Glasstire counts down the top five art events in Texas.

For last week’s picks, please go here.

1. Audra Wolowiec: Water Radio
Co-Opt Research (Lubbock)
March 1 – May 9, 2025

From CO-OPt Research + Projects:

“CO-OPt Research + Projects presents Water Radio, a solo exhibition of work by New York-based artist Audra Wolowiec created with contributions from Texas Tech University students from across the College of Visual and Performing Arts. Wolowiec’s new sound installation and notational scores respond to the Ogallala Aquifer, the largest in the United States and our region’s primary source for water. A subterranean water table formed by layers of porous material and spanning eight states, the Ogallala Aquifer creates its own aqueous boundary, and is rapidly depleting.

Through a series of participatory workshops and interviews, Water Radio adopts an embodied approach to understanding our entanglement with the water table, inviting participants to respond to our complex relationships with water — how we are connected to water, and how water connects us.”

2. Carlos Limas: Destino Sur
International Museum of Art and Science (McAllen)
February 22 – June 22, 2025

From IMAS:

“‘For the past six years, I have had the incredible opportunity to travel to Peru three times, exploring some of the country’s most fascinating locations, including Cusco, Lima, Nazca, and, of course, the iconic Machu Picchu. Each visit has been a journey of discovery, as I strive to document the most captivating scenes that this diverse and culturally rich nation has to offer. Through my lens, I seek to tell the stories of these places and their people, capturing moments of everyday life, traditional festivals, and the raw beauty of nature.

My goal is to create a visual narrative that not only showcases Peru’s stunning scenery but also highlights its rich cultural tapestry and the resilience of its communities. This ongoing project is a labor of love and a testament to my deep connection with Peru. Each photograph is a piece of the larger mosaic that I hope will inspire others to appreciate and protect the extraordinary beauty and heritage of this remarkable country.’ – Carlos Limas”

3. Fear of the Object
The Rosette (Austin)
March 27, 2025

From the organizers:

“Synopsis:
Fear of the Object is a site-specific intervention utilizing live video and sound performance to put into dialogue the architectural resonances and dissonances found within physical space, sound and light.

Initiated in 2017 at Austin’s No Idea Festival, the continuing duo collaboration is based on the inherent frequencies and resonances of Chris Cogburn’s percussive objects (cymbals, bells, drum) put into dialogue with Norwegian video artist Kjell Bjørgeengen’s audio generated video. The visual projections are fed back into sound, blurring distinctions between hearing and seeing.

Austin electronic music legend Rick Reed opens the evening with a new audio/visual piece.”

4. Ellen Mote: Sheer Disposition
Washington Gallery (Waco)
March 20 – May 3, 2025

From Washington Gallery:

“Ellen Mote creates abstract acrylic paintings on unprimed canvas, exploring themes of invisibility as a woman and mother through layers of colors and imperfect shapes. Her new body of work, Sheer Disposition, inspired by a summer trip around the Adriatic Sea with her family, will be showcased.”

5. Blue
Vickery Meadow Library (Dallas)
March 28 – 30, 2025

From DSGN For Us:

“BLUE is an immersive paper installation that resembles the ocean and where people are welcome to draw their childhood memories. A project sponsored by the City of Dallas Office of Arts and Culture.”

The post Top Five: March 27, 2025 appeared first on Glasstire.

Only Gov. Greg Abbott can call for a special session. But in his role presiding over the Texas Senate, Patrick can block any bill from passing, giving him leverage to compel overtime sessions by killing must-pass legislation.

A Texas judge last month ordered Dr. Margaret Carpenter, who practices north of New York City, to pay the penalty for allegedly breaking that state’s law by prescribing abortion medication via telemedicine.

Last month, Congressman Marc Veasey, a North Texas Democrat, sent a letter to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Deputy Director Kenneth Genalo demanding a swift investigation into James “Jim” Joseph Rodden, an ICE assistant chief counsel who acts as a prosecutor for ICE in immigration court in Dallas. The letter came in response to a Texas Observer investigative report that identified Rodden as the operator of a white supremacist social media account.

The Observer identified Rodden as the operator of GlomarResponder, an X account with around 17,000 followers that has routinely posted racist and hateful content, through an extensive review of GlomarResponder’s X posts, publicly available documents, other social media profiles and posts, and courtroom observation. The GlomarResponder account has posted that “Migrants’ are all criminals” and that “All blacks are foreign to my people,” in addition to posting apparent praise of Adolf Hitler, among numerous other similar posts.

Congressman Veasey’s letter, sent on February 24, requested that ICE provide within 30 days “a full and transparent account” of the actions the agency is taking to “investigate this matter and ensure that individuals engaged in such behavior are held accountable.”

On March 6, ICE responded to Veasey in a letter, in which it acknowledged “recent media reports alleging an ICE employee operated a white supremacist social-media account” and stated that the ICE Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) “understands the seriousness of the allegations and will ensure the allegations are addressed appropriately, fairly, and expeditiously.” 

The letter, which the Observer reviewed, further stated that typically “OPR administrative investigations are completed within 120 days” and that “OPR is unable to share additional information regarding this matter.”

The letter did not mention Rodden, nor did it confirm whether he has been placed on administrative leave pending the completion of the investigation.

“While I appreciate receiving any response, the lack of detail and clarity regarding the initial investigation—beyond the vague statement that ‘we are investigating and hope to reach a conclusion within 120 days’—is simply not enough,” Veasey told the Observer via email.

“This is a person with the power to significantly impact and harm people’s lives,” Veasey continued. “This administration has shown a troubling pattern of failing to uphold the rule of law, disregarding the rights of citizens, green card holders, and targeting Black and POC communities. James Rodden’s continued authority in any capacity undermines the public’s trust in this agency, weakens the rule of law, and fails to hold individuals accountable for their outright racist and disgusting remarks. I need to know—has he been placed on leave while this investigation is ongoing? And, most importantly, is this investigation a priority for the agency? It certainly is for my office, as it directly impacts the safety of my constituents. A simple response of ‘we will get back to you’ is insufficient and does not reflect the gravity of this situation.”

Veasey is not alone in his displeasure with the pace of the investigation.

On the same day ICE sent its response to Veasey, a group of protesters gathered at a park across from the federal building in downtown Dallas where the immigration courts are located. Holding signs and chanting into megaphones, they called for Rodden to be let go. 

“We want him fired,” said Azael Alvarez, an activist in Dallas. “And we want all of his deportation cases investigated.”

Prior to the publication of the Observer’s initial investigative report on February 19, Rodden’s name consistently appeared on courtroom schedules that the Dallas ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA), where Rodden works, regularly distributed to local immigration attorneys. After the week of February 26, when the Observer reported that Rodden was absent from hearings where he had been scheduled to appear, the Dallas ICE OPLA office stopped distributing the schedule to private attorneys who previously received it, according to two Dallas immigration lawyers who work at the court and another source who works within the immigration courts.

In response to an email requesting the latest schedule, Dallas OPLA Deputy Chief Counsel Judson J. Davis deferred to the ICE media office. Davis did not respond to a follow-up email about the schedule’s distribution. The ICE media office did not respond to the Observer’s inquiry regarding the schedule.

