Hasn’t cho already explained it though? Why should she explain it again in a personal email if her critiques are so widely known/easily researchable? That’s the part that doesn’t make sense and doesn’t sit well with me.

Playing fair makes us liberal/progressive. Abandon that and we have nothing.

White Man Rule No. 4: If you can’t have something, ruin it for everyone else.

Interesting takeaway from this election cycle: Turns out that the GOP, the party that routinely wraps itself in the American flag and the Constitution, not really all that interested in democracy.

Is anything ever actually said unless a man says it though, really?

Fuck that kid, right? Because he’s rich and white and entitled and remorseless.

Though I admittedly don’t know all the details, it seems the judicial community is letting them get away with it. the law enforcement community keeps arresting them.

Yes, it is, if she is to have a policy role — which, if Trump handing off the phone to her when Pelosi called and Ivanka’s attendance at every single meeting is any indication, she absolutely will — that is a flagrant violation of the nepotism law. The actual wife of the POTUS gets a special exception. His daughter…

Yes, I did. I think he wants her to do it, because no one is hard on her. It is a distraction. I know, if his latest wife doesn’t want to do it, fine. But, there isn’t some altruistic reason, like he cares about her. There isn’t one single thing this man does, that doesn’t have a specific reason behind it.

I read your full post, I just find the fact that you’re even trying to separate the two points ridiculous. No one is upset about the prospect of Ivanka performing first lady duties because she’s Trump’s daughter and not his wife. People are upset because the nature of their family makes increasing Ivanka’s presence…

Dolly Parton puts out a Christmas special each year on NBC that is entirely on brand and I love her for it. No one will ever speak ill or talk down about Dolly around me. She’s talented, self aware and a true treasure.

For real. They’re both horrible, and they only become feminists when they face any kind of discrimination personally. The absolutely could not care less about one other woman on the planet.

They actually kind of have to adopt the trappings of a religion to fight the way they do; a lot of Republicans like to pull out the “freedom of religion, not freedom from religion” card, and argue that Athiesism isn’t a religion, and therefore isn’t covered by religious liberty laws. So they pretend to be religious,…

How about we downplay neither of them? She was smart and brave to write the note and he was a great guy who called the cops.

I have a friend who always says, “If you’re worried about safety, wear a seatbelt.” I know it’s true, but a) Duh, I always have my kids wear their seatbelts, and b) Yes, one of my kids dying in an accident is more likely, and it would be horrific. But there’s something about human malice that’s especially terrifying.

Is it though? It seems pretty obnoxious and egotistical, if you ask me.

You’re right. He has a team reviewing everyone who applies, but he is personally reviewing every single file that makes it to the final round to decide which sentences to reduce and which to deny. Which isn’t a job you can do quickly.

To create a legally binding, individual document after vetting a person’s record to make sure they are not letting murderers out (for example) and then getting it to the president for approval, yes. But you go ahead and be condescending anyway.

Perhaps. But if Jill Stein and President-Elect Trump both state that there are suspicious discrepancies in the voting results, shouldn’t there be some sort of objective inquiry?

Oh, for fuck’s sake.