This saying is a pet peeve of mine, because it’s so contrary to the actual meaning of “eye for an eye”, which is a prohibition against escalation. Like in this case the guy injured someone’s neck and wrist, so the maximum punishment would be injuring his neck and wrist, not killing him. That’s not to say “eye for an eye” is an ideal justice system, just that it is opposed to wanton revenge and violence.
This would also have to pass the House, which it would not. I agree with Bernie’s statement and respect his choice to put the resolution forth on principle. I do not respect the article author or commentors who are either ignorant of basic U.S. civics, or choosing to be deliberately deceptive in order to place blame solely on Democrats.
An article about how we all need to come together opens with a salvo against all of their allies. Beyond parody
Here’s the theme cover: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Trp99eHyDyY
Like a spider dangled over the fire by a thread.
No I wasn’t emotionally scarred by high school American Lit, why do you ask?
Also, he was suspended in July 2021, so the consequences were pretty quick, and only the final nail in the coffin was delayed.
omg Toad, you can’t just ask people why they’re purple!
Nah, that’s another cut up with very little of the interview
Here is the full interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80DaR2CVNNk
Referenced study, from 2013, requires journal access: https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.12359
If there was a government-mandated monopoly on coffee and it was sold in L/s, we probably would.
It was in fact very badly written, with stuff like wage changes taking effect “immediately” (in practice 5 days after vote counts are certified).