JL
@jlwastooshort.bsky.social
150 followers 20 following 2.9K posts
Doggo. He/him. Religious, but not the sort you're probably thinking of. Not the other sort either. On the side of non-evil people everywhere. Alt where fewer of my posts will be angry about politics and society: @jlwastoopolitical.bsky.social
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Ahh yes, this day was having enough good vibes that the bluesky feed had to remind me that a good slice of the people notionally on my side are malevolent garbage. Must seek balance in all things.
Never forget the people who helped you get through 2020
I saw two frogs, one unicorn, and one lobster.
The funny thing was the occasional heckler who would go by. Dude, between the actual protestors and the cacophony of people honking and waving their support, you're outnumbered literally hundreds to one. Maybe roll a WIS check on this
Just got back from my protest in suburban Kansas. It was really cool. Not as big of a crowd as some of these cities, ofc, but again, suburb.
*gritting teeth* critical support
Reposted by JL
Remember back in January when all these sage politics-knowers were writing about how there had been a vibe shift and now the resistance was over?

lol. lmao.
Reposted by JL
ask not for whom the milkshake ducks: the milkshake ducks for thee
the reason why people like me and (I assume) OP talk about things like this is that this is a phenomenon we have observed. repeatedly.
but if one (not saying you! you may not be the the type I am speaking of!) is going to literally/figuratively slide into a Christian's mentions and mock them for, in OP's example, holding the Bible as a reliable source of scientific info, one might reasonably check that their target believes this.
I apologize if I was excessively unclear that I was referring to a particular type of interaction with a particular type of person. I am absolutely *not* talking about anyone who just goes around not believing in a deity, which I think is a lot of very good and reasonable people!
Well, in some sense the conspiracy theories are also a feature of reality. That is, for instance, I am exposed to the conspiracy theories as I move through the world, just as they are. But I elect not to believe them or to be influenced by those who do.
I don't think absolutely everyone who voted for him in 2024 is in that bucket. There are a lot who were just morons. But those are the ones you've seen peeled off already. The remainder, I think, are overwhelmingly the ones with "evil" written on their character sheet.
I mean, the thing is probably that they live in the same reality as us-- they see the same things we do. They just think those things are positives. They see derangement and abuse and criminality and think, "Yes. Give me that, please. More of that."
Let me clarify: I don't just mean that they see it as a major influence that must be engaged with and rebuked (obviously true!). I mean that they seem not to perceive that religion could be anything else. They engage with progressive Christians as though the latter were fundamentalists, e.g.
I actually woke up this morning and made a conscious decision that I was going to try to care less about who the citizens of Maine select.
Not in the framing of science specifically, but I definitely have observed the irony that a certain sort of atheist implicitly agrees with the fundamentalist that the fundamentalist's theology is the legitimate representative of Christian thought
Finally, having said my piece, I'm going to really try to care less about who the voters of Maine pick to represent them, as long as it's someone who won't be a fascist, a Collins, or even a Fetterman. It's gotten unhealthy for me.

Accordingly, I'm gonna mute this whole thread now. Have a good one.
Now also I was simplifying a bit when I implied the other candidates *can't* fix their issues. It's not literally impossible for someone to respond to a scandal in a way that restores their bona fides. I belive Platner is already trying. Will he succeed? Sure, maybe.
But it's a policy stance that they can more credibly evolve quickly on than, for instance, personal social media data points stretching back years. Unless they have a similar history of problematic policy statements about stuff like the filibuster, but afaik Mills doesn't; it's like one statement.
well, when I say the non-age factor for Mills, I meant her speaking against removal of the filibuster. Which is something that should be disqualifying for any current or prospective Dem senator at this point.
also I infer that, for whatever reason, they do not believe they can make a fake version and have it stick, because they've had more than enough time to do it at this juncture
said it before: as recently as earlier this year I thought there probably wouldn't be a real smoking gun in the Epstein files, but there is just a torrent of fear-diarrhea spilling out their collective diapers at this point, it no longer makes any sense for it to not be absolutely wild
Those Epstein files must be bad.

#KY04
TRUMP: CONGRESSMAN THOMAS MASSIE MUST BE THROWN OUT OF OFFICE
Reposted by JL
white house has joined bluesky
click here to block all official us government accounts instantly

bsky.app/profile/did:...