Sunday’s Forum

James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.


  1. OzarkHillbilly says:

    — Sylvester Tweetycat (@STweetycat)

    Do you know why we can fly a helicopter on Mars, but can’t turn on a light in Texas?

    Because scientists are in charge of Mars, and Republicans are in charge of Texas

    (hattip to Anne Laurie)

  2. OzarkHillbilly says:


    How does Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stay so thin when she regularly eats republicans for lunch?

  3. Kathy says:

    Don’t let this photo fool you. The situation was very dangerous.

    That said, and adding the luck that no one on the ground was injured, it’s worth mentioning the engines on the 777 are about the largest ones on commercial aircraft (not wider than a 737, but really big). When you consider how much energy goes through them, it’s amazing the fuselage was not damaged.

    And kudos to the flight crew for getting the plane down safely.

  4. OzarkHillbilly says:

    Growing number of Republican donors aim to prise party from Trump influence

    Some four dozen Republican donors were on a fundraising conference call on 5 February with Liz Cheney, the congresswoman and only Republican House leader to vote for Donald Trump’s impeachment for his role in the mob attack on the Capitol on 6 January.

    Many of the donors on the Cheney call are expected to donate the maximum amount of $5,800 to her 2022 re-election campaign before the end of the first quarter of this year, to ward off a primary challenge to her which Trump loyalists like congressman Matt Gaetz are encouraging, said Michael Epstein, a leading Maryland Republican donor.

    “We want to show a really big cycle for her to scare off competition,” Epstein said in an interview. “We want people who make judgments based on what’s right.”

    The number of donors on the call reflects in part a growing movement among Republican fundraisers to try to fight off threats from the Trump-supporting majority, which has maintained its hold on the Republican base, despite Trump’s loss to Joe Biden in the 2020 election.

    Though still a minority in Republican political circles, Trump’s critics – and the moneyed donors who are backing them – are scrambling fast on multiple fronts to try to prise control of the party away from those loyally toeing the Trump line.

    Rooting for injuries comes to mind.

  5. OzarkHillbilly says:

    Wear A Mask And Stand Back

    Boys played battleship. 5-yr old stacked all his ships on top of each other, leaving increasingly furious 7-yr to shoot up an almost empty ocean. When 7-yr old finally got a hit, 5-yr old calmly insisted only the top ship had been damaged, protecting those below it.

  6. Sleeping Dog says:

    Joe Biden has been president for a month. It seems much longer, perhaps because by comparison it has been so serene. With the normal order restored, the work of government is back to happening in the background, with even small controversies like a misogynist staffer, quickly and quietly removed, the facts determined and the miscreant dismissed. Without a buffoon attempting to dominate the news cycle, the behavior and actions of politicians like Cruz and Cuomo are getting the critical review that they deserve. And oh, I’m so happy that Cuomo didn’t jump into the Dem presidential race last spring as some activists hoped.

    Here at OTB, things are returning to normal as well. The generally liberal commentariat is dividing between the center leftist and progressives or if you would like to frame it differently between the pragmatists and the idealists. With the forum finding time for extended discussions about the Mars lander, movies and classic TV shows.

    My how normal.

  7. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Sleeping Dog: My how normal.


  8. CSK says:

    In a video taken by one the passengers you can hear the applause and cheers when the pilots lands the plane–very smoothly, too. Kudos indeed.

  9. CSK says:

    @Sleeping Dog:
    After 5 years of being the center of everyone’s attention, Trump, being Trump, will inevitably try to take over the news cycle. He is coming out of hiding to speak at the upcoming CPAC.

    Don’t be surprised if he starts holding rallies again.

  10. MarkedMan says:

    @Sleeping Dog: it’s interesting that you see “progressive” as equivalent to idealist. Of course, there’s no official definition, but my take is that progressives have a goal to improve the lot of everyone and protect and preserve our resources and environment, and look to pragmatic means to achieve those goals. Ideology plays very little role and what little usage it has is constantly checked against reality.

  11. de stijl says:


    I hope he does. The Trumpian wing is waning as we speak. Will continue to do so.