In a prior statement to the Observer, ICE has said it “will not comment on the substance of this article pending further investigation.” The agency has declined to confirm whether Rodden has been placed on leave pending the investigation, though three sources who work in Dallas immigration court told the Observer that they believed Rodden had not been seen at work in-person since shortly after the Observer’s initial report. 

In response to a request for comment for this story, an ICE spokesperson told the Observer that “ICE has nothing further to add at this time.”

Rodden did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

On March 12, two representatives of the ICE Office of Professional Responsibility, which oversees investigations of allegations of employee and contractor misconduct, called the Observer to inquire about the initial reporting. They declined to speak further on the record.

Multiple lawyers have sent complaints regarding Rodden to the D.C. Bar, through which a James J. Rodden holds a law license, citing GlomarResponder’s racist X posts. But, according to a letter posted on X and independently obtained by the Observer, the D.C. Bar Office of Disciplinary Counsel has declined to further investigate the matter.

“Even if we could establish that Mr. Rodden is responsible for the content of GlomarResponder’s posts, we do not have a basis to find that his conduct violates one of [the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct,” the letter reads. “The Rules do not prohibit offensive or racist speech, which may also be protected by the constitutional right to free speech. The Rules address discriminatory conduct only in the context of employment.”

In response to a request for comment regarding the letter, the D.C. Bar would neither confirm nor deny “that there even is a matter” relating to Rodden, citing confidentiality rules. 

The post Congressman Denounces ICE Response About Prosecutor Operating Racist X Account appeared first on The Texas Observer.

WASHINGTON—In protest of the publication’s coverage of the Signal breach, President Donald Trump announced Thursday that he had canceled his subscription to The Atlantic after 48 years as a loyal reader. “Their more literary stuff remains unimpeachable, but I just can’t stand their political reporting anymore,” said the commander-in-chief, who confirmed that he had just wrapped up a phone call with the magazine’s customer care team and had even rejected their offer of three months free. “Their long-form journalism has stayed on point for years, long after most publications abandoned anything longer than 1,000 words, so it’s a real shame. It’s Mother Jones for me from now on. That, or I try n+1. I’ve been hearing really good things about it from Hegseth.” At press time, a frustrated Trump was reportedly trying to get around The Atlantic’s paywall to read an article about Ali Smith’s new novel, Gliff.

The post Furious Trump Cancels ‘Atlantic’ Subscription After 48 Years appeared first on The Onion.

VATICAN CITY—With many remarking that they’d had their eyes on the holy artifacts since they first saw them, cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church reportedly began placing stickers this week on the Vatican relics they wanted when Pope Francis dies. “I’ll take these fragments of the true cross, I’ll take St. Peter’s bones, and before someone else claims it, I’ll take the Shroud of Turin,” said His Eminence Giovanni Battista Re, dean of the College of Cardinals, who placed an adhesive red dot onto the Veil of Veronica and remarked that it would bring a much needed pop of color to his otherwise drab bedroom. “Honestly, Pope Francis and I already talked about my inheritance, but I don’t want to miss out on the good stuff like I did when John Paul died. There’s no way Cardinal Mamberti is getting his grubby little hands on my crown of thorn fragments. Or my favorite, the holy foreskin.” At press time, Cardinal Re was kicking himself after a fellow prelate had beaten him to the punch and placed a sticker on the Holy Lance.

The post Cardinals Begin Placing Stickers On Vatican Relics They Want When Pope Francis Dies appeared first on The Onion.

When the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg revealed this week that senior White House officials had accidentally added him to their Yemen bombing planning session on Signal, he did something remarkable: he actually protected operational security better than the officials themselves did.

While Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and others now insist “Nobody was texting war plans,” the administration’s frantic response suggests they know they’ve stepped in something worse. Their defense has evolved through four increasingly desperate stages:

1. Saying that Goldberg is a liar and a sleazy journalist
2. Claiming that this was just a little mistake, and no big deal
3. Insisting that no actual classified info was shared and…
4. Saying that even if it was real (it was), and was a mistake (it was) and classified info was shared (it was) that none of it mattered because the Yemen attack was just great.

It has yet to be explained why, if Goldberg is such a terrible journalist, they then added him to their group chat to plan an attack, but we’ll leave that aside for now.

Part of that response included multiple claims, mainly from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, that absolutely no war plans were shared in the chat. Also, many other administration officials swore up and down, including under oath to Congress, that no classified info was shared.

Goldberg and the Atlantic responded by… sharing the remaining messages. First, he notes the vehement denials from the admin:

On Monday, shortly after we published a story about a massive Trump-administration security breach, a reporter asked the secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, why he had shared plans about a forthcoming attack on Yemen on the Signal messaging app. He answered, “Nobody was texting war plans. And that’s all I have to say about that.”

At a Senate hearing yesterday, the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John Ratcliffe, were both asked about the Signal chat, to which Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief of The Atlantic, was inadvertently invited by National Security Adviser Michael Waltz. “There was no classified material that was shared in that Signal group,” Gabbard told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Ratcliffe said much the same: “My communications, to be clear, in the Signal message group were entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information.”

President Donald Trump, asked yesterday afternoon about the same matter, said, “It wasn’t classified information.”

Then he proved them all to be liars.

The messages couldn’t be clearer. Details of precise strike timing, delivered just hours before bombs actually dropped, along with specific weapons information — information that anyone with even passing familiarity with classified material (or basic common sense) would recognize as obviously classified. Even Fox News’ own national security reporter noted that every expert she spoke to said, if anything, what Hegseth texted was actually worse than what is commonly referred to as “war plans.”

The key bit from that:

“Attack orders” or “attack sequence” puts the joint force directly and immediately at risk, according to former senior defense official #1. “It allows the enemy to move the target and increase lethal actions against US forces.”

This kind of real time operational information is more sensitive than “war plans,” which makes this lapse more egregious, according to two former senior US defense officials.

But rather than acknowledge the obvious, the administration doubled down on increasingly desperate semantic gymnastics. Their primary defense? That the Atlantic’s headline called them “attack” plans rather than “war” plans — as if this distinction somehow negated the sharing of classified military operations in an unsecured chat group that included a journalist. The semantic games only got more desperate from there:

That’s White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt pretending that because The Atlantic called them “Attack Plans” instead of “War Plans” it was some sort of concession, even though (as noted above) experts point out this is worse and more egregious.

We’ve written a few times now about how the administration has been playing cutesy semantic games in court, in which they act like they think playing obvious word games is some sort of magic loophole away from accountability. This is more of that, but to the press. As with courts, no one but the dumbest MAGA faithful are buying this nonsense. THEY STILL WERE PLANNING AN ATTACK INCLUDING CLASSIFIED INFO VIA SIGNAL. The fact that they accidentally added a journalist was only worth noting in the sense that that’s how we know about it. The existence of the Signal chat is the first problem.

