prettypussredux
PrettyPussRedux
prettypussredux

The dominant feature of fascism, historically, is that it does offer a lot of people something very attractive - stability. I have Russian people in my family, and their example is telling. They KNOW Putin is a dictator and kills opponents and whatnot. This is not a case of ignorance. But he does offer a degree of

That reminds me of another one - I can remember when Pink (I think it was her) did a PETA campaign and did some kind of interview or press junket for the reveal and the reporter there took great glee in noting that she showed up to the event in very nice leather boots. I can’t imagine that was pointed out by mistake.

Well, please don’t let me stop you from giving angry atheists a bad name!

Except let’s not move the goalposts here. You said “women, non-Jews, slaves, etc.” I’m asking you to point out specific passages that advocate harm or maltreatment of those people.

Because nobody in Hollywood actually researches before they sign up. PETA doesn’t even bother to research or care about who speaks for them. They’ve had spokespeople who’ve done campaigns against one thing but then been caught doing something else that is very contrary to the animal rights message, but PETA doesn’t

Um....citation?

I have actually had a man say to me that if I am a real Christian, I should support limited government because (and this is what he said) “If the charitable functions are all taken over by the government, what will be left for you to do to earn your way into Heaven?”

If Mel Gibson (yes, him) could use 100% robotics and computer imagery for the battle horses in Braveheart, they can certainly work around this.

Yeah, if you don’t mind Topshop using near-slaves, they’re awesome:

Good luck. Low-price is basically synonymous with “near-slave labor.” I thought that was common knowledge by now.

All the long-hemmed shirts.

Except you’re setting up a false narrative. It’s not about determining what issues matter to an exclusion of any others - it’s about weighing the options against each other and trying to determine which is LESS BAD. AA had a CEO with a propensity towards sexual harassment and related concerns, including the

That’s not really true though - truth is an ABSOLUTE defense (meaning it negates all other elements necessary to prove the claim). If something is true, it cannot be defamatory, no matter how damaging it might be.

In defamation cases, the defendant has the benefit of the doubt (that’s in contrast to other countries). The burden is on her to prove she is telling the truth - not on him to prove her a liar. I’m not sure what kind of evidence she has. The other issue is that defamation requires damages - she’d have to show that

They’re not immune though. They enjoy a level of immunity with respect to their actions in their capacity as President, and that’s a necessary thing - otherwise, the families of every single person killed in a drone strike during the Obama administration could sue him personally for wrongful death.

I’m torn. On one hand, I can totally believe every word she says, easily. BUT - this case sounds weak as hell. First, she’s arguing that he made her an “implied job offer.” I struggle to think how that’ll fly. Job offers are pretty much one of those things that should be in writing - or, if they are verbal, have to be

John Lewis took a horrific beating at Selma, which was immortalized in the picture. I doubt he’s afraid of Trump or any of Trump’s threats. He knows brutality already.

Again, that whoosing you hear is the point flying waaaay over your head.

And here we find another example of the perfect being the enemy of the good. Seems to be a pretty common theme on Jez these days....

AA had serious problems, but honestly? I still shopped there, even when Dov’s abuses became known. Why? Because the alternative was being okay with an overseas industry that exploits children, physically abuses its workers, risks their lives in unhumane conditions, etc. As much as I could dislike that one guy, I could