Intervening in a fight between bald eagles sounds like a great way to lose a finger or worse. Those fuckers are big and sharp. Nature is a cruel mistress or circle of life, whichever you prefer.

There's this story in The New York Times this morning, "Europe and Rest of World Try to Come to Terms With Trump the Imperialist":
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/07/world/europe/trump-venezuela-greenland-ukraine-europe.html#commentsContainer

And I realize it's not appropriate for me to do this, but I want to share verbatim a comment from this story which perfectly captures my sense of the latest madness. It is by one Austin Ouellette in Denver, CO:
The worst part about all of this, as per usual, is Trump supporters. They spent over a decade complaining about foreign intervention and now like characters of an Orwell novel they’ve doublethinked. Not only are they claiming every one of these actions (including the illegal impending annexation of Greenland) are justified but they’re also denying that this is in contradiction to any statements they’ve declared about military interventionism over the last ten years.

I work with some of them. And it’s terrifying to watch in real time. I imagine it’s exactly what living in East Germany in 1956 was like or what living in unified Germany in 1938 was like. If you haven’t had a conversation with a Trump supporter lately, you really should. Because it’s not possible to come to terms with just how detached from reality they are until you talk in real life. What you see on social media is, if anything, watered down.

"We should do whatever it takes to avoid becoming another San Francisco"

Charles, you're not with the latest and greatest. San Francisco is turning the corner with a new mayor who actually tackles crime to the delight of San Franciscans!

Meanwhile, our mayor ... (shudder)

Actually, this comment I've quoted at @2 reminds me of a story in The Atlantic yesterday which I didn't bother to read, but you can get the gist of it: "MAGA’s Foundational Lie." Subhead: The movement claims to stand with the police. Trump’s decision to pardon the cop-beaters of January 6 exposed his movement for what it is."

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/02/trump-indecency-jan-6-pardons/685324/

I mean, what isn't a foundational lie? Isn't this one lie just part of MAGA's broader pattern?

Take how Trump puts himself forward as the great champion of the working class. Then he proceeds to enact policies that are intended to squeeze the working class economically. And then MAGA uses this as evidence of what wonderful things he's doing for the working class.

I could go on.

Trump's Putin-like project is supported by this relentless fog of cognitive dissonance that has been imposed on milions of gullible people. As I like to say, why does MAGA's working class base support the interests of the oligarchs and mega-corporations over their own interests? Because it is in the interests of the oligarchs and mega-corporations for them to do so.

Correction @4. "Trump's Putin-like project" should read "Trump's Putin-like projection." Trump's power of projection that is integral to his ability to weave an alternate reality.

@5:

That's the thing about living in an alternate world unhinged from objective, empirical reality: what is "true" is based solely on what one is told to be true IN THE MOMENT. But, moments are ephemeral and so what was true yesterday or even a few hours ago may not be true NOW, if the person or persons directing that "reality" decide so.

One can only imagine the level of cognitive dysfunction required to live in such an alternate sphere. It's beyond "cognitive dissonance" in the sense that, the person isn't under the stress of holding two completely opposing beliefs simultaneously, but is literally changing beliefs from one moment to the next without any sort of conscious recognition that a change occurred. And when you have the temerity to point this out, all you get in response from these zombies is pure gaslighting: "you're lying. I/we NEVER thought that!" even when you present them with evidence of their past belief, because the past reality is instantly negated by the "new" reality. Orwell himself couldn't have dreamed up this magnitude of psychotic self-deception.

@6, If one value is as good as another, it logically follows that no value is better than another.

Multiculturalism leads to a Nihilistic world where truth and reality are solely in the eye of the beholder.

If sex, sexual preference, are mere preferences, not objective fact, why isn't everything else?

You are complaining that the right is now adopting the complete relativism and subjectiveism pioneered by, and insisted on, in the name of inclusion. Wierd.

In the multicultural world view, to be inclusive, if you encounter someone who sees the facts differently than you, all you can do, in the name of inclusion is validate that as their view. To say they are embracing falsehood is to exclude and make yourself superior. It is "othering" by definition.

It really is taking liberties with logic and sound reasoning to hyperbolize "cognitive dissonance" into a diagnosis "millions of people" who only had two choices for president.

NotMyopic @7, please don't take this the wrong way. Have you ever considered going to a psychiatrist to get help with whatever these issues are that you're going through?

@9: But you didn't consider responding to @7 in a thoughtful and academic way for which I thought you set the tone in @2. Why not?

