True. It has elastic in it. They had some weird products back in the 60's. Of course, we have weirder products now.

Wrong yet again, Guest. The plane that he and other photographers were on had a total of 30 minutes before their plane took off. He was not supposed to touch the kid, or they wouldn't let him back on the plane, since infectious disease was a very, very real worry there. There is an alternative accounting of Carter's explanation for the picture, but it isn't considered all that credible, as its from a competing photographer. Carter saw the picture, took the picture and - because he couldn't help the child - at least shooed the vulture away. Get your facts straight, coward.

Well, duh. Everyone who isn't over 50 or lives on some isolated farm or prima dona gated community knows that.

No, its about a guy who cheated and feels bad because he lost the guy.

wtf are you gibbering about? Of course they do.

Keep on going back. Think dinosaurs and pre-Kennedy.

Or hump her leg. Sex education wasn't really a thing back then. Even porn was lame, according to my great grandfather (he's the one who gave me the 'sex talk' when I was 12; he was awesome and unbelievably coarse about it.)

I agree. Getting a tattoo that isn't relevant is pretty ignorant...

Why is it bullshit? It seems entorely plausible to me.
How are tattoos any different that loading yourself up on makeup like Snookie or Tammie Faye Baker, or getting fake boobs or butt implants? Why hide behind all of the body modification? Granted, tats are less expensive than therapy, but inking doesn't solve the problem. It just masks it with a a new problem.
And it really depends on the piercing/body modification. If its a religious thing (or again, if you're shipwrecked, tradition says you're allowed an ear piercing), then all is cool. If its a spike through the septum, a Nefertiti or a Price Albert, you've undoubtedly got some issues:
"Tattoos promise to make you attractive, as if you have a personal force akin to gravity. Notice me. The more attraction you command, the more attention you get, and the more life you have — as we see in the public's devotion to celebrities and leaders."
- Dr. Kirby Farrell

Not really. It was a pretty obvious piece of bait. I'd like to find a clickbaiter, but I'd probably go to prison for destroying them.

Yep, I was wrong. I had confused Sam's Club with Costco.

Again, it isn't a logic flaw. It is a documented fact through at least a dozen studies since the late 80's. So, my logic is on solid ground. So, thinking that your (and others') thoird party vote didn't affect the election in favor of Trump is provably false. That you would have otherwise abstained from voting entirely means you wouldn't get to complain. About anything. Anyone who fails to vote has failed their first effing responsibility as an American.
Lastly, wtf? 'who cares what millions of people think'? And you are comparing a safe, sound and prosperous Clinton presidency with fucking slavery? False comparison much? If you want to talk morals, your candidate couldn't even find Aleppo on a map. Trump thinks it's just fine to molest women and children. He's in the pocket of the Russians.
I think you need to sit down and re-think the many, many bad decisions you have already made with your life, and strive to do better than the half-assed job you've done thus far.

So, your guy didn't win, didn't have a chance to win, and would have been a pretty lousy president. So, I think its a mathematical certainty that your conscience is pretty much useless.
And anyone who tells you that voting for a third party doesn't hurt the Democractic Party is flat-out lying to you. The Republicans are pretty cohesive in their party platform: big business, less government waste, putting poor and colored people into small bags and hurling them into the river, etc. The Democrats are a lot more open to new ideas, such as those entertained by third party candidates (so long as they aren't just stupid). That isn't theory, that's just fact.
The thing is, you are not supposed to vote your conscience. You are supposed to vote for the person who would nurt the least amount of people. At the most pragmatic, you vote for the person who is least likely to hurt you.
Millions can attest that you voted wrong.

You're right, Dash isn't an asshole. Neither are you. You're just a guy who wasted his vote so that Trumo could win. Prepare for massive buyer's remorse, So, as per the old-timey commercial, I do blame Denorex.

That's because you were taking the wrong test, and had prepared for the test with the wrong information. Had you studied the correct info, you'd have a solid president right now, not some Orange Tweeto ass-clown,

Wrong. The entire country loses.