I wonder why she (and others) always seem to choose this false dichotomy, books or guns.

Of the ~33,000, about 20,000 of the "slaughters" are suicides*. Five hundred are accidents. A few hundred are undetermined.

"If a frog had wings, he wouldn't bump his ass when he hopped."

Project, as shown: about $30 in parts, an hour of labor, plus $5.00 in ice every time you want to use it.

Interesting that some who decry homophobia, embrace hoplophobia. In fact, both are irrational. A rifle in the safe is no more harmful or scary than a gay child in his bedroom.

How about women having sex with drunk men? Or drunk people having sex with each other?

Well, there was a pretty big and heated discussion, recently, over the naming conventions used for soccer and soccer players.

"Never pass up an opportunity to eat, sleep, or go to the bathroom. You don't know when you'll get another..."

Alrighty, then. Back in.

And I have played for 40. Do you not see, from my explanation, that if one calls 30-30 "deuce," you lose nothing; the game will not change in the slightest? Two more points wins? Check. Splitting two points lands you at deuce? Check. It would simply be more efficient, and young boys playing and not concerned with…

Not trying to sound condescending, just trying to understand your post. Are you saying you don't understand why 30-30 equals deuce? Or are you agreeing that other people's not understanding that 30-30 equals deuce makes no sense?

...try saying /broo SKET ta/ in a small group and see how many people immediately correct you to /broo SHET ta/. I hear it goes well with a nice /CHEE an TEE/...

Growing up playing tennis with other kids, we would lazily call 30-30 "deuce," because 30-30 is effectively 40-40 (actual deuce), meaning (with either tied score) two more consecutive points wins a player the game.

Without knowing the facts of the case, and confident I never will know them, beyond speculation and the word of one very biased witness (the shooter), I offer the following possible scenario.

Don't be so bossy.

I guess my attempts to "mansplain" to you that "but, but, she has a number, a great big number" might sound like a shrill, juvenile argument, have failed.

Women dominate women's gymnastics. Men dominate men's gymnastics. They are mostly completely different sports, other than a couple of the events which are similar (vault, floor exercises). They are gender-segregated, though, so it is impossible to quantify which gender, if any, would dominate.

Everyone already knows Donovan's goals were against the hardest competition by the way his achievement is commonly described in the generally accepted way: without qualifiers.

Why would anyone refer to your hypothetical woman runner as the "USA's fastest Boston Marathon runner"? I don't follow the analogy.

You're a vulgar little thing, aren't you? That might be forgivable, if your arguments were valid or compelling, but "Nope"? You're just an angry, intellectually deficient person who needs the last word, no matter how incorrect your assertions.