It started a century and a half ago, long before the current gridlock.

That would technically pass the letter, if not the intent, of Article V... but it is a moot point, really, since even then it would require a supermajority of states to agree to reduce their own power. I don't see that happening.

The US government bears virtually no resemblance to the entity described in the Constitution, and hasn't for generations.

We have a Constitution structured around powerful states and a weak federal government, but a reality that all power has been concentrated in the Oval Office.

Unfortunately, short of actually throwing out the Constitution and starting over, that can't be done.

Basically "bipartisanship" in the US is nothing more than the equivalent of coalition government in parliamentary systems. It is just that the winner-take-all nature of the US system doesn't lend itself to more than two parties.

That's because most countries have ideological parties. Until recently, the two US parties were ideologically diverse coalitions. That's why, e.g., civil rights legislation was a bipartisan project. Today it wouldn't be, since the anti-CR folks have all sorted into one party.

Was Mary Morgan hurt by one or more men earlier in life and just decided to blame half the human race for it, or is she just naturally stupid?

I give it even odds.

As for needing a permit to carry them around, yes, that's true. You need that in most US states, too. In some states, e.g. California, they are essentially impossible to acquire for any reason.

And regardless, it turns out that mass murderers ignore the ned for carry permits. 🙄

Switzerland has shall-issue permits for semi-automatic rifles, i.e. "assault weapons". That is comparable to red US states.

It has may-issue permits for fully automatic weapons. The USA stopped issuing those 42 years ago.

In retrospect, having a President was one of the dumbest.

You said there was only one. Do you expect us to believe you tried counting to three and lost track?

Actually reading sounds hard. Content-free snark is much easier.

Yeah, that's what I was going to say. Trump is the closest we've had to an actually socialist President in US history.

Sales of new assault rifles (and other automatic weapons) were banned in the United States in 1984. In some states it is possible to purchase one made before that, if you pass an extensive background check and are independently wealthy.

None of the mass shootings since Columbine has involved one.

Swiss citizens have easier access to firearms than Americans do and have half the UK's murder rate. They've never had a school shooting, so far as I know.

Also, sale of new assault rifles has been banned here since the 1980s. You may be thinking of "assault weapons", which is a cosmetic thing.

We've had a system of background checks in place since 1994. The killers bought their guns second-hand illegally.

This is typical of mass shootings; either the killers have no known history of violence or mental illness, or they get the guns from a "clean" source.

Why on Earth would gay parents send their kids to a school where homophobia is religious dogma?

Sand fleas are excellent sand castle moat monsters.

Yeah, I live in Lee county. Not happy about that, but oh well.

"Scott faces challenges allocating money to useful things for society" is an argument that the money would have been handled better by the folks who fund ICE, the military, and Israeli genocide?

You're going to have to show your work there.

I didn't misread this. He literally said that if you have talent and work hard, you will definitely be successful at your chosen endeavor.

Unable to make a living doing what you love? It isn't capitalism's fault. You just suck.

Isn't this just the artist version of "don't complain about the rich, if you are poor it is because you are lazy or stupid"?

I feel seen.

The percentage that came from tuition increased, certainly, but it is still majority state funded. That's not "privatized".

It looks more like Jon Stewart to me, tbh.

"Raising hopes" seems accurate enough. If they had said it raised *expectations* of a successful negotiation, that would be something else.

I can't speak for other states, but California didn't do that. Constant-dollar state funding went up in the 80s, then in the early 2000s was cut back to where it had been before that.

lao.ca.gov/handouts/edu...

A crucial first step is nominating someone who isn't a complete waste of space as a human being like Biden was.

"At least he/she isn't Trump" was the option in 2020 and 2024 and barely worked 50% of the time. No more empty suits.

I’ll never get tired of watching people in Budapest celebrating getting rid of Viktor Orbán.

I’m dancing along with the people of Hungary!

💃

The opening riff to "How Soon is Now?".