Yeah, unofficially, my first reaction is: go for it. If it stops working, it'll just get deadded anyway, so no harm no foul.

You save all your empathy for right wing fools who push lies and the fools who accept it as gospel, right?

Truth?!? LMFAHS! These blatantly racist fake figures, which you misquoted from Trump tweeting some long ago debunked unofficial propaganda, are just wrong and earned him one of thousands of "pants on fire" awards.
*facepalm
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/nov/23/donald-trump/trump-tweet-blacks-white-homicide-victims/

The sad part being the honest numbers were bad enough to make the point, so why exaggerate? Probably because Bunker Boy just can't let any truth pass his lips, and you can't help but exaggerate on top of his outright lies.

Every time, buddy. You only reference already debunked, clearly fake statistics. Statistics that always contradict the official numbers. Is it because you're only looking where Twitler tells you to? Just throwing a handful of conspiracy word magnets at a fridge would have you accidentally right more often than you are. I can't believe that's not on purpose....but I can't discern what purpose it might serve.

I just tried to find any source for this and failed, so take the following with a pinch of salt, but...

My understanding was that this is an example of American automotive industry protectionism coming home to roost.

There was a time where the Japanese cars were viewed as more reliable, cheaper and more fuel efficient (as mentioned in the video). American companies became increasingly worried about competition so settled on the plan of changing American consumer preferences for ever larger cars through aggressive advertising.

This gave American companies a price advantage over foreign producers, as larger cars cost much more to transport, and created an unofficial import tariff. Other companies also did not have designs for big cars, as they are domestically unpopular and fuel is usually prohibitively expensive in their regions.

Now the same industries are calling protectionism as their designs don't match the preferences and fuel efficiencies expected by non US consumers.

Like I say, not sure about this, but if anyone knows something about this either way, I'd be interested to hear.

Of the screwy stuff that went down this election, the technicality of not having a full accurate count of mail in, military, provisional, and even still uncounted early votes within 30 minutes of polls closing barely rates mention if not for Republicans fighting tooth and nail to invalidate thousands of votes due to slow clerical work by unpaid volunteers and accusing those volunteers of fraud with with no evidence beyond biased supposition.

Don't believe the unofficial details you hear/read on Fox, they aren't news, they're entertainment (to some)....you know this....notice the url includes the disclaimer "opinion" so they can be fact free.

Compared to the Texas voting machines changing straight party democrat ticket votes to Cruz, Broward county's issues are nothing. There's certainly not any infraction there that merits denying tens of thousands of citizens their right to not only vote, but to have that vote counted.

*backup=[...snipped...]
Many More Backups: http://www.google.com/search?q=Attenborough+and+the+Empire+of+the+Ants&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&tbm=vid&source=lnt&tbs=dur:l&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj
D_dfNyuHbAhXuCTQIHYCjD3oQpwUIHw&biw=1016&bih=800&dpr=1&gws_rd=ssl

No.

There is an unofficial sequel written on the premise that Mordor was Middle-earth's first progressive, technological civilisation; which was thrown down by effectively a crusade of religious fanatics. I didn't get very far into it (because I was reading it as a pdf on a computer monitor), but Saruman's motivation at least makes substantially more sense in that interpretation.

This video gets somewhat hard to follow when half the time I can't tell if they're saying 'Soren' or mispronouncing 'Sauron'.

The director of the movie "You're Next" applauded this 'homage'.

So wonderful

The Simpsons’ couch gag has become a great place for innovative filmmakers and artists to show off their take on the iconic nuclear family and the many denizens of Springfield. From the creators of Rick And Morty, to Don Hertzfeldt, Guillermo Del Toro, John K., and many others, all have left their individual stamp on the opening of the classic show and its opening segment. Now another artist has thrown his hat in the ring, albeit unofficially, with a gruesome blending of The Simpsons with Adam Wingard’s film You’re Next.

Lee Hardcastle is an experienced stop-motion animator that has applied his craft to a segment in The ABCs Of Death, a mash-up of Frozen and The Thing, and even a music video for the group Gunship. Now Hardcastle has brought that same off-kilter horror sensibility to his proposed couch gag for Springfield’s first family with a possibly NSFW-ish (due to clay violence and gore) and fairly disturbing short. Hardcastle’s couch gag opens serenely enough before devolving into a home invasion pastiche just like You’re Next—much to the appreciation and applause of Adam Wingard himself. It’s unclear although unlikely that Fox will actually use this couch gag on screen, but maybe it will help boost Hardcastle’s chances for crafting a Treehouse Of Horror intro/segment.