Some trump voters were gullible enough to believe he was going to honor his promises to them despite all available evidence to the contrary, some don’t gaf about any of this stuff or maybe wanted it, and the rest are just going along with it because they are being coached by their peers and their media outlets to fall in line. To be fair there is also a large and growing percentage of them who actually regret their vote, too late to do anything about it of course but at least they’re capable of owning their mistake.

They may have only had 2 choices for president but they picked the most destructive option, even after 4 years under his leadership, and they don't deserve anyone's compassion. Useful idiots or horrible people, take your pick.

@7 and @9 Just wondering how "sexual preference" is not a preference?

Stereotyping "useful idiots" or "horrible people" tells us nothing and doesn't advance the conversation, but it makes some feel intellectually profound that they wouldn't feel otherwise.

Sexual orientation, not preference.

@9. Cressona, you are incorrect in several respects. First, the MAGA base is in the midst of a very serious and very public rift, and foreign policy is at the heart of it. A truly isolationist wing, with voices like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, MTG, are furious over Trumps policies in Tehran, now Venezuela, and most importantly, Israel. On the other side, legacy conservative publications/groups have maintained a more hawkish outlook, recently joined by Ben Shapiro and Bari Weiss. And the knives are out. Within the administration these factions have apparently coalesced around Rubio (hawk) and Vance (turtle).

There is no Donroe Doctrine. T is randomly reacting to the factions with no serious policy principles of his own. And so the polling shows a guarded approval (60%) among Repubs for what just happened, but lower numbers for deploying troops into the country.

Your other error, IMO, is that between these factions is Steve Bannon and his War Room. He has been instrumental in defining MAGA, and his foreign policy vision was never outright isolationism, but what he calls "hemispheric defence." What it boils down to is retrenchment in most of the globe, but aggressive imperialism closer to home. Bannon is the man that made it cool on the right to throw Ukraine under the bus while insisting we need to seize Greenland. It is Bannon that derides Europe as both doomed and a cultural adversary. What Bannon didn't count on was watching the republican base slouching to full isolationism ala Tucker.

I highly encourage you to read an interview or two of Bannon. In one of them he even opens up about his secret meeting with Alexander Dugin (aka Putins Brain) where he shares his attempt to convince Dugin of his ultimate fever dream - to woo the Kremlin into a civilizational alliance with the US that will defeat both European debauchery and Chinese militarism.

I understand none of this pleasant, but this is the landscape on the right - fractured and at war with itself.

Who gives a fuck about "advancing the conversation," i'm just sharing my opinion that is based on my own observations after living with this lunacy for the past decade. Trump was president for 4 years and he left the country worse than he found it, yet millions of people voted for him again. You either have to be dumb enough to disbelieve your own experience or satisfied with the guy who stole state secrets and rallied a violent mob to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power because he lost. The signs were all there and it's not "advancing the conversation" to pretend they weren't. If you want to talk about trump's presidency another way go for it but no one is obligated to show compassion and understanding for people who keep making really bad choices with dire consequences for the entire planet.

I love a Charles Slog AM - makes me wish he still wrote Police Beat.

As for the idiots who broke up the eagle fight, I hope that victorious eagle extracts revenge (let nature be nature - you still ended up with a dead eagle).

thekossack @15, it looks like you've just spent over 300 words confessing that you are easily distracted by circus sideshows. What's that expression? Not being able to see the forest for the fake plastic trees?

barth @16, I would say DFTT, but I realize that's kinda your thing. 😏

@16: So explain how Trump won a larger Latino vote along the southern border than expected in 2024 but polls now show he lost that support. You have to dig deeper than "yet millions of people voted for him again" to understand why Trump won and why is support is plummeting.

I'm not asking you to show compassion - I'm just dismayed by your sophomoric understanding of politics and shocking lack of intellectual curiosity.

@18: Don't conflate feeding with living rent free.

19 who gives a fuck, we're all just sharing our opinions here with exactly zero consequences for it, but since you asked, a lot of people were dumb enough to believe things would be different this time and they're no longer supporting trump because they realized too late they made a really bad mistake. I can't do anything with this information besides express my frustration with it but keep us posted on the progress you're making with your non-sophomoric understanding of politics and shocking depth of intellectual curiosity since apparently you're up to something bigger than just commenting on a blog like everyone else here.

@12: Anyone's vote is a snapshot in time evaluation of the political dynamics. Best to not ruminate over it and move on.

