I may be misremembering, but I believe the way things were originally designed was that the Senate was supposed to represent the states, not the people. The house represented the people. That's why the Senate has equal representation (because the states were meant to have equal say), and the house proportionate to population.

In that case, the trains will double as ovens. Now that's efficiency!

War on Terror 2: Mariachi Madness

I love a bit of Bull Yogurt to garnish my Rocky Mountain Oysters.

Edit: would be fun if a restaurant serving Rocky Mountain Oysters would provide the names of the bulls that provided for my meal.

You know, we really should have a world wide Fap For Peace day. Like those "Pray for [insert thing]" days you sometimes hear about people doing.

I'll add, it's incredibly dumb that the house is capped at 435 seats. There just is no way 435 people can represent the entirety of the nations population. Given advances in communication technology, there's also no reason to keep it there. They really should be increasing the size of the house dramatically and no longer have a cap. The size of the house should grow, or shrink, with the size of the population.

Are there crypto scams? yes, and plenty of them. Can you buy drugs with them? sure (and I thinks that's great!) Do either of the above statements get at the core issue here? not at all.

The issue here is not with the crypto itself. The issue here is the same issue that is regularly a problem anywhere software is deployed, digital security. The take away here is that many (all?) crypto exchanges are failing to properly secure their systems. Which is why the general rule that anybody investing in crypto should follow is never keep crypto in an exchange wallet unless you plan on trading it in the very short term. As an extension of that rule, you should never keep your crypto in a wallet that you don't hold the private keys for. If you don't have the private key for the wallet, it's not your wallet. Not your wallet, not your crypto.

Lol, yeah I followed this trial as it was happening and I remember them bringing up this bullshit accusation, but then never actually charging him because the charge was exactly that, bullshit.

Meanwhile at the FBI during the investigation: https://www.justice.gov/...

Sorry to be that guy, but the hockey mask was Jason Vorhees. Michael Meyers wore the Captain Kirk mask.

Cyrus The Virus. What a great 90s villain. Upvote for the Con Air reference.

I'm assuming the scale in this image is set to grams, but I'm hoping it's set to pounds

Often when I see someone accusing people of voting against their own interests, it's pretty clear that the person making the accusation has not taken the time to understand the values others are basing their choice on.
If I could rob a person and be confident that I would never be caught and punished for doing so, am I acting against my own self interest if I chose not to rob them because it goes against my moral code? No, of course not. But based on the way some people talk about voting against ones self interest, you might think I just cheated myself out of free money. Is it possible that a person might "vote against their own interests" because of a misinformed view? of course, but you'll never understand a person's motivations by chosing to paint them with broad strokes based on your prejudices instead of getting to know them individually and trying to understand what it is they truly value.

Heroes are remembered, but Tim Curry never dies.

The Unix Epoch is obviously the correct base for any calendar.

...and pair that with "this is what you voted for when you voted third party or stayed home, to say nothing of directly voting for this mess,"

Lol, if that's the approach the Dems are going to go with, I hope you loooove the current Republican regime. Attempting to shame people into voting for you is not likely to win much support.

Have to strongly disagree. If there are going to be political parties, the more the better.

Unfortunately we don't have a Presidential primary this year, when we desperately need one. So our choice is Biden or ... Full-on fascism.

You seem to make my point here. You don't think more parties are needed, but you want to keep pushing the "vote for my guy because the other guy is a monster" line. Sorry, but I'm not going to vote for someone based on who they are not. You point out there are only two shitty choices after stating that we don't need any more choices...

Appreciate the extra details and the link!

It can be both though. It's ok to appreciate and find hope in witnessing common people voluntarily coming to the aid of a fellow person in need while also acknowledging the failures of a system that help create the need for those goodwill actions by common people.

Literally one of the best movies of all time.