To be completely fair, he hasn't been just sitting around all this time. He's involved with a lot of charities, served in the arm forces, provided lots of material for the gossip columns with his affair with Camilla, had to deal with his over-sexed brother, and is now trying to contain the ticking time-bomb that is his youngest son and daughter-in-law.

Be warned, those things can drag some skeletons out of the family closet.

Have you ever actually listened to a group of teenaged guys communicate while gaming? Most of the language would draw serious FCC fines if they were on network TV in the US.

What's wrong with ketchup on nuggets?

Here is the real reason we don't have universal healthcare in the US: unless something drastic is done to bring down costs, the amount of taxes that would have to be collected would drive the population to revolt, even if you took away insurance premiums.

Haven't tried it, but this looks like a good recipe:
tastemade. co.uk/videos/clear-lemon-meringue-pie/

Wait until he finds out why vibrators were invented.

You have to hand it to OP, it's a great tip!

We had a similar discovery once, when we were moving out. Our cats liked to play with the little plastic ring that comes off a milk jug, and we never gave much thought about what happened to them until we picked up the sofa to load it, and there were several dozen milk rings lying. Apparently, the cats would knock these thinsg around until it went to the one place they couldnt get to, and so there they stayed until we moved out.

The more I think about this one, the more I wonder if the husband didn't already want out of the marriage, and this gives him a chance to do so while proclaiming his own innocence.

I am of two minds on this one: on the one hand, if the word of a 7 year-old is enough to break up a marriage, there were probably already issues present.
On the other hand, that daughter is going to have to live with the knowledge that she caused her parents' divorce. I can't help but wonder what this will do to her emotionally, long term.

Welcome to the work force. "Use it or lose it" vacation policies are pretty standard, and those few places that allow "banking" will almost always place limits on how much you can accumulate. They do this for the simple reason that they can't have people gone for extended lengths of time, unless there is some sort of long-term emergency.

Thankfully, very few churches do this. Most of us genuinely don't want to mix politics with faith. That said, on those occasions when it does, it's just as likely to swing either direction.

It's kind of like, walking into a store, you can get a $3 package of toilet paper or a $5 package. The $5 contains more than twice the $3, making it the better buy. The problem is that you only have $4.
Question: given the inherent unfairness of this, how would you change the equation to make it "fair"?

A couple of notes:
1) Johnson pursued the same policies that Lincoln had been prior to his death.
2) Johnson's impeachment was about him trying to get rid of Edwin Stanton as War Secretary (later, the War Department would be renamed "Department of Defense").
3) Most historians agree that impeaching Johnson would have had disastrious consequences for this country, and would have led to having a President who was little more than a figurehead with a nice office.

This door swings both ways, I have seen both liberals and conservatives do this.

You don't want people to apply just for the money? What, are you looking for people that are independently wealthy and only take a job to give themselves something to do?
News flash: if people could make a living without working, most of them wouldn't work.

Yes, he did say that, but that's not what got people upset. What got them upset was when he said, "I and the Father are one."

There is also the whole "banks lose the money that they loaned out" thing, unless you have the federal government reimburse them, which means that taxpayers pick up the tab, which means that the ones that paid theirs off have to help pay for college tuiton twice: once for the own kids, and again for someone else.

To be fair, racism was so predominant 100 years ago, most companies that existed at that time had been founded by a racist (or racists).