whyorwhynot
whyorwhynot
whyorwhynot

Dudes: You can find a woman attractive without having to base her entire worth and value around that. Please try harder.

How original. Male artist is guitar genius. Female artist has killer tits. Please do pat yourself on the back for your progressiveness.

Fuck this dude. Sky Ferreiras first album was some dope, dark shit. She's pop in so much as pop means a song is catchy.

You are super right. His profile is indeed stupid shit none of us have time for. SMH.

It’s about fucking time.

I thought it would be awesome if Barack Obama was named to the Supreme Court, but the joy I would take from that would be pretty short lived (with the occasional opinion that made me proud and joyful) but then I worry that SCOTUS Justices are sort of closed off from public debates and policy discussions and world

Your last part is the most important. Trump is validating fear, while Obama and Hillary are being rational. And sometimes pragmitisn doesn't win elections.

I for one think he’ll make an outstanding elder Statesman. He won’t disappear just because he’s no longer President.

Oh, snap! I'm standing up in my living room cheering right now.

The Democrats are going to beat Trump so badly that he’s going to sue them for defamation after the election results.

I will have to check that out. You are absolutely correct that it could take years, possibly decades. And it will have it’s nuances culturally, regionally, economically, historically. But we can at least start. I think my thing is at least wanting to start the conversation that the solution is going to involve men

he continued...”I had been there many times in the past, just because there are young men grinding with each other and dancing to electronic music doesn’t make it a gay club...because I was there and I am not gay!”

Actually I believe the old wisdom is defense attorneys want women who have sons and the prosecutors want fathers who have daughters. Women jurors in rape cases are often harder on the victim than male jurors.

I’m kind of surprised people don’t understand this. If you were the victim of a robbery and are up for jury selection for a robbery trail, you’re supposed to disclose that for obvious reasons. In fact, it shows what good lawyers he was able to afford to be able to catch something like this.

Jurors are typically asked to disclose if they or anyone close to them have been involved, in any capacity, with a situation similar to the one at trial. You can disclose it and still be chosen for the jury, but if you don’t disclose it, it appears negatively as a bias by one juror (rape victim didn’t disclose rape so

Normally, jury questionnaires will ask if you, or anyone close to you, were involved with a situation similar to the one being prosecuted. My guess is the foreman didn’t disclose that he was involved in a statutory rape case. It’s shitty, but if you don’t disclose information that you are asked to disclose, it

The juror did not consider himself a victim because it was a statutory rape conviction and he believed the relationship to be consensual. So in this case it's more an instance of general idiocy rather than shame.

Clinton’s mediation of the Honduran crisis was one of her greatest achievements as Secretary of State. Her efforts helped end a military coup, prevent a civil war, and restore free elections. This is something she is and should be proud of. Anyone who thinks it’s some kind of “scandal” is a moron.

Clinton’s mediating of the Honduran constitutional crisis ENDED a military coup, prevented a civil war and helped restore free elections. This was one of her greatest achievements as Secretary of State. It’s fucking hilarious that people would try to imply that this is some kind of “scandal”.