Jump to content

Pig Bellmont

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    7013
  • Joined

Everything posted by Pig Bellmont

  1. Also just because an internal investigation came to a favorable conclusion for the administration that paid for it doesn’t mean that the results (or methods) are above reproach
  2. Bullshit. The hazing described was institutional and there’s no way he didn’t know what was happening in his own locker room
  3. She knew how to check the air pressure on the tires but didn’t add air to fill up the one slightly off? And needed him to drive 50 miles to do what exactly? I’d definitely give that guy shit for wasting 2 hrs of his own time on that BS
  4. Probably one where he impersonates an underage kid again
  5. That thing is so fucking stupid
  6. Turns out being an unrepentant asshole has consequences
  7. Also Rahm Emmanuel who the character was loosely based off of
  8. I mean, I’m not one of these surlys but legislated restrictions on free speech need to pass strict scrutiny, which generally means the govt must have a compelling interest and the law is narrowly tailored to that interest. Just because minors aren’t adults doesn’t mean they’re not entitled to rights of speech (although that can be limited in school settings). So yes, it can be challenged. Probably both by people under 18, as well as by adults who are prevented from accessing social media without providing ID.
  9. Did you know a French omelette typically has none of those things and it’s also something learned early in culinary school? Have you ever watched Top Chef? Tom Colicchio loves asking the contestants to make him an omelette. There was more thought out into why the character would make an omelette that way other than just “this would taste good”
  10. We’re going to have to agree to disagree here. The number of deaths prevented by seatbelts and airbags is not equivalent to mandating age verification for use of social media. It’s more like the government wanting to determine the age of all my family when I download movies to make sure I’m not showing something R rated to someone younger than 17. We’re going to have to agree to disagree here. The number of deaths prevented by seatbelts and airbags is not equivalent to mandating age verification for use of social media. It’s more like the government wanting to determine the age of all my family when I download movies to make sure I’m not showing something R rated to someone younger than 17.
  11. It’s insane the state wants to ID people before they look at porn. Party of small government and all
  12. Why does the state legislature feel the need to substitute its judgment for that of parents? Next they are going to put cameras in all the bathrooms to perform genital checks
  13. Stop. You clearly don’t understand the issues of the case. You’re just embarrassing yourself
  14. Gorsuch, ironically enough, wrote the opinion stating Title VII of the civil rights act of 1964 applies to protecting against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation
  15. Don’t worry guys- I’m sure the 6 justices will get to occupy some empty seats on private jets soon for being good pets
  16. It’s blatantly choosing a political outcome and then retrofitting some bullshit. The Supreme Court has become ran by activist judges going against the will of Congress, the executive, and Americans. It’s become the very thing Rush Limbaugh and AM radio hosts hyperventilated about (in bad faith) 30 years ago.
  17. This is so dumb my brain hurts. Courts on their own (or sua sponte if you want the magic Latin phrase) can make determinations on jurisdiction at every appellate level
  18. I really appreciate Chris Grinder’s initial breakdown- for those interested, his sub stack Law Dork is great. (Apologies if already posted, I haven’t read the last few pages) edit: I’m also apparently shitty at copy/pasting https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-majority-ends-affirmative-action?utm_source=substack&publication_id=899862&post_id=131940496&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&action=share&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=true&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo5NzUyODM4NywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTMxOTQwNDk2LCJpYXQiOjE2ODgwNjY0NjYsImV4cCI6MTY5MDY1ODQ2NiwiaXNzIjoicHViLTg5OTg2MiIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24ifQ.LlF48oNfcBZNfAVVF-54SBBeicLeASZMMCeGHDy7McQ
  19. Maybe unenforceable but even still that conclusion requires a court and a judge to agree. Non-solicits have more enforceability than non-competes and C-suite/EVP types can be subject to more restrictive covenants than your average employee- even in California. Plus, does he really want to be in court defending against a temporary restraining order? Maybe, but given his unwillingness to pay basic bills like rent and mounting mandatory arbitration costs, it all just is another example of him exercising poor judgment with an important piece of his company- the (purported) CEO
  20. Are you an insane person? There was a huge amount of turnover in his administration, including cabinet positions. He had like 3 chiefs of staff in 4 years
  21. I have a smart watch I wear all the time
  22. I agree but I’ll say the show did a good job of building his character last season too showing him trying to date/having a strained relationship with his ex/caring for his daughter.
  23. Kind of an indictment on society, no? That a grandmother killing her husband and a 4 year old before herself is so ho hum? I disagree that this type of homicide is an everyday occurrence, but the casual cruelty of this desensitization is shitty
×
×
  • Create New...