    I want him to sow discord towards others Rs. I want him to go ham on slagging and denigrating ungrateful, post-Trump Rs. That would suit me fine.

    Trump is the best GOTV device for Ds that could be invented. The more Rs that bend their knee at Mar-A-Lago, the better. If Rs want to hitch their wagon to Trump they have my full blessing.

  12. de stijl says:

    I want as many as possible Rs to believe that Trump is key to winning in 2022 and 2024. It will work in the SE, but will backfire mostly everywhere else.

    Please continue, Governor.

  13. Michael Reynolds says:

    I wish I saw what you see in progressives. I agree their goals are laudable. In fact, I have the same goals. I think AOC is a rock star. I gave Warren my vote in the CA primary, and gave her some money as well.

    But pragmatists? No. They’re too intolerant to be pragmatists. Freaking out and hurling accusations over something as insignificant – to actual pragmatists – as the Neera Tanden nomination does not say pragmatism to me. Pragmatists care about actual issues in the lives of actual Americans, they don’t start attacking allies over irrelevant political blips.

    No, the intramural support on the Left only goes one way. Liberals have to grit their teeth and offer excuses for idiot Antifa breaking windows months after that kind of thing had even a scrap of usefulness. Liberals have to try and make sense of nonsensical prog demands that we be carbon neutral in a decade. But progressives don’t have allies, they’re just too precious for dirty compromises that might help improve the lives of actual Americans. Much better to rant at sell-out liberals than accomplish anything.

    Pragmatists? No. It’s all about performative politics, look at me, bask in the warmth of my moral perfection. Today Berkeley and Park Slope, tomorrow…um…let’s see. Can I come up with a single state that would elect a progressive governor? Nope. How about a Republican Senate seat a progressive candidate might take? Nope. Progressives are a political niche, a craft beer, popular in cities with major universities, unknown beyond the inner ring suburbs of blue dots.

  14. Sleeping Dog says:


    Having conceded that most commentators are generally liberal, but acknowledging that there is a healthy debate developing. I toyed with center leftist v. far left and rejected that as, to my reading, a negative frame on our most progressive co-partisans. Further-leftist crossed my mind, but that seemed awkward. Thinking progressive as the vanguard, seemed to fit the point I was making.

  15. OzarkHillbilly says:

    Peek a Boo…

    If that doesn’t make you smile, you are broken.

  16. OzarkHillbilly says:

    Speaking as a pragmatic progressive, I am willing to settle today for any success that betters things than they were yesterday, while vowing to try and push the ball even further forward tomorrow.

  17. de stijl says:

    Super smart birds kinda freak me out.

    That bird understood sightlines and camera lenses and could mimic mom’s speech to know that saying “peek-a-boo” gets mom’s attention and love and laughter.

  18. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @de stijl: Some bird brains are smarter than Fled Cancruz.

  19. de stijl says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: @OzarkHillbilly:

    Spot on.

    If the defense prevents you from throwing a bomb, let ’em eat 3.35 yards and a cloud of dust three times in a row.

    It moves the marker.

    Plus is less than ideal, but is better than status quo or regression.

  20. CSK says:
  21. CSK says:

    If you invented “Fled Cancruz,” you’re a genius.

  22. DrDaveT says:


    How does Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stay so thin when she regularly eats republicans for lunch?

    My wife’s reply was “She doesn’t swallow — she just chews them up and spits them out.”

  23. DrDaveT says:

    @Michael Reynolds:

    But pragmatists? No. They’re too intolerant to be pragmatists.

    Congratulations, Michael — you have just successfully ported the No True Scotsman fallacy to liberal politics, with a polarity reversal to boot.

  24. de stijl says:

    No one should get everything they want.

    The Greek play writers knew that several thousand years ago.

    Hubris leads to downfall inevitably.

  25. MarkedMan says:

    @Michael Reynolds: This is the problem with there being no official definition of “progressive” and “liberal”: I basically agree with everything you said, but if I wrote it I would have swapped “liberal” for “progressive” and vice versa.

    I think of liberalism as being exactly like conservatism in that is a random and arbitrary collection of issues one must feel passionate or angry about while the crowdsourced purity police relentlessly scan allies for any deviation from the current party doctrine. The goal isn’t to accomplish something, but rather win the contest of stage-theatrical denunciations of the insufficiently zealous.

