Eucatastrophe

He was given the keys to the Cathedral by the priests. They put him in charge of locking up and gave him verger duties. After he set it on fire, destroying the organ and organ loft, Fr Maire offered him a safe haven in his home to await trial. He proceeded to murder Fr Maire.

@romanhelmetguy @KurtSchlichter

In the Late American Republic, Congress became a vestigial organ. While legislative power was still nominally vested in this body, the high degree of consensus required to pass any legislation, combined with the roughly even and increasingly hostile division of the populace into the Reds and the Blues, prevented any major reforms from being enacted. The only true power remaining in the body rested in its ability to veto the President's military expenditures as well as his choice of ministers. To keep the government from failing completely, exceptions to the usual high vote threshold were carved out for the appointment of ministers. But the veto power over military expenditures was increasingly exercised. For historical reasons, military expenditures had to be approved by Congress yearly. This was in marked contrast to the vast majority of the government's actual expenditures (cash, food, and other in-kind payments to the poor and elderly), which were funded in perpetuity and thus elevated above the annual machinations of this fickle body. The controversy around military expenditures typically centered around the border troops and internal security forces. The Blues enjoyed marked support from the Mesoamericans who had recently migrated into the empire, and thus wished to minimize the number and efficacy of these troops in order to allow more such foreigners to slip through the empire's porous borders. Meanwhile, in public, the Reds supported drastically increasing spending on these border guards. But privately, many were beholden to the large landowners who employed these new arrivals on their plantations. Because of this dynamic, by the end of the 2020s, between 1 in 10 and 1 in 5 Americans were descended from ancestors who had managed to evade these border guards (their descendants were granted full citizenship by virtue of having been born on American soil). This dynamic continued until tensions between the Blues and the Reds boiled over. The power base of the Blues consisted of recently arrived Mesoamericans (as stated previously), but also the learned class of Europeans that constituted the administrative layers of the governmental and corporate bureaucracies, in addition to the descendants of freed African slaves. All of these groups were overwhelmingly urban. In contrast, the power base of the Reds consisted of the vast European rural peasantry that still constituted the plurality of Late Republican society, in addition to the commercially-minded merchants, traders, and plantation owners who were wary of the growing tax power of the administrative class. There was also a marked sex divide: women tended to favor the Blues, while men favored the Reds. The Blues were reformists and revolutionaries, the Reds conservatives and traditionalists. The aim of the Blues was the creation of a powerful state with wide-sweeping powers to tax the commerce of rich Reds in order to fund the distribution of food, shelter, medicine, and cash payments to their core base of poor urban Mesoamericans and Africans. This state was (of course) to be administered by the learned class of Blue bureaucrats. The aim of the Reds was divided. Their core rural base wished to return to the social and political arrangements of the Middle Republic. They especially harkening back to what they saw as the era of America's greatest prosperity, the 1950s (when America had emerged as the only major power whose lands were largely unscathed from the Second European War). Meanwhile the rich Reds sought primarily to tighten their monopoly on the Late Republic's land and commerce, and resist the encroachments of the Blue-backed administrative state. Demographic momentum was on the side of the Blues. However, in the mid-2020s, the Reds swept to power across all government bodies, riding a wave of anti-Blue sentiment. Yet, due to the aforementioned Red divide and the previously stated high vote threshold required to enact major reform, the Reds only managed to stall the momentum of the Blues, not reverse it. The porous border was closed, many migrants were rounded up in the interior of the republic, but no major laws were enacted that could've consolidated the Reds' power. And the rich Reds undermined their own power base by continuing to push for more migrants to be allowed into the republic to serve as cheap labor in their enterprises. A dissatisfied and fickle populace swept the Blues back into power. The tactics the Reds had used to round up migrants in the interior of the republic had shocked the power base of the Blues, and even many of those who normally supported the Reds came out against it. This became the Blue's pretense for doing away with the high vote threshold required to enact major reform (the threshold had only ever been a technicality based on governing norms, and was easily dispensed with once those norms were no longer seen as sacred). Suddenly Congress became not only powerful, but nearly all-powerful. The number of judges in the highest court was increased. The new appointees were all Blues, they served for life, and could not be removed. This ensured perpetual Blue control of judicial functions. A Mesoamerican protectorate was elevated into a State and given representation in Congress. The capital city, highly urban and Blue, was also turned into a State and given representation. This ensured perpetual Blue control of the legislative functions. And the Blue legislative majority then enacted voting reforms that heavily favored Blue Presidential candidates. These reforms were rubber-stamped by the Blue judiciary, ensuring perpetual Blue control of the executive function as well.

