Andrew Parker
@andrewparker.bsky.social
Formerly of the birdsite as Apark2453, but staking my claim to the full name!
Lawyer, overanalyzer of godawful subcultures, always up to dunk on some chuds.
If you’re into all of that too… I’m sorry, but welcome friend!
Lawyer, overanalyzer of godawful subcultures, always up to dunk on some chuds.
If you’re into all of that too… I’m sorry, but welcome friend!
Weird how the same researchers found both that brain development is “not a question of steady progression, but rather one of a few major turning points” and “epochs were defined by the brain remaining on a constant trend of development.”
Does “constant” not mean what I think it does?
Does “constant” not mean what I think it does?
November 26, 2025 at 2:52 AM
Weird how the same researchers found both that brain development is “not a question of steady progression, but rather one of a few major turning points” and “epochs were defined by the brain remaining on a constant trend of development.”
Does “constant” not mean what I think it does?
Does “constant” not mean what I think it does?
What’s fascinating is that in trying to find this article, my Google search yielded two seemingly-identical articles written two years apart from IFS:
Do they just have an annual “won’t anyone please think of the childless men” article?
Do they just have an annual “won’t anyone please think of the childless men” article?
November 24, 2025 at 4:45 PM
What’s fascinating is that in trying to find this article, my Google search yielded two seemingly-identical articles written two years apart from IFS:
Do they just have an annual “won’t anyone please think of the childless men” article?
Do they just have an annual “won’t anyone please think of the childless men” article?
And it’s not just a normal “not buying shit is bad for the economy generally because our economy requires constant consumerism to function” bit.
It’s the risk older electronics pose to “economic dynamism.”
It’s the risk older electronics pose to “economic dynamism.”
November 24, 2025 at 1:37 AM
And it’s not just a normal “not buying shit is bad for the economy generally because our economy requires constant consumerism to function” bit.
It’s the risk older electronics pose to “economic dynamism.”
It’s the risk older electronics pose to “economic dynamism.”
Apparently she was on the city council, but my thing is more that if you sincerely think it's as simple as "announce a mass rally of tens of thousands" or "I would launch a mass campaign for free transit and free childcare and build a militant movement to win", fucking do it.
November 23, 2025 at 2:46 AM
Apparently she was on the city council, but my thing is more that if you sincerely think it's as simple as "announce a mass rally of tens of thousands" or "I would launch a mass campaign for free transit and free childcare and build a militant movement to win", fucking do it.
It’s especially weird considering the only founding father who (according to Pence’s article) directly said anything about Israel.
The rest is just “the founding fathers were cool with Jews” which is neat! But conflating that with “championed the return of Jews to Israel” is part of the problem.
The rest is just “the founding fathers were cool with Jews” which is neat! But conflating that with “championed the return of Jews to Israel” is part of the problem.
November 21, 2025 at 6:04 PM
It’s especially weird considering the only founding father who (according to Pence’s article) directly said anything about Israel.
The rest is just “the founding fathers were cool with Jews” which is neat! But conflating that with “championed the return of Jews to Israel” is part of the problem.
The rest is just “the founding fathers were cool with Jews” which is neat! But conflating that with “championed the return of Jews to Israel” is part of the problem.
In case anyone needs it, this is from the current Manual for Courts Martial issued by the DoD’s (now DoW) Joint Service Committee.
Article 92 subjects a member of the armed services to court martial for failing to obey a *lawful* order. An order contrary to the constitution or US law is not lawful.
Article 92 subjects a member of the armed services to court martial for failing to obey a *lawful* order. An order contrary to the constitution or US law is not lawful.
November 20, 2025 at 8:21 PM
In case anyone needs it, this is from the current Manual for Courts Martial issued by the DoD’s (now DoW) Joint Service Committee.
Article 92 subjects a member of the armed services to court martial for failing to obey a *lawful* order. An order contrary to the constitution or US law is not lawful.
Article 92 subjects a member of the armed services to court martial for failing to obey a *lawful* order. An order contrary to the constitution or US law is not lawful.
Since I nabbed a screenshot before I got blocked, for posterity:
November 18, 2025 at 7:30 PM
Since I nabbed a screenshot before I got blocked, for posterity:
I feel like I'm losing my mind. The "we're in the studio making this photo" photo and the photo shown at the end aren't the same, but it's not like one is a work-in-progress of the other either.
Hell, the polka-dot arm that he takes during the video isn't in the photo at the beginning.
Hell, the polka-dot arm that he takes during the video isn't in the photo at the beginning.
November 12, 2025 at 5:01 AM
I feel like I'm losing my mind. The "we're in the studio making this photo" photo and the photo shown at the end aren't the same, but it's not like one is a work-in-progress of the other either.
Hell, the polka-dot arm that he takes during the video isn't in the photo at the beginning.
Hell, the polka-dot arm that he takes during the video isn't in the photo at the beginning.