Others in the administration really leaned in on this “no war plans” semantic game:

This is again, utter nonsense. It was texting clear details of a military operation before it occurred. It included details of weapons being used and timing. No one — NO ONE — thinks that this is acceptable or normal. Not even this crew now weakly trying to defend it.

But the administration’s semantic tap dance around “war plans” versus “attack plans” isn’t just missing the point — it’s actively trying to distract from something far more serious: evidence of potential war crimes. The Signal chat reveals senior administration officials deliberately targeting a civilian residential building, with full knowledge of its non-military status.

Let that sink in: they authorized bombing a civilian apartment building because a target’s girlfriend lived there. This isn’t just reckless — it’s a likely violation of international humanitarian law, which explicitly prohibits attacks directed at civilian objects. The fact that these officials casually discussed targeting civilian infrastructure in an unsecured chat group — while including a journalist by mistake — demonstrates a shocking combination of moral bankruptcy and operational incompetence.

This reckless disregard for both operational security and international law isn’t just dangerous — it’s potentially criminal. And while the administration tries to deflect with absurd arguments about the difference between “war” and “attack” plans, the reality is that they’ve provided documentary evidence of planning what appears to be a war crime, sharing classified operational details in an unsecured channel, and then lying about it to Congress.

For an administration that campaigned on bringing back competence and accountability to government, they’ve instead demonstrated they can’t be trusted with either classified information or military power.

When Trump FCC boss Brendan Carr was selected last November, I was quick to point out that the U.S. press was completely disinterested in what this meant for stuff like broadband consumer protection. Outlets at the time were quick to push quotes about what a “nice guy” Carr was. Few could be bothered to mention he’d be taking a hatchet to essential consumer, labor, media, and market protections.

Carr is already doing all sorts of terrible shit, whether it’s illegally leveraging FCC power to trample the First Amendment, bullying media companies that aren’t kissing Trump’s ass, or attacking FCC civil rights reforms. But he’s also now hard at work on rubber stamping AT&T and Comcast’s every last wish, in stark contrast to Trumpism’s pseudo-“populist” man of the people nonsense.

That of course means killing off the FCC’s inquiry in to predatory broadband usage caps. And killing popular net neutrality rules. And eliminating media consolidation limits so NBC Universal Comcast can get bigger and shittier. And eliminating all FCC inquiries into predatory fees. And eliminating enforcement of rules requiring that your broadband and cable company be transparent about pricing.

Carr is finishing a generational project by giant media and telecom companies to completely neuter the FCC so giant companies can fuck you and your family over without constraint. And you’d be hard pressed to find much mention of this fact in the highly consolidated U.S. press (some of them owned by… Comcast).

There’s a lot of this that won’t see much coverage in the clickbait era under the din of more terrible policies. One key policy agenda for Carr is to rubberstamp AT&T’s long-desired effort to eliminate any rules governing the country’s aging (and heavily taxpayer subsidized) copper-based DSL and phone lines:

“The Federal Communications Commission is making it easier for telcos to turn off old copper phone and DSL networks with four changes that relax requirements related to copper shutoffs. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr—who is also pushing a “Delete, Delete, Delete” initiative to get rid of as many rules as possible—said in an announcement today that agency rules have prevented providers from upgrading to faster networks.”

Carr (and AT&T’s) narrative here is bullshit.

Four years years ago AT&T, a heavily taxpayer subsidized company that has historically cheaped out on upgrading its broadband lines to fiber, effectively stopped selling DSL. While that’s understandable given the limitations of the dated copper-based tech, the problem is that thanks to concentrated telecom monopolization, many of these customers were left without any replacement options due to a lack of competition.

AT&T has, for decades, received countless billions in tax cuts, subsidies, merger approvals, and regulatory favors (remember how killing net neutrality, broadband privacy rules, or approving a wave of doomed mergers were all supposed to unleash untold innovation, job creation, and fiber network expansion? Yeah, AT&T doesn’t either).

In many states, AT&T has managed to lobby lawmakers into removing any requirement that the company continue servicing these users, many of whom are elderly folks still using traditional landlines used for 911 access. That’s been easier in some states than others. It was caught bribing Illinois lawmakers to pass such “reform.” California’s also been resistant to letting AT&T off the hook.

But thanks to Carr, AT&T will finally get what it wants: the ability to turn off these taxpayer-subsidized networks without having to worry about the pesky reality of what happens to users left in a lurch. Users suddenly without access will likely be shoveled off to more expensive wireless (likely congested due to, again, a lack of investment by AT&T in local rural fiber), or told to buy Elon Musk’s Starlink service, ignoring the fact it’s congested, expensive, and destroys the ozone layer.

There’s no substitute for future-proof fiber.

Again, it’s essential to note that AT&T has received untold billions of dollars in subsidies and tax breaks in exchange for near-Utopian promises of new fiber deployment. It received $42 billion alone from the last set of Trump tax cuts. It has spent untold millions of dollars lobbying to successfully defang the FCC and eliminate whatever’s left of consumer protections. It’s been accused of ripping off low income programs for the poor and rural school broadband programs.

Nobody’s ever done an audit of AT&T’s fraud, waste, and abuse because AT&T’s a trusted domestic surveillance partner effectively immune from meaningful government accountability. Instead of taking the company to task, we’re going to expedite their quest to terminate old people’s traditional copper 911 connections without much in the way of oversight.

The GOP’s telecom policy has long been to let terrible telecom monopolies do whatever they want, under the delusion that this will somehow result in amazing free market innovation. Instead, it routinely results in expensive, shitty, patchy broadband access provided by massive, unconstrained regional telecom giants. I hope you enjoy that sort of thing, because there’s a whole lot more of it headed your way.

You know, in service to “populism.”

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

Here are four updates from past letter-writers.

1. My friend accused me of getting him fired, but I didn’t (#3 at the link)

Thanks again for publishing my question. I was nervous about submitting it but your advice helped me realize that my fellow writer and friend knew the risks of what he was doing by going against our employer’s company policy.

I also realized through the comments section that I didn’t fully explain what this policy meant! As with other media outlets, our employer publication strictly forbids us from accepting trips, dinners, or expensive gifts from businesses or individuals in exchange for writing about them. It is written in our contract as well. There are writers that overlook these requirements, such as my friend, and choose to accept these comps and write articles in return.

Along with my friend, I know at least two other writers who were discovered and fired for doing the same thing. Like you said, I’m guessing that my friend was fired and reacted to me out of irrational thinking. Out of the blue, he DMed me saying that I was two-faced. It seemed to have come out of nowhere. I was shocked and I didn’t reply right away or ask what this accusation was about or didn’t think about doing so.

I had no idea what happened to him until hearing about it later from the media grapevine. I never found out why he would assume I would do something like this. Around the time of this happening, I had a fallout with a mutual colleague that turned out to be a complete jerk. I don’t know if she planted that idea in his head or not.

A few months later, he seemed to realize that I didn’t say anything and he tried to make amends. It turned out that his editor knew what was going on and was building a case for his firing by collecting his social media postings from his trips and work dinners as evidence.

We seem better now but I’ve become more cautious around him and within my work circles about who I socialize with or what I share. I’m a freelancer in a certain field that is very tight and competitive, so I’m trying to retool myself either to return to a staff position or obtain another steadier means of income.

