followed tags: 11
followed domains: 0
badges given: 12 of 12
member for: 1526 days
Man, I'm three kids into my adult life. Dad jokes are my bread and butter; Wait, Wait is the mead I wash it down with. I do have the self respect to groan whenever Paula Poundstone makes a joke, though.
I'd like the New Yorker Radio Hour more if David Remnick didn't sound like such a milksop. Dude talks like he has little suspenders for his socks that attach to his underpants
Somebody already loves him
Coulda sworn I posted the video for "believer" here way back when, but search isn't showing it. Coulda been with my old ghosted account.
Fuck it, great song, great album:
That's a live show I wouldn't mind seeing.
- Trump’s young staffers also rely on old standbys near the White House: POV, the rooftop bar at the W Hotel that overlooks the White House; Old Ebbitt Grill, a quintessential antebellum Washington establishment; and Joe’s, a seafood and steak spot, are favorites. So are the nearby restaurant-bar The Hamilton and Blackfinn, a gastropub off Farragut Square. Some staffers prefer the Exchange Saloon, a no-frills sports bar just west of the White House. One young former Health and Human Services official confides that Rebellion, a Southern-themed establishment farther north, near U Street, is “one of the few closet Trump bars” in town.
A cynical reader might interpret this as less of a human interest piece and more of a map of where to go to heckle beleaguered Trump staffers...
- the preponderance of American pop music is based on the beat of two and four," he says. "You'll have a lot of cultural influences that cause people to do one and three. I remember being in the Vienna Stadthalle — the town hall in Vienna, with about 12,000 people in it — and it was, like, Teutonic.
Dude, the Northeast suxxx. You ever been anywhere in the Northeast where you didn't think, "this'd be great if it weren't for the traffic and the accent and the racism and winters that made you want to kill yourself"?
Is any job worth the Northeast gawddamn
Ohoho, I'm not an MD. That'd break me. I'm an ED RN. At least I don't technically have to take my work home with me. Work is still grueling. Or maybe I'm just not cut out for the stress.
Beats are put together on a Roland SP-555 using soundbanks from the CR78 and the 808. Think I used some LinnDrum samples as well. All synth sounds are built on a Microkorg. Bass is some shitpot Chinese knockoff I got for $75 at Guitar Center. At some point I realized pushing all the stuff I was recording through an old Aiwa boombox gave it a nice warmth, added cool distortion and also compressed sounds better than Protools' free shitty compression algorithm.
Can't find it on youtube, just log into spotify
Never has an ode to an ancient Sufi mystic sounded so. Fucking. Funky gawddamn. Track is 25 min long and I can't stop listening and my wife is upstairs being like "honey are you coming to bed" and I'm all "up in a sec I gotta jam with my man Qualandar for a few more bars"
By the way mk for some reason if you post a raw link to spotify instead of embedding it just leaves a blank space. Ex.:
This article made me feel like I've been relying on some reductive-ass thinking re. Hearts and Minds for a long time. Kinda took it as gospel that of course we have to win over the community leaders in Kandahar if we want to get anywhere in Afghanistan. Never tried to apply that kind of logic to my own city. What are community leaders? How big is a community? How do we win people over? What's the timetable? Whut? I don't like to think that I reduce other cultures to a bunch of airy-fairy sociological precepts... but hell yeah I do
Hm. You and I, I think we're working with different definitions. Moving goalposts, for instance:
ME: Assault-style weapons seem to be defined primarily by their effective marketing, which is baked into gun design and promotes a militaristic approach to gun ownership and operation.
YOU: I have NEVER SEEN this marketing of which you speak.
ME: here it is on the gun, as explicitly advertised on the manufacturer's website.
YOU: I have NEVER TAKEN such claims from the website or features of those guns seriously. Also, try to define assault-style weapons, but in a way that's different than how you've already defined them.
Motte and Bailey?
ME: Assault rifles are becoming the weapon of choice for mass shooters.
YOU: prove that AR15s are the weapon of choice for mass shooters.
ME: I didn't say that, as such a claim would be unsupportable. You changed what I said to make your position defensible.
YOU: I win!
It's not that I WON'T engage with your arguments, it's that I CAN'T because you haven't yet leveled any. "I disagree" isn't an argument, it's a basic opinion. "people who don't own guns obviously don't know anything about guns, and thus are unqualified to contribute to the national debate" is kind of like saying "only gun owners should be allowed to speak to and shape policy on gun restrictions," which isn't so much of an argument as it is an absurdity. You're acting as though my inability to map out the differences in firing mechanisms between rifles renders me unfit for debate on policy, which is semantic bullshittery and you know it.
Which brings me to our biggest gulf in definitions: debate. You seem to think that it's sufficient just to lean on all the old semantic talking points that I always see trotted out in these discussions: "assault style can mean anything! you don't know the difference between a clip and a mag! those guns don't even work the same way!" Because it's easier to tout your mechanical knowledge of the tool than to defend the nature or necessity of the tool. You also seem content to constantly call me out as "naive," and then when I repeatedly invite you to develop your argument, start pouting about how I characterize gun owners as "brainwashed psychos," which I never did or even came close to doing. Ever. Explicitly or implicitly. At this point, my best guess is that you've had this argument so many times that you're responding to what you think I'm saying rather than actually examining my argument...?
And FWIW, I never addressed your "prove that previous policy has changed public perception" retort because that's a way larger discussion than just guns, and requires nuance, and this exchange has left me with little faith that we can speak to each other in the language of nuance, or even mutual respect. Which is a basic prerequisite for complex discussions.
Sorry you got bent out of shape over this topic. I do appreciate a lot of what you contribute on this site. I don't believe the above exchange represents the best of what you have to offer.
Read my initial post again. Never said AR15 was the weapon of choice. I said "assault style rifles", and I stand by that claim. Revising my printed words and then arguing against your preferred revision gets you nowhere, and wins you no points. If you're going to play semantics, at least stick to your own rules.
You haven't yet provided any counterarguments. You've just insisted that I provide evidence, and then more evidence when you didn't like the evidence I provided because it didn't align with your personal opinion on the matter. Your chief response up to now seems to be "you're naive, so I don't need to live up to my own standard of discourse." Have we ever interacted before this? What evidence, beyond my horrible mischaracterization of the AR line, leads you to believe that I'm naive, or otherwise unworthy of decent discourse?