Bozo_Casanova

Refs serving up some home cooking for Georgia my god

7 is good too

Bull fucking shit

GT Drum Major is thicc

really impressive obvious holding right at the point of attack.

Platforms don’t matter. JFC.

truly, one of the worst, sloppiest true crime docs I've ever seen.

Or maybe all of that, including the rise of Trump, along with the affordability crisis and growing wealth gap are the utterly predictable consequence of 30 years of cheap debt.

“Oh, you know the ones”

This is the way. Decent pours for company last night

I mean except that time* the guy you voted for said we should disarm people without due process, sure. *actually a few times

I have never worried about this or bothered to change the water. (This is not advice)

Skeet skeet skeet!

Is there any milk or cream? The only wet I see is eggs

@mchookem this looks great but I don’t bake and I don’t understand the instructions- did you just mix everything together and pour it in the pan? What does it mean to alternate dry with the pumpkin?

Agreed, and incidentally many of the forces at work got loose in corporate America at the boardroom level a couple of decades ago, which is how the obsessive focus on maximizing shareholder value ultimately destroyed quite a lot of shareholder value a few years later. And now a lot of those behaviors have gone away, and there are a whole new set of bad ones that the market punish in due time. So I'm not trying to give everyone else a pass or assert that the legal profession is uniquely in crisis. However, I'm just a tradesman, and so is every business person in America. The market is not fair and is not fast, but ultimately it will correct behavior that isn't profitable, productive or sustainable. Business people are subject to the law, and to regulation, but are ultimately subject to the market, whether they like it or not. I do believe that lawyers, on the other hand, have a unique obligation that comes with admission, because the law itself is an alternative to extrinsic forces and individual action/

But I’m not sure this is limited to the supremes. What has happened to the Supreme Court seems the natural endpoint of what has happened to lawyers. With sincerely great respect and reverence towards your profession, what I see is practitioners of law not protecting the very thing that pays their bills, hiding behind their “first duty to the client” to the exclusion of the most basic ethics while the tragedy of the commons plays out on a grand scale. Not you, obviously, but I don’t understand why there’s not more alarm. If the system doesn’t appear to be legitimate anymore (and it doesn’t), people will return to their original modes of settling things. And for that we don’t need lawyers. This is a man with vision.

By early 2027 that’s going to be Senator Ken Paxton to you.

Ok he can’t be all bad.

Half of one

I have this conversation too much, and where they usually end up is similar to when I explained why the 2001, 2003 & 2017 tax cuts could not ever pay for themselves: in general they shrug it off and continue to vote for their team. only this, unlike the deficits, will touch them personally. That said- the national dynamic looks a lot like Texas now, and I suspect the GOP will trick Democrats into standing in the line of fire when the voters are looking for someone to blame.

I’m a Gen5 guy myself, other than the trigger.

I’ll defer to the lawyers on the niceties, but in my opinion the decision is so outside the bounds of the history, precedent and the plain meaning of the texts involved, and the test it imposes is so absurdly subjective and nonsensical that it essentially means that future courts should feel encouraged to cherry pick whatever bits and bobs of history they wish, to serve whatever faction they feel most attached to at that moment. Thus- capture the capital and you can pick the president you want, capture the court and you can pick your laws, voters be damned.

I’d love to get Brisket’s take on this, but in my opinion calling Bruen a win for gun owners is like calling January 6th a win for voters.

Well, fair enough, but I mentioned you and Flatty because we have an interest/hobby in common and since the Gun Owners thread probably isn’t the place when there’s a point of contention, this will have to do. That said- we certainly do disagree. I don’t see Bruen as a win for Gun owners, full stop, and I don’t see how playing footsie with Russian spies or funneling Russian money into our elections, or spending members money on yachts and hookers represents gun owners either. Here’s what I think: you’re betting that you can be in a transactional relationship with a counterparty who breaks deals with everyone and routinely violates the terms of the ones he does keep. And maybe you can, short term, but the man literally put taking guns without due process on the table. Can you explain to me, in my well-known and profound naïveté how you can be sure that Harris does not own the gun she owns and has mentioned several times going back to when she was a DA. Why wouldn’t she own a gun? No offense, but the projection here is off the charts. Of course she owns a gun. It’s same reason I own one (or in my case more than 10, but will always have a at least one), and probably the same reason you will too. And given your involvement in the issue, the fact that you give Donald Trump,of all people, the benefit of the doubt is pretty telling.