“Don’t have expectations beyond being part of the team,” is 100% the slogan of a team that sucks real bad.

And Starbucks buys good beans. You can turn anything to shit if you’re committed to that goal.

Traditionally, the Golden Gate Bridge is the preferred venue for such activities.

Foreign policy is managed hypocrisy. That’s just the nature of the beast.

That graph looks exactly fucking like the NYT’s graph re: Donald Trump’s chances of winning.

“Let the Wookie win.” —America, 2016

The failure of the Clinton campaign to accept any responsibility for screwing this particular pooch is appalling.

For my money it’s the bits from 6:40 to 8:16 that really shine.

I got into wine and whiskey when I lived in PA because it was so damn hard to get my hands on a case of beer.

1) You can absolutely be fired. It’s a huge pain in the ass and often not worth it, but I have a friend here in D.C. whose whole job is to fend off claims from federal employees who were fired for looking at porn on the job.

So your argument (in your other comment) seems to be that you have no sympathy for people with good benefits and job security at the cost of a lower wage relative to the private sector.

If you’ve ever been in a corporate job during a M&A process, the internal chatter is pretty much the same.

In contrast to the rest of the people who are commenting on this, I live in D.C. and know a bunch of people who do the work because it’s worth doing. They’re competent, work quite hard, and do it for the love of the work and not the remuneration.

“If These Dongs Could Talk” would’ve been a great sequel.

“Beast Mode don’t cry.” (sniffling)

So, I have a lot of thoughts about this issue. The Senate wasn’t turned into a weapon, the filibuster was. The problem with this thread, which is largely composed of confused thinking by parties on both sides of the issue, is that is misapprehends the problem. The problem is not a nebulous lack of civics knowledge or…

I love how glibly you say “get educated” as if it were just a question of gumption and bootstraps.

That assumes that the marginal rise in input costs fully offsets the multiplier effect that comes of paying people more money, which would require a much more technical and context-based argument to assert. Certainly, it’s not the case in our current circumstances.

So, this is a bad response. It’s true that consumption does not literally equal politics, but patterns of consumption empower economic interest groups that influence politics.

During that game, a friend of mine invented the theory that Endy’s defense was always good enough to save the game once, but only in games where the Mets needed it saved twice.