    I’m pretty sure we are talking about the same people, just tagging them with different names.

  26. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: I can only assume that it’s because Republicans have less substance compared to other food choices. 😉

  27. Sleeping Dog says:

    But muh 2nd amendment rights…

    NBC reports that the fight broke out after a customer entered the gun outlet with a loaded gun that was unholstered. The man then got into an argument with a store clerk, who told him not to have a loaded gun until he was in the outlet’s range.

    Shooting at Louisiana Gun Store Leads to Multiple Deaths

    Tragic, but when any moron with a pulse can get and carry a gun…

  28. Kathy says:


    Well, we know they have no guts or spine. And once you get the sh*t out of them, they can’t possibly weigh more than an ounce each.

  29. de stijl says:


    I’m really sure I know I want equal treatment under the law for all Americans.

    And if the law denies that, then I want to change those laws.

    I think you are very wrong in that second paragraph. I disdain your cynicism.

  30. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @CSK: I invented neither “Fled” nor “Cancruz” but I did steal and then combine them.

  31. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @DrDaveT: I like your wife. Quick.

    ETA 2 more quick witted responses, @Just nutha ignint cracker: @Kathy:

    (hooray for an edit function!)

  32. de stijl says:


    I reject the premise and conclusion.

  33. OzarkHillbilly says:

    5th Circuit Grants Qualified Immunity to Cops Who Ignited a Suicidal, Gasoline-Drenched Man by Tasing Him

    On July 10, 2017, Olivas’ son called 911 to report that his father was threatening to kill himself. According to the 5th Circuit’s summary, Olivas’ son also said his father was threatening to “burn down their house.” That assertion contradicts the family’s account, which the court was supposed to accept as true in determining whether the officers deserved qualified immunity. The family maintains that Olivas “did not threaten to harm his wife, his son, or anyone else in his home.”

    Upon entering the house, Guadarrama smelled gasoline. Olivas’ wife, Selina Marie Ramirez, directed Guadarrama, Jefferson, and Officer Caleb Elliott to a bedroom, where they found Olivas “leaning against a wall and holding a red gas can.” According to the family’s account—which, again, the 5th Circuit was supposed to accept as true in the context of this ruling—Elliott shouted to the other officers, “If we tase him, he is going to light on fire!” Elliott discharged pepper spray in Olivas’ face, which temporarily blinded him.

    Around the same time, Olivas poured gasoline over himself. According to the 5th Circuit, it is not clear whether that happened before or after Olivas was hit with the pepper spray. The court says Guadarrama and Elliott “noticed that Olivas was holding some object that appeared as though it might be a lighter.” Guadarrama “fired his taser at the gasoline-soaked man, causing him to burst into flames.” Jefferson also fired his Taser, although he initially denied that he had done so.

    “The fire spread from Olivas to the walls of the bedroom, and the house eventually
    burned to the ground,” the 5th Circuit notes. Olivas was taken to a hospital, where he eventually died from his injuries. The officers thus precipitated the very outcome they were ostensibly trying to prevent.

    “In order to prevent the self immolation of the individual who was in a mental health crisis, we were required to set him afire before he could endanger others by setting himself on fire.”

    Yep, totally reasonable, exactly what I would do in such a situation.

  34. Mimai says:

    @MarkedMan: “I’m pretty sure we are talking about the same people, just tagging them with different names.”

    To bring some clarity to this discussion, it might be helpful to give some examples of these people.

  35. CSK says:

    Well done.

  36. de stijl says:


    Phan Thi Kim Phuc.

    The girl in the napalm picture. Wasn’t her choice.

  37. gVOR08 says:

    @de stijl:

    If Rs want to hitch their wagon to Trump they have my full blessing.

    Exactly. I want Trump to remain powerful in his Party. Everything Trump Touches Dies. As Dr. T instructs is, our rules force us into two, and only two, major parties. But unlike recent history, generally one or the other has been dominant and the other has had to learn to bargain and compromise as a relatively weak opposition. The country needs Rs to be weak for a generation or so while we patch up the damage from the last few decades.

