Haha. If you think what happened to you was bullying, you’ve never experienced true bullying. You said something stupid, and were told it was stupid. Enjoy your life.

I’m curious about how the title could be misunderstood?

Grow up. You got told to fuck off because you wrote something stupid. That is the worst that happened. No one is threatening to kill you, or wishing you harm. They are using harsh words to explain why you are wrong. Quit fucking whining.

You are still missing the point! The headline is 100% accurate. It is not clickbait or misleading. If you thought the headline “Interview With a Woman Who Recently Had an Abortion at 32 Weeks” was intended to vilify (on Jezebel no less), that is because you have some hangups with late-term abortion, and a reflexive…

Haha, I’m sorry? I was supposed to be able to tell that was a joke, how? I’d love for you to point out the premise, setup, and punchline.

The problem is with your employer, not the rule. The rule is a good rule. I worked at a company that didn’t fuck around with overtime. If you were inefficient enough that you constantly needed overtime to finish your work, that would be dealt with as a personnel matter. But the company was not interested in losing…

It’s a stupid argument. This case is not going to get overturned because the lawyer didn’t say “Well, he was thousands of miles away, incapable of not directing people to rape his unconscious girlfriend.” Do you know how difficult it is to make a successful ineffective assistance of counsel claim?

Yeah, one thing I got from reading the study was that Trump was unique as a candidate who receives that much media coverage, given his poll numbers and fundraising, but that the media actually gave him the coverage you’d expect of a famous person running the type of absurd campaign he ran. I think that’s still a…

Here are the things Winston did off the field:

In what way is his rape allegation part of a redemptive story?

I’m not saying the study is wrong in that Trump didn’t get free publicity. I am saying that publicity could not have sustained him this long if people hadn’t ultimately liked what he said.

The overwhelming majority of people will easily pass the background check. I guarantee If I went to buy a washing machine it would take more than 7 minutes just to run my credit and fill out the financing paperwork.

If he appeals and wins and the court remands the case for a new trial, yes he can be retried.

I know it is a popular refrain to “blame” the media for Trump’s rise, and I get it. He received an outsize portion of coverage. But I don’t think his staying power was due to the media. Over past cycles, the media has routinely built up new “outsider” candidates who burst onto the scene, like Herman Cain, Ben Carson,…

Again, it doesn’t matter what they call it. If HE admits he raped someone, that is possibly trouble later. His family, who were not there at the time of the incident, can call it whatever they want. Those letters are not coming back up in the guilt phase of any subsequent trial that might happen. So it is not really…

Literally, that’s not true, as I pointed out. These letters would not be used in the guilt phase of a subsequent trial. Only Brock’s own words carry any risk of legal entanglement. There is no legal reason for his parents to avoid saying what he did.

1) These letters were written for the sentencing phase of the trial, after he’d already been convicted.

He committed a nasty, horrible crime. I understand the instinct of parents to protect their child. But if my kid does something wrong, he is apologizing for what he did, and I am apologizing because some of that blame falls time. These letters did not have a whiff of that. They downplayed his crime, played up the…

Nothing in the article says they got on death row at the same time. It is not particularly crazy that 3 inmates out of a population of about 80 on death row would have conditions that make exposure to heat a problem:

Speaking of white male angst, Gawker just filed for bankruptcy.