No, I didn’t just “stop by.” Your original comment in this thread was a response to my comment, here: http://kitchenette.jezebel.com/i-think-the-po… So if you don’t like my perspectives on your replies to my comments, I’d suggest you don’t reply to my comments in the first place.

And they aren’t doing that because...why?

Well, it would work. He’d show them his ID, and his name would match the one on the card, because he bought all the cards in his name. The birthdate would not match — but again, he’s already admitting it’s not his birthday, per what the post above states. He just claims it’s some kind of “glitch,” and the barista…

I think the point here is that the card automatically registers the purchase as “free” because of the “birthday” date that’s programmed into it. He’s not pretending it’s his real birthday; he’s feigning surprise when the card gets swiped and registers “no charge,” and claiming it must be some technical glitch that…

I’m sure a lot of Sanders supporters and Black Lives Matter activists are saying exactly that right now — about each other. Both factions are warring, and tearing each other down. This has been a disease of the left for many decades now. We’re a lot better at sniping at each other than working together.

Well, it’s good that recognize the true enemy: white liberal progressives. Keep fighting that good fight against them!

The story is made up, of course. The original linked piece uses some interesting passive constructions (“it was claimed,” “it has been claimed,” etc.) in an awkward attempt to “write around” the lack of a credible source for this tale.

FIFA Rankings, as Deadspin has mentioned time and time again, are imperfect and never tell the whole story. I get that France and Germany are both really good, and probably should have been on other sides of the bracket, but it is impossible to seed this stuff well.

But I don’t know what my tomorrow morning will be like without a good morning text from him, without hearing his voice.

Saying it’s a “term of affection” means she’s trying to be friendly, not accusatory.

It means that of you lecturing busy-bodies responding here are more outraged than Quangel is — which is funny, because she’s the one the original tweet was describing, not you.

She didn’t just provide the cash. She paid the $49 fee to perform the “whois” lookup, and then discovered the result.

Actually, Emma Quangel accepted that explanation with an “OK”:

The tweet was clearly apologetic in tone, and Emma Quangel accepted it with her tweeted “OK.” So that’s good enough for Quangel, but not good enough for you, apparently. Because you are the Twitter Police, apparently!

On the contrary — she DID accept Natasha’s explanation that it was a term of affection, after nvc posted an apologetic tweet. See:

And because she had previously publicly accused her parents of abusing her, which they deny. And also because she and her parents have been at odds in a legal battles over custody of one of her brothers, and a child-abuse allegation against another one.

Do you have a bell? You need a bell.

That’s not true. She wasn’t passing herself off as black when she was at Howard. She still had blonde hair then. See: http://jezebel.com/when-rachel-do…

Not sure she ever took “scholarships meant for black kids.” Haven’t read that anywhere. Do you have a source for that ...?