NightSG

No, she was viewed as the extremist in a position of political power. 
 
Most conservatives saw that there were a bunch of AOC's out there.  The thought that an AOC could get elected was not on just about any conservative's radar.

The Third Reich never had a majority in Germany.  I am reminded of a wealthy architect that saw WWII coming and wanted nothing to do with it.  He sold his business in NYC and bought an island.  He moved his family thinking to let the world destroy itself while they sat it out.  The problem was that he was on one of the Midway islands and ended up sitting out the war in a Japanese POW camp where some of his family did not survive.  Ignoring evil is not a solution.
 
The Traveler

I just go inside and use the table as a table.  Drive through line around the building, 1-2 people in line inside. If I get a shake the food will usually be headed to the table by the time I get there anyway. 
Plus they have a place to wash your hands inside so your food doesn't get any extra earwax or well-used money flavoring. 

Too much talk. Build Thunderdome and settle this. 

There's the wolf, the sheep, and the sheepdog.  The wolf would take the babysitter and molest her on the way home.  The sheep follows protocol and don't take the babysitter home not only to avoid temptation but also so other people including the babysitter wouldn't have cause to think he's a wolf.  The sheepdog follows protocol and tries to protect his reputation because a good reputation makes him a better trusted sheepdog.  But, when there's no other way to keep the babysitter safe, he takes responsibility for the babysitter's protection from wolves regardless of the consequences to his own reputation.  Of course, the sheepdog knows with 100% certainty that he is a sheepdog and not a wolf and wouldn't succomb to wolfish temptations regardless of the dings to his reputation.

Splendid question, but I'd say no to the 2nd one.
1. We cannot have open borders and a welfare state.  Pick one or the other.  If you pick both, in 20 years the only illegal immigration will be from the U.S. to other countries.
2. I think it's despicable to use humans as pawns to increase political power.  If the unauthorized immigrants were conservative and raised U.S.-born children who voted Republican, you'd see Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and all 24 Democratic candidates down at the border laying bricks with both hands and their teeth.
3. I also think anyone who wants to become a U.S. citizen should be allowed to (minus criminals, maybe), but they should get in line and flow through the pipeline we have set up to ensure orderly immigration that doesn't damage the U.S. citizens already here.  So I view it more as a problem with line jumping, not illegal immigration. 

In our day and age there appears to be a lot of people seeking to justify/rationalize a paradigm rather than seeking to find truth. The Pioneers were not illegal immigrants. The only way you could liken this thought to illegal immigration is the Pioneers who traveled from Europe and other countries to travel to "Zion."
Did these Pioneers come over illegally? No. They went through proper channels to come to the US, and then traveled to where they could worship their God according to the dictates of their conscience. The link being drawn is a false link, a justification to rationalize a paradigm.
If you want to start a new life in America, go through proper channels. Should there be compassion, mercy, justice? Yes, all three are important. If I want to start a new life in Europe, to create a better life for my family (or to find asylum) then I need to go through the proper channels.
In times of war, I have two choices -- fight or flee. If I flee, and I am fleeing to another country that has established laws then I am at the mercy and compassion of the country I am fleeing to. The Book of Mormon even teaches this principle with the people of Ammon. They do not come over to the land of Nephi and expect the Nephites to take them in. They at first say the following when thinking of going to the land of the Nephites, "Yea, if the Lord saith unto us go, we will go down unto our brethren, and we will be their slaves..." They also discuss their willingness to perish in the land if the Nephites or the Lord did not say "go" or allow them to come into their land.
Part of life is to draw proper comparisons, not comparisons that further justify and rationalize a paradigm.
 
 

Well, locally, we've got a jeweler named Swindle and an accountant named Cheatham.

Junior if you stop going to church to appease your wife at what stage will you be able to go back to church without hurting her feelings more or making her feel like you have chosen church over her?  It will only get more difficult as you will have changed your behaviour and then will have to change it again.
If you honestly (and the only person you have to answer this to is yourself) want to go to church then just go, things will probably not be as bad as you are anticipating, and if they are you will find a way to deal with it. There will always be a reason not to go - find the reason why you MUST go regardless of the potential actions of others.

