I'm not the guy you asked, but she needs to be tested. Don Sr. ran his businesses for decades, appeared on tons of TV shows and gave tons of interviews for decades, donated money to things like 9/11 relief and black colleges and other great causes at critical times. Trump was in the spotlight for a very long time and when he was first elected, the people voting for him had plenty of material to dig through and find out what he was about.
Ivanka is a NYC socialite and her husband is loyal to Israel first. Ivanka has been a huge help the last 4 years, but all of that was done under her father's administration and at his direction. Before we can put her up for a national election, she needs to do something smaller but still impressive and she needs to do it 100% on her own.
It's everywhere. I was on Tinder for a while, when I was in college in Jacksonville FL. I personally matched with at least a dozen women who were either married, engaged, or over a year into a relationship with their "boyfriend" and were on Tinder as poly and "sex positive" people. I texted with a few for a while and they were fucking crazy, every single one.
My thoughts exactly. He isn't married to her yet, so he has the ability to walk away clean. He mentions being a student, so I assume when he graduates and starts working, she is going to try to get married and lock down the money.
Southern states have the same rates on average, across the whole state. White trash trailer park people and low income neighborhoods full of joggers and Hispanic immigrants involved in drugs have super high rates of divorce, one parent households, high school drop outs and many other bad characteristics. Southern areas full of hard working middle class Christians (of all races) are doing just fine.
I was in San Francisco in June and a guy near the wharf screamed at me. Something about me being "TOO LATE" and then he called me a n****r, which really confused me, because I am a very pale blond-haired blue-eyed white man and he was also white. People like this are everywhere there and they get lots of government assistance that they spend on heroin and shoot up in public. We desperately need asylums back.
Nice observation bro, I see 2 comments in a row have stopped trying to debate the points I made and comment on my tone. Did you run out of justifications for maiming random people trying to do invaluable services for their community?
Hey Ed,
Oh no, not at all. I had no delusions about why people are being rude. My comment was an offhanded observation about how others are behaving. I am fully aware that I am an asshole. If your definition of playing the victim is that broad, then you are certainly entitled to that opinion.
By the way, did you look up what "hypothetical" means yet?
And if they continue down this path, which I assume they will, we need to stop selling them weapons. We can't give a soon to be muslim majority nation F22s, Apache attack choppers and missle tech. We need to remain more inner focused for military purposes. Very few of our "allies" actually sent any help when we were fighting in the middle east and at this rate, none of them will be willing to help next time shit hits the fan.
Yeah, these people are treating me like an HOA Karen flipping out over someones grass being 2 inches too tall.
It's funny that the very same website that has been spamming "Law and Order" for months now suddenly has no concept of or concern for the law. They're behaving like toddlers who don't understand why they aren't allowed to kick their little brother in the head.
Why did you bother replying to me if you still have made no attempt to look up what hypothetical means?
At no point have I made any excuses on behalf of the city employee from the story in the article from the screenshot or speculated on whether the homeowner acted maliciously, was involved in boobytraping that particular sign or how the police should handle this.
You see, the comment I replied to initially was stating that boobytraps should be fully legal and his right to use on private property. I have given examples of why boobytraping your sign is and should remain illegal and then further elaborated on them. However, the bulk of the argument I made was not in response to boobytrapped Trump signs but boobytraps in general, such as the guy who wants to install a "porch bomb" the people who want to make "vietcong style bamboo spike pit traps" or the people who want motion activated sprinklers that spray capsaicin laden bird repellent. That is what this discussion is about. If you can't wrap your head around that, stop replying.
I have already answered this exact question several times, but since you felt the need to ask again, I'll cut and paste my response for you again.
The comment that I initially replied to was saying that boobytraps in general should be legal on private property, so that is what I am responding to in my reply. As for why the sign should absolutely not be bootstrapped, these signs are put out by the road. You know, where burried water and electric lines are, that a utilities worker might be servicing. So a utilities worker may need to move the sign to do their job, which was the first example I gave of someone having legitimate reasons to be on his property
Before replying to this, try reading one of the dozen other comments I have left in this comment tree before you repeat the same questions again.
