That’s not an exaggeration in any way. New York and Chicago. There are other cities with some public transit, but anywhere with a) jobs, b) decent schools, and c) reliable public transit will also be prohibitively expensive.

Except it’s not merely a cult, it is the entire history of the development of our nation. Our infrastructure is built on the idea that space is plentiful, and everyone has their own car. The very concept of suburban America is predicated on at least one car in every home. Communities were built without walking access or public transit. Commerce was congealed into vast campuses consisting entirely of parking lots and three-story office buildings. School districts consolidated into massive centralized buildings where thousands of students arrive via hundreds of big yellow busses, some traveling for hours each way.

Even if you wanted to break free from the “cult,” there’s like two cities in the entire USA where you could live, work, and raise a family in a decent school district without a car, and they would be some of the highest cost of living areas in the entire world.

My favorite story from the cast is when Jason Alexander was talking with Larry David about a particularly unlikely scenario, saying he was having trouble relating as a character to something that would never happen to anyone. David said “What are you talking about? This happened to me.” It was then that Alexander realized that George is Larry, and he stopped doing George as Woody Allen.

She learned this lesson, but is she actually a better person? Is she rethinking all of her odious stances and actions? I’m ready to applaud someone becoming a better person, even if she still has work to do on herself, but I’m also skeptical of any politician who sees the writing on the wall and makes a strategic course correction.

Quite literally, at times.

Oh that’s a terrible plan. Veterans are far more likely to end up poor than rich, and that doesn’t include the ones who never come home.

George is whimsical?

Don’t forget be extremely lucky.

That was basically the premise of Seinfeld.

Again, I didn’t accuse you of shit. I said pedophile enablers are bad people, and you volunteered to be offended. That’s on you if you felt accused of being shitty. If that’s what you’re about, then I really don’t care what you think of what I said.

I didn’t accuse you of anything. I said people who defend pedophiles are bad people. You jumped in to be like “No, we’re not!” If what I said offended you because I said I don’t like pedophile enablers (or pedophiles), then that’s you telling on yourself.

Ok, you caught me. I’m prejudiced against pedophiles and pedophile enablers, and I’m not sorry. If that offends you, I assume you’re a member of one of those two groups, and I don’t want to continue talking with you. I suppose that’s a sort of bigotry, but I’m not really worried what you think or what offends pedophiles and pedophile enablers.

I’m not suggesting you’re doing it specifically. I’m saying generally if you feel the need to make that distinction in your normal day to day life, you’re almost certainly a sexual predator.

Yeah, if you’re quoting the DSM V to defend yourself as technically not a pedophile, then yes you’ve crossed the rubicon of decency.

This is one of those technical distinctions where if you’re making the distinction, you’re already on the wrong side of everything.

Was he the one who was a piece of shit? Or was that Crick?

I have a big head, so every pair of headphones I’ve used will eventually break there. At least these can be repaired.

Yep, it’s the “probably” that creates the ethics conundrum. We won’t know how to improve the process without testing the process, and we cannot ethically create “test” humans like that scene in Alien Resurrection where all the failed Sigourney clones are sitting in jars, suffering and begging for death.

What? In my metaphor, Democrats are the nets made of sometimes poop, and Republicans are the turds. Was that not clear?

Yeah, sure. Gather the guillotine and meet me in the town square.