  38. MarkedMan says:

    @de stijl:

    I’m really sure I know I want equal treatment under the law for all Americans.

    And if the law denies that, then I want to change those laws

    I agree. I’m not sure why you think I’m being cynical.

  39. de stijl says:

    Today is dark and gray and snowy.

    Perfect day to curl up with some Joy Division.

    Leave Me Alone

  40. de stijl says:


    Second paragraph of this: @MarkedMan.

  41. Michael says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: Brilliant, cheating but, brilliant!

  42. MarkedMan says:

    @Mimai: Amongst famous people, I find that easier to do on the conservative side than on the liberal. In personal life, by contrast, I’ve met a few people, usually young, that care more about the correctness of what you say than what you actually do. I can think of one young woman who, upon learning that Ruth Bader Ginsberg had a non-optimal opinion about some woke issue, was devastated. She had always admired Ginsberg! But it turns out she wasn’t an ally after all! Now, in this case I know the young woman and she is a good person and actually quite practical and sensible, so was a bit taken aback by the instant 180 (which didn’t last, thank god).

    AOC is an interesting case. She strikes me as someone who could be very pragmatic and very effective, especially as she gains experience. But she became very famous very quickly and is celebrated by her fans more for owning some random conservative than for the tedious business that is crafting effective legislation. She could stay in the news and be invited to all the talking head shows forever without ever accomplishing anything. She is at a fork in the road. So far, she seems to be able to stay on the “effective” branch, but that’s definitely the harder road, and leads much more slowly to appreciation and fame.

    Bernie Sanders is an example of someone who went the opposite way. Disdainful of compromise and pragmatism, he accomplished virtually nothing during his entire time in the Senate. But he was pure!

  43. MarkedMan says:

    @de stijl: Because I think there are people who care more about purity than about accomplishing things? That’s not cynicism, it’s just human nature. Or is it that when I think of people who are more concerned about purity I picture then referring to themselves as “liberal” or “conservative”?

    Remember, this was in a post where I was commenting on the fact that such a label means different things to different people. I was giving my reaction to the word “liberal” and pointing out there was no official definition.

    I don’t like the terms liberal or conservative, because they are used all the time but don’t actually mean anything, or rather, mean so many things they are not useful in a discussion. As this discussion proves.

  44. Mimai says:

    @MarkedMan: Performative politics is almost a pleonasm these days, especially on the R side. And yet politicking does require some performing. I suppose the poison is in the dose. And in the eye of the beholder. You mention a fork in the road, implying that this is a one-time decision (please correct me if I mischaracterize your intent). My sense is that it is not a one-time decision – at least it doesn’t have to be. Rather, you perform when necessary (and hopefully as a means to an end), and you do the slow, boring policy work when necessary…..hopefully doing more of the later than the former.

  45. de stijl says:


    You are a rebel.

    Pols are performing? Never heard that before. You’ve opened my eyes.

    Are you 14?

  46. de stijl says:

    We should never try to be better or to govern better because pols are posers.

    That’s remarkably cynical, and frankly, juvenile.

  47. de stijl says:

    How did the Civil Rights Act happen?

    Was there performance and politicking?

  48. Sleeping Dog says:


    Same logic as, we need to destroy the village to save it.

  49. de stijl says:

    I need to sub to Hulu.

    I need to see Nomadland.

  50. Sleeping Dog says:


    It would be very easy for AOC to become the Sarah Palin of the left, if celebrity becomes her driver. To this point she seemed to have been able to focus on policy, though not, as yet, achieving outcomes. We should hope that AOC will model herself after Elizabeth Warren, who while being a staunch advocate of the progressive agenda, has quietly been able to move Chuck Schumer and senate democrats to the left on a number of issues.

    The squad member who seems to be following Warren’s lead is Ayanna Pressley (who would like to follow/join Warren as senator, when Liz or Markey retires)

    If she hasn’t, AOC should add a couple of Ted Kennedy biographies and Kennedy’s memoirs to her reading list. As a young senator Kennedy was every bit the firebrand that AOC is, along with the purity of Bernie. Kennedy figured out that if he wanted to advance his agenda he would need to take gains where he could find them and build coalitions. Barney Frank and Paul Wellstone were other firebrand liberals who learned to be effective and true to their beliefs.