Dyslexia in @22. Referes to 21, not 12.

“ Is the real Seattle Freeze now history? How I hate global warming.”

Good thing we have the CCA so we can do our part to fight global climate change. The only problem of course is we are getting very little return for the billions and billions of dollars we’ve given the state.

https://www.commerce.wa.gov/commerce-submits-corrected-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data-for-state-climate-report/

https://mynorthwest.com/kiro-opinion/wa-gas-prices-climate/4183818

@22 literally 1 comment ago your answer was to dig deeper. It’s almost like you have no integrity whatsoever

With regard to the ICE shooting, it's definitely unfortunate that someone died and that she tried to flee in such a dangerous and reckless manner, but it's clear she could easily have killed someone. The vehicle accelerates directly toward an officer who's right in its path and he barely manages to get out of the way as he shoots. At the end of the day, this is quite plainly within the scope of standard procedure and established legal guidelines, and the shooting was lawful.

@19 "explain how Trump won a larger Latino vote along the southern border than expected in 2024 but polls now show he lost that support"

Because nobody liked the alternative

The lack of any actual principles or internal consistency cressona commented on @2 is not unique to MAGA, it's also readily apparent among the Vote Blue No Matter Who set. The team sport nature of national politics is a real problem.

@26 No, I watched the video and she was not about to "easily" kill anyone. She backed up and was about to pull away when she was shot, and the car continued on the course she was starting. The only person even close to the front of her car was the fascist murder who needs to be hunted down, arrested and tried, and the car easily careened past that human piece of shit. From a dead stop there she wouldn't have killed anyone even if she tried.

@28 Transparently false - after she backs up, an officer is still in front of her car as she accelerates forward, and her wheels do not turn until he is barely moving out of the way and already firing. From a dead stop, you can certainly still knock someone down and run over their head, which is why officers take cars accelerating at them when they are in front of them so seriously. If you swing a knife at me and miss, you have still attemped assault with a deadly weapon. The officer will be convicted of nothing.

I'm reading the comment by thirteen12 @27, and I can't help but admire the message discipline. It's really quite impressive to imagine that an average citizen acting purely out of selfless civic interest would be so devoted to a single cause day in and day out, but such is the extraordinary nature of this tireless commenter.

I don't know, am I being naïve?

@30: You are being naive, as thirteen12 said "The team sport nature of national politics is a real problem" and that went right over your head.

@29

In the video on the NYTimes page there is plenty of blame to go around.
1) No Reason for the officer to reach for the handle and attempt to open the door.
2) No Reason for the driver to attempt to back up and pull away.
3) The officer who fired the shot should never have walked in front of the car. He placed himself in that position.

Other angles might show reveal more, and more video from before the officer attempts to open the car door would help put it into context.

But the officer who fired the shots put himself in danger by walking in front of the vehicle.

@29 According to witnesses at the scene, she was given conflicting orders by ICE officers, with one telling her to drive away and the one grabbing her door handle telling her to get out of the car. She followed the order to drive away and was shot.

@32 There was absolutely a reason for the driver to pull away--she was following orders by law enforcement.

@32: The driver was simply backing up a bit to turn into the street to drive away.
@29: The ICE officer should and will be convicted of manslaughter.

All the driver was doing and thinking about when murdered was simply shifting from R to D. Good Lord!

See for yourself in this Brian Tyler Cohen video:

https://youtu.be/YcwumixuYIs?t=232

@29 You're dumb.

@33

“There was absolutely a reason for the driver to pull away--she was following orders by law enforcement.”

Perhaps, though this was not evident in the video I saw.

As I said, “more video from before the officer attempts to open the car door would help put it into context.”

@36 Maybe that was why I didn't say it was on the video, I said it was from witnesses at the scene. Yes, it would be nice to get the officer's bodycam footage. I wouldn't give long odds on that--ICE has a nasty habit of either not turning their bodycams on or "losing" the footage.

See the update at 3:25pm here: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/01/07/shooting-south-minneapolis-ice-agents-federal-operation

@29 "From a dead stop, you can certainly still knock someone down and run over their head, which is why officers take cars accelerating at them when they are in front of them so seriously. If you swing a knife at me and miss, you have still attemped assault with a deadly weapon."