The city absolutely does not have to notify you before they dig up your yard to service underground lines. This is local government were talking about, they do whatever they want. Around here, if your tree limbs are hanging out over the road, they come trim them back. The tree is yours and is on your land, but they still do it anyway. It sounds like you advocate for a very libertarian form of land ownership, but unless you live in the absolute middle of nowhere, what you are talking about doesn't exist, and if you did live somewhere like that there would be no need for a road sign because nobody would ever drive by it and see it.
It would be nice if they were required to notify about things like this, but a few months ago, the city decided that the fire hydrants in my grandparents neighborhood were too old and needed to be replaced with a modern one. Well, wouldn't you know it, they were out there in my grandparents yard at 8am, no notice at all (retired people, they would have seen it) digging them all up. They destroyed about 5 square yards of pristine St Augustine grass with their digging and put ruts all through the front yard with their trucks and there isn't a thing that can be done about it.
As for your complaints about the use of "might" and "should" I did stop and respond briefly to your bit about this sign in this particular hurting someone in a way you feel is justified, but the big picture of this whole discussion, and why I originally responded to that guy in the first place was about his statements of what the law should be and what rights he should have. The "might" and "should" have nothing to do with this particular sign, they have to do with the repercussions of boobytraps at large. If boobytraping your property was legal and 200,000 pedes went out and did it, the arguments I made for why this is and should remain illegal come into play. Laws that are written to govern everyone have to consider what happens if everyone participates.
Also, this last bit is not aimed at you, just an observation, but for a website that has spammed "Law and Order" for months, there is a lot of advocating for unlawful behavior and pushing a very anarchist mindset in this thread.
First off, I was replying to a comment saying that a property owner should have the right to boobytrap whatever they want on private property, so my comment was addressing that, not a Trump sign with razor blades specifically.
But since you want to focus on the sign exclusively, These signs are put out by the road. You know, where burried water and electric lines are, that a utilities worker might be servicing. So a utilities worker may need to move the sign to do their job, which was the first example I gave of someone having legitimate reasons to be on his property. Sure it got "exactly who it was supposed to hurt here" but that doesn't mean it will always go down that way. I'm very sorry your intuition is so underdeveloped that you need every last detail of a hypothetical situation spelled out for you to understand it. Try harder next time!
This is in no way similar to the "think of the children" rhetoric, and I never said anything about children, but if you want to try and change my mind, go ahead and try.
In none of the examples I gave was the hypothetical home owner calling 911. The only 2 I gave where first responders are there to help the homeowner were having a heart attack and the house being ablaze.
Having a heart attack: are you going to disarm a bomb while writhing on the floor, your loved ones scrambling to help, but there isn't much they can do? Maybe they know the front porch is rigged up and you have to use the side door, but they're panicking and don't think to mention it. Buddy I really wish heart attacks were as simple and unburdensome as you seem to think, but they aren't.
The house is burning down: what, you going to go out on the porch, while the house is burning down, and fiddle with your bomb, which is in close proximity to a fire, instead of getting yourself and loved ones to safety? If you were really going to rig up the porch, you'd have it all set up in the crawl space under the porch. You going to crawl down there to fiddle with wires while the house is on fire? Who says you're even home? What if you're at work when the fire starts and the neighbor calls 911?
Get your head out of your ass!
These signs are put out by the road. You know, where burried water and electric lines are, that a utilities worker might be servicing. So a utilities worker may need to move the sign to do their job, which was the first example I gave of someone having legitimate reasons to be on his property.
I'm very sorry your intuition is so underdeveloped that you need every last detail of a hypothetical situation spelled out for you to understand it. Try harder next time!
My comment was responding more specifically to his statements that boobytraps in general should be his right on his private property. But more specifically to the point of the sign, "These signs are put out by the road. You know, where burried water and electric lines are, that a utilities worker might be servicing. So a utilities worker may need to move the sign to do their job, which was the first example I gave of someone having legitimate reasons to be on his property."*
*copied from another comment of mine
Bare minimum, we have midterm elections in 2 years. r/T_D back on reddit is where I got all my good memes and most of my solid information for the FL Governor race. We beat Gillum but some other commie will pop up (probably out of Orlando or St Pete this time) and the cycle will continue.