  51. MarkedMan says:

    @Mimai: You’re right in that effectiveness and pragmatism still needs to motivate “our side” and performance is important to that. And as you said, it’s more about the ratio than anything else.

    As to the fork in the road, I think it is harder for someone so in the spotlight to keep a balance between pragmatism and performance. This difficulty in finding balance is true of everyone thrust into fame, and moreso when you are at the beginning of your career. When you are famous there are all sorts of people who will give you affirmations for whatever you do, regardless of whether it is the right thing or not. I’ve never had any chance of becoming famous, so my opinion is purely based on observation and imaginings, but I suspect that many people who go off the deep end when fame hits have friends and family that tried to give them warning. But unlike most of us there are hundreds of bright, shiny, interesting and fun people waiting to take their place and more than willing to heap praise on them for telling that b*tch what you really think of her, or go ahead and have one more drink or put this up your nose.

    Right now AOC is getting cheers primarily for snarking on the opposition. It’s funny and it’s great to see someone like Ted Cruz taken down a notch. But has shown a real toughness and organizational capability. I hope she doesn’t put that aside because she can get more press attention by making fun of Cruz then by the hundreds of hours it takes to craft significant legislation. It’s her right if she does, but it’s our loss.

  52. Bob@Youngstown says:

    @de stijl:

    I need to see Nomadland.

    You might also try “Songs my Brothers Taught Me” and “The Rider” — same director as Nomadland

  53. Gustopher says:


    This is the problem with there being no official definition of “progressive” and “liberal”: I basically agree with everything you said, but if I wrote it I would have swapped “liberal” for “progressive” and vice versa.

    Here are the definitions I use:

    Liberals are institutionalists seeking moderate change by first moving the consensus. 2008 Joe Biden is a good example.

    Progressives are more worried about social justice, and more open to significant change. They are willing to move the consensus by first implementing change. Elizabeth Warren is a good example. AOC is a good example.

    It’s a fuzzy boundary — Biden now seemingly straddles the line, and grew a lot during the Obama years and after (am I the only one who remembers his work spotlighting campus sexual assaults with Lady Gaga? I’m not saying Liberals are in favor of sexual assault on campus, but it’s the type of social justice issue that they don’t spend a lot of time on)

    Both groups have their gadflies. You’re trying to combine two different ways of dividing the data if you’re trying to pick whether the liberals or progressives are the gadflies.

    With the Progressives it’s the Purity Pony Brigade who don’t have the common sense to take a partial victory, honestly thank their 90% allies, and then keep fighting. It’s the Twitter crowd. You’re stretching if you find a well known name, since politics is about forging compromise. Bernie is ineffective because he’s ineffective, not because he rides a Purity Pony.

    With the Liberals it’s Diane Feinstein.

  54. Gustopher says:


    Right now AOC is getting cheers primarily for snarking on the opposition. It’s funny and it’s great to see someone like Ted Cruz taken down a notch. But has shown a real toughness and organizational capability.

    AOC put the Green New Deal on the map, and made it the standard by which other climate change plans are measured. She moved the Overton window.

    She’s doing great for a very junior representative.

  55. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: “We had to destroy the village in order to save it?” Really? WTF?

  56. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Sleeping Dog: I’m not sure that AOC’s goals are the kind that can be accomplished via consensus. It may be hard for her when she discovers that we’re never going to get close enough to the world that she wants to wave at it on the horizon.

    Then again, her district may well be underwater in another generation, so maybe it doesn’t really matter.

  57. MarkedMan says:

    @Gustopher: I agree, and if that wasn’t clear it’s on me. Right now she strikes me as the type of person willing to get a deal and advance legislation and not someone just interested in winning hearts and minds but never getting to a bill.

  58. de stijl says:


    I will. I have heard great things about The Rider.

