MORE LIKE SUCKSPEARE, AMIRITE?!
MORE LIKE SUCKSPEARE, AMIRITE?!
Well, if we could actually trust you guys not to just go dumping whatever you don’t want into the water supply, maybe we wouldn’t need so many federal regulations.
“Oh yeah, let’s associate with far right European nationalists, good idea,” said no one with a functioning brain ever.
They’re not saying that it’s causing homeless; they’re saying that homeless people are flooding into Colorado because they can get marijuana legally there. The concern is that this is going to be severe stress on the state’s capacity to help the homeless. It’s a practical issue for a single state, not concerning the more general issue of whether marijuana should be legal. Obviously, if marijuana were legal nationally or at least in several highly populated states, this wouldn’t be an issue for Colorado in particular.
Doesn’t matter how “cool” it looks, Snyder will somehow find a way to simultaneously make it completely devoid of both fun and subtext. His comic movies are like watching Michael Bay trying to copy Christopher Nolan.
Really bizarre casting for Yezzan, though I guess he’ll probably be a composite of different characters.
Needs more offside.
Confused Americans: It’s basically just runny steak sauce.
The entire field of constitutional law is premised on the fact that there are many, many different and competing interpretations of legal texts. This is why there are 9 Supreme Court justices as opposed to just one. And FWIW, the full court is expected to strike down this ruling as it’s ridiculously narrow and convoluted would open up an absurdly far-reaching can of worms if this sort of tortured interpretation became grounds for legal precedent.
Despite the stock photo of sad Obama, this has no real effect on anything. Far down the chain of judicial review, districts are cherry picked like this to secure specific rulings, and in this case, it’s no coincidence that it went through an appeals court packed with Republican appointees. That’s not a slight on Republicans. Both sides do it, and the system is appropriately set up to ensure these judicial theatrics don’t really do much more than secure employment for more Justice Dept. lawyers. In any case, the ruling is based on an almost comically tortured interpretation, and the full court is expected to reverse the ruling.
The subsidies are designed to assist who work full time and have an income exceeding $20,000 a year. Medicaid is the program that assists people who don’t “earn” their living and it has nothing to do with this ruling. As Lisa R correctly said, this is just a way of fucking over middle class people who work for a living.
Gluten is the foundation of human civilization. Hooray for gluten!
The easiest way to get them to cooperate is to say you’re moving to a place that doesn’t have Comcast. Also, don’t start by saying “I want to cancel service.” Start by saying “I am moving to Iowa (or some other TWC state) where Comcast isn’t available.”
QUASI-SPOILERS ABOUT FAN THEORIES The most prominent fan theory regarding Aegon/Griff is that he’s a pretender whose true lineage traces back to Daemon Blackfyre who was a bastard of Aegon the Unworthy. Aegon the Unworthy legitimised his bastards and showed favoritism to Daemon to prevent his legitimate son (who he did not believe was really his) from taking the throne. This led to the Blackfyre Rebellion which eventually saw the Blackfyre branch driven into exile in the Free Cities. It’s also believed that Illyrio Mopatis (who is Varys’s old partner in crime) is married to a member of the Blackfyre branch and that he arranged the marriage of Dany to Khal Drogo to basically get rid of the Daeron Targaryen-descended Targaryens (who they believe are prone to psychosis and not “legitimate” heirs to the throne). This fan theory is based on the actual life of “Perkin Warbeck,” who emerged shortly after the War of the Roses and claimed to be the son of King Edward IV and tried to provoke an uprising against Henry VII.
Maybe Republicans should stop pissing off Latinos instead.
#5 The good ones are called “blowjobs.”
me bad grammar
I’d guess someone like Zizek would say that’s just another example of reinforcing the underlying system. The satirist prods the powerful into papering over cracks, but the underlying conditions and ideologies that actually led to the problem are left untouched.
I wouldn’t classify the Seinfeld characters as villains in a good/evil black hat sense, I think that disingenuously separates them from the audience, and I don’t think the comforting aspect of it misses the point of the satire at all. Exposing the fact that the vast majority of social relationships is a matter of managing the often contradictory interests of people who annoy us is universally relatable, and the fact that it normalized the notion that you don’t have to like the innocuously irritating existence of almost everyone else was a perfect, hilarious antidote to the moral pressures of humanist sentiment. The fact that the show rejects superfluous goodness does not make its characters villainous, it makes them human, and this is why people find it a comforting distraction. The fact that you’re not asked or obligated to even like the main characters themselves supports this further. In a way, Seinfeld and Friends go together perfectly which is why they made such a perfect partnership on Thursday nights. Both shows invite people into a clique of friends, but whereas Friends was all about the positive and internal warmth of forming a network of close social relationship largely walled off against the outside world, Seinfeld reflected how friendship is simultaneously driven by a collective, anti-social drive to limit your interactions with those outside the group. Those Thursday nights progressed like any conservation among close friends. You start out with people catching up, discussing what you’ve been up to, and once the guarded niceties have dropped, it quickly devolves into gleefully talking shit about other people. And, of course, this was usually amplified by the fact that the 8:30 slot was usually occupied by some shit sitcom standing as an unwelcome interruption, an irritating interaction with people you don’t really want to spend time with that served to prime the audience for Seinfeld’s welcome bitterness. At the time, I recall how NBC struggled to understand why the seemingly ideal 8:30 slot between Friends and Seinfeld more often seemed to be the death knell for shows, but what they failed to grasp was that the 8:30 show was supposed to be awful and the fact that they were awful made them perfect lead-ins to Seinfeld… which wasn’t a show about anything as malicious as sociopathy or villainy, but natural, universal dislike for the invasiveness of people whose company brings us no pleasure. The main characters of Seinfeld are not villains. They’re the victims. They’re not nice, but their meanness isn’t cruel and destructive, it’s passive and defensive. In that sense, the true villains in Seinfeld are those who think the harmless banality of their own existence obligates others to like or even love them, an evil most vividly embodied by Kenny Bania and his relentless and narcissistically indignant expectation that Jerry owes him his friendship.
