chasfh

This is exactly what they voted for. This video will be a huge recruitment tool.

They're removing the guardrails and getting us used to seeing this for when the military comes to your town and mine.

What are you talking about? She was nominated at the convention in Milwaukee. It was in all the papers.

I'm assuming they are gutting the apparatus that prevent and prosecute fraud because they want their designated enemies to be punished for fraud based only on accusation and not at all on evidence. More bluntly, they want only their own say-so to stand as the actionable evidence of fraud, and by having an actual apparatus in place designed to ferret out actual fraud, they would have to use it to prove fraud, which would frequently backfire on them, and they can't allow that to happen. Thus, they are pushing for a system where their mere accusation is both de facto and de jure evidence.

Supercalifragilistic

Fascinating!

Careful where you go in London. London’s Violent Crime Rate Compared To The UK National Average

Map of The Holy Roman Empire At Its Territorial Peak In The 12th Century

I ... I had no idea ... 😲 Where You Can & Can’t Flush Toilet Paper Around The World

This is good: I like this, it's worth adding. I'm a little surprised at the Virgin Islands: Rank State 2023 Share of Tourists Tourist Numbers (000) 1 New York 28.84% 9,076 2 Florida 25.21% 7,933 3 California 19.92% 6,269 4 Nevada 6.83% 2,149 5 Texas 5.95% 1,872 6 Hawaiian Islands 5.30% 1,668 7 Illinois 4.73% 1,488 8 Massachusetts 3.99% 1,256 9 New Jersey 3.25% 1,023 10 Arizona 2.99% 941 11 Georgia 2.89% 909 12 Pennsylvania 2.68% 843 13 Guam 2.24% 705 14 Washington 2.07% 651 15 Utah 1.82% 573 16 Virginia 1.58% 497 17 Colorado 1.48% 466 18 North Carolina 1.45% 456 19 Tennessee 1.36% 428 20 Michigan 1.22% 384 21 Ohio 1.06% 334 22 Maryland 1.03% 324 23 Louisiana 1.01% 318 24 Connecticut 0.93% 293 25 South Carolina 0.70% 220 26 Indiana 0.67% 211 26 Minnesota 0.66% 208 28 Wisconsin 0.65% 205 28 Oregon 0.64% 201 30 Puerto Rico 0.50% 157 31 Missouri 0.49% 154 32 Wyoming 0.41% 129 33 Maine 0.36% 113 34 Kentucky 0.33% 104 35 Alaska 0.32% 101 36 Alabama 0.31% 98 37 Kansas 0.29% 91 37 Rhode Island 0.29% 91 37 New Mexico 0.27% 85 40 New Hampshire 0.26% 82 40 Oklahoma 0.22% 69 40 Arkansas 0.21% 66 40 Iowa 0.21% 66 44 Montana 0.21% 66 45 Delaware 0.17% 53 46 Idaho 0.17% 53 47 Nebraska 0.17% 53 47 South Dakota 0.16% 50 47 Mississippi 0.13% 41 50 Vermont 0.13% 41 51 North Dakota 0.08% 25 52 West Virginia 0.07% 22 53 U.S. Virgin Islands 0.06% 19

No one is talking about Epstein at the moment.

After you ... 😁

Do you like placing the occasional and perfectly legal prop bet?

My point stands.

Whoa this guy is married to Katy Tur??

meh. He paid his debt.

Straight men commit violent crimes all the time. Dog bites man.

It’s true, although I don’t think that happens so often to a team coming off two straight playoffs after a long drought and is universally regarded as a team on the way up with bright prospects even for the coming season.

In a numbers game, you will always have a number of failures. I think this is too low a bar to then declare him de facto incompetent and no longer deserving of the job. My bar is he sits on his hands when we have nothing left in the cupboard, or otherwise moves chairs around the decks, and we lose 80-something or more games. That’s when I will consider calling for his head then.

I am hoping the Tigers go with MLB and we get to have one year of no on-screen prop betting odds before ESPN brings them all back for whenever the next season is.

I wonder what Kendrick Lamar thought of it. 😏

On the local “news talk” radio station just now, the bomb thrower on the mic referred to today as “Ashley Babbitt Day”, the anniversary of “her murder” by a “democrat police officer” named “Michael Peters”. Charming.

From the Department of No S***, Sherlock. Here's a bit of detail: In the 1950s, justices appointed by both parties sided with wealthy interests about 45% of the time. By 2022, Republican appointees voted for the wealthier party 70% of the time. Democratic appointees? 35%. .... The researchers argue this isn't about isolated cases or shifting legal doctrine. They say it's more a systemic matter, meaning a pattern that plays out fairly predictably across disputes that involve workers versus management, consumers versus corporations, and regulators versus industry. The study arrives as public trust in the court hits multidecade lows and scrutiny intensifies over decisions that have weakened unions, expanded the role of money in politics, and narrowed or limited federal regulatory power. Supporters say the research confirms what many have long suspected — that the legal system favors those with greater economic power, or “big guys” over “little guys,” colloquially speaking. Critics, for their part, counter that defining "rich" versus "poor" involves making subjective judgments, and the data may merely reflect a more consistently conservative court rather than an explicit pro-wealth bias. For corporations and large businesses, the benefits are straightforward. In a scenario in which a majority-conservative court can be reliably expected to side with wealthy interests—that is, the current scenario, which will only be changed by justices’ deaths or retirements — legal costs can be modeled more reliably, and outcomes predicted with greater confidence. ....

I'll take +25% over +17% every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.