Jolie, are you liberal or conservative? You've said your fair share of both.

How about put Hillary in jail and give Sanders the nomination? He won't accept and it'll probably go to Speaker of the House. That'd be perfect right?

The democrats have a spin on bigfoot? Nice. See cuzif you were talking about Hillary you'd only be three percentage points higher than me.

I never said anything about Trump. The debate is about Hillary is it not?

nothing is wrong with making a funny comment. And bigfoot takes up 29% of all Americans.

http://www.livescience.com/18869-bigfoot-belief-americans-canadians.html

People who trust Hillary take up 11%.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/16/nbc-poll-11-percent-think-hillary-honest-trustworthy/

Therefore more people believe in bigfoot than Hillary. Case closed.

Jolie isn't actually Angelina Jolie. Obviously she's a troll. So that said, why do people name themselves after famous people online? It seems kind of awkward.

the religious people on this site are retards who can't comprehend that saying we can't see something that tajes millions of years AND ALSO has actual things you CAN SEE(called evidence which these people don't have for god) isn't logically coherent.

Women can't go into combat in the military and there is still a lot of discrimination between corporations. Wal Mart had a few cases of this a year back. In a lot of Arabic countries, women don't have most rights that men have. In Saudi Arabia, women have to treat their men like their legal guardians. I don't blame you if you want to argue that Arab countries aren't developed but they have governments so they are to some extent.

my fault then. often times I am sarcastic on here though.

gctbjvfgctbjvfgctbjvfgctbjvfgctbjvf

Right, I agree with her. If the world runs out of chocolate now, we won't have it later. You said "No, that sounds logical" and I said "No, that sounds logical." If you were disputing me, then you should have said its illogical. This is a very simple concept. Did you think I was sarcastic?

This should be a support statement, and if possible a "rephrased" statement if they are willing to add a new option.

Does this say nothing that Americans don't at least have the right to the PURSUIT of happiness:

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/169/Pursuit-of-Happiness

No, it's perfectly logical. If we run out of chocolate then our children and grandchildren won't have chocolate unless we start growing the fuck out of dem coco beans.

I agree. That sounds rational.

jflsarhtjeahtjlkerkhesalrkhesalrkhesalrkhesalrkhesalrkhesalrkhesalrkhesalr

if this is true, how will we ever know for absolute certain ona fundamental level? obviously no one fundamentally knows anything

I can only stand Windows 8 because of the Windows 7 shell. I like being kept up with current tech, but Windows 8 GUI is shit IMO.

"In computing, a shell is a user interface for access to an operating system's services. In general, operating system shells use either a command-line interface (CLI) or graphical user interface (GUI), depending on a computer's role and particular operation."-Wikipedia

Yes, I know the definition is from Wikipedia, but for those of you who are computer illiterate its 100% correct.

I know Windows 10 compromises between the metro and the desktop a little bit more. Can't wait to be win7 shell free.

:)-

483204738204732943298747380145u238o542352352-u0423&( ^%%^

so then:

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ Without oxygenyouwouldntreallydie

you can't build something that works without logic, even if its just your own logic, other than art

so... it begins

the beast lives... out if the raging storm, in the hideous darkness it lurches... driven by death itself, only the satisfaction of slaughter, can return it.. to the darkness, from which it came...

nevermind

99999999999999999999999999999999999957272745837382864:83?;5

I feel like I should just do things for people without taking back because I shouldn't have rights. I don't know if I deserve to have rights. I keep them but I'm thinking about it.

What happened to you jolie? You had a baby? I mean really?

No because separate is inherently not equal, but if we did that and it caused problems in society, I think there would be more of a problem changing the law back. I've heard some extremists say if we tried such laws as outlawing gay marriage and going further into stoning gay people, if it didn't work they'd be ok changing the law back in the other direction. That's obviously bullshit because they would not keep that promise. I'm not just talking about religious people but a lot of abortionists have similar beliefs in other areas besides abortion. Abortion itself is not one.

Why not? Cite your sources and your more credible. It's a fact. I do it and it works. :) Otherwise, state that its your opinion.