Stick figure guy
@busephalus.bsky.social
Tech / Intl Rel / Econ / Music
Opinions are my own - also strong and weakly held. I will likely delete often.
Just because I agree with you on a couple things doesn’t mean I agree with you on everything. Nuance appreciator.
Opinions are my own - also strong and weakly held. I will likely delete often.
Just because I agree with you on a couple things doesn’t mean I agree with you on everything. Nuance appreciator.
Agreed. Same with my outdoor light fixtures. To buy one with a replaceable bulb is much more expensive so you’re locked into wasted by design somehow… terrible.
November 10, 2025 at 11:05 PM
Agreed. Same with my outdoor light fixtures. To buy one with a replaceable bulb is much more expensive so you’re locked into wasted by design somehow… terrible.
“We will be adding one demand per week until the shutdown is over”
Especially while the arguments were gaining ground and the White House finally lost a bit of a choke hold on the news cycle.
That said, I’m not on SNAP, I don’t work for gov, and I’m not flying anywhere so it’s easier to say.
Especially while the arguments were gaining ground and the White House finally lost a bit of a choke hold on the news cycle.
That said, I’m not on SNAP, I don’t work for gov, and I’m not flying anywhere so it’s easier to say.
November 10, 2025 at 1:52 PM
“We will be adding one demand per week until the shutdown is over”
Especially while the arguments were gaining ground and the White House finally lost a bit of a choke hold on the news cycle.
That said, I’m not on SNAP, I don’t work for gov, and I’m not flying anywhere so it’s easier to say.
Especially while the arguments were gaining ground and the White House finally lost a bit of a choke hold on the news cycle.
That said, I’m not on SNAP, I don’t work for gov, and I’m not flying anywhere so it’s easier to say.
Personally I was hoping the ACA subsidies were a Macguffin and eventually it would pivot to rescissions, tariffs, and illegal boat murder. But clearly the Senate wasn’t thinking about stopping the President from breaking the law and instead looked to “score some points”.
November 10, 2025 at 1:43 PM
Personally I was hoping the ACA subsidies were a Macguffin and eventually it would pivot to rescissions, tariffs, and illegal boat murder. But clearly the Senate wasn’t thinking about stopping the President from breaking the law and instead looked to “score some points”.
was hoping the healthcare demand would be the start with the next demand being, you know, that the President follow the law, stop rescissions, stop tariffs, change ICE rules of engagement, etc.
Congrats to all these big brains on getting them “on record” but nobody gives a shit.
Congrats to all these big brains on getting them “on record” but nobody gives a shit.
November 10, 2025 at 1:28 PM
was hoping the healthcare demand would be the start with the next demand being, you know, that the President follow the law, stop rescissions, stop tariffs, change ICE rules of engagement, etc.
Congrats to all these big brains on getting them “on record” but nobody gives a shit.
Congrats to all these big brains on getting them “on record” but nobody gives a shit.
Agreed - full stop.
When it comes to assessing risks prior to adjudication, however (Obtaining not renewing) determining whether someone broke a law to use a drug vs using it in accordance with state law is relevant in assessing their risk. Impacts maybe less binary with a wording change is all.
When it comes to assessing risks prior to adjudication, however (Obtaining not renewing) determining whether someone broke a law to use a drug vs using it in accordance with state law is relevant in assessing their risk. Impacts maybe less binary with a wording change is all.
November 4, 2025 at 8:44 PM
Agreed - full stop.
When it comes to assessing risks prior to adjudication, however (Obtaining not renewing) determining whether someone broke a law to use a drug vs using it in accordance with state law is relevant in assessing their risk. Impacts maybe less binary with a wording change is all.
When it comes to assessing risks prior to adjudication, however (Obtaining not renewing) determining whether someone broke a law to use a drug vs using it in accordance with state law is relevant in assessing their risk. Impacts maybe less binary with a wording change is all.
They should “just” remove the federal context box explanation area from the SF86. If you’re using it legally within your state and not on federal property or crossing state lines then you are being truthful.
November 4, 2025 at 8:34 PM
They should “just” remove the federal context box explanation area from the SF86. If you’re using it legally within your state and not on federal property or crossing state lines then you are being truthful.