The basic rule is that if you can drop the name and the sentence still makes sense, use a comma. It still applies to greetings, since a greeting is still a greeting whether or not you use a person’s name while doing so.
You wouldn’t use a comma if you said something like “Jack went to work.”
That’s a correct use of a comma. You often use commas when using a persons name. Isn’t that right, Grandwolf?
“Mom, have you seen my keys?”
“I’m off to the store, Sarah.”
“My best bud, Zach, is a geologist.”
Say no to ecofascism, kids.
Also, despite what some mushroom books will say, it’s not the 🤮😵 kind of poison (except in rare cases)
It’s the 😵💫🤤 kind of poison
Basically. Top it with olive oil, olives, and some anchovies for a traditional fisherman’s snack.
Wouldn’t most pizza snobs say that Margherita is the most pure pizza? After all, this guy doesn’t actually like pizza, he’s just using it as a vehicle for all that extra cheese. Hell, pizza Marinara doesn’t have cheese at all and originally didn’t even have tomato sauce. Surely that’s even more pure? I guess I’m a pizza snob snob. /s
Also, It’s kind of a stupid opinion. It’s ignorant of some absolutely fantastic kinds of pizza like capricciosa, which is one of the most popular kinds of pizza in Italy. If the inventors of pizza say plenty of toppings are fine and even good, why be so prescriptive for everyone else? If OOP could expand their definition of pizza, they might even get to try the magnificence of pissaladière.
If this is how I hear about Quincy Jones dying, fuck you
Yeah, but you came into my room
People always freak out over this picture but it’s just a joke about motorcycles. Bumper stickers say “Yamaha” and “Look twice for motorcycles”, but it seems to be partially torn so “for mo” is cut off.
Yeah, it’s this 
iconic image. There’s a meme that claims this image was on Osama Bin Laden’s hard drive.
I actually wondered the same thing while I was writing lol. Further research is clearly warranted 🧑🔬🔬
In his 1953 autobiography, Danish explorer Peter Freuchen claimed that in 1926, he became trapped in a blizzard while running a dog team and was forced to take shelter under his sled for 30 hours while snow built up and froze around him. When he tried to emerge, he found he was entombed in ice and unable to break free with his hands alone. Thinking quickly, he took a shit right there, shaped the turd into a chisel, and allowed it to freeze solid. He then claims he was able to use his newly made tool to chip his way free and make it back to camp. Peter was the only witness to his supposed escape. The study mentions it’s based on an Inuit ethnographic account, however. Maybe Peter, having spent much time in the Arctic with Inuit peoples simply took the story for himself. With the runners of the study finding that they were unable to replicate such a technique, it lends credibility to the claim that story may have been fabricated.
Good thing we also have more thylacines than ever before, right?
Nah, son. Thylacines have, in a way, become cryptids since their extinction, complete with cheesy travel shows where some bogan tells you all about how they totally saw one time and they’re 100% sure it was a thylacine they barely saw from a distance running away through the tall grass after sunset. I’ve seen similar shows about Bigfoot, Nessie, Mothman, and others. They don’t exist anymore, making your chances of seeing one alive no more likely than seeing Bigfoot, which is the point I was making. Animals thought to be extinct being officially rediscovered is a pretty rare occurrence; I assure you it doesn’t happen “regularly”. It’s a big deal when it happens because it’s quite rare. Yes, I’m familiar with the stories of all the other extinct species you mentioned as well. The ivory-billed woodpecker is still considered by most ornithologists to be extinct, and the last widely accepted sighting of any individual was in 1987, despite some supposed (but not universally accepted or entirely conclusive) sightings every once in a while. In 2020, a guy working for Fish and Wildlife claimed to have ID’d one in video footage, but it must not have been very compelling because the very next year Fish and Wildlife proposed declaring it officially extinct. People claim to have sighted the ivory-billed woodpecker not infrequently, much like the thylacine. What is infrequent is any compelling evidence whatsoever, however.
