Pips

Not really, that's a minor part of the opinion. The more important part is they tell you how much food you're going to get of what kind and then they give you that food. I don't think anyone would be able to win a case on "my burger didn't look like the burger in the ad" because every burger looks a little different. Lots of things that are the same don't look the same and let's not suddenly pretend we get McDonalds for the appearance. They'd win false advertising if, say, a quarter pounder was only 2 oz.

I dunno, seems like the judge is explicitly acknowledging it.

There is a legal, regulated, mostly safe method to buy cigarettes. It is inaccessible if you are under a certain age, but only the seller/provider is punished for violating regulations. It's okay to have restrictions on what children can consume.

While current laws on illegal drugs do not work, arguing against any regulation whatsoever is similarly silly, the laws obviously work. Smoking rates have dramatically declined since those laws and public education campaigns began.

If you're a power user there's a minor learning curve to prevent shit from breaking and some mild inconveniences like being unable to use NFC. Location can also just not work at times. Overall, I'm glad I made the switch.

At least we're not unique.

All Eastern religions have their own problems and crimes committed in the name of their beliefs. Christianity might have some of the more global harms, but it's hardly alone in being harmful.

If there is a quorum in the chamber but more Democrats than Republicans present, in theory they could successfully vote for a Democratic Speaker while in the minority. There is nothing that says the Speaker of the House has to be a member of the party that holds the majority. However, Republicans/the Speaker Pro Tem will almost definitely make sure this doesn't happen. I say almost definitely because, as we've seen, they're not that great at strategy these days.

Building up a new economy is not a crash. A crash is when the current system gets wrecked and it's possible something better emerges from the ashes. The problem is that an economic crash primarily hurts the poor, even if they don't own the stocks/property/means of production. They're the ones whose jobs and homes are lost.

Consider, for example, the Bengal famine. Entirely economic, there was literally enough food but it became prohibitively expensive due to market forces driven by the British. The rich British aristocrats didn't suffer, Indians did. In Venezuela when the market crashed, rich people got out or are able to weather it. Poor people are either stuck having to attempt to make the best of a terrible situation, or flee and seek aid as migrants.

It's a Catch-22. He's a contender for the presidency and the former president who has a real shot of winning. He's also under indictment in multiple jurisdictions. The things he says are news, regardless of how stupid they are, because he's saying them to become president and avoid jail.

The first time around they didn't have to give him so much coverage early on in the primary race. This time, they don't have a choice because it's actually relevant news. That said, most networks have toned down coverage of Trump significantly. Actually most news orgs are more focused on the shutdown than the recent debate and Trump's bullshit.

Styles change over time. I don't see you calling people slobs for leaving home without their hat.

People thought that was the case with finance until 2008, instead we had people left homeless and jobless for years. Wealthy people have a safety net when the system fails. Poor people do not. If the U.S. crashed, people would die from the fallout. People died in the last recessions and they weren't mostly the rich.

As someone who grew up with those stories, I'm also curious what are considered space battles since I don't recall any.