It seems to me that they can be stretched just shy of infinitely, because sources aren't reliable and people aren't paying attention. That is, when a source reports on what's happening with as little bias and editorializing as humanly possible, it is labeled as "left bias" while the conservative news sources don't bother talking about the problems with ICE at all. As long as that's the case, they can basically get away with anything because their human rights abuses won't get enough coverage or will be dismissed by enough of the population that it won't actually have an impact.
It's not a real rule. More like a running joke, because she's had problems getting chicken dishes right more than anything else. It probably does not come across on a random comment on the Internet, but I do think it would be kinda crazy to actually have rules like that in a real relationship.
I'm married. I do most of the cooking anyway. My wife is banned from cooking chicken because of the last time. So... "<Wife's name>, we talked about this. No chicken. Let's go to the Mexican restaurant nearby tonight."
Sorry, I did not mean to imply that the US doesn't have bidets. My point was that I would like to leave the US, but having easy access to a bidet is a necessity for me when choosing the destination country.
A vicious cycle happened. 24 hour news reports every child abduction basically in the country, making parents feel that they're more common than they are. Kids freedom starts getting restricted. There's less kids outside, so parents are less comfortable letting their own kids out, and kids have less incentive to go out. At the same time, the number of indoor entertainment options explodes. As they stop being seen outside, the world adjusts to life without them.... Less crosswalks, less bikeable areas, less parks. With so few kids being outside the house, the parents who still encourage their kids to play outside or go do things become the minority and law enforcement fucks with them accordingly, as in this story, making parents even more reluctant to let their kids out of their sight.
There's some resistance to this. Free Range Kids comes to mind. People see the problem and want to do something. But as you can see even in this thread, people have so accepted "kids should stay inside supervised at all times" as the norm that it's an uphill battle.
I am not trying to brake check people and get in an accident but I would very much like a signal for "Please remove your car from my butthole, it's getting uncomfortable."
Nah, 20s me was the best time to get into the show. 30s me is stressed, has no time, has developed anxiety, spends a lot of time exercising not because it feels good but because apparently my cholesterol is high now, and the show is mostly focused on the kids which is usually a sign that the plot quality has gone down.
The competitors only exist because Tesla succeeded, and they are not better. Every car company has spent money lobbying for less regulation on gas cars. Every car company has donated massive amounts of money to the Republican party. Every car company has had scandals driven by insane greed and disregard for human life, like VW and their diesel engine.
People act like Elon Musk invented being a shitty billionaire, but Henry Ford and Rockefeller were doing it long before Musk was born, and VW was the literal Nazimobile. The entire industry was built by shitty people, sustained by shitty people, and continues to be shitty to this day. If you drive a car, you don't get a choice of whether to financially support a piece of shit, you just get to choose which one, and taking it out on one group of largely progressive people who at least give a shit about the environment is counterproductive and stupid.
People supporting oil companies do not have the moral high ground here just because the fascist, murderous billionaires they support financially have the good sense to not do Nazi salutes on a stage. They're still responsible for incredible amounts of suffering and death, ongoing.
Maybe I'm too easy to please but I'd be happier if they took the money that currently goes towards tanks and "how to shoot first" seminars and put it towards ongoing education for officers on law, de-escalation tactics, and critical thinking in stressful situations.
No fault divorce isn't about assigning blame. They actually still do that in certain situations, such as adultery or abuse. No fault divorce means that the state will allow a divorce even if no one is to "blame." Prior to that, you essentially needed a legal reason to get a divorce other than "I just want to be married to this person anymore."
In case you're curious why they might hate the post office so much, I suspect it's because as a government entity it has two important attributes:
A requirement for universal access
At least some constitutional protections for privacy.
When you ship UPS or FedEx, you're giving a package to a private entity. They are only bound by the contract they make with you. If they decide to start opening every package, that's their right. The USPS has specific laws around when it can and cannot search packages, and generally requires a warrant.
I know it's not what you're saying, probably, but just to be clear: It wasn't a good thing going just fine until the Germans took it too far. It sucked in Italy, too, and is always bad.
It's the state of advertising tbh. If ads were still of the "Look, here's a cool product" variety, or even the "Look, here's people happily using a cool product" kind then the world would probably be a better place. Even targeting isn't so bad, when it's broad like "We want businesses to know about our B2B product."
The evil in modern advertising is the overly specific targeting, the lying, the psychological tricks, and the way they seem to invade every possible space.
My favorite "we had to regulate this" is coal mining. You see, the larger a coal mine tunnel, the more work and time it takes. So smaller tunnels will be more profitable. So in some places they preferred smaller women and children, so they could make make smaller, easier tunnels. This one I only ever found one source on, but supposedly one mine owner noticed that snags on clothing were slowing things down in the narrow tunnels so he insisted on sending them in nude. Nothing more capitalist than naked coal mining children.
This is the only area I DO get. I don't agree with it, but I can understand where they're coming from. If you believe a fetus is a person, it makes total sense to vote against murder. And we aren't going to win anyone over by framing it as just an issue for women. If it's even possible to change someone's mind on the topic it would be through education, not telling them that their opinion on murder doesn't matter.
It's mildly infuriating to me the people in this thread debating the meaning of the tattoos, because it totally misses the point. I don't think we have enough information to be defending his character, and it DOES NOT matter at all. He could be a stone cold murderer and I still wouldn't support extrajudicial deportation.
Basically, his character is all an irrelevant smoke screen. Stop engaging with it. It doesn't matter. What the Trump administration did was illegal and sets a terrible precedent, even if the dude was a murderous gang member.
Reliable public transportation that doesn't cause or get stuck in traffic jams, also.