RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
Married to a tomboy, so I have that going for me, which is nice.
User ID: 3756
I'm not a boomer, and I don't have a pension.
You're over 40 and have savings and a house. Under the new rules, that's a boomer. I'm a decade-ish younger than you and a boomer as well.
However I don't think this is an argument that most of his political allies would normally be sympathetic to.
Because it's all friend/enemy, or who/whom, or whichever phrasing you prefer.
A Pitcairner and a Tristanian? Is someone assembling a team? Just need someone from Desolation Island and the ultra-remote Inuit villages.
But first, employers must no longer prioritize (let alone require) college degrees
And instead of using college degrees to filter out applicants, they will be using...? Remember, the most obvious answers are illegal.
Hiking 10k miles. Only another 7k to go...
Depends on the state. In my state, as long as they can repeat "but I can be fair and impartial," trial judges put them on juries and the appellate courts have no issue with it.
I wonder how much of this dynamic infects actual jury rulings.
Many of them, and it's understood to be just fine and part of the process. Jacobson v. Henderson, 765 F. 2d 12 (2nd.Cir 1985) on why post-trial juror statements aren't admissible to attack a verdict:
the court observed that although "articulate jurors may intimidate the inarticulate, [and] the aggressive may unduly influence the docile," "scarcely any verdict might remain unassailable, if ... statements [to impeach a jury's verdict] were admissible."
Anderson v. Miller, 346 F. 3d 315 (2nd.Cir 2003) is a fun read on how far such behavior can go and still not result in a reversal:
[JUROR No. 11]: The whole group; I felt threatened by them. One time a guy almost got in a fight. They was always yelling at me. I felt afraid; they wouldn't listen to my evidence, what I said. When I asked things to be listened to they said that they didn't want to listen to it; that it would just be for me. I have a letter right here, where I asked — I was gonna send it in to you to come home yesterday; they told me that I wasn't gonna leave, they weren't gonna allow me to leave and I was afraid.
[Juror 2]: I hope you gonna say guilty today because I'm tired of being here.... Everyone was yelling there opinions, and everytime [two (?) words illegible] mine everyone would scream again I was nervous and stressed out with everybody yelling so I first went along with everybody. But then I felt guilty for doing what I did because that was on my conscience. They pressured me to change my vote because we are not going anywhere. I change my vote because I was afraid and pressured, I'm only 20 yrs old and I've never been on a jury, and they were hollering and calling me names. I couldn't take the pressure I just wanted to get away.
I have yet to find the right balance of bringing this up when dating as sadly all too many women my age are dog-crazy and frankly it is actually a deal-breaker to me. Call me selfish but I don't want to be eternally second fiddle.
It would be easier to tolerate if the dog was ever an acceptable breed or well-trained, but it's always a poorly-behaved kick dog.
In case anyone missed Massie's opening remark at his concession speech:
I would have come out sooner but it took a while to find Ed Gallrein in Tel Aviv.
The spending by AIPAC et al in the race seems to prove Massie correct in his claims:
Massie has also criticized what he believes is AIPAC’s outsized influence in U.S. foreign policy. He has accused the bipartisan group, which has bundled millions of dollars for lawmakers on both sides of the aisle over the years, of leveraging its financial resources to keep congressional Republicans in line on Israel. With his new bill, he is accusing AIPAC of “lobbying and acting on behalf of the interests of Israel.”
If anyone is confused or autistic, try a warm smile and the word "no".
Nancy had it right: just say no. I hate MANDATORY FUN ("MANDATORY FUN could be here," he thought) and I simply say no to it. Once there is a sufficient number of women in an office, they will start coming up with mandatory fun, but their social pressure is helpless against a solid "no." They'll pout and stamp their little feet and then they'll get over it (or they won't; I don't care).
The jury story is especially amusing. A total stranger trying to apply that kind of social pressure? It would start with a polite no but rapidly escalate to a firm "go fuck yourself." I deal with far worse people than her on a daily basis trying to bully me--she doesn't stand a chance.
And this is why 6'2" is the ideal male height. Any taller and you're a giant who scares the hoes. Any shorter and you're a disgusting manlet.
Probably worth an excavation trip for that kind of money.
How much emergency cash do people keep around? and where precisely so I know where to look I don't mean uninvested money in a checking account or whatever, I mean literal cash not in a bank.
I have a few thousand, which might be too much, but zero feels like too little.
I would call it a whopper because it sounds like a music blurb written by Patrick Bateman. That's supposed to be dialog from a teenager?
I still have all my old MTG decks
What era(s)?
I was too old for Pokemon. I sold off my MTG collection in 2004. I occasionally look at the current prices on cards I had and suffer the agony of knowing I could've bought a luxury car had I kept them and sold in 2015 or later.
otherwise you’d have to discard 90% of the franchise including the prequels too.
Your terms are acceptable.
The relevant original intent is the original intent of the framers and ratifiers of the 14th amendment, and this is hard to work out because the Jim Crow-era SCOTUS rendered the Privileges and Immunities clause nugatory in a way which was almost certainly not compatible with the intent of the Reconstruction Congress.
There are some law review articles arguing why Slaughterhouse was correctly decided, which even if not persuasive, marshal some interesting evidence against the now-common position that Slaughterhouse was beyond wrong.
Rehabilitating the Slaughterhouse Cases by Maltz
Privileges or Immunities by Hamburger
The Fourteenth Amendment and the Privileges and Immunities of American Citizenship by Lash (book, not article)
It can't help itself but to include prominent cleavage in all the female sprites, which... could be acceptable, were again, its art style not so distractingly detailed. But you end up with these perfectly spherical breasts contoured with perfect curve-following grids, which look like they belong in a calculus class. Beautiful! But distracting.
It sounds like the training material was the 1992-2002 corpus of Image Comics.
I haven't noticed recent increases besides gas/diesel, which seems to be about $4.50/$6 around me.
About 4 months ago, most dry goods at the grocery store went up at least $1, with many of them going up $2 (there is only one grocery store, yay rural living). There has not (yet) been another big increase that I've noticed.
It's not just you. It's the top story on APnews this morning. It's been one of the top stories on there for the past week.
And one of the stories this morning is alarmism about the CDC not getting involved, which is a nice 2-for-1 of virus and Trump alarmism.
Also has to avoid the widespread welfare fraud the feds used to pursue a bunch of the FLDS.
In that case, you should like the Archer novels. The plotting and writing are generally better, but the overall noir vibe isn't quite as good as the Marlowe novels.
That somewhat describes the Marlowe novels by Raymond Chandler, but it definitely describes the Lew Archer novels by MacDonald. Archer is dedicated to doing the right thing, which tends to be dragging into the light the secrets of the rich and corrupt. Pulpy, but high grade pulp, and 100% earnest.

The vast majority of attorneys I know followed the 2rafa path in undergrad and even in law school. This includes some who are now state trial court and state appellate court judges.
More options
Context Copy link