Phoenix Wright

this has been thrown around a lot, but i just don't think it's true. anecdotally, i know it isn't true and in the general case i find that there are sufficient ways to deal with trauma s.t. the victim is not "dying every day." replace the word rape with [crime that causes trauma]. would you be singing the same tune?

i got stupider after reading that. i honestly don't see the problem, in fact i applaud them. donald trump, in addition to his moronic ramblings, has given us yet another piece of undeniable proof of his stupidity, arrogance, and delusion. plus, it's the president of the united states for god's sake--that's a big story just by itself. there's a factcheck.org piece accompanying it as well.

yeah it's pretty funny.

gonna eat in the endzone :p he had quite a horrible day lol

sucks that it was the ravens that lost, but i'd pick the browns to win over any other team right now. i love an underdog. this rams-hawks game is classic. sucks that we aren't humiliating them again, but it's been good. goff returning to form of overthrowing passes a bit lol.

8min is a lot of game in the 4th quarter. relax dude

honestly sounds like an afc problem. i haven't had a problem with it yet. besides, suh knows what to do.

a bit speculative, but alarming if the future turns out the way it's hinted at in the article. not alarming because of any results; all the results that are likely to happen haven't changed (dems are slated to take the house, gop the senate, not to mention repub congress + pres means gop scotus nomination will go through), but because it seems to be identity politics are only getting worse. we're listening to each other less, getting angry at each other more. i hope we can find a way out of this garbage political landscape--it's not healthy for us as a people. this judge, for example, has absolutely no business in a supreme court anywhere. i don't understand what his qualifications are compared to others--i don't understand his appeal. in each test, he's been pretty lackluster: won't give straightforward answers to straightforward questions, poor temperament, no outstanding qualities to note. not to mention the assault accusations coupled with a joke of an fbi investigation. the gop can ok this guy simply because and people eat it the fuck up. it's frightening.

it's possible to hold an opinion on something based off of flawed information. example: black people make up the majority of enrolled college students, with white people the disproportionately enrolled minority group (that is, not enough are enrolled.) therefore, it is my opinion that we should help white people get enrolled in college. now, that opinion is inherently flawed. it's not wrong, but it's ill-informed and would probably change if i knew the actual facts. to be clear: it's actually the opposite. we see much less black students enrolled in college (<1% black student population in most cases) despite amounting to ~13% of the population (more in certain college areas). we'd expect at least 13% of college students to be black, just statistically speaking. does this paint a clear enough picture for you? i will say your reasoning is at least more solid than the above example, but the idea is the same: your reasoning is flawed, therefore the conclusions you've made (even though they're just opinions) are unsound. make sense? see above. that's a bit mean-spirited for "peaceful conversation," no?

sounds like it lol.

tomlin isn't doing a bad job. you don't fire a head coach because they don't win superbowls. jeff fisher has an almost 0.5 record with the titans and he was head coach longer than tomlin has been. tomlin has never even had a losing record with the steelers.

i certainly hope gsot is back. i want a sb

i think one of my most hated 21st-century political developments is that this is something that actually happens. in a positive light, it's somewhat beautiful that normal people have found a platform by which to exercise considerably more power than they otherwise would have in any other platform (aside from voting). however, it seems to never be used for progressive purposes. or even simply educational purposes. they're used to manipulate people and spread lies in order to discredit the opposition because it's easy and it works. frostyfiremage, note in the future that it's a fact russian operatives held an online brigade to elevate trump's status. now more than ever, it is imprudent to believe anonymous people. there was a recent new york times article that was fully anonymous--to the general public. that was okay because folks at the times know the person's identity. (which, i suppose a leap of faith is required to believe that ny times actually knows the person. but, you'd have to be quite cynical to think they were lying, especially given the respect that the times garners.) believe facts, not hearsay.

the highlights make me very sad i didn't get to watch the game.

i can't tell if that was an impressive show by the rams or an impressively bad show by the raiders.

crazy. my first tie game!

i am nearly in love with this season already. very bummed the rams dont play at a decent time for me. (4am cest.) i might actually set an alarm to watch...

what's different between then and now? ok. if the military targets indiscriminately, that's equivalent to targeting civilians imo...

this isn't an argument lol. the point is that it's morally reprehensible. let's just say i count my lucky stars you are no judge. and why not?

soviets being desperate doesn't stop it from being a crime. a starving man stealing food is still tried as theft. yes, circumstances are more sympathetic, but targeting civilians is a crime. when over 100k civilians in iraq die as a result of our intervention (the numbers are not certain, that's a low estimate), you think we're doing their job right? were those killings justified? does the number need to be 6 million before you hold the military liable for crimes against humanity? do you think the use of a nuclear weapon is justifiable under any circumstance today?

that isn't the point. the point is they're uneducated and likely know very little about mccain's voting record. therefore, their opinions are ignorable. because they should like him, overall. targeting civilians is a criminal act.

