The unfortunate reality is that there is no real advantage for Ukraine in calling Trump out on his bullshit and condemning the idiotic plan, no matter how much they deserve it.

Trump is a narcissistic moron with dementia. He doesn’t give a shit about the details and he has no principles, he just wants whatever makes him feel like a tough guy that people fear and respect. Fighting him will just lead to a temper tantrum. Better to give him empty words and hollow victories while avoiding any meaningful capitulation.

The rodents, their size unusual.

These are the same shit stains that refer to legal immigrants and refugees as criminal illegals. The ones that condemn the idea of politicized prosecutions and claim no one is above the law while pursuing politicized prosecutions of people for daring to hold Trump accountable and not treating him as entirely above the law. These are the ones touting transparency while cracking down on whistle-blowers.

I could go on all day with this. Everything they say is in bad faith. They don’t care about being right, they just want to throw out soundbites to be repeated by propaganda outlets. Illegal orders are lawful. Following the constitution is seditious. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. There are five lights. The Star Wars sequels are just as good.

And the fact that they know they must lie is all the more damning.

As long there isn’t one of those fucking wind farms out there wrecking the environment and giving whales autism, right?

“Operation Charlotte’s Web”

The one where they send in some pigs.

All this effort to communicate the idea of bigger or smaller rolls instead of just giving us the total surface area. But then, this isn’t about informing the consumer it’s about making it seem bigger. If they just gave us a total measurement in sq ft that would make it too easy to compare prices.

It’s like guys measuring their dick, they aren’t terribly concerned with the validity of the measurement as long as the result sounds good.

Characters have strengths and weaknesses. A GM should target both, giving everyone moments to shine and moments to struggle.

My understanding is that the creator wanted each season to follow a new set of characters, with season 2 being the previous generation that founded the organization that horn rimmed glasses guy worked for. But the network said no, and made him slap together a direct follow up. That was already an uphill battle before the writer’s strike.

Kind of unrelated, but season 1 was also supposed to end with all the various characters converging in an epic battle avengers style, but they were over budget and the network weren’t willing to give them more, so instead we got the poochy ending.

I’ve seen people object to a 13 month calendar based solely on the idea that you can’t divide the year into quarters. But it’s actually really easy to remember. A quarter is 13 weeks, or 3 months and 1 week. So Q1 ends a week after month three, Q2 ends 2 weeks after month six, Q3 ends 3 weeks after month nine, and q4 ends after month 13 aka the end of the year. And since the calendar doesn’t change, you don’t even need to remember it, just mark the quarter ends once and you’re done forever.

Just compare that to the unnecessary complexity of the Gregorian calendar and the effort it takes to remember basically anything that changes from year to year, or what day of the week any given date or holiday falls on, or even just which months have 30 days and which have 31.

Great idea. I hear the epstein files have info on some filthy whore that was sucking Clinton’s dick.

He doesn’t admit defeat, he claims some kind of win or deal and then backs down.

All they had to do was not fuck it up. Just sit back, let the developers work, and collect the money. But apparently they thought they could make slightly more by ruining everything. Fucking morons.

To achieve the status of measles elimination, a country must have no ongoing local transmission of the disease for at least one year. It will lose that status if it has a chain of cases that spread from person to person for more than one year.

We’ve been heading in that direction, but we won’t have officially lost our measles-free status until the current outbreak has continued for a full year.

In this case, the post was asking for people’s expectations regarding this story specifically, and the response is entirely valid. It’s very reasonable to think that this one news story isn’t likely to be the tipping point.

It’s different when people reply to every story that is in any way bad for Trump with a comment about how none of it matters, nothing will change, and no one cares. As though anything that doesn’t result in Trump being immediately impeached, incarcerated, or inhumed is completely worthless. Much like how sit ups are useless because no matter how many I do today, I still won’t have a six pack when I’m done.

All those comments do is demoralize people and discourage them from trying to support opposition to Trump in any way.

Average age of a first time homebuyer is now over 40. Even at a reasonable interest rate, most buyers would die before they actually own the house.

Dems made them promise to put those ACA measures back in next year.

They got Thune to promise a separate vote in the senate on the ACA credits, probably in December. Even if that passed in the senate, Johnson won’t schedule a vote on it in the house. And if by some miracle it passed the house, Trump would just veto it.

It’s nothing. It’s absolutely nothing. At most they got Republicans to vote against ACA credits specifically, which is nothing compared to other shit they’ve already voted on, and will be far less effective than letting them take the heat for the shut down. The fact that they were willing to prolong the shut down just to kill the ACA credits says a lot more than a simple vote would.

They may not have felt that this was a good case for their purposes. Or enough of them may have felt that this was a bad time for it. Hell, maybe a couple of the conservative justices just don’t care enough to want to revisit the issue.

But respect for the law, the constitution, and the rights and wellbeing of the people hasn’t been evident in many of their recent opinions. Letting half the states pretend a fraction of marriages never happened wouldn’t even be the most disruptive thing they’ve done. They endorsed racial profiling, made racial gerrymandering presumptively legal, made prosecuting bribery essentially impossible, overturned abortion rights, and crowned Trump as king and gave him a license to kill. And that’s ignoring all the shenanigans happening on the shadow docket where they don’t even bother justifying their decisions. That they’ve at least drawn something of a line against the Trump administration trying to eliminate due process altogether makes sense only because letting go of due process would mean giving up some of their own influence.

I never said they would actually do it, only that they wouldn’t find it difficult to write that opinion. Seeing as they’ve had multiple cases in recent years where the opinion was completely untethered from law, precedent, and fact, there’s basically no position so extreme that I would assume they can’t rationalize it.

Their powers don’t appear to be limited by their physical form, and you do remain conscious while being transported, so it seems unlikely that you could trap one using the transporter. And that’s without getting into the question of how much of the Q is the body vs how much is something else beyond that physical manifestation.

If they can invent presidential immunity despite there being absolutely nothing in the constitution to justify it, I’m sure they have no problem writing an opinion that allows bans on gay marriage.

My best guess would be that they would frame it as being about the right of the states to regulate marriage. If the state can decide how many people can be in a marriage, how old you have to be to marry, how closely related you can be and still marry, the requirements for starting or ending a marriage, and so on, then what’s one more criteria? Add some tangents about the history of marriage in the US, some comments about how government is involved in marriage specifically because of how it connects to issues relating to reproduction, cite some cases from the 19th century, and twist some more recent precedent to reverse its meaning so that you can pretend to be following existing case law and you have a pretty standard ruling for this court.