Rubio comes off to me as an empty suit who was brought up easily through the South Florida Cuban political machine with very little effort. Honestly I think he is in way over his head and that will be shown very easily if he becomes the GOP candidate.

Wealthy New Englander but a wedding at Disney World? That seems a bit un-WASPy to me...

I was quoting someone else; the main focus of the comment I was quoting was people who don’t vote.

People who don’t vote by definition don’t vote.

I always liked playing with as little combat/grinding as possible (even back in the day when it was expected of you, and avoiding combat could mess things up), but the big problem I’ve noticed with a lot of the games where you can talk/hack/sneak your way through a lot of things is eventually you’re put in a situation…

Absentee ballots. Actually better than regular ballots because they’re more reliable.

“Lots of people will reply to this by saying that they do not vote (or spoil their votes) to protest our fucked up political system.”

You’re lucky, the last time I dealt with someone smoking a hookah, he dropped me into his Rancor pit.

Throw the empty canister at the cashier and scream “coffee out.” They’ll thank you.

But the ratio of people complaining about posters who are or who may be about to exhibit Pinkham’s Law to people actually invoking Pinkham’s Law is about 100/1.

I am not sure how you interpreted me saying “I do think its useful to distinguish between the two concepts” with “never seen it before, or don’t understand why it’s used”....

The set of people who watch John Oliver and the set of people who have even the slightest chance of voting for Trump do not overlap that much.

the primary researcher didn’t know there was a difference between sex and gender.”

I was scammed out of three burgers because “The customer is always right.”

Doral and Miami generally are both overwhelmingly Hispanic. Not just in terms of population, but also in terms of political power and police makeup.

I’m familiar with that case, and just don’t agree with it; the Ninth Circuit used a different formulation of the “comment” requirement than the Supreme Court, and just because the video pokes fun at say, Democrats, doesn’t mean that it’s not also poking fun at the movie.

Well, if the guy is autistic they might not have thought he would be particularly reliable. According to the story linked:

According to the Supreme Court where there is no commercial use it’s easier to get past the “comment” requirement of the parody fair use exception to copyright law. Looking at this video as a whole I just can’t see any reasonable court not finding it protected.

“Christ on a cracker what’s wrong with whatever district manager decided to pay him for 166 hours.”

By following the movie’s plot and premise. The creator did not use the movie plot because they needed a story and were too lazy to think up their own.