H R Pickens
@hrpickens.bsky.social
I don't expect to be followed back. When I find your stuff interesting, I don't necessarily expect you to find my stuff interesting.
That photo is fake. It's not me. But also, basically, it is.
That photo is fake. It's not me. But also, basically, it is.
They haven't done anything interesting since David Lee Rath left.
December 3, 2025 at 1:59 AM
They haven't done anything interesting since David Lee Rath left.
I'm 100% on board with giving presidents the authority to unilaterally revoke pardons issued by earlier presidents.
December 2, 2025 at 11:52 PM
I'm 100% on board with giving presidents the authority to unilaterally revoke pardons issued by earlier presidents.
What the hell are they even going for? It's all at once baffling and off-putting.
Is it some kind of rejection of class warfare? I'm not convinced that that's the urgent question of the moment, and if it is, this slogan sounds like it's suiting up for the wrong side.
Is it some kind of rejection of class warfare? I'm not convinced that that's the urgent question of the moment, and if it is, this slogan sounds like it's suiting up for the wrong side.
December 2, 2025 at 11:47 PM
What the hell are they even going for? It's all at once baffling and off-putting.
Is it some kind of rejection of class warfare? I'm not convinced that that's the urgent question of the moment, and if it is, this slogan sounds like it's suiting up for the wrong side.
Is it some kind of rejection of class warfare? I'm not convinced that that's the urgent question of the moment, and if it is, this slogan sounds like it's suiting up for the wrong side.
And here's today's "What the hell? Why wasn't I already following this person?" moment.
December 2, 2025 at 11:33 PM
And here's today's "What the hell? Why wasn't I already following this person?" moment.
In any case, "we were targeting the wreckage because reasons, and that's just tough luck for the wounded clinging thereto" isn't an excuse:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz-W...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz-W...
Heinz-Wilhelm Eck - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
December 2, 2025 at 10:20 PM
In any case, "we were targeting the wreckage because reasons, and that's just tough luck for the wounded clinging thereto" isn't an excuse:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz-W...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz-W...
Which was a lie then and would be a lie now, and anyway doesn't excuse the perp.
December 2, 2025 at 8:10 PM
Which was a lie then and would be a lie now, and anyway doesn't excuse the perp.
To be clear, he was claiming that he didn't see the victims, and was simply trying to sink the wreckage because it marked his position.
The relevance here is that Whiskey Pete sounds like he's also going to try out some kind of "I didn't know that victims were there" defense.
The relevance here is that Whiskey Pete sounds like he's also going to try out some kind of "I didn't know that victims were there" defense.
December 2, 2025 at 8:10 PM
To be clear, he was claiming that he didn't see the victims, and was simply trying to sink the wreckage because it marked his position.
The relevance here is that Whiskey Pete sounds like he's also going to try out some kind of "I didn't know that victims were there" defense.
The relevance here is that Whiskey Pete sounds like he's also going to try out some kind of "I didn't know that victims were there" defense.
Some u-boat commander killed a bunch of helpless shipwreck survivors, and the excuse he ginned up was that he was shooting at the wreckage, not the luckless sailors clinging to bits of it.
They shot him. And a couple of his accomplices.
They shot him. And a couple of his accomplices.
December 2, 2025 at 8:00 PM
Some u-boat commander killed a bunch of helpless shipwreck survivors, and the excuse he ginned up was that he was shooting at the wreckage, not the luckless sailors clinging to bits of it.
They shot him. And a couple of his accomplices.
They shot him. And a couple of his accomplices.
Personally, I regret this. Israel is getting up to some awful stuff, and the US really ought to be using its awesome influence there to temper Israel's darker urges.
But I can't deny that, at least in 2024, that view did not prevail. Maybe it will next time out.
But I can't deny that, at least in 2024, that view did not prevail. Maybe it will next time out.
December 2, 2025 at 7:10 PM
Personally, I regret this. Israel is getting up to some awful stuff, and the US really ought to be using its awesome influence there to temper Israel's darker urges.
But I can't deny that, at least in 2024, that view did not prevail. Maybe it will next time out.
But I can't deny that, at least in 2024, that view did not prevail. Maybe it will next time out.
Your views got an airing, and your views lost. The Dems nominated a pair of Israel apologists, and did it with their eyes wide open.
December 2, 2025 at 7:07 PM
Your views got an airing, and your views lost. The Dems nominated a pair of Israel apologists, and did it with their eyes wide open.
So overwhelmingly popular with Dems that he cruised to the nomination.
And then, having won it, had an epic collapse on the debate stage. He revealed what appeared to be a sudden and extremely sharp decline in his mental acuity, which revelation immediately changed the dynamics of the race.
And then, having won it, had an epic collapse on the debate stage. He revealed what appeared to be a sudden and extremely sharp decline in his mental acuity, which revelation immediately changed the dynamics of the race.
December 2, 2025 at 7:06 PM
So overwhelmingly popular with Dems that he cruised to the nomination.
And then, having won it, had an epic collapse on the debate stage. He revealed what appeared to be a sudden and extremely sharp decline in his mental acuity, which revelation immediately changed the dynamics of the race.
