I am saying this as a huge fan of Alaska Thunderfuck.

I am voting for Biden.

I expect that to change as many people’s votes as Alaska’s announcement did.

I have decided to go with “hair vignette.”

Not to deflect the conversation, but is there a name for that circle-hair-beard thing? “Tragic” isn’t specific enough, and so have to think there’s a name for it. I’m pretty sure I’ve only seen it in memes.

This isn’t the kind of thing you forget like missing a birthday. It’s a major directive from one institution to another, and it’s entirely possible it’s just being slow walked. These are all handled by working groups who may not be motivated to get it done.

I’m not sure if the situation might change if Trump gets re-elected.

What is the alternative? Do they stay with foster families?

I’m just curious. I know nothing about adoption in the US much less Israel. I have to think there’d be some kind of principle of least harm and some evidence-based policies.

Apparently these pitched battles have been happening monthly for years.

We need to bring everyone together and realize they all live in an us-terus, not a you-terus. Our slogan will be “Peace, period.”

This is why I cannot consider the so-called leftists who oppose taking action against a fascist like Putin to be actual leftists. Putin is a hard right dictator who violates every principle of human rights at every turn.

Yeah, this statement is simply wrong. Men unconsciously notice a lot of things, and they might deny noticing even obvious ones because any acknowledgement of fashion is considered effeminate by some men.

I love the drag queen lashes that are so long they’ll take out the person next to you if you turn your head too fast.

I also think that Beni was the best character.

For the record, I’m playing advocatus diaboli here. I agree that your interpretation is the traditional one.

That said, it has not been challenged, as far as I know, and attributions of original intent (and by now even the application of previous rulings) are the subject of legal argumentation and opinion. My point was that the Constitution does not explicitly set a temporal component to the term of a federal justice, and it does not explicitly forbid one. This it would not take a constitutional amendment to set a term limit, but rather a finding that the law did not violate the constitution (which again would come down to an interpretation since it’s not explicitly set).

But what’s the definition of “Office” in this context? The Office of the President, for example, is defined as a span of four years. President is the title and Office includes both title and time, as do many other political positions.

So what I’m saying is that there’s nothing there that says Congress cannot pass a law saying the Office of a Supreme Court Justice is defined as holding the position for six years.

I’m not familiar with a constitutional ban on term limits, and the idea has been floated by people at fairly high levels. Where do you think the restriction is, and do you think any limits could apply to new justices even if the currents are grandfathered in?

shit heal

Chaotic evil clerics are the worst.