Pirate movies are infamous for being flops historically. Almost all efforts to produce female led reboots of existing franchises have also been flops. It’s amazing that anyone was interested in attempting this to begin with.

Yes because a single senator is all that’s required to pass legislation. In fact, he can push through legislation at will whenever he wants to. So it’s ridiculous for him to engage in anything other than pushing through legislation 24/7 since he alone has the power to do so. 

Right. So your opinion of the op-ed is based on what you imagine is there rather than what’s there. Got you.

The critical piece of context is that the op-ed is directly addressing the suggestions of some Democrat consultants and not the actual messaging of the Democratic party in it’s totality. Again, what he’s saying is clear if you read the op-ed.

Except that there is still value in the sense that it establishes what the actually will of the voters is, which is worth something in general. It also directly disenfranchises some voters who may vote differently in a general election given the slight by the government. To say there is no potential value in a…

And how does that potential outcome make having a referendum a bad idea?

Jezebel, just fire Kylie already. The level of dishonesty in the majority of her articles should be unacceptable. Dishonest arguments are a problem for most of your writers, but she is by far the worst one. 

He’s not saying that he wants to have people look at the display in question. He said he looked at it and it informed his opinion and voting position. I don’t agree with his position, but there’s no reason to misrepresent what he said.

Read the op-ed instead of Kylie’s misrepresentation of it. He never once said that abortion isn’t a key issue. He says the opposite of that. He also never says that abortion isn’t linked to the economy. He’s making an argument for tackling more than one issue so the party reaches more voters. That is all. Anyone…

A cursory read of the op-ed shows that this article misrepresents Bernie’s whole argument. He’s very clearly saying abortion is a key issue that should be discussed, but it taking issue with some political consultants telling the Democrat leadership to focus only on that issue for the final push of the election, which…

Do you work in the trades? Cause I have and, at least in the area I lived in at the time, there was a portion of the workers in the trades that was at least proportional to the general public, if not larger. That may have been regionally influenced though, Toronto is a pretty liberal city. 

“—and yes, this does seem to be a problem that exclusively plagues the straights”

“But if marriage is really about power—about the ability for men to own, control, and profit off of women, their bodies, and their finances”

No it wouldn’t back door them into any packages with service providers. This is a stand alone over the air transmission. 

So in other words you want more representation because you feel it’s important to be able to relate to the characters but you also demand that people who don’t relate to the character in your movies go see your movie. Got it.

“an archetype that exists solely because our default assumption is that heterosexual marriages are unhappy, that most men don’t care for their wives, that those who do love their wives are automatically deserving of our collective adoration.”

They don’t want unfettered capitalism. They want corporate socialism. They are very much in favour of public funds generated through taxation being used to subsidize private interests. That is not capitalism. 

The author likes playing buzzword bingo in everything she writes. It’s typical for her to throw out terms like that with little to no relevance to what she is speaking about or to what the words even mean. 

What is the point of this article exactly? That private events are bad or infer nefarious plots? This whole premise of this article is just incredibly dumb. We get it, you disagree with pro-lifers. That doesn’t mean that them having a closed event is any different than any other group having one. 

In a way this is a good thing, but only so far as them being honest about their intentions. I’d rather have them be up front about the plan than scrubbing any acknowledgement of their intentions from their messaging. By making it part of their planned policy it should theoretically maintain the momentum Democrats seem…