  59. Sleeping Dog says:

    @Just nutha ignint cracker:

    I hope you’re wrong and the AOC of today is youthful enthusiasm run amok. She has good ideas and can communicate them, but to turn them into policy it will take more than that. If she doesn’t adjust her approach and work toward getting to 50%+1 for her goals, she’ll be Bernie Sanders of the House, lots of good ideas and no accomplishments.

    Teddy Kennedy rejected Nixon’s offer on nat’l health insurance in the early 70’s, holding out for a better option that never came. It was then 40 years before a health insurance for all proposal came up for a vote in Congress, and Ted didn’t live to see its passage.

  60. de stijl says:

    People underestimate her because she is a relative young who knows how to do social media in an engaging, non-stilted way. Often dismissed as a Millennial.

    Have you seen her during committee hearings? She is on-point, focused, well-researched, probing.

    She shames her fellow members with her preparedness.

    She advocates for policies that are currently a bit too left for many Americans, but are not pie-in-the-sky nonsense bs, but policies that most of our key European allies think of as de riguer and middle of the road common sense.

    And her proposals are thought through not idealistic catch-phrases.

    She def ain’t no dummy.

    AOC has a big future.

  61. wr says:

    @Sleeping Dog: “It would be very easy for AOC to become the Sarah Palin of the left, if celebrity becomes her driver.”

    Well, yeah. If she was stupid. Which she isn’t.


  62. de stijl says:


    I would challenge anyone to watch Palin being interviewed by Couric in 2008 and compare AOC to Palin.

    Categorical difference. Uninformed, stupid vs. a tad left of center for now and *really* prepared.

  63. dazedandconfused says:

    It’s appears to be a pattern in Britain.

    Fireman trying to rescue scarlet mccaw gets cussed out…

  64. Teve says:
  65. CSK says:

    Talk about ingrates.

  66. Teve says:

    @Kathy: I can think about very complicated issues, but my brain works slowly. I can’t think on the fly at all. It always impresses me when people can put things together fast.

  67. Kurtz says:

    Criticizing the gadflies as useless is a misunderstanding of the political landscape.

    Arguing they are too idealistic and don’t get anything substantive done assumes that they don’t have functions within the party. Call it what you want, but they keep the consensus builders from giving away the store.

    It’s a bit ironic, because critcizing Sanders for being too idealistic fetishizes idealization of the political system. Yet he’s done enough that we talk about him between election cycles and debate about whether his influence in politics is good for Democrats. In a democracy, that matters.

  68. Monala says:

    @Mimai: great response, and great word, pleonasm—I learned something new today!

  69. de stijl says:


    A song in the spirit of Nomadland

    Pictures Of My Dress by The Mountain Goats

  70. Gustopher says:

    @de stijl:

    Have you seen her during committee hearings? She is on-point, focused, well-researched, probing.

    She shames her fellow members with her preparedness.

    Across a variety of topics, too.

    Either she is a modern day renaissance woman, or a lot of that is having a good staff and not being so full of herself that she thinks she doesn’t need them. I suspect the latter, and would say that’s a better skill set to have — making good use of other’s abilities, rather than simply powering through things.

    And, she pisses off the right wing, by being a competent Democratic woman. And being mean to Ted Cruz.

    My brothers are texting me that she is fat and ugly, because 1) a woman only has value so far as she gives them a stiffy, and 2) they’re apparently blind — would it be wrong to reply to the “fat and ugly” comments with pictures of their wives? No comments, just pictures.

    I’m thinking yes, that would be wrong.

  71. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Gustopher: Those are the type of people who think a gag improves any woman’s looks.

  72. Joan Blinks says:

    These comments are hilarious. You guys don’t think Bernie is pragmatic? He worked with John McCain to pass VA reform, this was a major legislative accomplishment of Obama’s second term and I think that veterans are much happier for it. As for describing Neera Tanden as pragmatic, what has she accomplished? From what I’ve seen she just tweets all day like Trump

  73. de stijl says:


    Do it. Maybe.

    Well, only if they were the aggressors and you really want to burn those bridges.

    You can always mitigate the damage by slapping a winky smiley face at the end.

    I’m being cheeky, that says.

    A bold person would. I am such a bad friend.

