Well, it turns out that when you don’t raise your kids, you can’t really affect how they turn out...

No no, the message is that you just shouldn’t eat any refugees. It’s the only safe way.

So, I agree this analogy has flaws. However, I’ve seen this exact same analogy used on this exact site by commentors when #notallmen was a big point of discussion. Only then it was “Yeah, not all men are going to sexually assault me. But, if I have a bowl/plate of Skittles/M&Ms/cookies and I know some are going to…

Oh give it a rest. If you want someone to blame, why not blame the 60+ crowd who support Trump by a margin of ten points on average.

Trayvon Martin is maybe the only person whose hunger for skittles killed him... And even then it was a right wing nut job who turned out to be the real killer.

Yeah, next time I eat a refugee I’ll make sure to check for poison first. That was the take away from this metaphor, right?

If I had a bowl of skittles and I told you three would kill you. Would you take a handful?

I got the rape/death threat combo. I deducted points for not calling me a whore first and/or adding any combination of stupid or “retarded” in his disjointed and misspelled bullshit.

And his father once again decided the Constitution doesn’t matter when he suggested that the bomber shouldn’t get good medical treatment or a good lawyer.

Especially preachy cunts with degrees from Columbia

I kinda want to fish for some sympathy and will be open about it. But I dropped my baby off at the vet this morning because she hasn’t pooped in a long time and she found me as soon as I woke up to tell me she was in a lot of pain :( I’m mighty worried, but I have every faith in my vet because she’s downright awesome.…

Yes, of course, you last statement is very true - but that is the problem. As even your troll noted, your responses have been very civil, and free from profanity and abuse and that is much appreciated.

“Was duped” suggests RS lay a trap into which the blogger was lured into passive complicity. This was Merlan’s first response to the questions raised about Erdely’s reporting, by somewhat objective third-party investigative journalists: “’Is the UVA Rape Story a Gigantic Hoax?’ Asks Idiot.” Typically profane and dead…

Far from it. Had this been a real journalistic enterprise, she would have been removed from this “beat” and forbidden to write about it. At least the RS writer has had the sense of propriety enough to withdraw from public life, But a Jezebel blogger whose only other professional credentials are drawing cat-eye…

Don’t forget the time another journalist/blogger tried to investigate “Jackie”s claims and Jezebel and Gawker responded by perpetuating a meme that he shits on the floor in a manner so embarrassingly spiteful and immature that their new owners deleted the article as soon as they were able to.

I really wish the woman who lied about all of this was responsible for restitution.

I recall that there were plenty of people who said maybe we should pump the brakes on this story since parts of it aren’t adding up. Granted, those people were tarred and feathered on Jezebel and Gawker, but they certainly existed. One particular person was roundly ridiculed for daring to question the story and…

All parties mentioned are guilty - Jackie for making up a story about rape, Erdeley for omitting even the most basic journalistic standards, like checking the time lines, contacting witnesses mentioned in the story to corroborate Jackie’s account and talking to the accused and last but not least RS Magazine, for…

I hope they sue your stupid ass next. How are you still employed?