I can’t see that doing any real harm, though. The only people who would be fooled by that are devoted Trump supporters, and neither Clinton nor Sanders could possibly be counting on their votes.

This is the same sort of jackass who, in 2008, was all over the Internet saying, “I will never vote for Obama, Hillary deserves the nomination, Party Unity My Ass.” That is, the sort of jackass who supports candidates more from some personal identification with them than out of a general sense of civic duty or…

I think you can recognize the political reality of that, and still find this distasteful. For example, I do. For all that I understand that this is how the game is played, the game itself is pretty disgusting.

I’m a Sanders supporter, and I feel the same way. Every time I hear a Sanders supporter say they’d never vote for Clinton, I want to scream. Yes, I’d much prefer Sanders to get the nomination, but anyone who learned nothing from what happened in 2000 should just shut the fuck up forever. I mean, hey, look how well…

It’s of a piece with his animosity toward Obama. He’s infuriated by criticism from people from whom he expects deference due to what he consciously or unconsciously considers to be their inherent inferiority. He can’t abide it, and he can’t stop trying to put them in their place.

Because we don’t really have a problem with what they do, we just want to be the ones who are doing it, not the ones it’s done to. Right?

Sounds like an updated version of life in the State of Nature.

Because I am a Pollyanna, I am going to pretend that he was the dad of the kid who dropped his own ball, and just wanted to make sure it didn’t get lost.

Because that’s all she was, a d-list celebrity, not a professional sports journalist at the top of her field. Allrighty, then.

“Prove you’re not guilty by allowing us to cash in on your trauma.”

Well, yes, forcing her would be the issue. Also, I’m pretty sure everyone didn’t believe that, and that those who did would have been much less credulous had her network actually stood up for her, rather than treating her as if she were guilty until proven innocent.

You know what else would have boosted her credibility? A strong show of support from the people who knew her.

Really? So if a woman you worked with told you this had happened to her, you’d just shrug and say, “Hey, who can really know? I mean, you’re my colleague, I’ve known you for years, but you’re a woman, so why would I have any faith in you?”

You know, I have to agree with Stout here. If he had allowed Bergeron to make the edits she wanted, it would have killed Arnold’s authentic communication. Unfortunately, what he was authentically communicating was his total lack of concern for the women Holtzclaw raped.

I know this post is old, but my attention was drawn back to it by a recommend. I just wanted to say that while I’m generally with you on the prescriptive grammar thing, I feel as if the one case in which grammar flames are okay is when someone’s claiming that the poors are dumb and need to stop breeding.

Don’t kid yourself. They always did.

It does when they refuse to listen to the people who actually live with the effects of racism.

This supports the claim that there’s a problem in L.A., which I don’t doubt. It doesn’t say anything about whether there are problems elsewhere as well. If anything, at least in L.A. there are enough other women willing to support each other that the problem is now out in the open. Because it’s not being talked about…

Is there some reason to believe it’s not the norm in comedy pretty much everywhere? I’d be happy to hear that, but pretty surprised.

Followed by a bear with a laptop.