So if I step out in front of a moving police vehicle and yell at it to stop, and it doesn't, I can shoot and kill the officer with impunity? What legal basis did ICE have to stop this driver? Without a legal basis they have no more authority to tell her to stop than I do the officer driving his vehicle.

https://youtu.be/8z3isjBL0lY?si=HKfnuhMzSJw35bpJ

@27 yes, when the options are an aspiring fascist piece of shit or any functional democrat, I’m a proud member of “Vote Blue No Matter Who set” (like any sane person).

@34 A bad analysis by Mr. Cohen - the slow motion clearly shows the car accelerating directly at the officer before he pulls his gun. He will not be convicted of manslaughter. He will not be convicted of anything.

@35 And yet, my analysis and prediction is correct, and all you can do is call childish names.

@37 Won't personally be going off hearsay by screeching "eyewitnesses" when all available audio evidence captures only an order to exit the car.

@38 Not a very good analogy at any level: He did not step out in front of it while it was moving forward, you don't have the legal authority to stop a vehicle, the legal basis is blocking the roadway, the driver does not determine the lawfulness of a stop and decide whether or not to stop and exit the vehicle - they are to obey a lawful command and fight it later in court, and you certainly aren't permitted to accelerate away and toward an officer.

@40 sure but you don't have to unquestioningly and uncritically support everything the Blue Team standard bearer proposes like too many do. There's a difference between strategically voting for the lesser of two evils and being a delusional stan of a political organization.

@41 "the legal basis is blocking the roadway"

You're arguing federal immigration agents have legal authority to enforce state or local statutes prohibiting blocking roadways? That's what you're going with?

@38, 43 -- "What legal basis did ICE have to stop this driver? Without a legal basis they have no more authority to tell her to stop than I do the officer driving his vehicle." "You're arguing federal immigration agents have legal authority to enforce state or local statutes prohibiting blocking roadways? That's what you're going with?"

When you're THISCLOSE to finally getting that the two major political parties have drastically different policy preferences that result in drastically different outcomes for people, including the woman tragically killed today, and it's bad to relentlessly trash the party that would have not have ICE doing what they did today.

@43 Do you seriously think if your car is blocking federal police, and they repeatedly order you out of it, and you refuse, you're in the clear? I've heard quite a few differing stances on this situation but this obviously wrong legal theory is definitely a new one.

@45 do you seriously think government agents can just tell you to do whatever they want and kill you if you don't obey? Speaking of an "obviously wrong legal theory"

@41 The driver was not blocking the roadway. An ICE vehicle left the scene past her immediately prior to the agent trying to open her door.

@45 Huh. You uncritically accept that an order was given to get out of the car, yet you won't accept that a contrary order was given to drive away. How very ... credulous of you. How do those jackboots taste?

@44 https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-deportation-record

You're the poster child for delusional Democrat stan

@46 Hm, I don't think that's quite what I said! They can definitely give you lawful orders, which is not really the same as "whatever they want", and defend themselves if you accelerate your car at them in response, which is why she was shot, not for "not obeying". It's also why the officer will not be convicted of anything. Remember to always stick to the evidence, and avoid sensationalized reporting.

@47 A vehicle in a different lane passes her. They are not obligated to try and squeeze the large truck past her vehicle, which is completely sideways in the entirety of their lane.

In every video, the audio clearly captures the officer repeatedly ordering her out of the car. No one is giving a different command at the same time. When an officer is directly next to you, telling you to exit the vehicle, with one hand inside your vehicle and another pulling on your doorhandle, it's a little difficult to believe she felt there was some ambiguity as to what she was expected to do. As usual, I'm the only one who bothered actually examining the primary sources and you failed to do so and were proven wrong.

@40 politics is almost always the lesser of two evils - I’ve never denied that reality. But only a fool thinks there is no difference between what the orange piece of shit is doing and what Harris would have done (personally I don’t think Harris would have done much which is great - I personally prefer a weaker federal government / weaker president).

@32, @34,

1) The reason to reach for the door handle is to remove the driver from the vehicle. Under Pennsylvania v. Mims, a driver is required to exit the vehicle solely at the officer's discretion. Drivers that don't voluntarily step out at the officer's discretion are removed, with decisive force, for among other reasons, to insure they don't flee with a 4,000 pound weapon.

2) The driver isn't free to leave. They are lawfully detained if they law enforcement had ANY lawful reason for the stop. Putting the car in gear shows intent to flee or assault. Force, but not deadly force, may be used to stop mere flight.

