United States Politics: ∆τ_i*ε*φ*m_i<0 where ε=4 and φ=0.25

[Nintex]

[Nintex]

Pretzels, The Pawn Stars guy and war with Iran

All in a days work

[benji]

[killamajig]

I'm going to go out in a limb and say there's not much a governor can do to fix those things unilaterally.

I literally LOL when I saw the sign that said "End gun violence" and " Prevent wildfires" Good luck with that.

[Nintex]

Don't worry 





UFC fight fixed
Pope leo fixed
Iran fixed

everything is fixed

[TylenolJones]

Finally, tired of commit a federal crime every morning

[benji]

[TylenolJones]

They’re just angry cause she’s the only politician with the courage to say the government needs to kill all sea lions. 

[Nintex]

[Nintex]

Economy
Housing
Health
Sex scandal
War
The Rapture
Assassination attempt
Nuclear war
ALIENS  

It's a good thing Star Fox is back we need all the help we can get for the incoming alien invasion.

I wonder what kind of SAFETY PROTOCOL they will engage, like ICE agents walking around with TEMU radio scanners. Anti-spacecraft batteries on the Statue of Liberty etc.
$5 trillion defense budget to built a space cruiser.

[benji]

[benji]

[Nintex]

ONE BIG GLOW  



Keep drinking lady at 1:45

[Nintex]

The Trump administration is falling apart because they can no longer consult with Jeffrey Epstein like previous administrations 

[Nintex]

[Uncle]

[tw eet]https://x.com/Maorunes_Dagon/status/2052162435583246635[/tweet]
[tw eet]https://x.com/trouble1668/status/2052163301014962557[/tweet]
[tw eet]https://x.com/PatrickHarrisSr/status/2052168298801111171[/tweet]
[tw eet]https://x.com/VoxSpackle/status/2052158277681844506[/tweet]
[tw eet]https://x.com/NewTwistedOwl/status/2052150198109868435[/tweet]

so apparently all these people SHOULD be mad, but they're mad for the wrong reasons?

the banana thing was a giant charade and known to be one for like 2 years?

https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/why-is-this-member-of-congress-claiming-its-illegal-to-peel-bananas-in-a-daycare

Gluesenkamp Perez recently introduced a bill that she says will target a key example of this kind of excessive government intrusion. She calls it the “Banana Act,” though its official name is the Cutting Red Tape on Child Care Providers Act. She wrote it, she says, because a constituent of hers who worked in a daycare told her that under state law, daycare employees weren’t legally allowed to serve bananas to children. Gluesenkamp Perez thought this was a perfect (and ridiculous) example of regulation gone mad. She claims that when she looked into it, state regulators misled her repeatedly about the law. But, she says, her own research revealed that the prohibition was real.

A rule prohibiting peeling bananas in a daycare does indeed sound silly. “You know regulations have gotten too convoluted and out of hand,” she says, when “small childcare providers can’t even peel a banana for them out of fear the state will shut down their facility.” And to those inclined to agree with narratives about red tape gone mad, it sounds like the kind of thing that might be true. But is it? I contacted Washington’s Department of Children, Youth, and Families. They were emphatic with me that there is no such rule. Their spokesperson, Nancy Gutierrez, said:

We do not have a rule that says you cannot peel fruit for children. If providers are touching foods that a child would put directly in their mouth, there are rules around glove use. [emphasis theirs]

But that’s precisely what Gluesenkamp Perez says they told her, too. She says that “for months,” regulators told her that the no peeling bananas in a daycare rule wasn’t real but that she eventually discovered it was. So the Department might just have been misleading me like they misled her—although I would note that it already doesn’t seem very likely that childcare providers need to “fear the state will shut down their facility” if they peel a banana, given that the regulatory agency that oversees childcare facilities says they would never do this, and there are seemingly no documented cases of it ever happening.