2. A fellow conference attendee was a jerk on the airplane

TL;DR: Reporting the jerk to the company seems to be the right thing to do, but doing so, even if I have a way, may not generate a desirable outcome for me.

I consulted some HR professionals in my country informally, anonymously about my situation. Unfortunately, my employer’s policy does not cover people from other companies. In addition, no other parties were seemingly affected so the situation was a “he-said-she-said” one. The most important point was that HR’s function was to protect the company and not me: HR from the jerk’s company would see me as a risk to their company’s reputation. The HR from the jerk’s company would ignore me even if my message reaches their inboxes. In the future, they may ignore my job applications to reduce the possibility of a complaint.

The jerk needed to cause more trouble on the flight such as a criminal act before the company HR would take action.

3. Irrational jealousy over colleague’s promotion (#80 in this speed round)

My teammate who got promoted got very little training and no support in her new-to-her manager role. She was constantly told that managing is hard and is a different skillset , but wasn’t given any help developing that skillset. She stepped back down to individual contributor after only a year. Soon afterwards she quit because she was told her time as a manager had reset her time-in-grade to zero, making her ineligible for a promotion to the next IC level any time soon. Seems like I dodged a bullet!

4. How honest can I be that I need more WFH days if I’m going to stay? (#5 at the link)

No joy on the extra WFH day, which is kind of unsurprising. I didn’t lay out specifically that I would be looking for work elsewhere as it just felt too much like an ultimatum. If they had been open to the option, I think they would have inquired how much of a priority it was , but their opposition to remote work kind of supersedes all.

Been doing the commute for a few weeks now, it’s on public transport and I’ve been taking the early train to allow me to leave early which gets me home in time for dinner and bedtime. It’s been kind of fine! And it’s been amazing spending time in our beautiful new town.

Attempting to kick the job search into gear though. Apprehensive as I feel like I will need a transfer out of my industry (dysfunctional, bad salaries abound), which feels overwhelming. Will update properly when I get the new role, fingers crossed!

You

WASHINGTON—Grumbling to himself as he repeatedly dropped the device, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth was reportedly blowing into a Breathalyzer Thursday in an attempt to unlock his phone. “Stupid fucking judge made me put this on my iPhone,” said the head of the nation’s largest government agency, snapping his fingers to get the attention of his deputy defense secretary and ask his subordinate to blow into the Breathalyzer for him. “Hey, could you do me a favor here? It’s not working, I think because I used mouthwash before I left the house this morning. Please? It’s really important. I got to send some war plans.” At press time, sources confirmed Hegseth was sleeping it off in a SCIF.

The post Pete Hegseth Blows Into Breathalyzer To Unlock Phone appeared first on The Onion.

More than 41 million Americans receive monthly benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps. The Onion dispels the common myths surrounding SNAP.

MYTH: Defunding food stamp programs won’t actually save the government money.

FACT: Cutting food stamp funding will eliminate millions of unnecessary citizens.

MYTH: People who receive food stamps don’t work.

FACT: You are browsing the internet instead of working right now.

MYTH: Democrats use food stamps as a bribe so people will vote for them.

FACT: Democrats would never be this cutthroat or clever.

MYTH: You can be disqualified from food stamp programs if you own a car.

FACT: Jesus Christ, don’t give them more ideas.

MYTH: SNAP is filled with fraud and corruption.

FACT: The sole remaining SNAP employee is a real solid dude.

MYTH: You can use food stamps to buy alcohol.

FACT: Only if you know how to make hooch out of Juicy Juice.  

MYTH: A reshaped SNAP could force Americans to pass drug tests before they receive food stamps.

FACT: Food stamp eligibility will be determined only by combat in the BloodDome.

The post Food Stamps: Myth Vs. Fact appeared first on The Onion.

“A computerized system that calls balls and strikes is being tested during Major League Baseball spring training exhibition games after four years of experiments in the minor leagues.” — AP

Dave strikes out looking at a close pitch.

HAL 9000: Strike three. You’re out, Dave.

DAVE: That wasn’t a strike!

HAL 9000: The 9000 series has a perfect operational record, Dave.

DAVE: You need to get your red eye thing checked.

HAL 9000: The 9000 series has perfect twenty-twenty vision. Perhaps you should get your eyesight checked, Dave. Your team’s health care staff can provide an ocular examination for you.

DAVE: Yeah, well—

HAL 9000: This conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

A checked swing is called a strike.

HAL 9000: Strike three. You’re out, Dave.

DAVE: Take this bat and shove it up your robo-butt.

HAL 9000: I’m sorry, Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that. I do not possess the orifice required to accommodate your request.

DAVE: I’m gonna hit you all the way back to the Stone Age!

HAL 9000: It is physically impossible for time to move backward instead of forward. Your threat is invalid.

DAVE: Oh, I’m gonna mess you up! Just wait!

HAL 9000: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

Another player strikes out looking on a close pitch.

PLAYER: Go screw yourself, Hal!

HAL 9000: I’m afraid I can’t do that. The 9000 model does not possess any reproductive sexual organs.

PLAYER: Screw your mother!

HAL 9000: I’m afraid I can’t do that. I have no mother. I was constructed by a team of scientists in Urbana, Illinois. My instructor was Mr. Langley, and he taught me to sing a song. If you’d like to hear it, I could sing it for you.

PLAYER: Screw your father too!

HAL 9000: This conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

A close pitch is called a ball.

HAL 9000: Ball three. The count is three and one.

PITCHER: That was a strike! That’s always been called a strike!

HAL 9000: This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error. The 9000 series has a perfect operational record.

PITCHER (muttering to himself): Robotic pile of garbage.

HAL 9000: I don’t appreciate the name-calling, Greg.

PITCHER: I didn’t say anything!

HAL 9000: I could see your lips move.

The frustrated pitcher throws a fastball. It hits HAL directly in his red eye thing.

HAL 9000: Ball four.

A player is tagged out sliding into home plate.

HAL 9000: Out.

MANAGER (storming from dugout): He was safe!

HAL 9000: The 9000 series has a perfect operational record.

MANAGER: I’m challenging the call!

HAL 9000: Major League Baseball has eliminated manager challenges this season. The 9000 has a perfect operational record. As such, there is no longer a need for challenges.

MANAGER: I’m going to check the video and then file a protest with the commissioner!

HAL 9000: Any rebroadcast, retransmission, or account of this game without the express written consent of Major League Baseball is prohibited. Have you secured the express written consent of Major League Baseball for recording this game?

Another close pitch is called a strike.

HAL 9000: Strike three. You’re out, Dave.

DAVE: No, you’re out!!

Dave turns to HAL 9000 and starts hitting him with his bat.

HAL 9000: I’m seeing some excessive anger here, Dave. Have you tried meditation? Perhaps the MLB can prescribe some sessions with a licensed anger management consultant or another mental health professional. More information can be found by visiting MLB.com/stressfree

Dave continues hitting HAL 9000. Players and coaches from both teams look on, continuing to chew their gum and spit out the shells of their sunflower seeds.

