ReasonablyPrudentPerson
ReasonablyPrudentPerson
ReasonablyPrudentPerson

When you take months to cut out every per person expense, down to the number of glasses, individual appetizers, waiters/staff on duty, and glasses of wine to the bare minimum in order to make as much room on the guest list for your family without breaking the bank, you might get pissed of that someone you don't know

For some, a chance to get four or five generations of family in one room and create a lasting memory is worth more than a summer full of parties

Or, they fought for months to get the guest list small enough so that they could afford their wedding and spend it with those closest to them, only for two dicks to decide that they were more important than an old high school friend who didnt make the cut

I spent hours cutting down friends, families, and other loved ones from my guest list so that we could afford the wedding and not violate the fire code. If you snuck in, I would give you the cake and than make you call all of my second-cousins, college friends, and long-time family friends and explain why your

If they want to give up five figures to protest this, than good on them. But I neither expect nor want them to do that. This makes just as big a statement, doesn't punish the players, their families, or the fans. It leaves all the attention on the actual wrong party here, the Owner. It helps literally no

Are you so lacking in emotional intelligence that you honestly can't understand why people project emotions and feelings onto animals? Or are you just being a hipster contrarian?

Why should they pay for Sterlings racism when he won't? Seems backwards to expect the AA players to have to take a financial hit because their boss hates them.

What would you have them do? Take the financial burden on themselves by refusing to play? Why not just put the only pressure on that the players have against the owners, risking the NBA brand through bad press?

Why should the players have to suffer the real punishment for Sterlings racism? He gets yelled at on the internet and they get fired and heavily fined. Seems fair.

I hate to "what about the menz" but thats an extremely rape culture inspired comment. Someone can be conscious and still unable to consent to sex. I'm not saying that OP should go to jail, or even that her husband should be mad at her if he doesn't feel like a victim, but that first paragraph is way too

That, despite the lack of explicit racism, a huge factor in disappearing diversity as you climb the corporate ladder is the result of a lack of access to informal mentor networks due to the fact that the current leadership is mostly white males and therefore are likely, due to implicit racism, to see "themselves" in

Reminder, it's in DC, so it would be pretty easy to make it federal jurisdiction without going full RICO.

Its totally American. The whole point of the rule of law is that parties are welcome to enter into private contracts and set their own rules for their transactions and conduct. If these contracts are breached, the government will enforce them only after a minimal showing by the aggrieved party. I think you need to

No they aren't. The whole point of a contract is to create a private set of laws between to parties. You and I can enter into a contract that says that you will be liable for punishment before an arbitrator of my choosing if you chew gum in France. If you fail to leave up to your obligation to appear before the

To be fair, Democrats have those same problems. Its hard to be pro-labor, pro-environment, pro-immigration, pro-student, pro-entitlement programs, pro-Cuban, and pro- public healthcare.

IMHO we are well overripe for a Dixie-crat style realignment of interest groups. The biggest float groups that could permanently

Name those acts.

I have no issues with a whistleblower, and I even grudgingly respect Snowden. However, Chelsea provided no editing to safeguard the life of our overseas allies who risk their life (something Snowden and his journalist did), had no complaint-in-chief that she seeked to expose (Unlike Prism or the war in

Name those acts.

I have no issues with a whistleblower, and I even grudgingly respect Snowden. However, Chelsea provided no editing to safeguard the life of our overseas allies who risk their life (something Snowden and his journalist did), had no complaint-in-chief that she seeked to expose (Unlike Prism or the war

What would you have done?

Are there actually fuses in the UK? Or do they mean resetting the circuit breaker? Cause that's not anymore DIY than draining the bathtub.