If its floods that concern you then "seal" a box with some filters, pure-tabs, and some fuel w/ lighters :)

Well, the way some sports' governing bodies like to ban things as unfair to those who choose not to do them, it can't be long before practice makes that list.

The problem with the new 007 is not the new 007.  The problem with the new 007 is the responses to the new 007.
SJWs think... the <insert group identity here> are finally getting representation!  If you don't like the film you're just <insert sexist, racist, bigot, whatever here>.  The problem with this is - SJWs are too stupid to realize they're literally being sexist, racist, bigot, whatever to wildly celebrate and defend representation of the group identity taken from the work of a cis-gendered white man tokenized for representation such that the group identity is riding the cis-gendered white man's success coattails.  It's like they are so happy with the crumbs they're getting because, why... they don't think that group identity can create its own stories written specifically for that group identity's cultural application of the human archetypes and become as successful?  Doesn't that make you... sexist, racist, bigot, whatever...?
 

The trouble with this is that in many jurisdictions, a party is liable for debts incurred by his or her spouse.  In Utah, I could rack up $100K of credit card debt, divorce my spouse, bankrupt out of my portion, and leave her holding the bag for all of it—her only recourses would be to pay off the debt or file for bankruptcy herself.
If a twenty-something female in a country where this sort of thing were permitted, discovered her husband had borrowed money using her as collateral—we’d tell her that her first and foremost priority is to keep herself safe from bondage, even at the cost of her marriage.  But unless @dougfir‘s wife has undisclosed income that she has used to pay off the credit cards she’s racked up—that’s exactly what she’s done to him.  Not once, not twice, but three times.  
That’s not a spouse; that’s a pimp.

I would think that is a coaching call also. Most coaches would have pulled star players and played others for experience when you go up 5 goals. It is hard enough in soccer to come back from a three goal lead. Looks like the coach and team wanted to make a statement.

Rapinoe et. al.'s attitude ON the field, including the disrespect to the anthem, has to do with the entire team leadership including the coach. 

Well... "illegal" is such a harsh word.  I'd just raise the taxes on the earned income of professional athletes.  Something modest, perhaps 150% or so.
And three cheers to your girlfriend, whose achievement is very noble (but is inspiring a bit of envy in me, perhaps).

Easy, fair solution to the pay gap; pool all the money and let the teams play each other for it. 

People like that are the reason shunning should make a comeback. 
When nature finally brings us the long overdue apex predator, they can test their athletic abilities against it alone. 

Not all of them were disrespectful to the country.  But all of them were disrespectful in soccer culture sportsmanship as is displayed in their match against Thailand.

I don't want to offend Americans and I kind of view myself as American anyway. But that women's US team had no respect for their opponents or the game of football. I don't like any of the players 

The "Squad" says racists things and it's ok.  The President fires back at their racist comments and he gets a Congressional Vote to condemn his comments as racist.
Honk honk.  Clown World.

Hah hah... More gaslighting.  "I shouldn't have to expound on my view unless you ask nicely even if you've written 2 posts on the matter and clearly don't understand my point of view... I should just say you clearly don't understand anything and wait until you say pretty please explain to me because I'm... I don't know... god emperor or something".
I'm done with this one.  I have no interest in what you have to say on the matter anymore.

Seems reasonable. After all, the Olympics don't seem to be suffering from not having salaried athletes. 
A sprint (half mile swim, 12.5 mile bike, 3 mile run) really should be doable for anyone without legitimate mobility issues, with a month or two of training. If I can ever manage a 5k run without my knee acting up, I'm going to give it a shot. 
 

Here is the thing.
if you don’t learn to communicate and respect each others wants and needs, you might as well file for divorce now.  You have a VERY unhealthy relationship that needs to be fixed or you will be unhappy your whole life, and worst yet, you will raise a child in a home by parents who are unhappy and don’t respect each other. And  then your kid will grow up to be just like you two.