aust.in.determinate
@abw56.bsky.social
Used to wrangle students, now I wrangle data. Snake River, Smoky Mountains, and forever a proud wife guy. Not a Know-Nothing.
Pinned
aust.in.determinate
@abw56.bsky.social
· Jan 20
all i'm saying is that today could have been a beautiful day
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
this gets to the fundamental lawlessness. the difference between law as a game and law as a tool of government.
birthright citizenship is the law. nothing has changed. the documents are the same. if that can change based on *nothing*, you don't have a real constitution in the first place.
birthright citizenship is the law. nothing has changed. the documents are the same. if that can change based on *nothing*, you don't have a real constitution in the first place.
also, let’s say wurman is right. well, we have had nearly 160 years of unlimited birthright citizenship that has been affirmed again and again by generations of Americans. whatever the original intent, that is what the birthright clause *means*.
December 7, 2025 at 7:40 PM
this gets to the fundamental lawlessness. the difference between law as a game and law as a tool of government.
birthright citizenship is the law. nothing has changed. the documents are the same. if that can change based on *nothing*, you don't have a real constitution in the first place.
birthright citizenship is the law. nothing has changed. the documents are the same. if that can change based on *nothing*, you don't have a real constitution in the first place.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
It is both deeply ironic and profoundly funny that all these overconfident maga chud dudebros are convinced they'll be at the top of a meritocratic system, when in reality they're actually the ones who've benefited most from what they themselves characterize as non-meritocratic factors.
Ending DEI practices in college admissions will expose an uncomfortable truth. Women now outperform men academically.
If universities stop trying to gender balance incoming classes but instead admit based on merit, they’ll reject men at higher rates than they do today.
If universities stop trying to gender balance incoming classes but instead admit based on merit, they’ll reject men at higher rates than they do today.
Trump’s attack on DEI may hurt college men, particularly White men
The Trump administration’s ban on diversity, equity and inclusion also targets gender. The ban may impact gender balancing practices that often benefit college men.
www.washingtonpost.com
December 7, 2025 at 6:25 PM
It is both deeply ironic and profoundly funny that all these overconfident maga chud dudebros are convinced they'll be at the top of a meritocratic system, when in reality they're actually the ones who've benefited most from what they themselves characterize as non-meritocratic factors.
This was Tom Cotton's last townhall.
If there's one thing I'd change about Congress, it'd be a minimum requirement of in-person time in your jurisdiction with no entrance restrictions based on campaign donation or political affiliation.
It's a joke this isn't already a baseline expectation.
If there's one thing I'd change about Congress, it'd be a minimum requirement of in-person time in your jurisdiction with no entrance restrictions based on campaign donation or political affiliation.
It's a joke this isn't already a baseline expectation.
None of these guys are as tough as they like to pretend. Despite all his bluster, Tom Cotton has been afraid to set foot in a room with his own constituents since he was thoroughly defanged by them at a townhall in 2017.
www.nwaonline.com/news/2017/fe...
www.nwaonline.com/news/2017/fe...
"I will die," Springdale woman tells Cotton | Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., faced a loud, angry and capacity crowd of about 2,000 Wednesday in a town hall meeting in the usually safe conservative enclave of Springdale.
www.nwaonline.com
December 7, 2025 at 5:09 PM
This was Tom Cotton's last townhall.
If there's one thing I'd change about Congress, it'd be a minimum requirement of in-person time in your jurisdiction with no entrance restrictions based on campaign donation or political affiliation.
It's a joke this isn't already a baseline expectation.
If there's one thing I'd change about Congress, it'd be a minimum requirement of in-person time in your jurisdiction with no entrance restrictions based on campaign donation or political affiliation.
It's a joke this isn't already a baseline expectation.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
At some point someone just needs to say “you are an indecent person, you are lying to cover the slaughter of defenseless men, you know you are lying, and even under the tenets of your own professed faith you will certainly burn in hell if you continue down this path”
WELKER: Isn't it possible that even the act of taking off a t shirt could've been part of an attempt to get attention for help?