3) The officer (or a non-cop) who stepped in front of the vehicle has the legal right to use the public street. It might not be prudent or tactically sound (that is a potential employment disciplinary matter, or lawsuit matter), but they retain the right of self-defense any place they are lawfully allowed to be. A 4,000 pound vehicle moving at you is reasonably perceived as a threat of serious physical injury, legallly allowing the use of deadly force.

If you are detained, the place to argue that the detention was unreasonable and violates the 4a, is in court, AFTER the fact. Arguing it on the roadside, particularly if you try and and leave, or use force (i.e. a 4k vehicle) is likely to leave arguments about the reasonableness of the stop, or whether officers used the most prudent tactics, to your survivors and estate, as Plaintiff. You want to survive so you can be the Plaintiff, not your estate.

Buddhamat and Bax, do you really need to throw cold water on thirteen12's one-man crusade to argue that the Democrats are not worth voting for when the alternative is a madman who wants to end the American experiment at the 250-year mark? It's just a shame Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can't hold a candle to thirteen12's idol (and Vladimir Putin dinner-party guest) Jill Stein.

thirteen12, I'm looking forward to the material you'll be cooking up for the 2026 midterms now that Gaza no longer has the cachet it once did. Any idea if your buddy "averagebob" will be showing up again for the midterms to help campaign against the Dems?

@42 "...sure but you don't have to unquestioningly and uncritically support everything the Blue Team standard bearer proposes like too many do."

And yet, despite all of those "too many" doing it, you couldn't give so much as one single example. (And the Stranger resides in Seattle, one of the bluest of blue cities.)

As you can't possibly be expected to remember after all of this time, the Stranger, and many sympathetic commenters (most of whom have since gone DEAD silent on the issue) accused the Democratic presidential nominee of aiding and abetting "GENOCIDE," (you know, one of the worst crimes imaginable) and constantly told anyone within earshot not to vote for her, until and unless she agreed to every last item on the checklist her accusers compiled. The problem was not uncritical support of her, but implacable opposition to her. (Please do try to make a note of this for next time.)

@50: To paraphrase a much better writer than myself, I believe you'll find it very hard getting a man to understand something, when his entire public persona depends upon him not understanding it.

Phoebe dear, it's not even been a week yet. You sound like an old crank.

The recent dustup about the way drug users should be handled borders on hysteria, particularly given that nothing has really changed yet. Forever, we've all acknowledged that the status quo was not working. She proposes trying something new, and the henhouse (with SPOG in the lead) acts like a dog just came in the door.

@48 "They can definitely give you lawful orders, which is not really the same as "whatever they want"

You're operating under the delusion that anything a law enforcement officer says is a "lawful order" that must be obeyed at risk of death. My entire point which was that, because immigration officials don't enforce blocking the roadway ordinances, there was no "lawful order." Them telling her to move had no more lawful force than me telling someone to move their car.

@53 "And yet, despite all of those "too many" doing it, you couldn't give so much as one single example."

The most obvious example is the debate that you actually referenced in the very next paragraph of your comment where some of us were critical of Biden's Gaza stance and others, notably you, insisted we stop talking about it because it might hurt the Democrat's chance to win.

when
criticism's
not allowed
there's no valid
point to that system

outwitted
by the cunning
overwhelmed by men
to weak to save their humanity

while
democracy hangs
by a gossamer thread

@3
"Meanwhile, our mayor ... (shudder)"

She hasn't done anything yet, she's only been mayor for 7 days.

I didn't vote for her, but accept that she won a free and fair election and is the new Mayor of Seattle. I wish her the best and am withholding judgement.

From George H. W. Bush to William Jefferson Clinton
"Dear Bill,
When I walked into this office just now I felt the same sense of wonder and respect that I felt four years ago. I know you will feel that, too.
I wish you great happiness here. I never felt the loneliness some Presidents have described.
There will be very tough times, made even more difficult by criticism you may not think is fair. I'm not a very good one to give advice; but just don't let the critics discourage you or push you off course.
You will be our President when you read this note. I wish you well. I wish your family well.
Your success is now our country's success. I am rooting for you.
Good luck,
George"

Katie Wilson's success is now our city's success.

can
you say
Hyperbole?

... they "constantly told
anyone within earshot not to vote for her,
until and unless she agreed to every last item on the checklist her accusers compiled."

not even Acknowledging
the plight of those we
were bombing to
smithereens

may've had
a little Some-
thing to Do with it

@44, The ruling by SCOTUS in Mims was based on the stop being fir ANY lawful reason while the person is in a vehicle.