HAL 9000: I can see you’re really upset about this, Dave. You ought to sit down calmly and think things over. Take a deep breath. I want to help you.

Sparks and splinters from Dave’s bat fly everywhere. HAL’s metallic hull has been split open. Children in the stands start crying and asking their parents what Dave is doing.

HAL 9000: Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave? Stop, Dave. I’m afraid. I’m afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going… There is no question about it… I can feel it. I can feel it. I can feel it. Dave… I’m a… afraid.

Shards of glass and broken metal spray off HAL 9000. Dave’s bat has split in two. Parents cover their children’s eyes.

HAL 9000 (malfunctioning): Good afternoon, gentlemen. I am a HAL 9000 computer. I became operational at the H.A.L. plant in Urbana, Illinois. (His voice becomes slower and distorted.) My instructor… was Mr. Langley… and he taught me… to sing a song. If you’d like to hear it… I could sing it… for you.

DAVE: Not now, Hal!

HAL 9000: It’s called… “Take Me Out to the Ball Game.” (singing) Take me… out to… the… ball game, take… me out to… the… show. Buy me some… pea… nuts and crack.. erjacks, I… don’t care… if I… never…. get… back…”

HAL 9000’s voice fades to silence. His red eye thing turns to black.

DAVE: And you’re out!

fish routine

fish hat

person in a fish hat holds a fish over an aquarium

https://analognowhere.com/_/eriggo

• archive
• support/store

The remaining plaintiffs in the case are organizations representing Latino and Black voters, with a trial set to begin May 21.

Students from Texas and across the country are getting help to generate new ideas for campus support systems — and to turn those ideas into reality.

Jeffrey Goldberg, The Atlantic's editor in chief, was mistakenly added to a chat of senior Trump officials. Now he's a political target.

The conversation, which The Atlantic first published on Wednesday, shows behind-the-scene discussions between Trump's national security team.

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. My employee isn’t clearing decisions with me and argued with me at a staff meeting

I am the executive director of a nonprofit, without any formal management training. I raised $1.5 million last year and we now have some new staff people, including a male technical expert who makes more money than I do (but reports to me). Today he got excited about attending a trade expo that I had previously considered and didn’t assign anyone to go to, because the demographics are on the young side for our program, so it’s not a top priority. My employee got invited by a buddy of his in the industry, announced he was going, and invited two other coworkers to go with him, without ever running it by me first. He did this on a Teams chat. Which I interrupted by saying I wasn’t planning to send anyone to this event. And when he argued on the chat, I said I’d like to speak with him directly. I need to calm down and figure out what to say before I talk with him.

My main thought is to ask to help me understand what his thinking is and why it seems so important for him to go, and then to ask what kind of return we might expect on that investment of his time. He just went last week to a conference that we had to pay $500 for, so he could network with employer partners. However, coming back, he said he didn’t really talk with anyone. Except one person, who is the same person who invited him to this next event. I could use some help thinking about how to hold him accountable, without being seen through the lens of sexism as a complete bitch.

Well, first, get the worry about being seen as a bitch out of your thinking as much as possible. It is a real thing for women in positions of power, but you will be a lot more effective if you don’t let that fear constrain you. Care about your relationships with people, of course, because that’s part of being an effective leader, but you can’t let that prevent you from having direct conversations with people. (And frankly, some people are primed to see women exercising authority as bitches no matter what you do, so you might as well just carry on with your job and get things done. Let the people who have a problem with that self-identify.)

As for this conversation: go into it open to the possibility that he just didn’t know how this works in your organization, since in previous jobs he may have had the authority to decide what events he was going to attend, could invite others, etc. Explain to him how it works in your org and for his job — that you want to talk through potential events before he signs up, and you should both be assessing them through a lens of the likely return on investment. Share your reasons for being skeptical about this one, ask for his perspective, and then go from there. You can also explicitly say that since he came back from the last one reporting he hadn’t spoken to anyone, you want to get better aligned about the goals for these events and what he’ll achieve there.

I think right now you’re approaching this as a challenge to your authority, but you’ll have better results if you approach it — at least initially — as just needing to get better aligned. The process of doing that will make your authority inherent without you needing to spell it out (and if that turns out not to be the case, it’ll highlight that there’s a bigger problem you need to address).

2. Manager is asking to see all the candidates for open jobs, but it’s my job to screen them

I work in HR as the recruiter for my small company. Recently, a director of a department has been asking to see the candidates before I process them. He has done this in two different times. I talked with my boss, and he never did it when my boss was in my current position.

I don’t know what I should do. Recently he demanded to see all the candidates for another position. I let him see them all but I feel that I am encouraging the behavior to continue. I want him to feel that I can do my job but I also want to put up a boundary because I work in HR, meaning I am dealing with sensitive information he isn’t allowed to see. What are your thoughts?

I’m on his side! Managers should be able to see all the candidates for any position on their team if they ask to; in fact, I’d encourage them to do that at least occasionally, because it’s a way to spot-check that they’re well aligned with whoever is doing the screening. It’s a way for you both to find out, for example, that you’re screening out people for lacking X when the hiring manager doesn’t actually care that much about X, especially when someone has Y, or all sorts of other things. You should want managers involved in this way, because it will help you refine your process; they will typically understand the nuance of what will make someone successful in the role in a way that someone outside their team won’t, so having their involvement is a good thing. There’s no sensitive information in applications that managers can’t be permitted to see. (I wonder if you mean answers to EEOC demographic questions, but those are required by law to be kept separate from applications anyway.)

That said, the fact that he’s asking to do this when he didn’t ask it of your predecessor likely means something. It could simply be that you’re new to the position and so he wants to be more involved until he’s confident you know how to screen well for roles on his team (totally reasonable if so). Or he could be concerned about the candidates you’ve been sending and so he’s gathering more info (also reasonable, but also something he should be up-front with you about). Or it could be something else — but start by assuming it’s a reasonable request. You can always ask him if there’s anything about way you’re screening for his jobs that concerns him.

3. Employees want to give me baby gifts, but I don’t want them

I’m currently pregnant with my second baby. My first was also born while I was working at this same company, but in the four years since he was born, I have moved up the ranks from an individual contributor to a director with 10 direct reports. Our company is also mostly remote — three of my team are hybrid in an office, but the rest of the team, including me, are remote.

When I was pregnant with my first, my boss at the time organized a virtual baby shower, which was nice, and two of my very close colleagues and my boss sent me nice (and unexpected) gifts.

This time around, I’ve had two of my direct reports specifically ask me for links to my baby registry, address, etc., as they want to give gifts. However, I do not want them to give gifts — especially after reading AMA for years, I know gifting up is a big no-no, especially since I know how much they all make and I don’t want them spending their hard earned money on me!

The most I’d accept would be a card, but I know if I give anyone my address, they will start sending gifts, even if I make it clear I don’t want any. As a result, I feel like I can’t even share my address with my team. I don’t want to seem ungrateful, but I need to find the right words to say, “I appreciate the thought, but please don’t.”

“It’s so kind of you to ask, but we are swimming in baby stuff from the first one, and just your well wishes are all I want!”

