unbillievable

The Handmaid's tale isn't really mainstream literature, like Atlas shrugged, or 1984. How many people would even know the reference? Most people would assume they're lampooning nuns.

"Everyone is welcome, except cops and conservatives..." The reporters should have waited to film the advanced class; where the teach the over-head, bike-lock smash.

Everything is going according to plan. By the time I retire, we will have Universal Healthcare. The first few years of it will be great. Then I will be too old to care (or dead) by the time the money runs out.

The conclusion of that article is that healthcare costs a lot because prices are high. Basically saying that water is wet because it's liquid. Not much of an answer. It did mention that Americans have access to more medical technology than any nation on the planet (better) but have low comparable health because we're fat slobs. (freedom!!) Doesn't explain why drugs and healthcare cost more. Maybe include cost of research, malpractice insurance, free-loaders, etc. A detailed analysis would have helped instead of spending 90% of the article trying to prove that the US spends more than every nation; a conclusion everyone agrees with anyway.

Why aren't we investigating Audi for running Feminist advertising during the Superbowl? They're clearly trying to influence Americans.

Can someone explain to me how Trump university is a fraud, but Evergreen is legitimate? If it's about fake degrees, then everyone with a Gender Studies degree should be suing their college.

You do know that you're talking about California and morality, right? They advertise themselves as the state that experiments with what is socially acceptable.

I didn't want to leave out the nations with helipads and ski jumps. AT least they're trying... (I know the fleet cycles between 10 to 13 lately... but there have been talks of retrofitting some for training and drones, including the old diesel fleet.)

This argument get's brought up a lot and it's an incredibly naive point of view. It's the same as asking why every other industrialized nation can get by with no aircraft carriers while the US needs 18 of them. It's because the US is subsidizing the entire world so all these free-loading countries won't have to spend money on it. There's a reason why the US releases 4X more medical patents for worldwide use than the rest of the world COMBINED.

Is being informed considered manipulation? The current allegations from the Democrats is that Russia hacked their internal emails and released them to the public. If the media had done their job, they would have exposed the Hilary collusion themselves.

The minimum wage was low enough to be below the normal market equilibrium. Most businesses were already above it. Once the minimum pushed beyond normal market forces, the system adjusted. That's why small increases in the past didn't affect anything. It had always trailed inflation. It's basic economics. Common sense. I also found it interesting that the liberal rebuttal to this study is that they think the jobs that moved outside the city center should not be counted as a loss, because those people could have found jobs in other states. They must be the idiots that believed NAFTA was a net gain since Mexico got a lot of former American jobs.

It's probably because 75% of the states are red. (thanks Obama).

This is true about every issue on the left, from feminism to global warming. It isn't about whether you agree, it's how fanatic you are about the cause. It's never good enough unless you're wearing black masks and attacking people with bike locks.

The leftist media search the fringes of society to find the rare few who everyone will deem absolute idiots, as their example of the alt-right. Meanwhile, conservatives merely point to the LEADERS of the liberal left to cite their examples. We're trying to compare celebrities, and college professors with thousands of followers, to white supremacists who's last rally drew exactly 1 person.

The only consensus seems to be that each district have an equal number of people. There isn't a law that outlines how to divide the population into these smaller groups. It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court can rule on a law that doesn't exist. Here's an idea; does a district even have to be connected, or can you carve up a city like swiss cheese.

How do you subjectively draw a district line? Do you do it geographically or by population density? By school? Do we make it a grid? I want to know what people think. What's the solution? Should they institute a neighborhood draft, block by block?

What's the secret? Women have begun to dominate university enrollment and they prefer social vs stem majors, so there's a shortage of technically certified labor in western countries. * *and by "women", i'm including the beta-millennial males with gender fluidity seeking safe spaces.

“I don’t think a man is going to try and sneak in as a woman and pay $75 to go sit (in a pool). For what purpose?” The above quote from a gender studies professor proves that feminists live in their own bubble. Has she never even talked to a man?

Then Now.

This I agree with. We are not on the same side. I would have been more surprised if they had shown respect. It would have felt cheap and condescending. We view them as terrorists. They view themselves as revolutionaries.

We've taken big steps left and small steps right for a while now. (Which is how Socialism works in the west -one concession at at time.) How else do you explain a lifelong Democrat being considered a far right candidate? Make no mistake, liberals of today will find themselves called far right conservatives in the future. You don't believe Trans-Species is a thing? Bigot! So what happens when the President decides that he can use his Pen and Phone to execute the will of HIS people instead of laws passed by Congress? Even go on a tour apologizing for things his country is doing?

I can (kind of) see their point of view. What do you think we would do if they held a moment of silence for all those killed by the MOAB in afganistan. I know it's not the same thing, but it does feel a little petty to do that knowing who they're playing against.

I don't believe this is true, otherwise, the president would be picked by the government, (like a prime minister) and not elected by the people. (and no, you can't use the electoral college as an excuse.) I know people are saying that he represents the country as a whole, but that just means he executes the will of our combined interests.

I think you guys are arguing semantics over the difference between national and local interests. At some point, there is a disconnect between representing Me vs Us. I think (sorry if I'm assuming) that Azalin believes the President is not his representative, but everyone's. Although I'm curious to know where that line is drawn. I've never thought of it that way, but you guys bring up a good point about the actual impact of politicians; especially the difference between elected and appointed officials. If an elected official appoints a cabinet, did the voters choose them both as representatives since we knew they came as a set?