Hello Senator Thune, At 3 AM on Friday, March 27th, in a near-empty chamber, you passed a bill by voice vote that excludes all funding for ICE and CBP. Let me repeat that: voice vote. No roll call. No record of who was there. No accountability. Just you, Barrasso, and a handful of senators shuffling paper in the dead of night while America slept. You could have demanded a recorded vote. You chose not to. You could have held the line for five more days until the House returned. You chose not to. You could have used the same procedural tools Democrats have used against you for 40 days. You chose not to. Instead, you gave Chuck Schumer exactly what he asked for, DHS funding minus immigration enforcement, and called it a win. Then you walked to the cameras and blamed the Democrats. Let's be precise about what you did: 1. You caved to a demand Democrats made on Day 1 of this shutdown. Forty-one days of supposed hardball negotiation, and you settled for their opening offer. 2. You handed them a template. The next time Democrats want to defund any agency — ICE, CBP, or anything else — they now know: just shut down DHS and wait. John Thune will fold at 3 AM. 3. You punted to reconciliation. "Good possibility," you said. Not "we will." Not "guaranteed." Just maybe. Meanwhile, ICE operates on fumes from last year's bill with no certainty of future funding. The precedent you set: You have argued for months that the filibuster is sacrosanct. That the 60-vote threshold protects minority rights. That we cannot bend Senate rules for policy wins. But at 3 AM on Friday, you bent every norm that actually mattered: • Voice vote to avoid accountability • Empty chamber to avoid debate • Midnight deal to avoid scrutiny • Immediate recess to avoid questions You'll bend the rules to avoid a fight. You just won't bend them to win one. What you've actually accomplished: Democrats demanded ICE restrictions. They got ICE defunded. Not reformed. Not restrained. Defunded. And you're out here tweeting about how Democrats are the "Defund the Police" party while you just voted to defund border enforcement at 3 in the morning. The question you should answer: Why did this deal have to happen at 3 AM? Why couldn't it happen at 3 PM, with cameras rolling and every senator on record? You know why. Because you didn't want your voters to see what surrender looks like. Here's my message: We saw it anyway. Stop hiding behind "Democrat obstruction." You're the Majority Leader. You set the schedule. You control the floor. You chose this outcome. Own it.

Recounting in detail how the Mueller SCO treated Gen. Flynn -- a rebuttal to the morons on X shrieking "But he pled guilty" in reaction to the settlement of his civil case. Paywalled but free trials available. RPs greatly appreciated. Link in the panels below.

@The_Kyle_Mann I'll watch it if Colbert cameos as Ted Sandyman.

My immediate reaction to Colbert writing a LOTR movie was - "No. Just no." Yes, I know he's a LOTR nerd. And it's at least a step above Rings of Power that someone involved in the project has been in the same room as Tolkien's books. But I neither trust anyone in modern-day Hollywood to do the great works of literature justice nor believe Colbert shares Tolkien's faith and values (and yes, I know he claims to be a Catholic). THAT BEING SAID, A FEW CONSIDERATIONS as I think the announcement was kinda confusing and there are some interesting bits of lore in Tolkien's writings that may shed some light on where this thing is going. 1.) The movie's stated goal appears to be getting chapters 3-8 of Fellowship on film - chapters mostly skipped by Peter Jackson for various reasons. This is the section of the book where Frodo fakes the move to Crickhollow, then meets Tom Bombadil and then faces the Barrow-wight (I think about a week's worth of time in the book). 2.) The movie uses a framing device set 14 years after Frodo leaves Middle-Earth. The framing device itself seems to have two concurrent plots: A PLOT --- Sam, Merry, and Pippin retrace their steps from the Shire through the Barrow-downs, perhaps thinking or talking to one another about what happened back in the day, and this is what sends us back to chaps 3-8 of Fellowship. --- --- (This journey is not mentioned anywhere in Tolkien's writings as far as I can tell. It's completely made up for this. Although, yes, I believe at the time it is set, all 3 of these Hobbits were still living in or near the Shire, and they certainly could have gone on walks together). B PLOT --- "Sam's daughter, Elanor, has discovered a long-buried secret and is determined to uncover why the War of the Ring was very nearly lost before it even began." This also is not mentioned anywhere in Tolkien - HOWEVER - Sam and Elanor do have a conversation when she's about 14, which was published in a couple of Christopher Tolkien's collections. The conversation centers around Elanor asking why beautiful things are fading away. Sam encourages his daughter that there are still good things in this world. And then Samwise reveals to her the secret that Frodo said he may be able to follow the elves to Valinor one day as well. OK SO LET ME EXPLAIN! No - it is too much; let me sum up. What we have here is Frodo & Friends traveling through the Old Forest, meeting Tom Bombadil, getting captured by the Barrow-wights, and then being rescued by said Bombadil. Told through a non-canon framing device (though plausible enough) of the 3 remaining Hobbits, 14 years after the books/movies end, following the old route East. And meanwhile, Sam's daughter is searching for some "long-buried secret." What could this be? Who knows. I will wildly speculate anyway: The movie's description says she uncovers how the War of the Ring was "nearly lost before it began." Since we know the flashback portions of the movie culminate with the Barrow-wight, it's likely to be centered around that. It may have something to do with the sword Merry got there that ended up slaying the Witch-King. Remember in the first movie, how Aragorn handed the hobbits swords and was like "here take these." (Me and my friends booed in the theater back in 2001 lol "THOSE ARE BARROW-BLADES! GIVE US BOMBADIL!"). Now, in this version, they'll be talking it over and be like "Remember how they said Aragorn just gave us those blades? That's not how it happened!" or something. Funny and too meta maybe - but it's very consistent with Tolkien (see his retcon of the Hobbit woven into the story). Also, in the book, Frodo very nearly puts the Ring on - imagining himself abandoning his friends and running free - before he fights the temptation and bravely faces the wight. There could be some plot device where she realizes how close they came to failing the quest right then and there. Elanor and Sam's conversation is centered around the slow fading away of beauty. This would tie in with Bombadil's talk in the books, where he talks about the thousands of years he's watched kingdoms rise and fall, etc. So I suspect whatever this side plot is about, it will all tie together nicely with Bombadil and the group's walk retracing their steps. In conclusion: Should you be excited about this movie? No. Do not get excited about anything from Hollywood these days. That is electing the way of pain. But does this have the potential to be faithful to Tolkien? I think it does. I think it's weird that they kind of buried the lede — if they'd framed it as Fellowship of the Ring: The Untold Story or something, or TOM BOMBADIL AND FRIENDS RUN AROUND NAKED ON THE GRASS, I'd pre-order my ticket on the spot. Do I think they'll pull it off? Eh. Remains to be seen. Even if Colbert's writing is strong and lore-faithful, it could be executed poorly. But I'm not as dismissive as I was at first (or really, have been about all Tolkien media in the past 20 years). There are some hurdles: I assume they'll need to use the same actors and de-age them for the flashback shots, which always looks kinda wonky. There are issues of being consistent with the original films. If they're basically trying to shoot an hour or two of content that could have seamlessly fit into Fellowship - that's a high bar to clear. Jackson's involved, yes, but he didn't always get Tolkien right either, and I suspect he won't direct. And Colbert & Hollywood despise a lot of the values Tolkien held dear. So I don't trust them, but who knows. And if they fail, well, there's always this thing called "a book" you can read that's way better than even Jackson's films.

Starbase is overworldly

@ArthurMacwaters Leftist would rather sterilize the planet than allow this to happen.

Most people really don't realize that in *our lifetimes* we will see factories, settlements, and giant electromagnetic railguns on the Moon

@HonorAndDaring Yes. Speaking of which. Has @Pontifex paused his pacifist lectures long enough to notice this?

In a former age, the Pope would have called for a crusade to right this injustice.

@nayibbukele @RestoreBritain_ @RupertLowe10

Cuadra por cuadra... tardará un poco, pero quedará hermoso.

I MET THE SINGLE MOST TEXAN HUMAN BEING ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH 🦨⛽️

@Truthful_ast We would have already colonized the solar system but for socialism.

Unfortunately most people including space fans, have no understanding of building infrastructure on the Moon. A bunch of small construction vehicles sent by Starship can build a mass driver in just few short years. Humans suck at comprehending future scale and it’s worsened by how long and difficult it is to build things down here on Earth due to regulations but such things do not exist in space and are driven by companies who actually need to lay down the foundation. Everyone needs to sit down and binge watch ANTHROFUTURISM on YouTube! The 2030s will be a turning point in human history.

@IMAO_ I blame @DouthatNYT .

I think it was Douthat who pointed out that social conservatives tend to be right, but by the time they're proven right, no one cares anymore.

@Kekius_Sage That's because NASA is better known for its Muslim engagement in recent decades.

We are returning to the Moon for the first time in 54 years on April 1, and no one is talking about it. NASA will provide real-time coverage throughout the mission on YouTube, along with a separate live stream from Orion whenever bandwidth allows. NASA will also hold daily mission briefings from Johnson Space Center in Houston starting Thursday, April 2, except on April 6 during lunar flyby operations.

@VivaldiVril That's because of the corrupt judiciary and incompetent Senate leadership.

Fantasies of violence will get us nowhere. We have a President who is more conservative than anything we've had for 100 years, who is changing America in ways we couldn't have dreamed of 10 years ago, but the Retard Right can't stop panicking and daydreaming about vigilantism because they're used to losing so much. Our political solution is clear- VOTE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER, WIN THE MIDTERMS, and for the love of God STOP HELPING THE ENEMY.

@Andrewnsnyder Now multiply that by 1000 and you've got Colbert.

I took the bait and watched this. So. Much. Cringe.

@sentdefender Judge Boasberg! Help us!

U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is blocking the promotion of four Army officers to be one-star generals, two of which are Black and two women on a list of roughly three dozen officers up for promotion, in a highly unusual move that has prompted some senior military officials to question whether the officers are being singled out because of their race or gender, according to The New York Times. Hegseth had been pressing senior Army leaders, including Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll, for months to remove the officers’ names, military officials said. But Secretary Driscoll, citing the officers’ decades-long records of exemplary service, had repeatedly refused. Earlier this month, Hegseth broke the logjam by unilaterally striking the officers’ names from the list, though it is not clear he has the legal authority to do so. The list is currently being reviewed by the White House, which is expected to sent for final approval to the Senate.

@cdrsalamander It should be converted into office space for every teacher's union representative in the nation.

It should be raised to the ground and a neo-classical masterpiece put in its place…or better…row houses like we find at Jackson Pl. NW off Lafayette square. Make DC beautiful again.

@GPrime85 Lie back and think of England?

@jackbutler4815 Colbert will cameo as the fox and work in a comment about Trump.

After learning that a new LORD OF THE RINGS movie written by Stephen Colbert is allegedly in the works, I re-skimmed the chapters it will supposedly be based on. I had forgotten about this bizarre and awesome aside about a fox. Now I want the whole movie to be about this fox: