I found out I can access the local bar's TouchTones from my house and my work. So on random evenings, I'll queue a song list up starting with Photograph (my calling card), then do a list of bizarre songs (Surfin' Bird, it's Not Unusual, a 20+ minute Sufjan Stevens song, Babymetal, etc), then close it out with Photograph again.
I'm going to give the bartender a Pavlovian response to hearing Nickelback
As much as I want people who experience rape or incest to have access to abortion, I feel like any person who is pro-life except in cases of rape or incest is just giving away the game that they are only trying to control women.
Because if they actually thought abortion was murder, that the fetus was a life, then it wouldn't matter how it was conceived. It would be like saying that killing your 6-month-old baby was murder unless it was the product of rape or incest, and then it's okay. But that would be absolutely ridiculous. Because a 6-month-old is a person and a fetus is not.
So it's pretty clear, if they don't think it's murder, they just want to control women.
Enh, he was a little kid, powerful in the force but untrained, and it makes perfect sense (and is perfectly normal) for a kid growing up to get the hots for the older woman. And he may have unintentionally used the force to manipulate her.
Or she's a groomer and he's a child-murderer. Who knows?
The superdelegates, which in 2016 made up about 15% of the delegates, were not elected and are not beholden to any voters, they just chose whichever candidate they wanted, and 604 out of 651 went for Clinton immediately, which meant Bernie started off at an immediate disadvantage.
There's this idea that if it's technically possible to succeed, that the system is not rigged (see racism, sexism, etc). But that's ridiculous. If someone starts off at a major advantage over their competition, the system is rigged for them. If, in the general election, one candidate started off with 75 electoral votes because some unelected people just decided they liked that candidate, I imagine we would call that system rigged in favor of that candidate (even if it is technically possible for their opponent to win). Not only that, but starting off at such a deficit for what would already have been considered a close race is likely to make those who might have voted for Bernie just not bother showing up.
So yes, I'd say the primary was rigged against Bernie. And the Democrats seem to agree, because they got rid of superdelegates for the initial vote, because everyone was pissed.
That's not really true. Primaries weren't rigged in the Rupublican primaries in 2016. They voted Trump in despite what the RNC wanted. It was the Dem's primary that was rigged (and turned a bunch of people off of voting in the main election, and it seems those people still haven't learned anything).
Completely unnecessary, and you shouldn't blame the other person because you didn't understand their point.
Two cups of coffee is a significantly healthier choice than 2L of coca cola. That was obviously the point they were making. There's no need to jump down their throat about it, and it's telling that you jump to that over something relatively innocuous.
I'm no expert but it seems to me like it's basically the kind of thing that is only technically legal only because nobody has been stupid enough to push their luck.
That has been the Trump administration (and post-presidency) playbook since 2016, and it has worked out remarkably well for them (and shown how flimsy many of our laws are). I say send it and let the chips fall where they may. If the courts end up deciding "yeah, that's illegal" it's not like they can get the shells back, unless they want to remove them piece by piece from exploded Russian equipment and Russian soldiers. They just won't be able to use that tactic again. It's not blatantly illegal now.
I'm thinking of the mechanics of a shape-shifter being pregnant... like, if they switched genders would the fetus just get stuck inside between organs and die, or would it cease to exist? Would the shape-shifter be able to take on a male outward appearance while maintaining a uterus? Or would they just not shift for 9 months?
Much simpler, I suppose, for the shape-shifter to father a child.
Remember in 2016 when Republican types were adamant that Hillary wouldn't be tough enough on Putin, and that Liberals were Communists? And that the Liberals would let Russia do whatever it wanted?
And now those same Republicans are outspoken against helping Ukraine, and want to let Russia just have it. Their preferred candidate wants to dismantle the organization of countries that stands as the United front against Russian expansion. Working deliberately and blatantly toward Putin's interests isn't a problem to them at all.
Back then, I thought that if there was a single (decent) principle they actually stand for, that would have been it. Apparently I was wrong.
Are there significant numbers of black or Asian or Native or Latino people who worry about interbreeding with white people "replacing" their particular skin color? Or is it just a stupid white person thing?
Viewing your particular skin color as some inherently sacred thing that should allow you to prevent other people from loving (or even just fucking) whoever they want is one of the dumber things I've heard someone openly saying.
You'll vote lesser of two evils in most elections pretty much until the other side starts putting up reasonable candidates. Blaming Democrats for not giving you decent choice just completely misses the point: The Republicans choosing fascism means they aren't a viable choice. They are removing choice from the ballot, not Democrats. You're not being forced into anything by Democrats, they are simply running a platform that you should have the opportunity to disagree with, but you can't, because the other side is fascism.
But let's take the approach of "not rewarding them" for putting out shitty candidates (that aren't fascist). Do you think once the fascists get into power, that Dems will even have the opportunity to change? What is your end game, because not voting for the lesser evil is the acceptance and indifference of either evil, and allows the worst evil to win.
The time for that fight is the primary, local elections, and between election cycles. Refusing to participate at the ballot box because you don't like the choices you've been given is counterproductive, not just pointless.
The main purpose of words having meaning is to effectively communicate.
Ignoring the context that words are used and insisting on very narrow definitions is not only pedantic, but hinders the ideas being communicated.