There have been many sightings and footprints found of Bigfoot, too. I live in the Bigfoot sighting capital of the world and new sightings are routinely reported. If the “Portland” in your name is in reference to the one in Oregon, you do too.
The last widely accepted sighting of a wild thylacine was in 1933, nearly a hundred years ago. Even if any tiny, isolated pockets had managed to escape extermination (which is unlikely on an island without much mountainous terrain or dense forest, especially when everyone and their grandma was out hunting them for the bounty the government put on their tails), they’d be in big trouble owing to genetic drift by now. You always hear people say “I know what I saw,” but do they really? It makes me circle back to the Bigfoot thing. At least some of the people who claim to have seen Bigfoot genuinely believe they really saw him.
Did you intend to link to an explicitly pro-Western, Zionist, neoconservative magazine? Not sure if I fully trust their framing, especially when it comes to someone so consistently critical of Western policy. The article is just the author (not even a member of the staff, it appears to be a letter to the editor) whining that Chomsky said the author couldn’t find certain quotes and that his stance on Vietnam was hawkish, not a whole lot mentioned on anything else. I’m aware of some of Chomsky’s more problematic positions, but how does this back that up what you’re saying? Sounds more like a petty personal spat between a couple academics.
About Us
COMMENTARY is a highly acclaimed monthly magazine of opinion and a pivotal voice in American intellectual life. Since its inception in 1945, and increasingly after it emerged as the flagship of neoconservatism in the 1970s, the magazine has been consistently engaged with several large, interrelated questions: the fate of democracy and of democratic ideas in a world threatened by totalitarian ideologies; the state of American and Western security; the future of the Jews, Judaism, and Jewish culture in Israel, the United States, and around the world; and the preservation of high culture in an age of political correctness and the collapse of critical standards.Many of COMMENTARY’s articles have been controversial, and more than a few have been hugely influential—touchstones for debate and discussion in universities, among policy analysts in and out of government, within the ranks of professionals and community activists, and in circles of serious thought worldwide. A large number of articles can be counted as landmarks of American letters and intellectual life. Agree with it or disagree with it, COMMENTARY cannot be ignored. To read it is to take part in the great American discussion.
Mission
Since its founding in November 1945, COMMENTARY has been expression of belief in the United States, central role in the preservation and advance of Western civilization and, most immediately, the continuing existence of the Jewish people. COMMENTARY, in the words of Cohen, “is an act of faith in our possibilities in America.”More than seven decades later, the publication of COMMENTARY remains an act of faith—faith in the power of ideas, in the value of defending tradition, in the strength of the Jewish people, and in America. COMMENTARY is an act of faith in its singular approach to the consideration of the traditions of Judaism and Jewish life. The traditions of Western civilization, of which the Hebrew Bible is the wellspring, are also our constant concern. COMMENTARY is a reflection of the manifold glories of the West and the inestimable contribution it has made to the betterment of humankind. Most of all, through our publication of articles on political, historical, cultural, and theological issues, COMMENTARY is an act of faith in the transformative effect of ideas. From our beginning under Elliot E. Cohen, to Norman Podhoretz, the magazine’s second editor, to Neal Kozodoy, its third, and now to current editor John Podhoretz, COMMENTARY‘s mission remains anchored in these principles: to maintain, sustain, and cultivate the future of the Jewish people; to bear witness against anti-semitism and defend Zionism and the State of Israel; to take inventory in and increase the storehouse of the best that has been thought and said; and to stand with and for the West and its finest flowering, the United States.
Interesting. Hey, Jamie, overlay a map of indigenous populations…
(Correlates less the further east and south you get, though)
“By precisely reflecting sunlight that is endlessly available in space to specific targets on the ground, we can create a world where sunlight powers solar farms for longer than just daytime, and in doing this, commoditize sunlight.”
Are those real stockings? During WWII, almost all the synthetic fabrics being produced were being used for the war effort, which made stockings incredibly difficult or impossible to find, so women took to drawing on the “seam” with makeup instead. Maybe they’re inspecting how good of a job they did at faking them?