And then, having won it, had an epic collapse on the debate stage. He revealed what appeared to be a sudden and extremely sharp decline in his mental acuity, which revelation immediately changed the dynamics of the race.
And anyway, to the extent that you found her views objectionable, those views didn't significantly differ from those of the guy who HAD won the primary, so those views, if not that candidate, had already won a legitimate primary.
December 2, 2025 at 7:03 PM
And anyway, to the extent that you found her views objectionable, those views didn't significantly differ from those of the guy who HAD won the primary, so those views, if not that candidate, had already won a legitimate primary.
Now, as it happens, he did drop out. And he did it so late that there wasn't time to run a proper primary.
But his successor as nominee wasn't just his personal pick. She was the sitting VP and thus had an ironclad constitutional mandate to replace him if a replacement was needed.
But his successor as nominee wasn't just his personal pick. She was the sitting VP and thus had an ironclad constitutional mandate to replace him if a replacement was needed.
December 2, 2025 at 7:02 PM
Now, as it happens, he did drop out. And he did it so late that there wasn't time to run a proper primary.
But his successor as nominee wasn't just his personal pick. She was the sitting VP and thus had an ironclad constitutional mandate to replace him if a replacement was needed.
But his successor as nominee wasn't just his personal pick. She was the sitting VP and thus had an ironclad constitutional mandate to replace him if a replacement was needed.
...yes? Because that candidate was overwhelmingly popular with the voters of his party.
So popular that nobody with your preferred views could even be arsed to challenge him.
He won the primary so big that you might not notice there even was a primary. But there was.
So popular that nobody with your preferred views could even be arsed to challenge him.
He won the primary so big that you might not notice there even was a primary. But there was.
December 2, 2025 at 7:01 PM
...yes? Because that candidate was overwhelmingly popular with the voters of his party.
So popular that nobody with your preferred views could even be arsed to challenge him.
He won the primary so big that you might not notice there even was a primary. But there was.
So popular that nobody with your preferred views could even be arsed to challenge him.
He won the primary so big that you might not notice there even was a primary. But there was.
This guy has a team of six to eight staffers not watching news for him.
December 2, 2025 at 4:06 PM
This guy has a team of six to eight staffers not watching news for him.
I get it. I'm just saying that he could have made Brutus the hero of his play and it would have still been a banger.
December 2, 2025 at 3:54 PM
I get it. I'm just saying that he could have made Brutus the hero of his play and it would have still been a banger.
I get that the bit about McMartin preschool was a tasty little bon mot, but it's bad form to cite that "link" in a way that suggests that the case was anything other than hysteria and injustice.
Why do Larry Nassar the favor of juxtaposing him with people wrongly accused of sex abuse?
Why do Larry Nassar the favor of juxtaposing him with people wrongly accused of sex abuse?
December 2, 2025 at 3:53 PM
I get that the bit about McMartin preschool was a tasty little bon mot, but it's bad form to cite that "link" in a way that suggests that the case was anything other than hysteria and injustice.
Why do Larry Nassar the favor of juxtaposing him with people wrongly accused of sex abuse?
Why do Larry Nassar the favor of juxtaposing him with people wrongly accused of sex abuse?
Bad luck for us that the greatest writer of the English language was a monarchist.
December 2, 2025 at 3:36 PM
Bad luck for us that the greatest writer of the English language was a monarchist.
I never understood the appeal of auto racing until the very moment I read this piece.
Xu makes this sound like a lot of fun.
Xu makes this sound like a lot of fun.
December 2, 2025 at 3:22 PM
I never understood the appeal of auto racing until the very moment I read this piece.
Xu makes this sound like a lot of fun.
Xu makes this sound like a lot of fun.
I guess I imagined that the point of the boat thing was to goad Venezuela's government into a response that they could use as a pretext for the invasion they so badly want to get off.
December 2, 2025 at 3:15 PM
I guess I imagined that the point of the boat thing was to goad Venezuela's government into a response that they could use as a pretext for the invasion they so badly want to get off.
"Apes don't read philosophy."
December 2, 2025 at 2:24 AM
"Apes don't read philosophy."
He's got a Yezhov vibe and I wouldn't expect him to outlast the creep by five minutes.
December 1, 2025 at 2:12 AM
He's got a Yezhov vibe and I wouldn't expect him to outlast the creep by five minutes.
Thing is, I'm old enough to remember the Republicans playing constitutional hardball and straight up stealing a seat from Obama, and did so with open contempt for the idea that there was anything wrong with such a shameless power grab.
So I'd be pleased to give a little of the same back.
So I'd be pleased to give a little of the same back.
November 29, 2025 at 1:55 AM
Thing is, I'm old enough to remember the Republicans playing constitutional hardball and straight up stealing a seat from Obama, and did so with open contempt for the idea that there was anything wrong with such a shameless power grab.
So I'd be pleased to give a little of the same back.
So I'd be pleased to give a little of the same back.
A: I would not approve of Trump picking all four. I'd object to him picking even one
November 29, 2025 at 1:47 AM
A: I would not approve of Trump picking all four. I'd object to him picking even one