Happy Wednesday [DOT 27/10/21]

Hi all, I hope your week is going great so far.

ICYMI, there are some hot takes from last night here. Let’s see what else is going on, shall we?

Umm, excuse me?

Neat pics!

Yosemite Falls is flowing again thanks to that major storm that walloped the drought-choked US West


A cyclist survived an attack from a 500-pound bear by kicking the animal after it charged toward him


Rob McElhenney and Ryan Reynolds see first Wrexham game at Maidenhead


Robinhood shares tank as revenue falls way short of expectations on lighter crypto trading

What, did he think they were calling about his car’s extended warranty?

A hiker got lost in Colorado, then ignored rescuers’ calls because they came from an unknown number


Have a great Wednesday!



  1. …so…I thought maybe something had changed…but no, when I checked the definition still reads

    victim (noun) a person harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action.

    …which sounds an awful lot like exactly the term for people “injured, or killed” because a kid shot them…with a rifle he’d gone to some lengths to acquire…in a place a goodly distance from his home…which he’d traveled to (with said rifle) for the express purpose of seeking to confront people very much like the ones he shot

    …but I’m not a judge, so what do I know?

    • Yes. This is a really demoralizing judgement, for the families of the victims and for those of us who believe that boy is the pawn of homegrown terrorist groups.

    • There’s such a toxic positivity and showing “strength” element behind survivors not wanting to call themselves victims, too. It minimizes the experience of being an actual victim of an actual crime, though. Society doesn’t allow people to sit in that space for very long and it would be healthier if they did. There’s no shame in identifying as a victim if in fact you are a victim.

      • …it probably should have  stopped surprising me by now but  every so often I still find it throws me when a word is used (or in this case not) in a way that seems to defy the meaning of the term…& given that the point of words is generally their meaning something about that offends me

        …but (though I don’t have much in the way of a reference to say if it’s true or not) I gather that it’s not necessarily just this trial in which that term apparently can’t be used…or can only be used in closing arguments, I think it might be?

        …not sure of it makes it any better or if it makes it a “lucky coincidence” for young kyle to have got a judge on his case who (I believe I read somewhere) takes this line regularly…either way there’s a thing called reductio ad absurdum & having never of heard about this before I’d have said no being able to call someone deceased by gunshot a victim in the trial of the person who shot him fully qualified as an example?

    • That judge is deepthroating the cop boots and probably very racist.

      If you can’t use “victim” because it’s “a loaded term” to sum up the excuse, but you absolutely can call them “rioters” “looters” or “arsonists” whether or not there is even evidence of those victims doing that, then you clearly want the jury to forget that (1) they’re still victims of Rittenhouse and (2) that none of those three things are capital offenses and rando neonazi shooters are not judicial due process.

  2. Not a happy story at all, but someone finally wrote a story that explains most of why the Texas abortion ban (and any ban LIKE that one!) worries me so much–so many folks are gonna get coerced into pregnancies & won’t feel able to leave abusers (and/or the abusers will harassment HELL out of them, accusing them and many of the folks they know of seeking illegal abortions, even if it’s a miscarriage.);



  3. I used to work about 20 miles from Cantwell.  When I was there, a man got mauled outside Cantwell so badly it made the national news.  He described the point at which the bear had put its paws on his shoulders and tried to tear his head off with its jaws as the sound of two rocks rubbing together.  Anyway, it’s important to read the whole story rather than just the headline because the cyclist did exactly what he was supposed to do–the kicking part was inadvertent.

    I read the lost hiker story the other day and the first thing I thought of was that this was an indictment against the plague of robocalls.  This guy probably gets so many scam calls that I can see his reticence to waste his time answering the phone for a spammer when he was focused on trying to get out of his little jam.

  4. This is why the “New York Times” is known as the Paper of Record:


    What’s going on at City Hall and up in Albany, let alone DC? Who cares, whatever happens we will support them 100% for “access.” BUT, for those of us living in the leafier precincts of Westchester and the nicer parts of New Jersey, like Montclair, we will devote our considerable resources to doing a deep dive into that which matters to us most.

  5. Talk about double dipping!


    not sure if this was covered yesterday but pretty disturbing…


    on the lighter side…



    • you know…come to think of it….its kinda funny that a good chunk of these fucknuts willing to go a great length at expense to themselves in order to not have poison injected into them are doing so so they can go out drinking again….

Leave a Reply