How right, I should limit my neurotic nitpicking to appropriate spaces.

They seem like cheap plated metal, any alterations are going to wind up flaking and looking terrible

Eclipses do not have a semicircular phase. It’s wrong as lunar phases, and it’s wrong as an ecliptic transit.

Considering that semi-circles are not part of an eclipse, no.

Different colors? They’re all monochrome gold, if it looks like different colors that’s just reflections from light in the room

I’m not sure I understand. Like put them in the lathe and smooth the points out?

I’d wager Grandma is symbolic of the generation to which most of those barons, mongers, and billionaires belong.

If you can find a product you actually believe in, sales can be pretty nice

If we’re being technical, it resulted more directly from mercantilism than feudalism.

Capitalism is explicitly designed for people to benefit themselves at the expense of others. Capital begets more capital in a positive feedback loop that results in massively powerful billionaires.

If you elect representatives, those representatives are checked somewhat by the threat of being voted out. Capitalism has no such check. Sure, ostensibly people can choose not to buy a product, but unregulated capitalism selects for monopolies.

Having this pop up in the middle of a dozen goofy 5 minute skits with guys in Garfield and Odie costumes was an unexpected surprise, but a welcome one.

Slide your cuffs up to your palms and hold them in your hands while you put on your sweater

Also, Israel is much much less reliant on the US for aid than in times past, and I think there’s a fear that if we stop supplying them, somebody else will and then we’ll have absolutely no influence over anything they do.

It seems like the prevailing narrative tries as hard as it can to bury this fact. Unilaterally withdrawing aid doesn’t magically make Israel stop what they’re doing, they can easily get support elsewhere. All unilaterally withdrawing does is throw away our only real bargaining chip to try and nudge them toward ceasefire.

And what is your alternative? That a majority of Americans spontaneously organize and rise up outside of the purview of elections? That they spontaneously organize and vote third party?

“Useful idiots”, look in the mirror champ. There are plenty of good times to levy well-deserved criticisms at the not-literally-fascists party. Months before a close election between them and the literally-fascists party is not one of them. It’s probably the worst time in fact, and only serves, whatever your moral reasoning is, to increase the probability of a literally-fascists party win. You’ve unwittingly volunteered as a stooge in the troll army helping the right. Congrats, you played yourself.

You’re strawmanning ultimatums that no one’s saying. All we’re saying is that, functionally, high turnout for Democrats is the best outcome leftists get from the election. Republicans are worse for leftists than Democrats, across the board, full stop. Republicans are worse for the genocide you’re talking about, full stop.

Muddying the water about the failings of democratic leadership are entirely counterproductive in securing an administration that’s better for the left than the alternative. Big tenting with the neo-libs is how things haven’t gotten more awful than they are.

One of the two is going to win in November and dictate future foreign policy. There are two outcomes, that’s literally an actual dichotomy. Your actions regarding the election (personal voting strategy as well as comments that sway the personal voting strategies of others) ultimately support one of those two outcomes. If you get enough people to abstain in protest against Democratic foreign policy, you are increasing the probability of getting Republican foreign policy.

Me. I read a lot of documents. Landscape is annoying, and portrait requires constantly scrolling left and right. E-readers are bigger than I feel like carrying everywhere. I want something that fits in my pocket, but I can use to comfortably read PDFs when I’m in a waiting room or something.

On the other hand, I think the flip phones are basically a stupid gimmick and I can’t imagine a valuable use case. But different people have different needs, so let people value the features they value.

Freedom freedom freedom oy!

More than 50% of the people.

Substantially less than 100%. The terms are not synonymous.

they certainly do provide insight into the language used in the constitution, as well as the intent of the authors.

Some of the authors. If it was sufficiently representative, it would have made it into the Constitution itself.

If Congress chooses to discuss a term used in the constitution, their usage does not alter the constitutional meaning, but only establishes a legislative meaning.

This still does not establish the constitutional meaning. You have notably not provided sufficient evidence to establish a constitutional meaning.

the states accepted and enacted the constitution in the context of the papers.

Correct. The states accepted and ratified the Constitution, not the Federalist Papers.

and have no problem whatsoever considering the disciplined portion to be unambiguously a part of the Militia.

That portion being the “whole nation”.

The “whole nation” is not disciplined. I was quite specific: if, and only if, the “whole nation” is disciplined, it is appropriate to consider the “whole nation” to be synonymous with the Militia.

What if I argue that Congress found a different way to ensure the population was “properly armed and equipped” that didn’t require annual assembly?

“Properly” being the functional term here. “Armed and equipped” is not the same as “Properly armed and equipped”.

If you don’t like being held to pedantry, don’t make flippant categorical equivalences of precise legal language.

10 USC 246 does not cover males under 17 or over 45, these are part of the People who are not legislative Militia. Hypotheticals are not evidence.

The Federalist Papers are not the Constitution. If you draw a distinction between the constitutional and legislative, I’ll draw a further distinction against commentary.

I am a proponent of disciplining the whole nation, and have no problem whatsoever considering the disciplined portion to be unambiguously a part of the Militia. If Congress does indeed reinstate assembly to properly arm and equip every member of the People, I will promptly concede. But hypotheticals are not evidence.

the constitutional meaning does not exclude anyone

Buddy, you keep just saying that like it’s some b ontological fact. I’ve repeatedly asked you for evidence to support that and you keep shifting focus to avoid doing so.

Until you can provide concrete, tangible evidence to support that interpretation, I’m not interested in hearing anything else. Show me documentation, not just your own assertions. No more dancing.