RealityForAll said:

Is Pet Murder a felony, or a misdemeanor?

If the victim is a cat, it’s a feliny.

If a dog, it’s probably a misdobermannor.

signed off on this construction?

mtierney said:

I found it very unChristian and impolite for the Bishop to use her bully pulpit to disrespect the President and his family to voice her personal liberal opinions, as speaking “ex cathdera”, so to speak, in order to take a cheap shot at her seated target. How unChristian was her personal need for acknowledgement and affirmation on the talk show route the following day!

Bishop Budde was interviewed in connection with Trump insulting her on his social media. Among other things, Trump referred to her as a "so-called bishop", which is a lot more disrespectful than citing bedrock Christian teaching from the pulpit at a cathedral.

the thing about blanket government bans of puberty blockers is it takes away all possibility of doctors and families making an informed choice to use them for their children. It's a legitimate treatment option for some children, and it can make a difference in their future mental health. And for purely political purposes, a lot of people are sowing confusion about it.

it's not a surprise 70+% of people oppose this treatment. Most of them probably only know what they are being told by politicians and moguls with an ax to grind.

Let’s be clear.  If FEMA is disbanded, some private company will hire key individuals, build the same rapid response capabilities, and sell them to the states at higher prices, while lining someone’s pockets and paying lobbyists. States will get less and pay more (and create their own standards for who is deserving of disaster relief). I tend to think any crucial business that our new government wants to get out of will be a major business opportunity for a well-connected supporter.  

nohero said:

Here's another point of view, from National Catholic Reporter, for you to mock - 

Editorial: Addressing Trump, Bishop Budde did what a Christian is obliged to do

"If a Christian leader in her pulpit, addressing a president who voluntarily placed himself in that sacred space, cannot speak out of the heart of the Gospel, then we might as well turn our cathedrals, basilicas and other houses of worship into museums.

"President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance spent months ginning up inordinate fear among immigrant communities and exploiting the lies beneath that fear for political purposes. Trump has pardoned violent criminals who attempted an insurrection. He has been celebrated by crude racists and those who would endanger the LGBTQ community.

"If Budde had not addressed those fears and begged for mercy, the service would have been, at best, a disingenuous engagement and, at worst, an act of fraud and cowardice."

The first IKEA product where disassembly is required.

Agree, db. But, as you say, it requires a Senate which gives a ****. But they don't. Same with all the conflicts in Trump's holdings. Who will oppose? Clearly not the GOP Senate. We've seen what GOPers do when the Republic is at stake: they consider their jobs and act accordingly. 


Greetings from Little Rhody, BTW, my former neighbors. The outrage continues as we lurch toward the end. Every day, every exec. action, every appointment: If we thought Hegseth didn't have a prayer, we stand corrected. What the heck: why not Gabbard?  Who would have thought that "I promise not to drink to excess" would be reassuring from the guy who will command the most lethal fighting force on earth. 

Might as well say, "My fellow Americans, if WW3 breaks out, I promise I won't be hammered at some strip club."  And assurances from alcoholics are rock solid. Very few fall off the wagon.

Who could've headed this off? Mitch (you get no credit for anti-Hegseth-vote-you-bastard) McConnell? The Senate? The GOP in general? Voters? 

We've clearly answered the question of who we are. This is us. Period. Full f'ing stop.

Any MOLers on Bluesky?

I know this is a drop-in from the past but I hope to contribute going forward. 

PVW said:

nan said:

PVW said:

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/washington-v-trump-birthright-citizenship-tro.pdf

This is a big problem. Has anyone asked Trump how this would be handled? 

Given his track record, I don't think he cares.

Pay attention when the mass immigration raids begin -- US citizens will be caught up in them. He won't care.

the MAGAs don't care. One of the people detained in Newark yesterday was a U.S. citizen. Some guy on the NJ.com FB page seemed totally unfazed by that because apparently the guy was released. As if being held by ICE agents is no big deal.

the callousness in our country these days is really dismaying. Many people apparently think immigrants are subhuman.

It was like that in the U.S. back when the waves of Irish, Italians, Poles, Jews, etc. came here. But I thought we'd advanced beyond those attitudes.

Obviously not.

paulsurovell said:

PVW said:

paulsurovell said:

PVW said:

paulsurovell said:

PVW said:

paulsurovell said:

Musk's view of his daughter is consistent with his view that adults should be allowed to do anything they want as long as they don't harm others, because his regret about his daughter's transition relates to what happened to her as a minor, not as an adult.

Vivian is an adult now, and does not regret transitioning. So on what basis should she, or anyone else, GAF whether or not Musk regrets it?

As I said, Musk's assumed right to have an opinion about other peoples bodies, and to have those opinions get the force of the government behind it, makes him a natural fit for his role in this oligarchic, regressive administration.

You're right. But you are certainly GAF about it.

It's not his opinion I care about, but the fact that he believes he has a right to impose his opinion on others, and with his partnering with Trump he's now achieved a great deal of power to do so. That, I do very much GAF about.

How does Musk "impose his opinion on others"?

Several. For example, he's used his power as the owner of a communications platform to amplify hateful attacks against transgender people -- by changing moderation rules to allow attacks that formerly would have drawn penalties, by retweeting posts that attack trans people and so giving those posts far more visibility than they otherwise would have, by tweeting such attacks himself which gives a patina of official approval to such attacks on his platform. We don't know the details of how he tweaks the algorithm, but it also does appear that it's been tweaked to give his own posts greater reach, including of course those attacking trans people.

Then he bought substantial equity in Trump's presidency, an administration that shares his hostility to trans people. His money is now behind things like Trump's executive order attacking trans people. And it's only day three of this administration.

Probably you'll try to make some weaselly argument about how Musk isn't really attacking trans people. You can save your breath, I'm not interested in your sucking up to the oligarch.

You didn't explain how Musk imposes his opinion on others.

If you're in the military and are transgender, Trump's kicking you out. If your gender doesn't correspond to your sex, the federal government will refuse to recognize this. Funny how you get so worked up about moderation on private discussion platforms, but Trump and Musk using the power of the federal government to try and erase the existence of trans people doesn't phase you.