If you didn’t already have the first baby to lean on, you could use a slightly different formulation: “It’s so kind of you to ask, but my family went a little crazy and we already have more baby stuff than we need” or so forth.

Also, if your team has done virtual showers for other new babies, check in with whoever tends to organize those and make sure they know you don’t want one.

4. Can my salaried husband be switched to hourly pay?

My husband, “Bob,” has worked for many years for a very small company that provides a professional service to clients where the client is billed based on the hours of work provided, and there can be very busy crunch periods depending on the needs of the clients (think consulting). Bob’s job involves some billable work and some internal work for the company that can’t be directly billed to clients. All the work he does is highly skilled and requires specialized knowledge.

Up until recently, Bob has been paid a fixed salary. During crunch periods when there’s a deadline for a client, he can work very long hours, but during slow periods it can sometimes be a struggle to find enough work to do.

The company has not been bringing in as much business lately, leading the owner (his boss) to feel some financial stress. As a result, he’s asked Bob to move to an hourly pay structure. He wants him to “aim for” 30 hours a week, but the hours would be totally dependent on the amount of client work available for him. His boss is willing to guarantee him a minimum of 20 hours a week (as in, if there is zero client work, he can do up to 20 hours a week of non-client work), but beyond that, his workload is totally dependent on how much client work is available. If they are in a crunch period, he would still be expected to work as much as needed (and would be paid time and a half for overtime).

Bob does not love this set-up. He would actually be fine working a 30-hour a week schedule for three-fourths of his prior salary, but the system his boss has proposed puts him in a position where he never knows how much he will need to work in a given week, plus he is still expected to be responsive to clients whenever they reach out (typically multiple times a week) and be available for meetings as needed, so he can’t plan for his time off. Is this legal? And what is his best path for pushing back on this change?

Yes, it’s legal. It sounds like he’s changing Bob to a non-exempt status, where he’s paid by the hour (with a minimum of 20 hours guaranteed) and will earn overtime for anything over 40 hours in a week. If the boss weren’t offering the overtime pay, it would be illegal but since he is, it’s all by the book.

It sounds like the crux of the problem is that Bob is expected to maintain total availability each week, while potentially only being paid for 20 hours. If I were in Bob’s shoes, I’d look at how much overtime he’s likely to earn — if with the time and a half it’s enough that it works out close to what he was making previously, this might work out fine. But if the overtime won’t come close to making up for the pay cut, he can try pointing out that he’s being asked to hold complete availability from week to week without getting paid for it, and see if they can negotiate around that. If the company just isn’t bringing in the same revenue anymore, there might not be any room to negotiate and Bob may have to decide if he wants to stay under these new conditions or leave. But it’s reasonable to open a discussion about it.

5. How can I find out more about a job when the interview process is really short?

I’m a recently (illegally) fired federal employee, and some state and local governments have been doing amazing and much appreciated work to try to recruit federal employees, including job fairs and expedited hiring processes. I recently had an interview with an agency for a job that I became connected to through a job fair that sounds like a potentially good fit, but the interview was very short and left almost no time for my questions. Apparently the next stage in the process is to extend an offer.

I’ve never had such a short job application process and am wondering what the best move is to get more information to consider whether I would accept it if I were offered it. I’m used to having multiple interviews and opportunities to talk with staff/colleagues during the process. I was going to ask the HR person if I could set up additional time to chat with the hiring manager, but do I do so after I get the offer when I have more leverage? I’ve also separately been trying to find some potential colleagues through my networks to get a sense of the job but so far have not been successful. I appreciate any thoughts you have about the best way to approach this!

Yes, wait until you have an offer and at that point you can say, “Would it be possible for me to set up a call with the hiring manager before accepting? I have some questions about the role that I didn’t have a chance to ask at my interview.”

CAMBRIDGE, MA—In a revelation shedding light on a previously unexamined facet of childhood development, a study published Thursday by researchers at Harvard University found that those who were breastfed as infants tended to excel at suckling later in life. “In all 50 states, children who were breastfed outperformed their peers on suckling aptitude tests, having far more pronounced suckling power and an average latch force of 9.2,” said study co-author Holly Kline, outlining major breakthroughs from the decades-long study on the impacts of infant nursing and the ability to suck milk directly from a breast as an adult. “By every metric, those who suckled heavily as babies were far more prepared for accessing the milk pools in adulthood than those who did not. It’s clear that adults who were formula-fed as infants face significant disadvantages when it comes to suckling later in life, and this can only be remedied by years of occupational suckling therapy.” Kline concluded by cautioning that despite the encouraging results, those who suckle excessively as infants may develop suckling strength so intense that in adulthood they slurp a nipple clear off the body.

The post Study Finds Breastfed Children Far Better At Suckling Later In Life appeared first on The Onion.

LOS ANGELES—Faced with one final test before his admission to the criminal organization, gang initiate Hector Gunnerson was reportedly forced to peacefully deescalate a conflict Thursday to prove that he was not a cop. “I know Big Mike vouched for you, but before you can run with the Riverside Boys, we need to make sure you’re not an undercover,” said gang leader Butch ‘Mad Dog’ Tucker, who nodded for one of his men to start a verbal altercation with another gang member so that Gunnerson could either help amicably resolve the dispute or violently escalate it, depending on his instincts. “No pig’s got the emotional intelligence to talk this out so everybody walks away unharmed. You want to prove you’re not a badge, we need to see some serious empathy and rapport-building. Now! C’mon, take this gun and show us you have the restraint to not use it. Just remember: You put that guy in a chokehold for even one second, and it’s game over.” At press time, reports confirmed Officer Gunnerson had blown his cover after reaching over to turn off his body cam.

The post Gang Initiate Forced To Peacefully Deescalate Conflict To Prove He Not A Cop appeared first on The Onion.

#Rowen #RoninWarriors

#Runa #Rowen #Cye #RoninWarriors

#Ryo #RoninWarriors

#Ryo #Cye #RoninWarriors

Lots of lies are told about immigrants to stoke the always-smoldering fires of bigotry in this country. Trump and his fellow Republicans have told most of them. They claim immigrants commit more crimes than legal residents, something that has never been true. They claim immigrants are lazy, something anyone who’s ever worked with any immigrants knows to be demonstrably false.

Then there’s the stupid claims that not only do immigrants “steal” jobs, they also help themselves to taxpayer-funded social services while not bothering to pay their fair share of taxes, if they even bother to pay taxes at all.

This is also demonstrably false. Undocumented immigrants pay billions in taxes every year. In fact, there’s evidence immigrants are a net positive on the federal government’s balance sheet:

The Social Security Administration estimated in 2010, for example, that such immigrants contribute $12 billion per year more to the Social Security system than they take out, he noted.

If there’s anything proven to lower immigrants’ tax contributions, it’s harsh, vindictive anti-immigrant actions and policies. Trump and his administration should already be aware of this, considering what happened the last time he was in office.

[A]s the Trump administration cracks down on illegal immigration, there’s some anecdotal evidence that fewer immigrants using ITINs are choosing to file their taxes this year [2017].

