I calls 'em as I sees 'em.

Of course it is…that's what made it funny.

That's sort of my whole point. In the show, it's clear that White Josh is not looking at Darrell as a sugar daddy. I'm just saying that in real life, if he wasn't looking at him as a potential sugar daddy, White Josh would not be looking at Darrell at all.

Lucy Lane's interrogation of James about whether or not his relationship with Supergirl is the same as his relationship with Superman made me think that she believes James was secretly boning Superman (or was wanting to).

My impression was that it's a pretty small firm. And the fact that it's in West Covina means they aren't likely to have many high-profile clients, so while the firm is probably doing ok , I don't believe that Darrell comes across as sugar daddy material.

I don't think White Josh's font of answers is what Darrell is interested in clinging to.

I never got the impression that he was rich, exactly…
Also, the way it works is the older rich men fall for the twink (that's their secret weapon). It is seldom the other way around.

Sorry, it's a cute fantasy and all, but I'm not buying White Josh and Darrell as a couple. It just would not ever happen in reality. Those two would only end up dating in a writer's imagination.

Plus the fact that he is wearing a hoodie/bandana combo and circa 1994 OJ gloves, yet Darrel and Rick still put their guns away, like they think no way is this guy suspicious at all.

Well, it's all the rage with the kids these days.

Wait, what? I think you might have missed my point entirely.

I'm curious about this woman that Uncle Pete describes as the ideal of love, who is able to cum anytime from missionary position vaginal penetration only and who never engages in oral sex of any kind (giving or receiving)?

I kept expecting to hear a gun shot before the credits started rolling…too obvious, I guess.

He won't if you don't tell him. Pipe down!

Don't you get it? Even if the police and forensics made mistakes, those mistakes did not erase all of the evidence in this case. You want to argue about socks? Fine, remove the socks from the case. There is still more than enough evidence to prove Simpson is a murderer.

No, prosecutors aren't always on the right side of the law (btw, I was referring to being on the right side morally and ethically). Many examples exist, but the one that springs to mind is the Ryan Ferguson case.

Don't get me wrong—the prosecutors were grossly inadequate, practically to the point of incompetence, in my opinion.

Evidence was neither completely mishandled nor fabricated.

Nothing you've said changes a thing. OJ hacked two people to death. No honest intelligent person can look at the evidence and come to any other conclusion. His defense team made shit up in order to shift the focus away from the victims of his crime. The jury ignored the incontrovertible evidence and let him walk. They…

You're wrong. It's not difficult to say OJ definitely did it. There is more than enough physical and circumstantial evidence to prove he slaughtered the two victims. The fact that the jury gave him a pass does not suddenly make all the evidence disappear.