What is going on over on Gawker’s version of the article? All I saw were people discussing it.

“Appropriation”? Really?

Who is telling anyone to do that?

Yes. That would describe the “cuckold” relationship, as well as the hundreds of Tumblr blogs devoted to men and women who proudly share tales of their sexual exploits behind their partner’s back.

The majority of Americans do not require any such explanation from Sanders; you’ll be lucky to get one, and I’m sorry nothing that his been written by anyone else is enough for you.

“According to Sanders’ campaign manager Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ reason for opposing the Brady bill was two-fold. First, he believed implementing a national waiting period was federal overreach. And second, he was doing his job.

You’re not asking; you’re demanding, which make you think you’re either antagonizinig (trolling) or willfully ignorant.

Of course. I understand that perfectly, but there’s a contingent of liberals that seems to think Sanders’ stance on gun rights/regulation is somehow ‘conservative’ or event right-wing. I consider that a ridiculous assessment, and one that divided the Democratic Party.

His voting record needs no explanation because it’s ALREADY been explained. Do the research. Are you next going to post his “female rape fantasy” essay?

Vermont also has very little gun-related violence or street crime.

Give me a quote, because as far as I know he’s only ever mentioned immigrants at rallies in regards to giving them citizenship.

Sanders’ record needs no explanation. I don’t question any of his votes, and those that some might were already explained by others. This is a non-issue.

Basically, Sanders was asked if the United States should have “open borders,” and he disagreed; stating that “open borders” are a Koch Bros. proposal.

Nothing Sanders has said about immigration sounds anything like something Trump would say. From an economic perspective, everything he has said is very accurate and very unbiased.

His alleged votes for both bills have already been discussed, clarified, and rebutted.

All of your claims have been discussed and rebutted. None of them are true, or at least are presented in inaccurate ways.

There are valid reasons to judge her; this is not one of them.

It may or may not be the same Marissa Johnson, but the fact remains that that article was posted in 2010... Before she was even 18. Should she not have a right to change her opinion?

I don’t understand. Women have been saying for years that wiping from back-to-front is unsanitary; you’re saying they’re wrong?

The Seattle agitators decided to protest a Medicaid rally for the sick and elderly. That is wrong, and counterproductive.