They also booed over the national anthems of other South American teams.
It was more a case of not having a like-for-like replacement for Thiago Silva. Dante and Luiz are too similar, and they both need a more disciplined defender to cover for their often questionable positional decisions. Using both with David Luiz given license to go on Playstation runs against one of the best teams in the tournament was madness and having Neymar would likely have just left their defence even more exposed.
9 People Who Will Die Alone
And what’s with this “It’s okay because it’s not illegal” argument? You can go to third world countries and do all kinds of horrendous things. It doesn’t make it okay that something is legal in Syria or Zimbabwe.
As Texas’s own ugly and bloody history has shown time and time again, something isn’t actually okay just because a bunch of sociopathic hicks thinks so.
Not sure why this got posted as a response. Indignation not directed at you in case that wasn’t clear. :)
Doesn’t matter. You’re still sick in the head if you enjoy the act of killing a highly intelligent mammal. If a person working at an animal shelter got all excited and titillated from putting down cats and dogs, that would still qualify them as a giant f’n sicko.
There’s a difference between doing something unpleasant out of necessity and doing something because you enjoy watching things die and gloating over their carcasses. If a farmer got off on slaughtering his pigs and cows and took Facebook pictures of himself doing victory poses whenever he did it, people would think he was a fucking psycho and rightly so. Yet, it’s okay for people who pay corrupt local officials to slaughter elephants and lions? And FFS, if you want to feed the local population, do something meaningful and donate to Heifer International. Giving them the doggy bag from your sociopath safari does fuck all to help long term.
Hosting the World Cup every three years would interfere with continental competitions like the Copa America, African Cup of Nations and European Championships.
The idea of a character oblivious and personally unaffected by the history developing around him is an interesting one (if not an entirely original idea), but Forrest Gump rings hollow in that its premise of Gump’s purity and innocent immunity to history and social development only works with a white, male character of relatively high social standing. It’s hard to see how this movie would have worked if Gump were black. It would have been much more interesting if Gump himself wasn’t presented as pristinely nice and selfless, but rather, presented as somewhat childishly self-centered with the combination of incredible personal success and unfailing obliviousness to the social turmoil around him being as much a product of his inherent privilege as his mental handicap. But it looks like we’ll have to wait for the George W. Bush biopic for that movie…
People’s “weird” aversion to people who don’t bath at least once a week is also a very recent thing, does that make it necessarily wrong or not a legitimate personal preference? Not everything is solely a question of “society, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan” in the sense of being some grand cultural conspiracy that has no relevance to genuine individual experience and preferences. Some people just prefer the sensation of touching a shaved, smooth leg over the sensation of touching a hairy, coarse leg, just as some people prefer the sensation of a shaved, smooth face over a bearded, coarse one. This is the problem with this recent wave of internet social theory. It may be well intentioned, but in the hands of people who just want to soapbox, it gets incredibly reductionist and ultimately just becomes a tool for asserting personal preference under the guise of moral righteousness. Should women have to shave their legs to be viewed as normal or professional-looking? No, absolutely not. Is it wrong for a man or woman to prefer that a sexual partner shave his or her legs just as a man or woman might prefer that a sexual partner shave his face? Also no. And suggesting otherwise veers feminism 4.0 too far into the pseudo-feminist realm of MRA-style “all men should desire me simply because I’m not a jerk” friend zone-resentment whining.
Not the equivalent of at all. Baseball is fundamentally an individual sport based on a 1v1 duel, so you can’t really compare it to a game where multiple people are actively attacking and defending at all times.
It’s a shame that Howard wastes his talents at a club that knows how to defend.
Hey now, America is so far ahead of Australia with our brilliant developmental strategy of using a German football legend to convince German kids with an American parent to play for us. :D
Most of these only apply if you’re really disorganized and probably aren’t cut out for a scientific/academic career anyway. If you don’t procrastinate constantly, you absolutely can get at least 6 hours of sleep a night and finishing your papers well ahead of the deadline. If you’re staying up all night and barely meeting deadlines, your performance is going to suffer and you’re not going to be able to keep up with people who have their shit together, especially when you’re a post-doc or adjunct expected to actually get your research published. It’s certainly true that grad school takes over your life, but you only have to lose sleep if you’re still trying to have a normal, college life on the side.
Law school is nothing special. Hence, why people chicken out of PhD programs and go get a JD instead.
Finishing is like that sense of exhilaration and freedom that you feel when the train finally flies off the track and glides gracefully, if only for a moment, over the smouldering canyon that is real life.
Fascinating article, though politicians and extremists engaging in historical revisionism and “buffet religiosity” to twist religions in service to completely contradictory economic and social ideologies isn’t exactly unique to the Middle-East nor is it very likely to be met with a rational consideration for history. These type of people think only in broad, mythical terms.
You’re not talking to a Croatia fan, so the banter is pointless. When every neutral on the planet is saying you were shit and needed the ref to pull your ass out of the fire, that’s because it’s true.
Haha, Italian defending match fixing. What a surprise…
You were terrible and deserved to lose. Fred dived. Perisic scored. This was an utterly shameful and embarrassing beginning to a World Cup that was already an embarrassment before the first ball was kicked. At this rate, you guys are going to make Qatar look like a sensible choice.