TOM COTTON: Or it could've been an attempt to signal to another cartel boat to come pick them up and pick up the cargo
TOM COTTON: Or it could've been an attempt to signal to another cartel boat to come pick them up and pick up the cargo
December 7, 2025 at 3:55 PM
At some point someone just needs to say “you are an indecent person, you are lying to cover the slaughter of defenseless men, you know you are lying, and even under the tenets of your own professed faith you will certainly burn in hell if you continue down this path”
Don't love Jeffries as leader, or Cuellar as a member of the caucus, but causing Trump to publicly crash out and admit his corrupt intent (while washing Cuellar the stink of a backroom dealing) is probably the best result you can get out of this situation.
I still would have voted Cisneros though.
I still would have voted Cisneros though.
Trump rages that Henry Cuellar didn’t pay him back for a pardon by switching parties, blasting Cuellar for a “lack of LOYALTY.”
In other words, Trump admits he was trying to use his pardon power to buy Republicans a House seat.
In other words, Trump admits he was trying to use his pardon power to buy Republicans a House seat.
December 7, 2025 at 4:33 PM
Don't love Jeffries as leader, or Cuellar as a member of the caucus, but causing Trump to publicly crash out and admit his corrupt intent (while washing Cuellar the stink of a backroom dealing) is probably the best result you can get out of this situation.
I still would have voted Cisneros though.
I still would have voted Cisneros though.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
This continues to be why I will never give full legitimacy to the "gerontocracy" arguments. The way that Trump is currently being treated by news media makes it exceptionally clear that their main beef with Biden was him being Biden—not his age, physical/mental health, or fitness for the job.
It really is amazing that the president has a noticeable an unexplained physical ailment that is disfiguring his right hand and there's no reporting about it. The White House's line is that it's from Trump shaking too many hands! Something is clearly being covered up.
December 7, 2025 at 1:28 PM
This continues to be why I will never give full legitimacy to the "gerontocracy" arguments. The way that Trump is currently being treated by news media makes it exceptionally clear that their main beef with Biden was him being Biden—not his age, physical/mental health, or fitness for the job.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
Assigned's mentions for this post are flooded with people who want to jeer at Biden so may I just say: When a Democratic former president makes a point of standing up for trans rights in a situation where he is absolutely not required to do so, for God's sake, just take the W.
6 Dec 2025 @rikiwilchins.bsky.social -- Biden, generally a lukewarm backer of trans rights as President, uses Intl International LGBTQ+ Leaders Conference speech to slam Reps/Trump for turning trans rights into "political football...into something scary, something sinister."
Joe Biden slams Republicans for turning transgender rights into ‘political football’
The former president gave a speech expressing support for LGBTQ+ rights at an LGBTQ+ leaders conference on Friday
www.theguardian.com
December 7, 2025 at 12:02 PM
Assigned's mentions for this post are flooded with people who want to jeer at Biden so may I just say: When a Democratic former president makes a point of standing up for trans rights in a situation where he is absolutely not required to do so, for God's sake, just take the W.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
just a reminder as you read this very lovely thread of Charles Sumner-posting: Casten’s reputation is that of a business-friendly moderate.
the caucus may or may not be able to do anything about this, which may or may not be a real threat.
but they are *pissed*
the caucus may or may not be able to do anything about this, which may or may not be a real threat.
but they are *pissed*
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 7, 2025 at 4:02 AM
just a reminder as you read this very lovely thread of Charles Sumner-posting: Casten’s reputation is that of a business-friendly moderate.
the caucus may or may not be able to do anything about this, which may or may not be a real threat.
but they are *pissed*
the caucus may or may not be able to do anything about this, which may or may not be a real threat.
but they are *pissed*
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
Not a criticism of this (excellent!) thread, or Casten in particular, but I do think Democrats need to start laying out clear, definitive and escalatory steps they plan to take in response if/when SCOTUS goes through with this.
The 14th Amendment says that all people born in America, regardless of race are citizens and have a right to equal protection under the law. For SCOTUS to be remotely confused on that text speaks to their racism, not the Constitution (1/3) www.cnn.com/2025/12/05/p...
