Instead of saying they will resign, they need to insist that they will all stayin place, follow their oath to uphold the Constitution, refuse to carry out his unconstitutional orders, and do everything possible to remove him from power.
Also, smug Canadians must remember that even though there's a lot about their system that works well, the two Ford brothers have been, variously, mayor of Toronto and premier of Ontario. They are very similar in all the offensive ways to the Orange Turd in the White House. Canadians are not immune.
Probably not. No one was brave enough to tell him that he was giving them shoes so big that they were clomping around like clowns. For many years, no one has told him that every day he goes out in public with psycho Barbie orange makeup caked on his face. He has no friends. No one who will tell him.
That might work as well as "a devastating, satirical piece in the Times."
youtu.be/zB5Gf6osDWI?...
Boy, a bunch of people with candles? That absolutely sounds like something that would stop Donald Trump dead in his tracks.
I'm good friends with people who lived in your freshman dorm, and although they are not conservative, they've always spoken highly of your intelligence and principles. Especially the past decade.
When I find myself agreeing with Piers Morgan and Marjorie Taylor Greene, I feel dizzy. I certainly find both of them reprehensible in general, but the past 24 hours, they have spoken truth.
But, George, they are not your caliber and even though I'm not a conservative, I admire you so much.
Perhaps you can share some examples of your own attempts at data visualization which are superior to those who Nat Silver. I don't see any on your feed. Are you just being modest and afraid of showing us your genius? If you've got nothing, share links to better data visualization by other people.
He is not absolutely flabbergasted. It's clear that he suspected this, but this is much more solid. Empirical evidence of his hunch. You lie when you rage bait and say that he was absolutely flabbergasted by the obvious. But you do you.
locally. We knew that we weren't Catholics, but we were totally unaware that there was any umbrella category that included us. Perhaps our parents were aware of this, but by Middle school, I learned that not one of my Protestant friends knew this about themselves.
idea who they might be. As far as I knew, we didn't have any of these "Protestants". We had Methodist, Baptist, Quakers, Congregationalists, Episcopalians in the nearby city of 10,000. I knew there were also Lutherans and Presbyterians too far away.
But "Protestants"? I never heard the word used
Almost no Protestant kids knew they were Protestant. I was far more interested in stuff like this and it was only when I took a confirmation classes in a Methodist Church page, probably 12 that I found out that we were Protestant. I heard about Protestants on coverage of Northern Ireland but had no
Midwestern context.
A lot of the change between generations seems to have been due to the introduction of the birth control. Pill. Catholic families were still much larger than Protestant ones, but that was mostly a legacy. Legacy. By the mid '60s, family size was becoming almost identical.
were fairly openly anti-Pope ("whore of Babylon" kind of things), but generally only when talking amongst themselves or with those they were hoping to convert. In general, these evangelicals were quite unpopular because, a la Lake Woebegone, they seemed to take themselves far too seriously for a
In my experience, in the rural Midwest, even by the '60s, most kids didn't have any anti-Catholic feelings, this in an area that was about 30 to 40% Catholic. But we knew some parents nursed anti-Catholic feelings, although this was a mystery for us young uns. The 10 to 20% who were Evangelical
Except of course, he's been trying to find ways to twist words to support himself. When the judge says that the only additional work allowed is that needed to make it safe, he interpreted it says meaning any work would be allowed as long as the end result was a safe building. Obviously a lie.
So many people find it hard to do even one thing at a time that I guess I shouldn't despair that they can't bear two ideas in their head at the same time, but it's absolutely necessary.
pre- or post-Conquest? Or the Forum of Trajan during the Empire?
"When you find urban areas with broad, open spaces, or when you see public buildings that have wide spaces where people can get together and exchange information, those societies tend to be more democratic."
Like the Nuremberg rallies? Or Tiananmen under the Qing? Or the Templo Mayor are, whether
The problems with 19th century evolutionist and stage-based social theory seem to be much stronger territory for this article.
Collective vs autocratic seems like a very bad way to set up the spectrum. Collective rule can range from dictatorial to democratic. Using democratic and collective as basically interchangeable terms also seems very sloppy.
Greece was a democracy? When and where? A city or two for maybe a century or so. Isn't it right?
And Rome was a democracy? When was that? Not when it was a republic. Certainly not when it was an empire.
I had not expected to read something. So funny in a thread about an issue so serious. Thank you for all of the work and also for the humor.
Is this true? I googled this and found info that says only 20% of the total energy requirements are met by solar.
You mentioned D3Paul in your bio. That constantly wins awards as being a place with happy students, but it is an intellectual and academic mediocrity.
That's an amazingly silly thing. If you spent just 5 minutes looking at New York Times articles, you would find out that very few of them qualify as creating Blue Sky rage bait. But you do you.
You've just shown us here that you don't understand the difference between profane-laden advocacy & investigative journalism. I also know how to use profanities & swear all the time. But I expect something better, especially from somebody who brags about having published a book through U of chicago.
through the University of Chicago? You should do better.
The NYT absolutely is not normalizing this misogynistic and offensive idea. This misnamed proposal of household voting absolutely needs to be resisted, but pretending that an investigative article is supporting what it's investigating is deeply lazy, dishonest, and stupid. You've published something
What you described is important but that is a de facto argument. It remains true that repealing amendments requires 3/4 of the state legislatures' approval. It is true that there is this SCOTUS+executive order workaround which doesn't involve repealing an amendment but renders it effectively null.