I certainly get all of that, but what I responded to was the way that your phrasing of “accomplishment/attribute” made me think. I found that more interesting than whether it is “important.”
I certainly get all of that, but what I responded to was the way that your phrasing of “accomplishment/attribute” made me think. I found that more interesting than whether it is “important.”
I never really thought about it, but, now that you say it like that, we consider it an accomplishment. Important or not, we really think it is an accomplishment, really think we have grown scalps that could beat up other scalps.
This article is a fine piece of writing, but, to be honest, I skimmed it after seeing “full head of hair.”
You know, that is an interesting question that didn’t really occur to me - I wonder if Melissa does find it degrading. She has a choice to be a participant or not, so it isn’t the same question, but, still, a fair one.
a.) President “The” Donald, and I think you are fine.
Not even deserves, this is a press secretary that makes sense. If you assume that the job of a press secretary is to be the public face of the administration, I feel he is doing a bang up job - every word out of his mouth feels like an echo of the Oval Office hallway.
Yes.
At a Pizza Hut, after ordering a Coke, and after the inefficient waiter says, “Is Pepsi okay?”
Wait... does that mean cocaine? Because, based on US drug law, that is the one with proven medical benefits.
That’s some responsible Interneting right there.
Twenty-five years. Are you the same person that you were twenty-five years ago?
Trump? You misspelled “John Barron.”
You may or may not have been getting at that, but what you said was that executives related to a profession that historically has workers with poor health should not be involved with trying to help people in their field who historically have poor health.
Thank you.
Thank you for taking the time to fight these fights.
After reading this comment, I am embarrassed that I bothered to respond to your previous comment.
By now, I think everyone has agreed that the “better of two evils” argument is intellectually dishonest. If you supported Trump’s platform, fine. If you were, instead, not a racist, classist, misogynistic, xenophobic, homophobic son of a butch, that’s okay, too.
You know, I was skimming and I saw, “Where is the hegemony? / Sweet hegemony.”
Everything is the opposite. Colin Kaepernick? Still biracial.
There are fewer politicians willing to side with you because you think that this was a race between two anti-union presidential candidates.