Supreme Court agrees to decide if Trump may end birthright citizenship | CNN Politics
The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide if President Donald Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship with an executive order is constitutional, offering the justices an opportunity to revisit w...
www.cnn.com
December 7, 2025 at 4:08 AM
Not a criticism of this (excellent!) thread, or Casten in particular, but I do think Democrats need to start laying out clear, definitive and escalatory steps they plan to take in response if/when SCOTUS goes through with this.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
I am entirely here for Turbolib Sean Casten.
I'd also note they already invalidated Section 3 that says that you can't hold federal office if you engaged in insurrection against the United States. These are not judges impartially applying the law. They are racist despots who despise American progress. (3/3)
December 7, 2025 at 3:52 AM
I am entirely here for Turbolib Sean Casten.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
without birthright citizenship in the united states, you don't have a democracy and you don't have rule of law.
revoking birthright citizenship gives fascists free rein to purge the country of literally anyone they don't like. it opens the door to atrocities and mass murder. i am not exaggerating.
revoking birthright citizenship gives fascists free rein to purge the country of literally anyone they don't like. it opens the door to atrocities and mass murder. i am not exaggerating.
December 7, 2025 at 3:24 AM
without birthright citizenship in the united states, you don't have a democracy and you don't have rule of law.
revoking birthright citizenship gives fascists free rein to purge the country of literally anyone they don't like. it opens the door to atrocities and mass murder. i am not exaggerating.
revoking birthright citizenship gives fascists free rein to purge the country of literally anyone they don't like. it opens the door to atrocities and mass murder. i am not exaggerating.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
all of these people need to go to prison and most of them need to die there
> they were “identified terrorist targets”
>> neat, you don’t have an AUMF
>> even if there were one, they were SHIPWRECKED and hors de combat
> we were actually targeting *the cocaine*
>> by your own admission IT WAS NOT HEADED TO THE UNITED STATES
>> neat, you don’t have an AUMF
>> even if there were one, they were SHIPWRECKED and hors de combat
> we were actually targeting *the cocaine*
>> by your own admission IT WAS NOT HEADED TO THE UNITED STATES
So “the shipments directly threaten Americans” huh? The shipments were headed to the U.S. then?
…
…
Oh. Okay.
…
…
Oh. Okay.
December 7, 2025 at 2:29 AM
all of these people need to go to prison and most of them need to die there
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
If you've ever been to a naturalization ceremony, you know they're filled with people whose palpable love of this country is twenty times stronger than the pinched "patriotism" of any native-born MAGA chud.
Just unspeakable assholery.
Just unspeakable assholery.
December 7, 2025 at 12:45 AM
If you've ever been to a naturalization ceremony, you know they're filled with people whose palpable love of this country is twenty times stronger than the pinched "patriotism" of any native-born MAGA chud.
Just unspeakable assholery.
Just unspeakable assholery.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
i don't want a unifying Dem who promises to return to good government.
i want an angel of death who promises the government the reconstruction amendments promise.
i want an angel of death who promises the government the reconstruction amendments promise.
December 6, 2025 at 11:08 PM
i don't want a unifying Dem who promises to return to good government.
i want an angel of death who promises the government the reconstruction amendments promise.
i want an angel of death who promises the government the reconstruction amendments promise.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
i don't want to win a unifying 70-30.
i want to win 51-49 based on promises of vengeance.
i want to win 51-49 based on promises of vengeance.
I don’t want to vote for a Democrat who promises to get Trump’s voters to vote for them. I want a Democrat who wants to put Trump in prison
December 6, 2025 at 11:06 PM
i don't want to win a unifying 70-30.
i want to win 51-49 based on promises of vengeance.
i want to win 51-49 based on promises of vengeance.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
Elon Musk is worse at hiding it but this is the problem with all billionaires: they are a threat to democratic governance. They have an insatiable need to own and control everything. If you want to be free you have to curb their power, and demand political leaders who understand that
Elon Musk is against the European Union being the European Union —he posted this after X (fka Twitter) was fined for violations of the EU’s Digital Services Act.
December 6, 2025 at 9:07 PM
Elon Musk is worse at hiding it but this is the problem with all billionaires: they are a threat to democratic governance. They have an insatiable need to own and control everything. If you want to be free you have to curb their power, and demand political leaders who understand that
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
people died for birthright citizenship. i get that it’s more fun to be a pundit when your team has the white house and you get to brag to friends about visiting the oval office; but what i’m wondering is if maybe that’s actually not a good reason to throw away something we fought a civil war to win?
