You may not like it - I certainly don't - but many people put higher stock in opinions shared by celebrities. Hell, look at Trump himself - people were so enraptured by his celebrity that he managed to get elected President, despite his numerous pre-Presidency failings, which I'm too busy to list here today.
tetrachromacy
joined 2 years ago
I like Le Risque a bit better but probably because I've listened to it a dozen times since it came out. Can't wait for this album.
One of the people who was shot at this event is then-US representative Gabby Giffords. She was shot in the head and survived, but six people were killed. She is Mark Kelly's wife. I would presume they're going to have very strong opinions on gun control laws because of this.
Yeah, but they don't serve them on the menu. Put out a request for a blumpkin on nextdoor and someone will probably meet you there for one.
Well, it's not quite a blimp, but it's not exactly a pumpkin, either.
Can't wear mismatched socks if you buy 80 pairs of the same sock. Just grab two from the clean bin and you're ready to face the day.
Walking round the house? White ankle socks.
Birthday party? White ankle socks.
Your niece's christening? White ankle socks.
Day at the office? Wouldn't you know it, white ankle socks.
Trip to Canada? Couple pairs of white ankle socks with extra as backup.
Going to the beach? I got flip flops for that.
Meat Loaf is right. You guys suck!
Cannon's ruling was that the entire concept of the DoJ appointing a special prosecutor is unconstitutional. Following that same logic, anyone who has ever been the subject of a special prosecutor investigation that was later adjudicated guilty can and should have their convictions thrown out.
That's why Hunter is saying his case should be thrown out. He was investigated by a special prosecutor on behalf of the Department of Justice. That investigator ruled he broke the law when he had the temerity to own a firearm while he was using illegal drugs, and then the case went to court.
Under Cannon's ruling, Hunter has got every right to ask for this. So does Bill Clinton for Whitewater. And the ghost of Richard Nixon for Watergate. Anyone who was ever investigated by a special prosecutor appointed by the DoJ who then faced any sort of legal consequences for their actions can now ask to have their convictions overturned on these grounds.
Cannon's ruling is a pretty intense case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater with regards to judicial procedure, and it's likely to be reversed by the appeals court. On the other hand, her ruling was only meant to delay the trial, which worked flawlessly. When her peers in the appeals court reverse the ruling and remove her from the bench for it or any other reason, look forward to seeing her as a talking head on conservative news networks. She's certainly earned her place there.
They say you should only say good things about dead people. He's dead. Good.
This fucking cookie joke I knew when I saw the first one it was coming and still made me laugh.
You also appear to be under the misconception that parents will automatically vote in the best interests of their children. Some may, but not all. It also pressures people to produce children needlessly in order to have more personal electoral power, which will result in a baby boom the likes of which hasn't been seen since the end of WW2 - and back then, the US had a dominant economic position where there were more resources available to support these children.
I feel that you might be trying to argue your position in good faith. However, giving parents more rights to vote because they have children is a terrible idea. It will be exploited mercilessly by bad faith actors. Hell, the USA should be rewarding parents who choose to have fewer(2 or less) children, or those who choose not to have kids. This planet is already too overcrowded.