This is some pretty weak-ass trolling. The difference is that the KKK is still a racist hate group.

You can't just make a wild, fringe statement like "Planned Parenthood promotes eugenics and is racist in 2014!" and then not show proof. Please cite sources that demonstrate that Planned Parenthood's "intentions" never changed.

Still waiting for the detailed explanation on how PP is racist today.

Wait so you think PP still believes in eugenics? If so, [citation needed]

Please explain how Margaret Sanger's beliefs are relevant to the 2014 incarnation of Planned Parenthood.

I think it's irrelevant when the issue you bring up is a hundred years old and that particular message has nothing whatsoever to do with its current one.

and old joke construction, but always effective.

that was almost a hundred years ago. it's irrelevant.

Ah, you nailed it. I don't know why Valleywag even exists. How much digital ink have they spilled over the impossible, no-chance-it-will-ever-happen, utterly absurd "California separation" story?

No, that's clearly not what I'm saying. I'm saying if you're Beyonce, you can not work with someone like Richardson and it's not going to be a problem for you.

in some cases, yes.

I love scrolling down into the "Pending" section for some forgotten lunacy, and you did not disappoint.

what's your point? that the contents of a fashion magazine are interesting or important for any reason?

as far as I know women were allowed to drive in the US ten years ago.

Her shoes made my feet involuntarily seize up.

right? everyone's focusing on the Bible angle and ignoring the church's interesting interpretation of the legal system.

Count on Jezebel to be sanctimonious about fucking microwaves.

It's amusing to me how smart, decent people (justifiably) hate discussing evolutionary biology/psychology, but when discussing monogamy that stigma doesn't show up. Its like: "Yep, monogamy's hard. It's human nature!"

you missed that they won. that an enormous corporation like McDonald's was held accountable. it may have been a small cash prize, but the important aspect was the outcome.

it's completely bizarre that you think the content of the song has anything whatsoever to do with copyright/ownership.