ragingbulldogiii
RagingBulldogIII
ragingbulldogiii

California is a different state. Does not apply. Nunes isn’t in a statewide elected office. Does not apply.

It’s West Virginia. Trump won big there.

Oh for fucks sake.

People like Bill Clinton are incapable of true introspection. The idea that he will wake up one morning and see any of his past behavior as problematic (ie. any of his past allegations or even walking across the tarmac and getting on a plane with Loretta Lynch) is wishful thinking, at best.

And that is exactly the same argument that evangelicals make: “Donald Trump did more to help the unborn than any other president in history.”

Bill Clinton was (is) a sexual predator who was accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick and of sexual assault by Paula Jones and others.

Or they’re incredibly relevant since he’s on a promotional tour for his book and doing public interviews for the first time since #metoo broke public.

The Clintons are like herpes: no one wants to be reminded that they exist, but every few months they pop up and it’s super embarrassing.

I really don’t understand the hate the movie got. I’m not a super fan or anything, but I thought it was a pretty good movie, and that Kelly was good in it. I thought the whole casino part was a bit slow, but that’s not her fault. I will never understand the people who didn’t like the shoulder brush.

Anyone who thinks TLJ “ruined mah childhood” has clearly never moved beyond that childhood.

They shouldn’t be harassing her. I do wish that storyline had been written better though—they made her character a touch annoying.

It’s not a false equivalency because it’s not a refusal of service; it’s a refusal of custom work. You can refuse anyone custom work for any reason. The baker justified his refusal with a religious belief, but he didn’t have to. If he had said “I don’t want to do another wedding cake this year” that is also a valid

What artist makes their art with the intention of it being destroyed?

Actually Masterpiece Cakeshop specifically told the couple they could purchase a premade cake from the baked goods section of the store, so they were not outright refused service — they were refused a wedding cake specifically. Wedding cakes are custom works, it’s why they cost so much more.

The way I read it, it basically seems to distinguish custom work from service, which I’m fine with. If a different cake store refused to make a MAGA cake, for example, they’d be protected. If a tattoo artist refused to do a racist tattoo, they would be protected. If anything, the religious freedom aspect seems to not

But you are. You said Sotomayor and Ginsberg couldn’t convince Breyer and Kagan the latter two were wrong.

You’d prefer that we were founded based on the accepted practices of contemporary Europe?

I don’t see either Sotomayor or RBG being hesitant to speak their minds no matter the Chief Justice, to be frank. And if Gorsuch is actually able to have such an impact on that room across party lines, then he definitely checks out as a “letter of the law” guy.

It wasn’t a refusal to serve gay people. It was refusal to do custom work for a particular event. If they came in for a birthday cake, I’m sure there wouldn’t have been an issue.

Of course, if you refuse to do a job, expect to be slammed on social media and maybe a couple headlines, regardless if you are on the right

Except this ruling also doesn’t cut very deep though, either.