Chavez
@chavez78.bsky.social
Twitter refugee.
Master pintsmith.
Here for news, sports, and mindless tomfoolery.
Master pintsmith.
Here for news, sports, and mindless tomfoolery.
I have no idea what's real anymore. Which one is The Onion again?
September 30, 2025 at 2:53 PM
I have no idea what's real anymore. Which one is The Onion again?
May we survive the new CDC.
September 9, 2025 at 7:55 PM
May we survive the new CDC.
May 5, 2025 at 2:03 PM
I came to make a joke about Coofandy, but lo and behold, they have a website.
You can get coofandy clothing off of Amazon. The only problem is paying for shipping (which is free after a certain amount.)
MAGCOMSEN and TACVASEN better up their game!
You can get coofandy clothing off of Amazon. The only problem is paying for shipping (which is free after a certain amount.)
MAGCOMSEN and TACVASEN better up their game!
February 11, 2025 at 9:22 PM
I came to make a joke about Coofandy, but lo and behold, they have a website.
You can get coofandy clothing off of Amazon. The only problem is paying for shipping (which is free after a certain amount.)
MAGCOMSEN and TACVASEN better up their game!
You can get coofandy clothing off of Amazon. The only problem is paying for shipping (which is free after a certain amount.)
MAGCOMSEN and TACVASEN better up their game!
"My ancestors came here legally..."
Some food for thought for those of you who came by boat. Seems like "legally" is a pretty loose term.
Some food for thought for those of you who came by boat. Seems like "legally" is a pretty loose term.
February 2, 2025 at 10:01 PM
"My ancestors came here legally..."
Some food for thought for those of you who came by boat. Seems like "legally" is a pretty loose term.
Some food for thought for those of you who came by boat. Seems like "legally" is a pretty loose term.
Because you're unaware of the other definitions of the word. The likely answer is this one:
January 24, 2025 at 10:26 PM
Because you're unaware of the other definitions of the word. The likely answer is this one:
In the article:
It's entirely possible that it wasn't the committee who shared the information, especially if, as the article notes, medical records are stripped of personal details.
But sure, go on with your assumption. Next time read the article.
It's entirely possible that it wasn't the committee who shared the information, especially if, as the article notes, medical records are stripped of personal details.
But sure, go on with your assumption. Next time read the article.
November 22, 2024 at 3:56 PM
In the article:
It's entirely possible that it wasn't the committee who shared the information, especially if, as the article notes, medical records are stripped of personal details.
But sure, go on with your assumption. Next time read the article.
It's entirely possible that it wasn't the committee who shared the information, especially if, as the article notes, medical records are stripped of personal details.
But sure, go on with your assumption. Next time read the article.