My dogs do love McDonalds. You might be on to something.

I wouldn’t feed it to them because I love my dogs and want them to live at least relatively healthy. But they’d love it if I would.

They also usually rent out equipment, like carpet cleaners, post-hole diggers, large drain snakes, etc. And relatively cheap for the one time possibly in your lifetime you need to use it.

At the same time, how is it the right-wingers hate health insurance companies so much that they support the assassination of one of the CEOs… but they don’t support universal health care?

Probably for the same reason a bunch of people voted to protect abortion while using the same ballot to elect the guy who got the protection taken away in the first place.

The questions this begs kept increasing as I read the headline, and reading the article added answers I didn’t have questions for.

But this feels like pretty inadequate journalism. What was the anime argument?! I need answers!

And honestly, that present two days a year is a drop in the bucket of debt if you’re already dealing with debt.

I’m not saying putting yourself in $3k of credit card debt to take your kids to Disneyland is totally worth it, but if you’re several thousand in debt and scraping, that ~$100 present twice a year won’t be the thing that breaks you, and is worth cutting costs elsewhere on a regular basis.

Yeah, one of the most infuriating things, that we have to find ways for the people who caused the problem to profit from fixing it to get anything accomplished.

The reality is because of the lived experiences of people based on the color of their skin, people are different based on skin color. You’re right that it’s a stupid reason to think differently of people, but if people had been mistreated for many generations based on the color of their hair, and there was still a good chunk of people that something so arbitrary was somehow important, then you would want to approach a person with that hair color with understanding of that history and current struggle.

So why does it matter? Because 100 years ago, their great-great-grandparents had any wealth they managed to build up taken from them, 70 years ago their great-grandparents were kept boxed into separate, substandard areas, and 50 years ago their grandparents were kept from being able to buy homes outside low-income, substandard housing areas, and 30 years ago their parents were told it was their fault for growing up in crime-filled, poor areas with under-funded schools. And the whole time police have continuously treated them as that same substandard, poor, likely-criminal, so they have disproportionately been put in jail or grown up with one parent in jail. This obviously doesn’t apply to everyone, but it’s enough to lead people to treat them differently, either because they presume (until otherwise established) that they are poor, poorly educated, and likely criminal (by basically racist assholes) or with a certain amount of respect for their presumed struggles.

Taking it to an extreme, if a person comes across a very old person with a number tattooed in block letters on their forearm, they will respond one of two ways: with respect and concern for their presumed struggles and trauma, or with irrational hatred (by neo-nazis). Judging or “separating” a person for a barely noticeable tattoo that they didn’t even put on themselves may seem arbitrary, but only if you ignore the entire history that makes them different.

I was under the impression it was forthe woman’s benefit, that it is easier for a cut to heal than a tear. Is that not the case? Is the risk of tearing overblown?

My dog’s name is Die Fledermaus. He’s a black-and-tan dachshund.

We call him Maus for short. But he does look like a little bat dog.

How is it that we discover bones of a large flying creature, and first thought is “it looks mammalian, like a flying possum!” And then “nah, that’s ridiculous. It was a flying reptile! Like a DRAGON!”

Large flying creature, and nobody thinks giant bird? Really?

Gotta launch the arrows at the climax, too, for maximum effect.

I’ve dealt with eagles plenty while on 60s, and that was bad enough. I can’t imagine dealing with bats of the same size at night.

The 60 is a beast, though.

My question was less about how doable it is, and more… if you can’t afford to buy a house, how can you afford to pay rent (and thus someone else’s mortgage plus a little extra)?

The last place I lived, I could afford my mortgage but I wouldn’t have been able to afford to rent an equivalent house. Hence my confusion.

I know this wasn’t your point, but I’ve been confused on a particular point for awhile:

buying a house is simply out of reach unless you have dual income and it better be nearly six figure dual income…

Just the general idea of it being impossible to afford to buy a house. And don’t get me wrong, the prices on houses have gotten ridiculous! At the same time, we talk about landlords buying houses and charging exorbitant rent (suggesting at the very least more than what they pay).

So if rent is more than the mortgage, insurance, etc, then how is it impossible to buy a house if it is possible to rent (an equivalent home)? Is it the down payment (if any)? Costs involved in purchasing? Because it seems like month to month it would be cheaper.

I say this as someone who has rented and owned, and owning felt significantly cheaper.

(Full disclosure, I’m in the military, so I had access to a VA loan… though not really sure what that did for me except maybe allow 0% down… if other people are absolutely required to put up a percentage then I can definitely understand it).

We need better stalls in the US for that to be the case. WAY too many gaps and openings.

Because they’re not disabled. What are you even talking about?

That’s like supporting some racist segragationist bullshit by saying “well, can’t black people just use disabled bathrooms? They’re a small portion of the population.”

See how ridiculous that sounds? It’s not disparaging to disabled people to point out how inappropriate that is. You’re just making life harder for disabled people to feed some asshole’s bigotry.

So I get the sense that the whole third sight thing requires intent, as in it requires the force-user to specifically intend to use it as opposed to it just running in the background. So they would only use it in a fight (or navigating or something).

But it also seems like it would be a reflexive thing for a force-using warrior to immediately reach out for it if surprised or confused, so the second she heard loading I’d imagine she’d see her death and… you know… avoid it.

Isn’t this a large part of the premise of the newer Disney Princess and the Frog movie?

That one person is a gem and we should appreciate them. They noticed you got talked over, and made sure to circle back, noticeably so the others don’t do it again, to make sure you weren’t silenced. It shows they not only noticed, but were bothered by it.

Treasure those people, and be those people.

Unless he was diagnosed as a pathological liar, they should not. Not that he isn’t, because he is, but as a news organization they should only provide the facts, quotes, and unbiased contextual information. That is what we should expect from the news. It should not be “left-leaning” or “right-leaning,” because they shouldn’t tell us what we should think about what they are reporting.

They should report that some of his former (and possibly current, if it’s accurate) aids and expected cabinet members wrote, participated, or supported Project 2025. They should report what Trump’s response was when asked about it, as well as including the factual context of how many people directly surrounding him that were openly involved (to give the lie to him “not knowing”).

We need news to stop giving opinion. Period. They should strive to be as unbiased as possible, including reporting on events based on newsworthy-ness, not trying to be “fair” to the candidates by reporting on both in an equally negative way regardless of the severity of their respective news (e.g. Obama’s tan suit vs. Trump’s children in cages.)