Labrys provides twice the edge™
labyris.bsky.social
Labrys provides twice the edge™
@labyris.bsky.social
I'm not going to be nice about it.
Study how other countries did it. Uruguay provides a remarkably apt example.
November 15, 2025 at 3:34 PM
Honey, Epstein ain't got shit on the Catholic church.
November 15, 2025 at 7:16 AM
Not sure this is the solution. "Independent" isn't a party, it's the explicit rejection of partisan alignment.

Parties are useful when they function as organized voting blocs. Republicans do this extremely well, which is how they get things done.

Dems can't do it for shit, which is why they fail.
November 15, 2025 at 7:09 AM
Or we can form a new party. That's hardly unprecendented.
November 13, 2025 at 10:17 PM
...who is 14!

Yep, that's enough internet for me today.
November 13, 2025 at 6:07 PM
Don't post shit like this.
November 13, 2025 at 6:05 PM
That is equal parts correct and disgusting.
November 13, 2025 at 5:56 PM
"People don't vote for candidates who don't represent them" is quite precisely how elections work in a representative democracy.

Here's an idea Democrats could try: represent the left.

Conservatives already have a party that's doing a great job for them. They don't need both.

or whatever.
November 13, 2025 at 5:52 PM
That's your dad?

Wow.

I wish he was mine, too.
November 13, 2025 at 5:31 PM
In fairness to the OG golden calfers: how could they know what they did was wrong? They hadn't gotten the law yet.

That law was only thing God ever wrote in its own hand, the most holy sacred object ever, entrusted to Moses who, in a fit of pique, smashed it.

Whose was the greater blasphemy?
November 13, 2025 at 5:25 PM
I seldom see a correction taken with such grace.

Well done, you.
November 13, 2025 at 5:05 PM
I appreciate your willingness, but our best estimates suggest something less than 1% of sex-offenses go to trial.

It's horrifying that female witness to property crimes are treated as presumptively credible, but when she witnesses the criminal violation of her own body, she's not.
November 13, 2025 at 5:02 PM
"It's not illegal if the president does it" insisted Nixon, who escaped criminal consequences via a sleazy deal he made with his similarly amoral successor.

The worst of Nixon's scumbag staffers scuttled over to the Ford Admin, then Reagan, Bush, then other Bush.

Then Trump. It's not coincidence.
November 13, 2025 at 4:42 PM
The US intelligence community, including military intel, knows EXACTLY what Trump has been up to for decades.

They knew he was a traitor long before we all watched him attempt an auto-coup in real-time.

They have done nothing to stop him, protect our nation, or protect us from him.

Complicit.
November 13, 2025 at 4:34 PM
And if they accept it, they'll suddenly discover a bottomless well of forgiveness deep within their Christian hearts.

Forgiveness that applies to literally nobody else.
November 13, 2025 at 4:24 PM
Yes, but until Dems follow through with prosecutions this is grandstanding.

Biden put a limpdick Federalist Society enthusiast in charge of the DOJ, Garland spun his chair for 4 years, now here we are.

Well I'm done with that shit. Want my vote? Guarantee prosecutions. I'll accept nothing less.
November 13, 2025 at 4:20 PM
Sex-offenders do favors for other sex-offenders.

Which is why so few cops will arrest them, but when they do, so few prosecutors put them on trial, but when they do, so few juries will convict them, but when they do, so few judges will actually punish them.

Sex-offenders do favors for each other.
November 13, 2025 at 4:00 PM
The Bureau of Prisons determines an inmate's security level using a classification system that considers each inmate's crime, behavior, and history via a multi-step process to calculate a "security score."

Then Trump ignores all that because, well...what do laws or regulations matter to criminals?
November 13, 2025 at 3:54 PM