Someone said “fuck” on TV! Quick, let’s make an actual news article about it before the world ends!

Why do you refer to the female candidate with her first name and the male candidate with his last name? The same thing regularly happens with Clinton. I assume the casual disrespect is not intentional but I’m very curious as to why this happens.

Either spell out “asshole” or use another word. This isn’t us cable TV.

My favourite is:

If you’re scared to spell out a scary, bad word, find another word to use instead of trying to hide it behind similar characters.

Why do you refer to the man with his last name and to the woman with her first name?

They’re probably hoping for just that. It would mean further delays.

Okay, you didn’t like that one thing she did and used a lot of words to express that and your judgement of this person appears to be absolute and final. Edgy. How does that relate to the topic at hand? Are there any nothing dishes you need to complain about here?

If you say so, TropicalDingdong…

“But it’s got what plants crave!?”

It irks me that while Trump is usually called by his last name, like all men, when people talk about women they casually use their first names like Hillary or, in this case, E Jean. It’s such a casual and mindless form of disrespect that few seem to notice.

Edit: WTF, no, Clinton’s last name wasn’t “already taken” by her husband. That’s even more disrespectful. You can easily infer who is referred to from context, using her full name or even “Ms Clinton”.

The guy who wrote those is very insightful. I also like his writing style. Thanks for sharing!

Your correct indexing is highly appreciated!

Is it still 1 (one) slice of bread if it’s a whole community of people sharing pics of how they wasted bread?

Is is still wasted if it’s 1 (one) slice of bread?

🤔

Not the food wasting one.

Wow, that’s so deep, you are so profound!

Except it’s complete bullshit, isn’t it? Believing something is entirely different from accusing someone of something but a great philosopher like you is surely aware of that, right?

You made up a stupid principle on the spot after being called out for talking bullshit because you couldn’t find a suitable counter argument. It’s neither personal nor the internet, it’s your weak attempt of worming out of something dumb you said. Don’t worry, I was 15 once, I remember what it feels like. Your brain just isn’t there yet.

Now kindly go troll elsewhere.

Good on you. Is accusing people you “never believe” of lying part of that habit?

Yes, your incredulity certainly makes your argument much stronger. But postulating obvious platitudes is what really drives your point home.

It doesn’t matter who I hurt by not tipping. It matters that I help shitty employers keep up a shitty system if I do. Employees are being hurt whether I tip or not. But my money will not go into some exploitative asshole’s pocket, regardless of your appeals to emotion.

You’re telling me, the customer, that I should help the employees unionize? Are you all up to date with the respective responsibilities of parties here? I believe it’s the employees who should drive unionization, not customers who are entirely unable to do anything about it.

Also, was the suggestion that tips go into emergency funds meant seriously? Do you know how unions and emergency funds operate?

Most businesses don’t advocate that they’re exploiting their employees, so your suggestion to just “not go to stores that rely on it” falls a bit flat.

Okay, thanks for the advice but I already don’t frequent businesses that exploit their employees and you have no reason to assume I do.

You made the assumption I do just so you could get a snarky remark in, not to make a meaningful counterpoint.

And subsidising shit wages just helps employers keep up a shitty system that only they benefit from. Sorry if this sucks but maybe some workers should get behind this idea as well instead of always playing victim.