pennica
@pennica.bsky.social
I am an unremarkable man of moderately low character.
Maturely antifascist.
We are vain and we are blind
I hate people when they’re not polite
Maturely antifascist.
We are vain and we are blind
I hate people when they’re not polite
Reposted by pennica
They don't want traditional masculine virtues, which is something they give; they want traditional masculine rents, which is something they get.
December 7, 2025 at 2:51 AM
They don't want traditional masculine virtues, which is something they give; they want traditional masculine rents, which is something they get.
Reposted by pennica
and judge pan gets at what i was gesturing towards earlier today: that this idea that the purpose of the executive branch is to effectuate the political agenda of the president is extra-constitutional. it has no basis in the text or the history for that matter!
December 5, 2025 at 5:12 PM
and judge pan gets at what i was gesturing towards earlier today: that this idea that the purpose of the executive branch is to effectuate the political agenda of the president is extra-constitutional. it has no basis in the text or the history for that matter!
Reposted by pennica
My point is not: The US is less racist.
It is also not: France is more racist.
My big takeaway is racism in the US is just... transparent. It's easy to see, because of the legacy of slavery and Black people in this country, the racism is loud.
It is also not: France is more racist.
My big takeaway is racism in the US is just... transparent. It's easy to see, because of the legacy of slavery and Black people in this country, the racism is loud.
December 7, 2025 at 3:04 AM
My point is not: The US is less racist.
It is also not: France is more racist.
My big takeaway is racism in the US is just... transparent. It's easy to see, because of the legacy of slavery and Black people in this country, the racism is loud.
It is also not: France is more racist.
My big takeaway is racism in the US is just... transparent. It's easy to see, because of the legacy of slavery and Black people in this country, the racism is loud.
Reposted by pennica
The definition of extremist will be anyone who opposes MAGA.
December 6, 2025 at 11:00 PM
The definition of extremist will be anyone who opposes MAGA.
That's pretty much what the national security presidential memorandum that was published by the regime after Charlie Kirk was murdered said.
www.thefire.org/news/trumps-...
www.thefire.org/news/trumps-...
![A quote from the NSPM: "There are common recurrent motivations and indicia uniting this pattern of violent and terroristic activities under the umbrella of self-described “anti-fascism.” [ . . . ] Common threads animating this violent conduct include anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:2cxl3p2xqavj4jvi23xxdcyh/bafkreifq7natbeam2wjbs7dcgihgb24fyccg4h4eaxbqza4x5bgfdtf2ya@jpeg)
December 7, 2025 at 12:46 AM
That's pretty much what the national security presidential memorandum that was published by the regime after Charlie Kirk was murdered said.
www.thefire.org/news/trumps-...
www.thefire.org/news/trumps-...
Reposted by pennica
As a bartender, I remember in Trump I a significant uptick in old white men saying, "Merry Christmas." With firmness and glaring at me, daring me to say something else.
A slur is a good description of it.
A slur is a good description of it.
December 6, 2025 at 3:29 PM
As a bartender, I remember in Trump I a significant uptick in old white men saying, "Merry Christmas." With firmness and glaring at me, daring me to say something else.
A slur is a good description of it.
A slur is a good description of it.
An Australian accent *is* the sarcasm font.
December 6, 2025 at 1:48 PM
An Australian accent *is* the sarcasm font.
Reposted by pennica
That this SCOTUS used it to justify striking affirmative action bc it discriminated against WHITE people and now thinks their might be a colorable argument about the birthright part shows only that they are confused about whether the good team won the Civil War. (2/3)
December 5, 2025 at 10:57 PM
That this SCOTUS used it to justify striking affirmative action bc it discriminated against WHITE people and now thinks their might be a colorable argument about the birthright part shows only that they are confused about whether the good team won the Civil War. (2/3)
Pretty sure I didn't get it to her by the time she had to go to work, but I put a little towards the coats.
December 5, 2025 at 8:48 PM
Pretty sure I didn't get it to her by the time she had to go to work, but I put a little towards the coats.