247mph isn't too ridiculous (though still insane). Pretty much all sports bikes are electronically limited to 299km/h (186mph), which is sort of an unofficial industry agreed standard arrived at in the earlyto mid nineties when the marketing was dominated by top speeds and it was getting out of hand. It's not something that someone determined couldn't bypass relatively easily though (and probably doesn't apply at all to track bikes).

No way, I was watching this and sent the link to someone for them to watch. In the 2 Seconds it took them to open the link, the video was killed for copyright claim. So, this gets the unofficial *Dead

The rationale for Assad in using chemical weapons is a group punishment of sorts for aiding the rebels. The conflict has been locked in back and forth territorial plays between Assad and the rebels. Dumping chemical weapons in a contested zone is a powerful psychological disincentive to the local civilian population in aiding the rebels.

Comparing this to Iraq '03 is misguided. Obama has shown no evidence of being a neoconservative, politically any serious involvement would be hugely damaging. There's good evidence to suggest that once Assad goes, there would be a civil war between the rebels for control. From there the rebels who come to power will likely be Islamic fundamentalists.

Besides, with fracking and CSG, the US is in a vastly different situation visa vi oil and gas, and either way Syria is hardly an oil slick. There's really little reason to get involved besides humanitarian reasons to act as disincentive to future dictators, at this point and I think it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

@Buck

The opposition to Assad is ragtag of mostly the local Sunni majority as the local Christians, Druze and Alawites have generally aligned themselves with Assad. They have little to nothing to do with the Muslim Brotherhood.

The reporting I have read is saying the strongest insurgents who are doing the weight of the fighting are generally fundamentalist Islamists, they also seem to be receiving the bulk of the funding from Saudi Arabia and Qatar unofficial groups who are sponsoring them.

The US is giving arms to purportedly moderate groups through the Supreme Military Council and Syrian Opposition Coalition political organisations, however it is not clear how extensive this program is.

So I did an unofficial survey at work this afternoon.

One lesbian was totally with me -- it is fine to "out" yourself. She even said what I said -- everyone wins when people decide to leave the closet.

She also agrees with you (and me) that outing someone else is horrible.

She had no trouble with the phrase "outing herself."

The next person I asked was a straight woman. She didn't even know what I was talking about AT ALL.

I shall gather more data later.... I'm very curious about how this is going to play out....

It's the way the world was meant to be. Not this follow-the-leader-which-is-just-the-fuck-in-front-of-you-just-as-dumb-as-you BS. Patterning ourselves after our collective misjudgements and perpetuated fear-ignorance via meme-behavior in the form of social pressure; I see your comment of "Fuck-it", I instantly relate to you and your superior "boss" attitude. Thus agreement is unofficially created, and a thread of social structure formed.

Fuck you. Fuck everything. And love it. Good for her, indeed. Grow a beard or don't. What's the difference? I married a woman for her boobs. Does it matter if that's an acceptable attraction for a man? I'm also attracted to her large clitoris. It's like a weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee penis.

You can do your own research if you really want to find the answer. From the research I've done, I've already established that the availability of guns does not guarantee a significant reduction in violent crime. If that were the case, DC's violent crime rate would be significantly lower than it is because they have very strict gun laws. I've also established that a ban on assault rifles would not have a significant impact on gun-related crime because the vast majority of gun-related crime is committed using pistols, not fully-automatic weapons. I've also established that the majority of guns used in gun-related crimes are obtained illegally, either stolen or obtained through unofficial means. The facts simply don't support the idea that banning assault rifles (or even all guns) would significantly reduce violent crime.

The current fixation on gun control is a purely reactionary response to recent shooting sprees (which comprise a negligible percentage of all gun violence). The only reason people care now is because these shooting sprees generally take place in middle and upper-class areas. Nobody cares when people get killed in poor areas, where the bulk of violent crime occurs.

I'm in no way a gun nut (I don't own nor plan to ever own any guns) but I'm not going to let my opinion of guns get in the way of facts. People who blindly believe that banning guns will solve all problems are just as bad as the NRA. Do your own research and don't ignore facts that contradict your own position. The FBI website is a great place to start, as they provide annual statistics on all crime in the U.S. and they don't have any reason to skew the numbers.