    Btw, what shit taste your brothers have. She is freakin’ gorgeous. In what world is she fat!?

    If you do not like them, and they are unprovoked being assholes to you, do it. Aggression requires a response.

    If you want to preserve a chance at a healthy relationship then think it through.

    One thing I have found to really effective is to just say “I didn’t like what said when you said x. I interpret “blah” as you being mean and insulting and provocative.”

    Don’t ask for anything. Just state you did not like it.

    People get weirded out by the directness of that approach. Don’t ask for an apology or retraction. State your feeling directly.

    If people aggress against you say it clear.

    Then move to a new topic. It’s the polite thing to do. It sends a clear message.

    Whether you forgive or forget or hold a grudge forever in your own head is entirely up to you. Leave em guessing.

  74. Kathy says:


    Often undeserved praise is nice 😉

    I sat overnight on the United 777 story. I usually need time to think an issue over, too.

  75. Gustopher says:

    @de stijl: I’m thinking it’s wrong to call their wives fat and ugly, and suggest that their only value is their looks.

    As for their taste, their partisan filter blinds them.

    I get that. There was a time when Sarah Palin was quite the looker. Then she opened her mouth, and all sorts of attractive women who happened to look like her were suddenly less attractive.

    The crazy right wing freak at my job is convinced that the governor of South Dakota is hot. And that Any Coney Barret is hot. Makes me throw up in my mouth a little bit to see that level of … ugh. I guess it’s better than thinking they’re good people because he’s attracted to them, but… ugh.

    (He asked me if I would be a reference when he’s looking for work. I’ve told him only if it means he’s moving to South Dakota. He says he would like to, but there are no good jobs in the states he wants to move to… He doesn’t see a connection)

  76. CSK says:

    Boeing says it’s grounding 24 of its 777s.

  77. Jax says:

    @Kathy: I thought of you immediately when my friend in Denver posted a big, “obviously the outer plate from a plane engine” that landed a couple blocks up from her house as the story broke.

    The 2020’s are the gift that keeps on giving.

  78. de stijl says:


    The wives have nothing to do with it. Straight up.

    But if dudes are aggressing you let them know you see it and do not appreciate it.

    Sorry, that is my approach. It need not be yours. Be you.

    Sioux Falls has some high tech jobs. Depends on what he’s after.

    An ex is from Rapid City and I love that town.

    The intermountain West major cities are going to all be mini San Joses’ near future which is cool, but will also distort local real estate markets. Wealth distribution.

  79. de stijl says:


    I thought of the arc in Breaking Bad where a mid-air collision over Albuquerque rained debris down including one charred pink teddy bear that happened to fall into Walter White’s pool.

    Conveniently and thematically right next to that Lily Of The Valley planter pot.

  80. Teve says:


    My brothers are texting me that she is fat and ugly, because 1) a woman only has value so far as she gives them a stiffy,

    do your brothers have severe mental disabilities? Whether you agree with her politics or not, she’s 10 lbs of hot in a 5 lb bag.

  81. Kathy says:


    See? I hadn’t heard about that.

  82. Kathy says:


    The new 20s haven’t been good to Boeing (though the MAX disaster was uncovered in 2019, but that’s not decade compliant).

  83. Gustopher says:


    do your brothers have severe mental disabilities?

    Whenever I am asked what’s wrong with my brothers, I say “bad breeding.”

  84. Gustopher says:

    @de stijl:

    But if dudes are aggressing you let them know you see it and do not appreciate it.

    Sorry, that is my approach. It need not be yours. Be you.

    They are my brothers, which means they are close tissue matches. I don’t need any organs now, but if I ever do, being on good enough terms to know where they live is the first step in arranging some sort of “accident” that leaves them brain dead but with their organs intact.

    Crazy right wing guy at work? He’s not going to be a tissue match, so I’m free to piss him off. I can think of nothing worse than trying to get him promoted so he will stay longer at a job that really sucks and makes him miserable.

    I would leave, but my focus has been on and off for the entire pandemic… so why fuck up a good job? So much less pressure to do well when no one can. Currently building a list of better questions to ask when interviewing. “How long have you been here? How many of the people who interviewed you are still here?”)