Now if they could just bring back the Mazdaspeed 6 life would be truly grand.
Bweeds
bweeds
“The mean global wealth is $56,540 per person”
So, he’s still gonna win, right?
The problem is offending someone so much that they punch you in the face may be inadvisable, but it’s not illegal. Punching someone in the face is.
This is such a stupid opinion. The U.S. has materially higher levels of gun violence than any other comparably wealthy country. In large part because of lax gun laws. Countries with stricter gun laws simply do not have the level of gun violence the U.S. has, nor do they have these sorts of mass shootings with the…
I’m not sure a couple dozen idiots clicking and posting comments about how they don’t want to read articles they could quite easily avoid reading is “the majority of the readership.”
As much as I’m against cheating, I’m even more against spectators being involved in the enforcement of rules. This is no different than some jackass watching a golf tournament in his media room calling in to report a rules violation, and the golf officials acting upon the telephone call when they otherwise wouldn’t…
Isn’t that what you do with fancy dogs?
I’m sorry but the only Stark worth a single goddamn is Uncle Benjen
I can’t conceive of any universe, with football or without, in which everyone wouldn’t hate Dallas.
Yes, Union soldiers were killing their fellow citizens, who were traitors.
No. He would not denounce white supremacy. However, he would denounce all the stupid fucking statues of himself all over the place:
He doesn’t HAVE to use them. He could just not use Twitter. He could set his account to private. He’s making choices on the forum and nature of the forum. He chooses to use the site in a manner that allows people to respond to him, and then restricts that ability based on content.
You are focusing on his behavior as to whether he responds. I am focusing on his behavior as to whether he is using the service. It is not a service he has to use. It is a service he chooses to use, and it is a service that allows people to respond. He is a government figure restricting that ability based on content.…
Actually, a lot of First Amendment experts believe this is a fairly easy case for the Plaintiffs. This restricts their ability to respond directly to one of the President’s admittedly favorite forms of communication. A government actor can’t restrict speech on the basis of content except in very strict circumstances…
1. Clarify Modern.
Yeah, but how many of those retail jobs were held by TRUE WORKING MEN WHO CARRY LUNCHPAILS?
Not that anyone has spoken about.
Can we just pause and consider how fucked up it is that our civil rights are now taken away via Tweet?