ike, son of mike
@i-bresnick.bsky.social
dad, husband, jew, trekkie, zionist, executive, lawyer
in roughly that order
in roughly that order
Is that a meh because you don't believe a Jewish group when they point out Nazi symbols, or is it a meh because you like Nazi symbols and dislike Jewish groups?
December 3, 2025 at 10:21 PM
Is that a meh because you don't believe a Jewish group when they point out Nazi symbols, or is it a meh because you like Nazi symbols and dislike Jewish groups?
The only thing that Fetterman has been consistent about are his schlubby anesthetics. The left supported him against Lamb based on these aesthetics, and they support Platner for the same reason, and it'll be the same reason they get burned on him.
December 3, 2025 at 10:14 PM
The only thing that Fetterman has been consistent about are his schlubby anesthetics. The left supported him against Lamb based on these aesthetics, and they support Platner for the same reason, and it'll be the same reason they get burned on him.
Reposted by ike, son of mike
it didn’t *resemble* a nazi symbol, it *is* a nazi symbol, and he was told this, repeatedly, for years. tame your fucking boner for white working class cosplayers, this should be fucking embarrassing to write and publish under your own name
December 3, 2025 at 5:42 PM
it didn’t *resemble* a nazi symbol, it *is* a nazi symbol, and he was told this, repeatedly, for years. tame your fucking boner for white working class cosplayers, this should be fucking embarrassing to write and publish under your own name
Which instances?
December 3, 2025 at 5:04 AM
Which instances?
I think you were blocked for looking like a sockpuppet
December 3, 2025 at 4:59 AM
I think you were blocked for looking like a sockpuppet
Reposted by ike, son of mike
They were clear that Natives who couldn’t be brought to court were not subject to our jurisdiction because that is what jurisdiction means
December 3, 2025 at 4:47 AM
They were clear that Natives who couldn’t be brought to court were not subject to our jurisdiction because that is what jurisdiction means
Reposted by ike, son of mike
The sourcing in the quoted article is all like "unconfirmed watchdog reports" or "some guys said".
Unclear what really happened, but it matters that Obama definitely did not take a posture of "yeah I double-tapped them and I'll do you too if you keep whining about it"
Unclear what really happened, but it matters that Obama definitely did not take a posture of "yeah I double-tapped them and I'll do you too if you keep whining about it"
December 2, 2025 at 7:12 PM
The sourcing in the quoted article is all like "unconfirmed watchdog reports" or "some guys said".
Unclear what really happened, but it matters that Obama definitely did not take a posture of "yeah I double-tapped them and I'll do you too if you keep whining about it"
Unclear what really happened, but it matters that Obama definitely did not take a posture of "yeah I double-tapped them and I'll do you too if you keep whining about it"
What? Is this sarcasm?
December 3, 2025 at 4:00 AM
What? Is this sarcasm?
Reposted by ike, son of mike
No, this is a stupid comparison. The issue isn't "hitting the same target twice is not ok" - it absolutely can be. It's "hitting survivors of the first attack who are hors de combat and clinging to a destroyed ship is a war crime"
December 2, 2025 at 7:10 PM
No, this is a stupid comparison. The issue isn't "hitting the same target twice is not ok" - it absolutely can be. It's "hitting survivors of the first attack who are hors de combat and clinging to a destroyed ship is a war crime"
Like, that's "I got mad at a business I buy from, so I killed the boss there" which is actually a very broad category, distinct from "I murdered my abusive husband because I couldn't take it anymore," which I think is the distinction being drawn.
December 3, 2025 at 1:47 AM
Like, that's "I got mad at a business I buy from, so I killed the boss there" which is actually a very broad category, distinct from "I murdered my abusive husband because I couldn't take it anymore," which I think is the distinction being drawn.
So who's LM going to buy health insurance from next
December 3, 2025 at 1:46 AM
So who's LM going to buy health insurance from next
Reposted by ike, son of mike
If he were an average-looking for-profit nursing home heir instead of a hot one, people would be reacting differently.
December 2, 2025 at 6:45 PM
If he were an average-looking for-profit nursing home heir instead of a hot one, people would be reacting differently.
If you want the not evil people to do more to stop the evil people from going evil shit, you need to give the not evil people actual power to do so.
December 2, 2025 at 7:23 PM
If you want the not evil people to do more to stop the evil people from going evil shit, you need to give the not evil people actual power to do so.
Yeah, so it still sounds like Argentina chose to go to war
December 2, 2025 at 5:19 PM
Yeah, so it still sounds like Argentina chose to go to war
Hang on, didn't Argentina initiate the war with a military invasion of the "disputed" territory?
December 2, 2025 at 4:47 PM
Hang on, didn't Argentina initiate the war with a military invasion of the "disputed" territory?
Not in 2024 you didn't
December 2, 2025 at 4:23 PM
Not in 2024 you didn't
Okay, so then you had your open and fair primary in which you couldn't persuade any serious challenger to the incumbent president to step up, and then you advocated to discard the results of it anyway!
Not sure what you're complaining about, you got what you wanted.
Not sure what you're complaining about, you got what you wanted.
December 2, 2025 at 4:15 PM
Okay, so then you had your open and fair primary in which you couldn't persuade any serious challenger to the incumbent president to step up, and then you advocated to discard the results of it anyway!
Not sure what you're complaining about, you got what you wanted.
Not sure what you're complaining about, you got what you wanted.