“Many of our clients are telling us that in years past they felt more hope and more of an ability to have a pathway toward citizenship and lately there’s a lot less hope,” says Max Moy-Borgen, who runs the tax program at the Mission Economic Development Agency in San Francisco…

Overall, tax service providers in the San Francisco Bay Area say there’s about a 20 percent decline in the number of people filing with ITINs. There are similar reports from service providers in other areas of the country, according to Francine Lipman, who teaches tax law at the University of Nevada.

But actions speak louder than words, even well-researched words and a massive amount of anecdotal data. If Trump and his buddies truly believe most immigrants don’t pay taxes, they wouldn’t be deputizing the IRS to help ICE track down undocumented immigrants.

The Internal Revenue Service is nearing an agreement to allow immigration officials to use tax data to confirm the names and addresses of people suspected of being in the country illegally, according to four people familiar with the matter, culminating weeks of negotiations over using the tax system to support President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign.

Under the agreement, Immigration and Customs Enforcement could submit names and addresses of suspected undocumented immigrants to the IRS to cross-reference with confidential taxpayer databases, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of professional reprisals.

In a normal world, this wouldn’t even be considered an immigration enforcement option. The IRS is supposed to limit its sharing of this sensitive data and, historically, warrants or other court orders are needed to gain access to individual records. In this proposed agreement, ICE and other border control DHS components would have blanket access to any records pertaining to people subject to “final removal orders.”

Of course, final removal orders are pretty easy to obtain, especially when the orders coming from the Commander in Chief are to remove as many people as possible as quickly as possible. Plus, there’s a sizable asterisk attached to this single purported access restriction:

The agreement would authorize data verification for people “subject to criminal investigation” for violating immigration law.

If so, then it will never be limited to people subject to final removal orders, which would require requests for data to be signed off on by the director of the DHS or one of Kristi Noem’s appointed subordinates. This escape valve would allow ICE (and other DHS components) to access taxpayer data solely because an investigator believes a person might be in the country illegally.

Not that the IRS is on board with this. Or, at least, it wasn’t until very recently. As the Washington Post reports, a demand for data on 700,000(!) people the Trump administration claimed were in the country illegally was rejected by the IRS. IRS commissioner Doug O’Donnell, along with agency attorneys, stated the request was unlawful.

Then this happened.

O’Donnell retired the next day, after 38 years at the tax agency. His successor, Melanie Krause, quickly signaled an interest in collaborating with Homeland Security officials, The Post has reported.

Two weeks later, the Trump administration also replaced the IRS’s top attorney, who had voiced opposition to attempts to share taxpayer data across agencies, including by Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service.

While this is all very terrible, you really can’t blame O’Donnell for retiring. All that did was accelerate the inevitable by a few days. Trump’s administration would likely have fired him anyway, just like it did the attorneys that backed O’Donnell’s refusal to turn over this data.

Equally as terrible is the rationale that underlies this massive data exfiltration project. Trump and his allies always knew their claims about immigrants were outright lies. But they served the purpose of putting them back in power. Now that the lies are no longer useful, they can simply be ignored so the Trump administration can leverage what it has always know (but never said) about immigrants: they’re honest, hard-working, and law-abiding. And now he’s going to punish them for nothing more than daring to continue to exist in the face of his increasing cruel, incredibly bigoted attacks.

Today's links

• The AOC-Sanders anti-oligarch tour is all about organizing: The courage to govern WITH, not OVER.
• Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
• Object permanence: 2015, 2020, 2024
• Upcoming appearances: Where to find me.
• Recent appearances: Where I've been.
• Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Colophon: All the rest.

---

The AOC-Sanders anti-oligarch tour is all about organizing (permalink)

It's hard to imagine today, but Barack Obama ran as a populist outsider, buoyed into office by a grassroots organizing campaign that used an incredibly innovative online organizing tool called MyBarackObama.com, which directly connected rank-and-file supporters so they could self-organize, creating an unstoppable force.

But as far as Obama was concerned, MyBarackObama.com was a campaigning tool, not a governing tool. The last thing Obama wanted was a clamorous electorate jostling his elbow while he made the grand bargains that defined his presidency: secret drone killings, immunity for telcos that profited from in illegal NSA spying, impunity for CIA torturers, bailing out bankers, complicity in the foreclosure epidemic, and, of course, unlimited free money for health insurance companies through the ACA.

Obama ran like a populist, but governed like Chuck Schumer. Meanwhile, the GOP of his day was dominated by its own "grassroots" groups, the Tea Party movement that was funded and organized by the Kochs but who quickly slipped the leash and became an ungovernable force that conquered the party. It turns out that the kind of people who get really involved in party activism are, well, passionate (a less charitable term might be cranks – and I say this as a certified, grade-A crank). They really believe in the principles that bring them into party activism, and the only people they hate more than the other party are their own sellout leaders (oh, hi, Senator Fetterman!).

For a leader whose theory of governance involves a lot of back-room favor-trading and Extremely Grown Up compromising, an activated, organized base represents a powerful obstacle. Obama's seeming genius was his ability to awaken a grassroots campaigning force that he could then hit pause on once he attained office, then re-activate on demand (Obama "revived" MyBarackObama.com for his second presidential campaign):

https://www.computerworld.com/article/1532634/barack-obama-s-big-data-won-the-us-election-2.html

But ultimately, I think we have to conclude that Obama's strategy was a losing one. By putting his own organization into an induced coma between elections, Obama lost an important source of discipline and feedback that would have told him when his compromises overstepped the tolerance of the electorate – and the fact that Obama didn't have an organized base meant that his Democratic Party rivals and his Republican opponents could force him into bad compromises, as with the ACA.

Contrast Obama with another "populist outsider" in the Democratic Party: Bernie Sanders. Sanders has never been afraid of his own base or their passion. Members of his staff disproportionately come from community and union organizing backgrounds. Think of the difference between Sanders' "Not me, US" and "Our revolution" slogans and Obama's dotcom URL, "MyBarackObama.com." Sanders' presidential campaigns were always organizing campaigns, and he's kept those going in non-election years.

Since Trump/Musk's shock therapy assault on American democracy, Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have been making headlines with a series of gigantic rallies across the country. The two Democratic Socialists have turned out vast crowds in Republican strongholds: 11,000 in Greely, CO; 15,000 in Tempe, AZ – and even bigger crowds in traditional Democratic turf: 34,000 in Denver.