I keep returning to this because I simply can't put into words how insane it is to compare "presuming the leader of the Senate Democratic Caucus has a hand in leading it" to antisemitic tropes about Jews "secretly controlling everything from the shadows"
It's not a secret, it's literally his title.
It's not a secret, it's literally his title.
November 11, 2025 at 5:01 AM
I keep returning to this because I simply can't put into words how insane it is to compare "presuming the leader of the Senate Democratic Caucus has a hand in leading it" to antisemitic tropes about Jews "secretly controlling everything from the shadows"
It's not a secret, it's literally his title.
It's not a secret, it's literally his title.
This also applies to the purported RIF "protections". Unless, again, I'm missing something pretty substantial, this only stops Trump "between the date of enactment of this Act and the date specified in section 106(3)."
So until January 30. He can fire everyone again in three months?
So until January 30. He can fire everyone again in three months?
November 10, 2025 at 1:15 AM
This also applies to the purported RIF "protections". Unless, again, I'm missing something pretty substantial, this only stops Trump "between the date of enactment of this Act and the date specified in section 106(3)."
So until January 30. He can fire everyone again in three months?
So until January 30. He can fire everyone again in three months?
Tear gas refers to the entire category of lachrymatory agents, not to any specific chemical. OC gas is a form of tear gas. See e.g., this from the Oregon Dept. of Environmental Quality.
This would be like saying "they clarified that they beat the baby with a tonfa, not a baton."
This would be like saying "they clarified that they beat the baby with a tonfa, not a baton."
November 9, 2025 at 1:27 AM
Tear gas refers to the entire category of lachrymatory agents, not to any specific chemical. OC gas is a form of tear gas. See e.g., this from the Oregon Dept. of Environmental Quality.
This would be like saying "they clarified that they beat the baby with a tonfa, not a baton."
This would be like saying "they clarified that they beat the baby with a tonfa, not a baton."
“I hear this in personal conversation with lots of people but few people are saying it out loud” is the kind of statement only Charles Xavier can say with a straight face.
November 6, 2025 at 12:44 PM
“I hear this in personal conversation with lots of people but few people are saying it out loud” is the kind of statement only Charles Xavier can say with a straight face.
Honeybear, Clearsky thinks it’s reporting data from February 2024 and Bluesky only has 25 million accounts.
November 4, 2025 at 3:56 PM
Honeybear, Clearsky thinks it’s reporting data from February 2024 and Bluesky only has 25 million accounts.
Weirdly, I remember tons of stories from the New York Times covering Trump campaign events focused on crowd size.
“Record crowd”, “packed arena”, not just “here’s what was said at this rally of some number of people”
“Record crowd”, “packed arena”, not just “here’s what was said at this rally of some number of people”
October 18, 2025 at 11:02 PM
Weirdly, I remember tons of stories from the New York Times covering Trump campaign events focused on crowd size.
“Record crowd”, “packed arena”, not just “here’s what was said at this rally of some number of people”
“Record crowd”, “packed arena”, not just “here’s what was said at this rally of some number of people”
This is, obviously, not the most important part of the article. But good god is this a weird way to describe the lyrics to the Ghostbuster’s theme.
October 15, 2025 at 4:01 PM
This is, obviously, not the most important part of the article. But good god is this a weird way to describe the lyrics to the Ghostbuster’s theme.
Did a chatbot write this?
October 8, 2025 at 9:30 PM
Did a chatbot write this?
Unless it’s saying certain bigoted assholes should rest in piss.
Or running a blocklist identifying fans of a notorious sex pest voice actor.
Those are definitely things you can’t “just do”.
Or running a blocklist identifying fans of a notorious sex pest voice actor.
Those are definitely things you can’t “just do”.
October 3, 2025 at 12:26 AM
Unless it’s saying certain bigoted assholes should rest in piss.
Or running a blocklist identifying fans of a notorious sex pest voice actor.
Those are definitely things you can’t “just do”.
Or running a blocklist identifying fans of a notorious sex pest voice actor.
Those are definitely things you can’t “just do”.
For the record: the deleted post and original article referred to “the autism problem” that Trump “wants to solve”.
Please explain, for the record, what “more specific context” was needed to discover that referring to a group of people as “the ___ problem” in need of a “solution” was wrong.
Please explain, for the record, what “more specific context” was needed to discover that referring to a group of people as “the ___ problem” in need of a “solution” was wrong.
September 24, 2025 at 3:21 AM
For the record: the deleted post and original article referred to “the autism problem” that Trump “wants to solve”.
Please explain, for the record, what “more specific context” was needed to discover that referring to a group of people as “the ___ problem” in need of a “solution” was wrong.
Please explain, for the record, what “more specific context” was needed to discover that referring to a group of people as “the ___ problem” in need of a “solution” was wrong.
Two mistakes in the first paragraph.