no one? who said this individual doesn't rag on dems, including both clintons? admitting to a mistake of that magnitude doesn't make him a better person. why does saying "i'm sorry" matter here? but is the reasoning sound? is it accurate? i'm not so certain. a blanket statement like that allows a military to do whatever it wants. your family, friends, nor you would have been in any danger. i honestly cannot believe the atomic bombs still get support like this to this day. do you all support the bombings of tokyo too? london? berlin? do you all support the use of agent orange? do you support gassing the enemy? biological warfare? i mean wtf the alt-right is stupid. what they think of mccain is irrelevant. the poster argued that mccain furthered their causes and then some. you have way too much of a hardon for the military.

it's extremely tough to argue the use of the atomic bombs, especially 2, were justified. was there a decent (enough) military reasoning behind the use? maybe, sure. i'm not certain, especially looking back, but even at the time, that its use was justified or is justified. then again, i'm not certain really any bombings are justified. a political fb group member's opinion on mccain, which i find myself not disagreeing with... John McCain fought tooth and nail to make sure that people like my late father would die of preventable illnesses they couldn’t afford to treat and that people like my mother would drive their families into medical bankruptcy as a result of an aggressive stomach tumor and a protracted hospital stay. Were he content to enjoy his ill-gotten fruits outside of the legislative sphere, I would have begrudged him little in his decline. Were he merely a two-term stooge of the financial industry cut from a common bipartisan cloth, I could chuckle at his death but have some level of compassion for his situation. But this is a man who - aside from voting against MLK day as a holiday, and fuck anyone who suggests an “evolution” on such an issue is possible while holding office all the time - worked tirelessly until his last day in the Senate to propagate violence across the globe, to pilfer the third world of what little resource wealth it doesn’t have, to suffocate American citizens under a blanket of police surveillance and data mining, and to deprive every American from the basic modern liberties of health care and education. I do not need to lie about McCain to sully him. I do not need to commit libel to invite heaping scorn from merely relitigating his atrocious record as a humanitarian and representative of the best interests of the people. Everyone who cries loudest about the insidious creep of “fake news” weeps most openly over the passing of what can most charitably be described as a terrifically compromised fossil with a singular focus on erasing brown lives abroad. News that paints a such a genuine and heartfelt proponent of war crimes, baseless invasions that slaughter hundreds of thousands, and “100-year wars” as a lion of political independence and steadfast courage is faker than the fakest Russian-funded Blacktivist web-page could ever dream of being. There is no “Fairness Doctrine” to the media portrayal of McCain. It is a post-wasabi diarrhea of platitudes and bipartisan gladhanding. Events such as these are used to bring us all together as Americans and remind us of how similar we really are as police increasingly tighten the vise around the necks of the poor and former Obama Treasury Secretaries lead ten-figure firms that send predatory loans to the same families made destitute by their policies and/or negligence. The runway of our booming economy was foamed with the turmoil and upheaval forced upon millions after millions of families - overwhelmingly black and Latino, mind you - and you must not be angry about this because everyone agrees that McCain was a hero. Even Bernie Sanders, socialist that he might sometimes pretend to be, is convinced of redemptive qualities within John McCain’s character. If those qualities exist, then they must be juxtaposed against the absolute shame of his tenure as a legislator and public voice for the people to digest. To do otherwise is to erase the death perpetrated against countless families both at home and abroad as a result of his campaigning. Condolences to his family. Like Reagan, I’m glad he’s dead. I want to know what all of your reactions will be when Trump dies, because nothing he has done (please miss me with that white collar financial crimes shit, his money has always been dirty) is anywhere close to as bad as Iraq. If you think blowjob hush money is a greater treason than a minor genocide, then I don’t know what to tell you. Oh, yes I do. Go cry over John McCain’s death some more.

it's unfortunate that nothing has changed since i've started coming here less. but anyway, i'm not going to tear your posts apart because i no longer find it useful or entertaining. i will say this, though: the democratic party, as an entity, does not do this. people on twitter do this. people on tumblr do this. i have to let you know that individual people have very little potential to illuminate the strategies or operations of the party itself. analyzing the behaviors of fringe party members isn't useful lol. you've always felt that it was and i don't understand why. you actually understand so little about the democratic base, which is why your positions and insights are stupid. (seriously--you're gonna bitch about affirmative action? you obviously do not understand the very basic philosophies behind the democratic party.) i'm not listening to you because it's obvious you are ill-informed and arrogant, not because you're right-wing. what the hell are you even talking about here? this is a child's mentality. ("laugh and say, 'i told you so'"? really? lmfao.) rabbit-holes don't 'turn' on anything. this reads like an un-ironic version of this.

i truly do not understand the logic behind being against welfare but for big bank bailouts (especially in 2008, after they took advantage of the american people and crashed the economy for nearly a decade). if a fiscal conservative can explain the reasoning to me articulately, please do. maybe to those wanting to stop the clock or turn it backward... a far-right winger's opinion on what left-wing strategy should be is also a funny concept.