Lol, you think the obamas are squeaky clean. You are super delusional.

there are no good starting points. Everyone is biased. But perhaps not vox, who deliberately misleads to push an agenda? At least some other outlets just unintentionally mislead!

“Both Sides”

Holy shit, you think that Vox is a “decent starting point for genuine information and insight.”

Why would a libertarian read Reason? It’s total garbage.

Fucking statists. I’m looking at you Nick Gillespie & Matt Welch.

Oh, I guess that republicans and democrats support BLM in equal numbers.

Fucking spare me, these tools just put a water microphone (something invented by the market) in a titanium box. The cost of this project isn’t listed.

And the result? A recording of a whale. Thats it. There is no technological break through here, and there wont be from a recording of a whale.

So tell me again why I…

Oh... Am I somehow magically forcing you to read my comments? Is my patriarchal privilege permeating your personal space on a public website on the internet and forcing you to participate in the conversation?

Please explain!

The irony of it? Am I forcing you to read what I say? Am I forcing you to participate?

Is the comment section of a large public website your personal space that I am invading?

The person I wrote those long comments to actually enjoyed our exchange, also you might note that they also wrote long comments.

You might also note that all those posts have a star, it was from the person I was responding to.

Also... does “don’t fucking touch me” apply to cops, how about politicians? Does it apply to…

Except that he was hiring women, hence the binders.

Well your definition of when it is and isn’t okay to violate someone’s bodily autonomy is completely arbitrary because the law is arbitrary.

If pointing out that resting your idea of when it’s okay to violate bodily autonomy on the law leads to self-contradiction then I guess I’m just a big ole troll.

So it was offensive because he dodged the question and it was ‘tone deaf’?

How is it tone deaf, because he was trying to hire women?

So if I am understanding this correctly, not enough women in government... sexist.
Trying to hire more women to work in the government... sexist.

okay.

how is “binders full of women” offensive given the context?

Well it was a fun exchange while it lasted, have fun on vacation and with your moving.

oh so your bodily autonomy can be violated when you disobeyed a bunch of people you never met who wrote some shit down on paper?

So if it were the law that abortion was illegal, that wouldn’t violate women’s bodily autonomy because aborting the baby/fetus is a crime?

The fucking entitlement is astounding.

No, and I apologize for the confusion. What I meant was that, since you used gang rape in an example, and then brought up the point about gang rape being okay because the majority have voted to take away the rights of another human being—not that you believe that, but that it is something that could be argued under…

do politicians and police have to follow this rule?

...you have so far been quite reasonable. I guess I should say thank you, but I’m not sure if that means anything to you at all.