First “Utah prosecutors claimed” is not “more evidence has emerged”. Now more than ever “cop or lawyer of a right-wing government said so” can’t be mistaken for “evidence”.
Second, no carefulness in choice of words would have mattered.
Not your best work.
First “Utah prosecutors claimed” is not “more evidence has emerged”. Now more than ever “cop or lawyer of a right-wing government said so” can’t be mistaken for “evidence”.
Second, no carefulness in choice of words would have mattered.
Not your best work.
September 18, 2025 at 9:14 PM
Two mistakes in the first paragraph.
First “Utah prosecutors claimed” is not “more evidence has emerged”. Now more than ever “cop or lawyer of a right-wing government said so” can’t be mistaken for “evidence”.
Second, no carefulness in choice of words would have mattered.
Not your best work.
First “Utah prosecutors claimed” is not “more evidence has emerged”. Now more than ever “cop or lawyer of a right-wing government said so” can’t be mistaken for “evidence”.
Second, no carefulness in choice of words would have mattered.
Not your best work.
Perhaps doing a last-minute google search for "track suit squat" to arrive at the conclusion "ackshually this meme did not originate from the pepe version therefore he probably knows it from the slav squat not from its association with Pepe I am very smart" may not be the best analysis.
2/2
2/2
September 13, 2025 at 2:09 AM
Perhaps doing a last-minute google search for "track suit squat" to arrive at the conclusion "ackshually this meme did not originate from the pepe version therefore he probably knows it from the slav squat not from its association with Pepe I am very smart" may not be the best analysis.
2/2
2/2
If you don’t already know that one of these means “loss” and the other (if posted on 4chan) is a rape joke, and why, you’d have to be pretty committed to listen to me go through all the layers of abstraction to explain it.
And I’ll sound like an absolute lunatic explaining it.
2/
And I’ll sound like an absolute lunatic explaining it.
2/
September 12, 2025 at 7:39 PM
If you don’t already know that one of these means “loss” and the other (if posted on 4chan) is a rape joke, and why, you’d have to be pretty committed to listen to me go through all the layers of abstraction to explain it.
And I’ll sound like an absolute lunatic explaining it.
2/
And I’ll sound like an absolute lunatic explaining it.
2/
I know no one needs proof we’re in hell, but goddamn.
Michael Cohen having a podcast talking to notorious grifter and perpetual L recipient Allison Gill simply should not be in any just world.
Michael Cohen having a podcast talking to notorious grifter and perpetual L recipient Allison Gill simply should not be in any just world.
September 12, 2025 at 5:55 PM
I know no one needs proof we’re in hell, but goddamn.
Michael Cohen having a podcast talking to notorious grifter and perpetual L recipient Allison Gill simply should not be in any just world.
Michael Cohen having a podcast talking to notorious grifter and perpetual L recipient Allison Gill simply should not be in any just world.
This is a perfect example of the fascinating semiotics to the concepts of violence and legitimacy.
Is the violence against trans people and immigrants Kirk has helped bring about not violence? Is violence brought about through politics somehow apolitical?
1/
Is the violence against trans people and immigrants Kirk has helped bring about not violence? Is violence brought about through politics somehow apolitical?
1/
September 11, 2025 at 1:37 AM
This is a perfect example of the fascinating semiotics to the concepts of violence and legitimacy.
Is the violence against trans people and immigrants Kirk has helped bring about not violence? Is violence brought about through politics somehow apolitical?
1/
Is the violence against trans people and immigrants Kirk has helped bring about not violence? Is violence brought about through politics somehow apolitical?
1/
Incidentally, I was trying to find what if anything Yglesias had ever actually done that earned such a prominent voice in politics.
I didn’t find that, but I did find this:
And I can’t tell if it’s pure projection or some amount of introspection the brain worms took from him.
I didn’t find that, but I did find this:
And I can’t tell if it’s pure projection or some amount of introspection the brain worms took from him.
August 28, 2025 at 4:26 PM
Incidentally, I was trying to find what if anything Yglesias had ever actually done that earned such a prominent voice in politics.
I didn’t find that, but I did find this:
And I can’t tell if it’s pure projection or some amount of introspection the brain worms took from him.
I didn’t find that, but I did find this:
And I can’t tell if it’s pure projection or some amount of introspection the brain worms took from him.
How anyone can read this analysis and think “yep this seems very smart and thoughtful” baffles me.
“Probably isn’t true… probably costs them at least a few votes… probably hurts Republicans”
“Probably isn’t true… probably costs them at least a few votes… probably hurts Republicans”
August 28, 2025 at 4:18 PM
How anyone can read this analysis and think “yep this seems very smart and thoughtful” baffles me.
“Probably isn’t true… probably costs them at least a few votes… probably hurts Republicans”
“Probably isn’t true… probably costs them at least a few votes… probably hurts Republicans”