It could be because of reasonable suspicion that they violated a city noise ordinace at home, violated a restraining order, or a traffic violation.

If the agents had reasonable suspicion of violation of immigration law, or ANY federal statute, then its a lawful stop, the driver is not free to leave, and the driver is required to exit the vehicle SOLELY at the LEO'S discretion, for the duration of a reasonable investigation to establish probable cause or refute that suspicion.

@56: Which is not, actually, an example of "unquestioningly and uncritically support everything the Blue Team standard bearer proposes," but rather an example of the "lesser of two evils" idea that Bax and Buddhamat kept trying to teach you, above.

Fail harder.

when the
"Democratic"
National Convention
REFUSES to allow the people
with families in a country we the peeps're
Complicit af in bombing the holy Shite outta, to Not
even Acknowledge their Existence at That same Convention,

When "EVERY VOTE COUNTS!"

can it be 'Surprising' when
Some of the Electorate
turns away in Disgust?

who on Earth thinks
that that may be
a 'Winning'
strategy?

well, the
Dems*
did.

Failing to learn that lesson
will result, Surprise! in
Repeating it over
and over and
Over again

If we should happen
to, once again,
GET that
Chance

*or,
at Least
the Unelected
Rulers of the 'democratic'
national committee (LLC, bitches!) surely Did.

@61 probably a better example was Bax recently claiming the Democrats forfeiting the shutdown and allowing millions to lose healthcare was good actually because Dems polling got a boost.

@54: Okay, I'll wait till Friday.

Defund the FUCK Outta
Cadet Bonespurs's
Brownshirts
aka ICE:

"For those keeping score, Bellingcat,
https://bsky.app/profile/bellingcat.com/post/3mbujjukc5c23

The New York Times Visual Investigation Team,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQCvNExBDjE

& Washington Post's Visual Forensic team
https://bsky.app/profile/bellingcat.com/post/3mbujjukc5c23

have all published analysis showing the ICE shooter
wasn't in the path of Renee Nicole Good’s vehicle
when he shot her, contradicting statements
by the President & his cronies."

--Eliot Higgins; ‪@eliothiggins.bsky.social‬

https://bsky.app/profile/eliothiggins.bsky.social/post/3mbwcnucmds26

@63 -- I know that you're intentionally a mendacious gasbag, so you lying about me is no surprise. What I actually said was in response to your claim that the Democrats in Congress had failed during the shutdown because they didn't secure an extension of the ACA subsidies. They had no ability to extend the subsides being in the minority. The only leverage the Democrats had was drawing public attention to the issue to make it clear to the public (who doesn't support the changes) that the GOP was responsible given that the GOP has a majority in both houses and the Presidency. The Democrats played this extremely poor hand (which they had in part thanks to people like you) extremely well, given that TODAY the House passed a 3 year extension of the subsidies with all Democrats and 9 Republicans voting yes. But I know you don't actually care about the substance of any of these policy issues, because your sole goal is to get fewer Democrats and more Republicans elected, so undoubtedly if the subsidies are extended you'll just criticize Democrats anyway.

Do I wish that there was a Democratic President and Democratic majority in both houses to prevent terrible legislation from passing that takes away health insurance from millions of people? Absolutely! It's why I was trying to get Democrats elected while you were doing everything you could to get Donald Trump into the White House and GOP majorities in Congress. That's the difference between you and me: you're a huge liar who doesn't care about any of the things you post here claiming to be concerned with and instead you do everything in your power to get Republicans elected to make the country a worse place.

@67 what did you do to try to get Democrats elected, vote for Harris in a deep blue state? How many calls did you make or doors did you knock? What percent of your annual income did you donate? Or, infinitely more likely, do you just mean you simped for them online and attacked me and others for daring to disagree with any of their policies?

@67: "a huge liar who doesn't care about any of the things you post here claiming to be concerned with and instead you do everything in your power to get Republicans elected to make the country a worse place."

we usually just call them "progressives" for short 😂

Kshama Sawant for Congress?!? Puh-LEASE! She backed Felon Mu$k's Mein Trumpf in 2024. We don't need any more MAGA goons stinking up Congress!

Really, Charles. I'm amazed you're still here griping about PNW weather. If you're pining for colder outdoor temperatures so badly, you can always move to Alaska, the Arctic, Mount Everest, or Antartica.
Would forty below zero and eleven months of winter be cold and dark enough for you?