

What's your solution for the people that live there?

Trump is a maniac but it's pretty clear he says "Take a stand against tyrants AND support the one and only…"

Not "Take a stand against tyrants that support…"

If this is the best the Biden team has… Yeesh

No, the rules have always allowed them to consider promotions individually. It's voting on promos as a bloc that requires unanimous consent.

Because that's not the whole story.

Yes, they can (and have) done a few individually.

The reason they've resisted doing that for the most part is two-fold:

1. They don't want to normalize what Tuberville is doing. If they "give-in" and start considering promotions individually, then they signal that any senator can use this as a tool.

2. They think that what Tuberville is doing is ultimately harmful to Republicans and will help Democrats win more seats in the next election. They will run ads saying that Tuberville and his fellow Republicans are hurting American military members and weakening our military readiness.

Agreed. I actually can't even remember if I finished it or just set it down one day and forgot to come back to it.

The story was… Sort of interesting? The art direction was just way ahead of the gameplay, which was a shame.

There's something in the article about auto-delete policies.

If those policies violated a recordkeeping requirement maybe a jury could infer it was done intentionally in furtherance of a crime

Or maybe even if it was set to auto delete messages after some really unusually short period. By that I mean if you configured it to delete messages after a few days it might be hard to explain the legitimate business purpose served by such a rule.

I mean, he got shot and he's recovered so… in this case the consequences were definitely reversible.

Yes exactly. Whichever party has a stranglehold in a given state/county/whatever will object because ranked choice voting has the potential to allow previously marginal (or zero chance) candidates to be elected.

Democrats are not inherently more fair-minded than conservatives. Both parties’ (all parties, actually) first priority is to maintain power. Everything else is secondary to that.