I believe you have confused “racists” with “libertarians.” I’m certain a good chunk of the 28% would be personally willing to sell to black people, but don’t believe the government should impose their moral values on others. (How large a chunk, we’ll never know, since the GSS doesn’t dig deeper.)

Indirectly, yes — insofar as the CO Health Dept. assessment is based on this study, if the study is wrong, then so is the savings estimate.

If you’re honestly wondering: http://www.nationalreview.com/agenda/385884/…

Can you imagine what the response of average Californians would BE to that signature-collector? I think the result would be more heartening than you think.

Unfortunate that it was killed by a judge. I prefer to see terrible initiatives like this killed by the resounding voice of the people — and this most certainly would have been killed without reaching the ballot.

It takes balls to misrepresent a survey while linking to the survey AND claiming that someone else is misrepresentating the same survey. My hat is off to you, Ms. Merlen. You are the ballsiest misrepresenter of data I know.

In the Original Series, the Enterprise went above Warp 10 more than once. (I think the fastest they ever went was Warp 14, in “Whom Gods Destroy.” But that’s off the top of my head.) This was because the Original Series followed the time-honored “what number sounds coolest?” method for writing warp speeds.

Also Minnesotan. Is this unique to us? I kind of thought most progressives, everywhere, are soccer moms deep down.

Yup. This kind of thinking is why the Republicans keep nominating people who can’t win the popular vote — their whole organizing mechanism ensures that whoever seems to be “next on deck” gets the nomination with only token resistance. Their last actual insurgent nominee was Reagan in ‘76. Since then, it’s been Reagan,…

Just a few points, since I think we’re on similar pages in principle:

“The freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

Probably there is. The U.K. has no Bill of Rights, so the Crown respects freedom of religion and freedom of expression on a purely voluntary basis (and, of course, has often deliberately attacked both at various points throughout its history). Even its current statutory law is laughably weak-sauce when it comes to…

Didn’t Robert Heinlein suggest that only those who serve in the armed forces should be able to vote? That doesn’t make too much sense in a country like the U.S., but, in Israel, where foreign policy is an existential concern and military service is nearly universal, it might.

I don’t think it’s Hillary. The writer says, “I do not want the opponent in office.” This strongly suggests that the writer knows (or assumes) who the opponent actually is.

So are we now just pretending Dunham’s behavior stopped when she was seven? Is that our chosen defense mechanism?

Probability this law holds up in court is about the same as the probability Arkansas’s 12-week ban wins on appeal.

Your username confuses me now. So you’re a fake doctor, but you’re not fake? Or are you faking not being fake, too?

How long do you think it would take for charges to get filed if this guy phoned a death threat to Ron O’Brien, Ohio Prosecutor? Seconds, or whole minutes?

Might this be overthinking it a little?

So you’re good with Citizens United, then?