December 6, 2025 at 4:39 PM
people died for birthright citizenship. i get that it’s more fun to be a pundit when your team has the white house and you get to brag to friends about visiting the oval office; but what i’m wondering is if maybe that’s actually not a good reason to throw away something we fought a civil war to win?
Matt has a broken-clock quality about him, but he shouldn't ever be forgiven for making this hard right turn on the 14th Amendment after writing an entire book called One Billion Americans.
I continue to think that Matty coming out against birthright citizenship a few months ago should have been taken as a major warning sign that the group chats have already decided to surrender on this.
December 6, 2025 at 11:06 PM
Matt has a broken-clock quality about him, but he shouldn't ever be forgiven for making this hard right turn on the 14th Amendment after writing an entire book called One Billion Americans.
Musk is the prototypical Davos Man. Any government that can tell him no is by definition too big.
Elon Musk is against the European Union being the European Union —he posted this after X (fka Twitter) was fined for violations of the EU’s Digital Services Act.
December 6, 2025 at 11:01 PM
Musk is the prototypical Davos Man. Any government that can tell him no is by definition too big.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
I don’t want to vote for a Democrat who promises to get Trump’s voters to vote for them. I want a Democrat who wants to put Trump in prison
December 6, 2025 at 9:29 PM
I don’t want to vote for a Democrat who promises to get Trump’s voters to vote for them. I want a Democrat who wants to put Trump in prison
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
This is part of why I'm bearish on if there will be much of an ongoing cult of Trump after he's gone. They'll keep invoking him for a while only to bitterly bicker amongst themselves about who gets to claim him, which is incompatible with him continuing to be any kind of unified rallying point.
see the thing about them all being the worst people in the world is that even when one of them gets killed they can't create a proper cult of martyrdom around him because the others get jealous he's getting all the attention.
I'm not quite sure where to start
December 6, 2025 at 9:36 PM
This is part of why I'm bearish on if there will be much of an ongoing cult of Trump after he's gone. They'll keep invoking him for a while only to bitterly bicker amongst themselves about who gets to claim him, which is incompatible with him continuing to be any kind of unified rallying point.
This was the key piece Obama missed after '08.
Mobilizing to vote is necessary. Mobilizing to govern is essential.
Mobilizing to vote is necessary. Mobilizing to govern is essential.
Mamdani: Oftentimes when we win elections, we tell people to go home and just trust us. But the message really has to be that we want you to come along with us… That’s something we’ve been looking to share with New Yorkers: We want to not only win with New Yorkers, but also govern with New Yorkers.
December 6, 2025 at 6:56 PM
This was the key piece Obama missed after '08.
Mobilizing to vote is necessary. Mobilizing to govern is essential.
Mobilizing to vote is necessary. Mobilizing to govern is essential.
Not a biblical scholar here, but if I remember right when Jesus performed his miracles he insisted on people being quiet about it, not smashing that subscribe button.
December 6, 2025 at 3:40 PM
Not a biblical scholar here, but if I remember right when Jesus performed his miracles he insisted on people being quiet about it, not smashing that subscribe button.
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
These blatantly skewed maps in states like Texas & Indiana are direct result of Roberts Court decision in 2019 essentially legalizing extreme partisan gerrymandering which doesn’t get enough attention as one of worst things court has done www.motherjones.com/politics/202...
December 5, 2025 at 8:26 PM
These blatantly skewed maps in states like Texas & Indiana are direct result of Roberts Court decision in 2019 essentially legalizing extreme partisan gerrymandering which doesn’t get enough attention as one of worst things court has done www.motherjones.com/politics/202...
Reposted by aust.in.determinate
the next generation of liberal leaders are going to have to be of the "we have to make hard choices now so that our children will have easier choices when it's their turn" variety
December 5, 2025 at 9:22 PM
the next generation of liberal leaders are going to have to be of the "we have to make hard choices now so that our children will have easier choices when it's their turn" variety