But earlier this month, he said he would move the company’s headquarters to Austin, citing a new Golden State law meant to protect LGBTQ+ children as the “final straw.”
Imagine being so full of hate for a highly vulnerable group of people that you base your business decisions around it.
It does seem like an oddly specific denial.
The bananas won’t be fooled, because everyone knows that bananas are straight until they get picked and the banana bender puts the bend in them.
The thought of seeing someone shouting “Train!” still gives me nostalgia.
Including humans. I’m not going near the person launching pinecones at my head from their yard.
But quoting it implies it’s an invalid claim.
Interesting. I read the quotes as meaning: someone else said it, it’s not just some opinion we made up. In this case, it was reporting the coroner’s official finding.
In other words, I understood it to be reinforcing the claim rather than invalidating it.
Why are we quoting each other? I remember the comment before yours. I made it. Idiot.
Because quoting in a response provides structure to the response that improves readability.
Also, you are posting on a publicly accessible forum, not having a one-on-one conversation. In that context, that fact that you may remember what you said doesn’t mean that it’s not beneficial to repeat it for others.
The “idiot” comment was unnecessarily rude where someone was engaging in what appeared to be a good faith response, and only brings down the tone of your entire post.
It’s Australia. Everything tries to kill you.
The article has a paragraph later on that says:
In rejecting the plaintiffs’ claims for damages, the court said, “It cannot be said that discussions at the Diet…regarding provisions not allowing same-sex marriage are clearly in violation of the Constitution.”
I suspect the plaintiffs are only appealing that aspect of the judgment.
All dinosaurs are lesser to spinosaurus.
Stewart’s line about how can another administration be more absurd than the Bush administration dated surprisingly badly.
Does it want the hose again?
Forge Exquisite Armour Reproductions
This sounds like a good way to turn an ally against them.
Does Trump have any leverage on Kavanaugh? He played close to the line with the rules to get him appointed for life, but choosing a person likely to be ideologically symathetic is more of a mutually beneficial arrangement than a favour.
It feels like the best way to get someone who is in a secure position of power like that offside is to tell them they have to do what you say or that they owe you. Kavanaugh can just as easily say Trump is disqualified, and never be told he owes anyone again.
Have you also been forgetting to covert votes to metric before you send them?
For reference:
1 upvote = 2.2 nah yeahs
1 downvote = 2.2 yeah nahs
Are you a bot? Because that was a rambling word-salad with no discernible point.
Personally, I’ve always been partial to Nikola Tesla’s alternating current.
Oh, he absolutely should be told to shut his mouth.
The point is the courts have to be a lot more careful about circumscribing a right that has quite strong existing protections versus something that does not.
It charges up during the day like one of those glow in the dark stickers, obviously.
Gotta chase that sweet, sweet live service money though.