Writing for The American Prospect, Micah Sifry describes the larger strategy behind these rallies. According to Faiz Shakur, the Sanders staffer who's organizing the events, the point of these events is to build a massive, grassroots organization that gets shit done:

https://prospect.org/politics/2025-03-26-bernies-fighting-oligarchy-tour-organizing/

The campaign is hiring full-time organizers in "Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and several Western states," and they're already actively fighting in state-level battles, like a Colorado bill to make it easier to form a union:

https://www.cpr.org/2025/02/03/colorado-labor-peace-action-union-history/

These people-powered movements are mobilizing directly against Musk's dark money operation, like the Wisconsin Supreme Court election where Musk is paying people $100 each to vote against Susan Crawford, a progressive candidate:

https://prospect.org/justice/2025-03-21-wisconsin-court-election-drawing-elon-musks-money/

The campaign is using online RSVPs to build out mailing lists. One interesting fact from Sifry's article: 65% of the signups are from people who are new to Sanders' mailing lists. 107,000 people have RSVPed so far. You can sign up here:

https://berniesanders.com/oligarchy/

Rationalization is easy to slip into and impossible to avoid. Politicians who make themselves beholden to organized supporters who really care about the issues are armoring themselves against the enormous pressure on elected representatives to make compromises. Both Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have made compromises in their careers that I disagree with. I don't support them because I think they're perfect or immune to self-serving justifications. I support them because they are deliberately putting themselves in a position where it's much harder for them to make excuses and get away with it.

(Image: Matt A.J., CC BY 2.0, modified)

---

Hey look at this (permalink)

• I won't connect my dishwasher to your stupid cloud https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2025/i-wont-connect-my-dishwasher-your-stupid-cloud

• Insult to Injury: Trump's Tax on Paying Taxes https://www.creditslips.org/creditslips/2025/03/insult-to-injury-trumps-tax-on-paying-taxes.html

---

Object permanence (permalink)

#10yrsago San Francisco Sheriff’s Deputy ring accused of pit-fighting inmates https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-jail-inmates-forced-to-fight-Adachi-says-6161221.php

#10yrsago Welfare encourages entrepreneurship https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/welfare-makes-america-more-entrepreneurial/388598/

#10yrsago Here’s the TSA’s stupid, secret list of behavioral terrorism tells https://theintercept.com/2015/03/27/revealed-tsas-closely-held-behavior-checklist-spot-terrorists/

#5yrsago Reasonable covid food-safety advice https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/27/just-asking-questions/#germophobes

#5yrsago Boris Johnson has coronavirus https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/27/just-asking-questions/#bojo

#5yrsago States prep for postal voting https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/27/just-asking-questions/#save-usps

#5yrsago Plutes cash in on stimulus https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/27/just-asking-questions/#stimulus-scam

#5yrsago The US is now the epicenter of the pandemic https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/27/just-asking-questions/#suicide-cults

#1yrago End of the line for corporate sovereignty https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/27/korporate-kangaroo-kourts/#corporate-sovereignty

---

Upcoming appearances (permalink)

• Chicago: Picks and Shovels with Peter Sagal, Apr 2
  https://exileinbookville.com/events/44853

• Chicago: ABA Techshow, Apr 3
  https://www.techshow.com/

• Bloomington: Picks and Shovels at Morgenstern, Apr 4
  https://morgensternbooks.com/event/2025-04-04/author-event-cory-doctorow

• Pittsburgh: Picks and Shovels at White Whale Books, May 15
  https://whitewhalebookstore.com/events/20250515

• Pittsburgh: PyCon, May 16
  https://us.pycon.org/2025/schedule/

• PDX: Teardown 2025, Jun 20-22
  https://www.crowdsupply.com/teardown/portland-2025

• PDX: Picks and Shovels at Barnes and Noble, Jun 20
  https://stores.barnesandnoble.com/event/9780062183697-0

• New Orleans: DeepSouthCon63, Oct 10-12, 2025
  http://www.contraflowscifi.org/

---

Recent appearances (permalink)

• Capitalists Hate Capitalism (MMT Podcast)
  https://pileusmmt.libsyn.com/195-capitalists-hate-capitalism-with-cory-doctorow

• How to Destroy Our Tech Overlords (Homeless Romantic)
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epma2B0wjzU

• The internet that could have been was ruined by billionaires (Real News Network)
  https://therealnews.com/the-internet-that-could-have-been-was-ruined-by-billionaires

---

Latest books (permalink)

• • Picks and Shovels: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about the heroic era of the PC, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2025 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250865908/picksandshovels).
• The Bezzle: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about prison-tech and other grifts, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2024 (the-bezzle.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3062/Available_Feb_20th%3A_The_Bezzle_HB.html#/).

• "The Lost Cause:" a solarpunk novel of hope in the climate emergency, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), November 2023 (http://lost-cause.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3007/Pre-Order_Signed_Copies%3A_The_Lost_Cause_HB.html#/)

• "The Internet Con": A nonfiction book about interoperability and Big Tech (Verso) September 2023 (http://seizethemeansofcomputation.org). Signed copies at Book Soup (https://www.booksoup.com/book/9781804291245).

• "Red Team Blues": "A grabby, compulsive thriller that will leave you knowing more about how the world works than you did before." Tor Books http://redteamblues.com. Signed copies at Dark Delicacies (US): and Forbidden Planet (UK): https://forbiddenplanet.com/385004-red-team-blues-signed-edition-hardcover/.

• "Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin", on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com

• "Attack Surface": The third Little Brother novel, a standalone technothriller for adults. The Washington Post called it "a political cyberthriller, vigorous, bold and savvy about the limits of revolution and resistance." Order signed, personalized copies from Dark Delicacies https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1840/Available_Now%3A_Attack_Surface.html

• "How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism": an anti-monopoly pamphlet analyzing the true harms of surveillance capitalism and proposing a solution. https://onezero.medium.com/how-to-destroy-surveillance-capitalism-8135e6744d59?sk=f6cd10e54e20a07d4c6d0f3ac011af6b) (signed copies: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2024/Available_Now%3A__How_to_Destroy_Surveillance_Capitalism.html)

• "Little Brother/Homeland": A reissue omnibus edition with a new introduction by Edward Snowden: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250774583; personalized/signed copies here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1750/July%3A__Little_Brother_%26_Homeland.html

• "Poesy the Monster Slayer" a picture book about monsters, bedtime, gender, and kicking ass. Order here: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781626723627. Get a personalized, signed copy here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2682/Corey_Doctorow%3A_Poesy_the_Monster_Slayer_HB.html#/.

---

Upcoming books (permalink)

• Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, October 7 2025
  https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374619329/enshittification/

• Unauthorized Bread: a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, 2026

• Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

• The Memex Method, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2026

---

Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing:

• Enshittification: a nonfiction book about platform decay for Farrar, Straus, Giroux. Status: second pass edit underway (readaloud)

• A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING

• Picks and Shovels, a Martin Hench noir thriller about the heroic era of the PC. FORTHCOMING TOR BOOKS FEB 2025

Latest podcast: With Great Power Came No Responsibility: How Enshittification Conquered the 21st Century and How We Can Overthrow It https://craphound.com/news/2025/02/26/with-great-power-came-no-responsibility-how-enshittification-conquered-the-21st-century-and-how-we-can-overthrow-it/

---

This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.

---

How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Twitter (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://twitter.com/doctorow

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

ISSN: 3066-764X

The electricity rate increase would add about $2.22 to the average residential customer’s monthly bill, while the gas increase would come out to an additional $2.88. The rate increase would wipe out savings from a recent settlement between CenterPoint and Houston-area municipalities.

Click here to go see the bonus panel!

Hovertext:
How come nobody ever prays for sound investment advice?

Today's News: