Yes, but it's just a Chef's Choice machine. If you're good with relying on that (pro: easy/fast; con: shortens your knives' lifespans), you may as well just buy the home model as it'll be a lot cheaper in the long run.

No, it's really just the natural monopoly. The buildings that have FIOS service in Baltimore get TV through FIOS too. The problem is that Comcast already provides service to every residence in the city, and their network rollout is long since paid for.

> Virginia's governor is termlimited to one 4 year term.

VA's also a state where their Republican governor wasn't chosen via an open primary, which allowed him to run as a moderate and govern like he's doing.

Even for all that's wrong with Hogan, we're so much better off with the system we have.

Yes, but FYI: if the MVA's back to pre-pandemic rules on this, they won't accept your expired ID as proof of anything, so when you go to get a new one you'll need to bring proofs of identity/age/etc.

Usually they'll just ask for your name, then confirm DOB and address. No ID required.

The only time you'd be asked to speak is if you answer yes to any of the potentially disqualifying questions and are asked to go up to provide an explanation.

I served on a jury in June and at no point was asked to remove my mask, but I wasn't asked to speak at any point either.

There's no such thing from a legal standpoint. Assuming you're paying taxes on the booze you buy to serve, not selling it, and not giving it to children, it doesn't matter who's pouring. If you're trying to do a cash bar, that gets into liquor licensing, which would be tied to the event or the space rather than the bartender.

Compared to what? I paid $130 for an ipad screen replacement there back in May. I wouldn't rave about the work or turnaround time, but I can't imagine anybody doing it much cheaper.

> If the union doesn’t have enough leverage, this is the result.

This is illegal. It's illegal for an employer to reward nonunion employees, and it's illegal for an employer to participate in a union election (by, for instance, bragging about how they're denying benefits to unionized employees).

Also, this store didn't unionize because of general public advocacy, they did so because they employees chose to. You don't have to support that, but if you don't, it says a lot more about your labor politics than who you think should have a union instead.

If you have received a sample ballot at your address with your name on it, you are registered to vote.

Also: Maryland doesn't remove inactive names from the voter registry. I bought my house in 2011 and still get sample ballots for one of the last tenants who lived here.

Disappointing, but it's the same thing Starbucks and a lot of other big companies are doin. The NLRB doesn't have the money to investigate all unfair labor practices currently, and if they can wait until Republicans have control of any part of the government again, they won't be investigated at all.

not really the sort of question that needs to be answered more than once

The absolute funniest thing about that comment coming from that [noun] is that they post in r/JordanPeterson. Which do you think he's done more of: tearful videos attacking others, or impassioned defenses of male fragility?

oh huh, genuinely wasn't sure what guy on the left was doing, though I guess the radiant stigmata might've been a clue.

> Question I [...] Seems like small conflict of interest, but would the new situation improve that?

Ryan Dorsey's take was that the current advisory board took so long to meet that we don't actually know yet whether it needs to be changed. I'm inclined to vote no.

Growing up, my dad's mom lived in Parkville, my mom's family lived in AAco. Coming up 295 or down Harford, we had to make sure our windows were up and doors locked going into the city.

> No one gives away a billion dollar company to save a few hundred million on taxes. That just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

He's 83. It's estate management (which is also why it's an exemption rather than a deduction).

Caroline St.'s not in Harbor East tho

> He [...] believes “every billionaire is a policy failure.”

In context, this is an excuse. He gave the money away to a nonprofit his family controls to dodge estate taxes. On its own I don't think it's more than normal superrich tax avoision, but it's one of the policy failures the saying is usually meant to include.

I have no idea what the point of that dig is, but be honest: does it work for you offline?

But it would still involve clicking play on a video with a runtime of 20 minutes and ...hard pass, personally speaking.

Context: https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/22/politics/dark-money-donation-conservative-group-invs

talking about one without the other feels misleading, IMO.

Well, even though Adam Conover's generally good, the video's 20 minutes long! It would take significantly less time to find a decent link, send somebody that link, and have them read it.

Otherwise, while the glow up is bigly cringe, if you want to drag Pa Tagonia (...Pat Agonia?), I think Barre Seid (tbf I had to google this) really should be mentioned too. The difference between complicity and abuse matters even when it comes to billionaires.

He's not wrong, but maybe a more balanced way to put it is that the Patagonia guy's doing the same thing RW billionaires do to... :gestures at everything:, and on basic level there's a real value difference there.

Every billionaire is a policy failure, but some billionaires are less bad than others.

Disagree with what? Van Hollen's not arguing we should fix the 'to Nowhere' part.