as it becomes clear that Yes has won in VA and gerrymandering will pass, a message to Republican voters:
you brought this on yourselves
you convinced the most fairness-obsessed, That Wouldn’t Be Fair-minded voters in the country to affirmatively vote to put you in the dumpster
you earned this
If Republicans hate the CA and VA redistricting, they can thank the person responsible - Donald J. Trump.
None of it would’ve been possible without his leadership on this issue.
The words "North Carolina," and "Missouri" do not appear in this piece of shit article.
Neither does the word "decade."
"Florida" and "Texas" appear in subordinate clauses, after words like "After Virginia ..." and "Gov. Gavin Newsom of California framed ..."
www.nytimes.com/2026/04/20/u...
What is "remarkable," @nytnickc.bsky.social, is that it didn't even occur to you to ask, hey, why are there these mid-decade redistrictings happening in the first place? What did Trump say the goal of them were?
Kinda weird isn't it? Kinda weirder than a "Dems are hypocrites!!?!" angle?
As Shiv describes it, you learn it when you do it. As someone who didn’t grow up with youngsters and gained a mess of them when I married, I learned just to sit with them, ask questions, invite answers, and play whatever they play.
No judgement. Honestly just sit with them and play. That is it.
Williams says that the bill wouldn't apply to "appropriate drag," and said that it's written in a way that obscenity could be determined by individual law enforcement.
Conservatives *want* the vagary inherent in the law because it makes them, and their police, the arbiter of morality. They don't like the idea of justice being blind.
"Of course we won't go after Shakespeare!" they say honestly, and they're correct.
They'll decide what drag is "appropriate."
The peak of fear mongering. The author claims Ohio HB 249 will jail women for going braless in a T-shirt. HB 249 is about shielding kids from adult performances & imagery —not policing whether women wear bras, bikinis, or T-shirts. Twisting it into "women could be jailed for going braless" isn't just wrong —it's a deliberate misrepresentation. It's common sense to shield kids' innocence from adult performances & imaginary. Nothing but perversion - twisting a bill that aims to protect the innocence of children into something it's not. Do better.
Here's the thing:
If legislators didn't intend for HB 249 to be used against women wearing leggings and low-rise jeans, if they didn't mean for it to be used against trans people existing... THEY COULD FIX THE LANGUAGE.
They drafted it that way for a reason. It's naive to think they won't use it.
SPLC used paid informants within extremist circles to infiltrate the system of hate & investigate w help if law enforcement
DOJ saying SPLC "funded extremist groups" & "money laundered"
Is just upside down world
This lawsuit is probably to uncover the informants
www.cnn.com/2026/04/21/p...
Imagine if he said it a different way: we have the lowest federal tax rate… and if the people who are owed refunds just don’t collect them we will also have the highest federal gross income ever!!
Nope, still just as stupid and mob-boss.
It’s daunting with the little ones (under 3-4) at first. I agree, the best attitude is to think “smart doggie” just to get your headspace right.
But then you see the 1 year old sorta-understands what you say, and the 2 year old knows how to answer questions, and each one has a distinct personality.
Uncle: you get to play with toys, laugh and be silly and stoopid without any guilt about being too old or told to just grow up.
And you bond with the kids, listen to them, ask questions and play games. And send them back to mom and dad when they wear you out.
How can you NOT want this job?
everytime something like this is posted it's by someone who doesn't actually know any single men
Think about the timing. Ghost guns are already illegal because they don’t have serial numbers and traceability to licensed manufacturers.
What event recently could have triggered a “do something, anything!” type of reaction from elites that lobby lawmakers? Oh yeah, Luigi… 🤔
But she has the secret pass from Russia. She will never lose her job.
Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern slams Republicans for their FISA provision last week:
"Republicans spent most of last week negotiating with themselves...The sloppy way they drafted this provision may have actually expanded warrantless surveillance in some cases, not eliminated it."
Go Jim!
Why do I want the highest political body in the land to be an opaque cabal where I cannot understand who or what is being discussed and what the actual opinion of the Justices are, why is that a desirable system, exactly
And it’s already illegal, and CRAZY detailed. There was a whole controversy a few years ago over what constitutes a firearm that came down to this legal restriction: you can DYI every single part EXCEPT this one.
Congress even created a primer on this topic.
www.congress.gov/crs-product/...
Doesn't this cut the other way? If the Justices are operating outside of political pressure because they have life time appointments, release of their memos shouldn't affect them. That's a reason for greater transparency, not less.
Regardless of what one thinks of the "emergency docket" or the Clean Power Plan, leaking confidential court materials poses a real danger to the integrity of the justice system. That's why licensed attorneys usually fear to touch such leaks with a ten-foot pole. The leak of a draft opinion in Dobbs, for example, led directly to an assassination attempt on Justice Brett Kavanaugh, aimed at preventing that draft opinion from obtaining his vote for the necessary majority. It's only a longstanding
A crying shame, truly. What is this world coming to where you can’t even strip half the population of their humanity without an assassination attempt????
Claims about there being a public interest in the memos, for example, don't make their publication any less prejudicial to the administration of justice. Judges don't run for reelection, and they're supposed to operate without outside political pressure, so the argument that "the public needs to know" is at its minimum. If the public interest really requires
If they’re “_supposed_ to operate without outside political pressure” then it seems to me that the public has an extra big interest in knowing that they’re not!
Agreed. Like speech, you ban the result you don’t want (imminent threat) without banning the mechanisms (free speech). It’s already illegal to possess a firearm without serial number.
And why this law in New York now? My take is it’s “just do something, anything” type of take as a response to Luigi
Yes and no. ITIN (individual tax identification number) exists for people who are not citizens but need to pay taxes. Common situations are: foreign student getting a US job, foreign spouse needing tax ID for joint tax return with US spouse, and undocumented workers not wanting to be tax cheats.
maybe I'm the insane/stupid one but I thought the entire premise of the original "proof of work" cryptocurrency conceit was that it was impossible to do something like this
Say what you will about the worst members of the Roberts Court, but they all make sure their wives are in on the grift.
Jane Roberts, Martha Alito and Ginni Thomas are equal partners with their husbands in the grand project of destroying the United States and enriching themselves in the process.
Exactly. And Rs in the state top to bottom running the elections. And this whole “one individual shown with all these votes”. Are you really suggesting TX tracks votes and ballots directly to voters, and not anonymously? Isn’t that a much larger risk?
this is why Dems need to go as hard as possible on reforms and actually fixing things rather than kick the can, because "people will remember how bad things were and not put these folks back in charge" is a demonstrably false statement
thermostatic backlash + the current recruitment pipeline for new republican politicians = further disaster
I remain confident that Trump himself will fail, but what comes with the next republican to take back power is likely to be just as bad
You’re very clearly treading on 1A protected speech and don’t realize it. Distribution of documents or knowledge has significant prior restraint limits because you can’t limit speech. Instead you limit imminent threats and actions.
NRA wants to extend 2A with those same protections. EFF does not.
More importantly, it’s already illegal to do this: you cannot possess a firearm with no serial number or with no traceability to the manufacturer.
Think instead about why New York is pushing this. Maybe something to do with Luigi and a “do something, anything!”request by certain people?
No, read the actual article. They are against this law. It’s your right to not have surveillance, crippling limitations, and a “but we have to do something” law that does not address this issue.
And stop doing the social media thing of “well, you said you like waffles so you hate pancakes.”