But if Gluesenkamp Perez found the regulation, I figured her office could provide it to me. So I asked them: What is she referring to? What provision said that a childcare provider “would have needed to install like six more sinks before they could legally serve fresh fruit”? Gluesenkamp Perez’s office said that “the part of Washington state code that spurred this” was WAC 110-300-0198, part of the Foundational Quality Standards For Early Learning Programs. Gluesenkamp Perez’s spokesperson pointed me to the following provision:

(4) Center early learning programs licensed after the date this chapter becomes effective must have:

        (a) A handwashing sink separate from dishwashing facilities;

        (b) A food preparation sink located in the food preparation area; and

        © A method to clean and sanitize dishes, pans, kitchen utensils, and equipment in the food preparation area using:

                (i) A two-compartment sink and an automatic dishwasher that sanitizes with heat or chemicals; or

                (ii) A three-compartment sink method (sink one is used to wash, sink two is used to rinse, sink three contains a sanitizer, and the dishes are allowed to air dry).

Now, this provision does not appear to say what Gluesenkamp Perez is claiming the law says. It provides that child daycare centers must have two separate sinks, one for handwashing and one for dishwashing, and a method for cleaning dishes and utensils, either a dishwasher or a three-compartment sink. There is nothing here about bags of chips being legal to serve but the peeling of fruit being prohibited. I asked Gluesenkamp Perez’s office to clarify how this provision prohibits serving bananas in a daycare (but allows for junk food). They did not answer. Instead they sent the following statement:

“Access to safe, affordable, available childcare is one of the most important issues facing families in Southwest Washington and in communities across the country. The Congresswoman heard directly from local childcare providers in her district about the real experiences they faced when trying to provide healthy snacks to kids, as well as the impacts of confusing, burdensome regulations on small businesses. Her bipartisan banana bill would ensure that these small businesses have clarity on the rules and are supported and not overregulated out of existence.”

But where is the regulation that gives rise to the bill? The first sentence of the response is irrelevant (yes, access to childcare is important). The second sentence repeats the point that the Congresswoman was told by a constituent that the regulations were burdensome. The third sentence suggests that daycares might be “overregulated out of existence.” But where is the actual regulation? Gluesenkamp Perez made a very specific charge in her video: She said that regulators misled her and insisted it was perfectly legal to serve bananas in a daycare but that she looked into it and found out that serving fresh fruit required “like six more sinks.” Her office did not provide me with any evidence to support her claim that this regulation is real, let alone that anyone had ever actually been pushed out of business for violating it. (I followed up repeatedly and asked them to comment on the DCYF’s denial that the regulation exists but could get nothing else out of them beyond the above.)

In fact, the spokesperson for the Department of Children, Youth, and Families not only told me that serving fresh fruit is legal, but that it’s encouraged: “Fruits and vegetables [are] high on the list of items to be served,” they said. “Processed foods, such as chips, fall much lower on the food pyramid. We also offer programs to help providers ensure understanding and monitoring of the importance of eating healthy foods.” In fact, the very regulations that Gluesenkamp Perez says prohibit serving fruit actually require it. In the section on menus, state regulations say that “an early learning provider must serve a fruit or vegetable during at least one snack per day.”

[benji]

Saw this referenced somewhere:


$3 to Vox if you want to read it: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/19/13340828/hillary-clinton-debate-trump-won
jk fuck paywalls: https://web.archive.org/web/20181003183109/https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/19/13340828/hillary-clinton-debate-trump-won

[Nintex]

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2026/05/kash-patel-fbi-bourbon/687066/

The director of the FBI is an excessive drinker who hands out bourbon bottles

PROMISES MADE PROMISES KEPT

[Nintex]

[Nintex]

[benji]

[TylenolJones]

Future governor of California 

[benji]

I just looked at the polling for the first time, every time somebody dropped out of the race somehow Katie Porter polled lower.  

Also, I just learned that the guy from The Hills is running for mayor of Los Angeles as a MAGA Republican.

[benji]

People are making amazingly cringe AI ads for him.  

This one probably won't be as popular even though it's better:

[Nintex]

Democrats are not prepared for the volume of AI slop and email spam the Republicans are about to unleash

[simiansmarts]

Democrats are not prepared for the volume of AI slop and email spam the Republicans are about to unleash

[who is ted danson?]

[Nintex]

"I've doubled the size of it because we obviously need that."  

[simiansmarts]

[Nintex]

I wonder when Trump is going to declare bankruptcy  

He floated that idea many times over the years.
To fix the economy he would just declare bankruptcy and reset the debt back to 0.