The first thing I saw on the news this morning was the attack on the tankers. The second thing I saw was Trump's comments. You really just like to make stuff up in order to justify criticizing those who criticize Trump. The news can talk about both issues, which is what they are doing.
Also, it is a really big deal when a President who has been accused of working with foreign powers interested in undermining our elections says on TV that he thinks its okay to work with foreign powers interested in undermining our elections. To say that an attack on a few tankers is more newsworthy than the President of the United States telling everyone that he would happily violate the law and arguably commit treason in order to be re-elected is a pretty big fucking deal. But you keep trying to minimize Trump's statements.
It seems like he's saying that religion, which is based almost entirely on faith, is the same thing as science, which is based on evidence. Leftists argue that religion shouldn't be the reason why laws are passed, so science also shouldn't be a reason why laws are passed or leftists are being hypocrites. That's the best I can do. Regardless, he's a moron.
So she's too smart for our country and we really just need a fucking moron in charge because he does a better job of communicating to the morons in our country. Got it.
She's really fucking smart. It would be nice to have a really fucking smart person as our President again instead of a drooling man baby who communicates through word salad.
The census bureau asks many questions that are not part of a count of residents, sure. I'll put aside whether they should and just focus on the question at issue. This is a question that objective data has showed will result in an inaccurate account of the population. The purpose of the census is the get an accurate count of the population. The purpose of the new question is to obtain information on immigration, which is immaterial to the purpose of the census. Should the census include a question that will undermine its constitutional purpose in order to get additional information that is immaterial to that constitutional purpose? Absolutely not.
You seem to be making an argument that a bad act in the past excuses a bad act in the future. That's just straight up bullshit. Regardless of what was done in the 1950s, this isn't the 1950s and we know that including the question would undermine the purpose of the census. Therefore, it should not be included in the census.
I suggest you take some time to actually articulate the point you think you are making. Because it doesn't appear that you're making any point relevant to my post.
This is not the purpose of the census. If you want those numbers, do a different poll. The purpose of the census is to get an accurate count of people living in the US. You won't get that if you include a citizenship question. Your belief that the US Government should subvert the constitutional purpose for the census and use it to collect data on illegal immigration just proves your disdain for the Constitution.
An interesting though I saw on WAGNH: CL qualification is worth about 50 million. Unless Real wants to really break the bank for him, it may be better long term to keep Hazard and let him go on a free next year (or cheap in January) since he's probably the difference between qualifying for CL and not. It may be the better move to keep him through the transfer ban and go for CL qualification than to let him leave and pretty much give up on CL. It would be a net loss of 30-50 million, but if we sell him now we can't replace him and if we make CL after he leaves we'll be a more attractive club for a replacement when the ban is over. Or, keep him through December and sell him for less in the January transfer window since that will allow CHO and RLC to get healthy. A fall without Hazard, CHO, and RLC and no replacements because of the ban would be doom for the team and may set us back more long term than taking a monetary hit by selling him for less in January or giving him up on a free next year.
Creepy fascination? She's hot and he wanted to fuck her. That's pretty much the extent of his thought process. Of all the horrible shit he's done in the name of getting laid, it'd be pretty poetic if he gets taken down because he gave too much access to a woman he wanted to fuck and she screwed him (figuratively).