Ultimately, the police are not doing enough to discourage this kind of wild night racing.
That's very true -- in fact, that's the understatement of the year. These two guys were 28, so who knows how long they were doing this sort of thing without any intervention by law enforcement.
Last year while out for a walk one night, I was waiting at an intersection for the crosswalk light to change. When it turned green for me (or blue, as they call it here), I didn't start walking right away because I saw a bozozoku car coming down the street -- and I just had a hunch that he wasn't going to stop.
Sure enough, he blew right through the red light. If I had started crossing the street when the light changed, which I had right of way to do, I would have been right in that a**hole's path.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
Catholics used to have to eat fish on Friday
Not quite true. We were obliged to abstain from meat on Friday. We were not obliged to actually eat fish. (And we still are, on Fridays during Lent.)
We don't/didn't have to eat fish. We can eat pasta, vegetables, bread, etc. on Fridays during Lent. It doesn't have to be fish. Just as long as we don't eat meat, it's okay.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
While it's great that he has caused all this trouble for the Abes
He's caused a lot of trouble for a lot of people, not just Abe. But because it's politically advantageous for people (like you) who oppose Abe, it's a good thing?
That sounds like Chris Mathews when he said that Hurricane Sandy could be good politically for Obama when he was running for re-election. Never mind how many people were negatively affected. As long as it's good politically, eh?
-10 ( +1 / -11 )
He has been watching the US news conferences with Spicer. Spicer is the new model.
Bad comparison. Imamura was asked a legitimate question by a fair, impartial, objective journalist.
As for Imamura, he should resign. I wouldn't be surprised if he did -- if not voluntarily, then under pressure.
-6 ( +6 / -12 )
What if the husband was an abusive and violent monster
Hmmm. We never hear "what if the wife was an abusive or violent monster" whenever a husband murders a wife.
If you're a woman married to such a man, you leave the bastard. Last time I checked, domestic violence wasn't a capital offense.
If she had killed in self-defense, okay -- different story. But an act of self-defense usually doesn't last for four hours.
She didn't claim he was abusive or violent, according to the story. She only said that she "had trouble" with him. For all we know, the "trouble" could have been that he left empty beer cans around the house.
and this killing was revenge for years of abuse?
Revenge is never an acceptable excuse for murder. Not in the eyes of the law, anyway.
Plus, studies show that women commit at least as many violent acts against their husbands/live-in boyfriends, as the other way around. When was the last time a man claimed "revenge" for killing a violent, abusive wife/girlfriend?
And please, don't say there aren't violent or abusive wives or girlfriends. If that's what you think, re-read the previous paragraph.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
So this year teams like Israel and Cuba who did well dont get to the host country at all
Israel and Cuba didn't really do that well. In the first round, maybe, but after that they were ordinary. Especially Cuba; they must have been disappointed that they didn't get out of the second round in Tokyo.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
But will they go back to being men-only after the Olympics? That's the question.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
I'm not a big death-penalty fan but in this case, I could make an exception. Pure evil.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
Why is this a paradox? Is Trump supposed to ignore the media because he sees them as an enemy?
No military commander ignores the enemy military. No business ignores its competitors. No coach or manager of a sports team ignores what the rival team is doing.
If an army, business, or team is your enemy or your competitor, you don't ignore it. You watch it like a hawk!
Please. This implied idea here that Trump is somehow acting hypocritically or in a contradictory fashion is absurd.
-5 ( +1 / -6 )
Starbucks is overpriced and overrated anyway. Dunkin Donuts coffee is better, and cheaper.
0 ( +5 / -5 )
When testifying before Congress, Sessions was specifically asked about contacts with Russians WITH REGARD TO THE ELECTION. That's all.
He was NOT asked about contacts with Russians with regard to his Senate-committee service. Of COURSE he spoke with Russia's ambassador in that capacity (as well as ambassadors from around 20 other countries). That's NOT what he was asked about.
This whole thing is a ridiculous, manufactured "scandal" -- another lame attempt by Democrats to derail and de-legitimize the Trump presidency.
For the Dems, this isn't about Sessions. Nor is it about Russia. It's about politics. It's about their stubborn refusal to admit that they lost the election last November, and that Donald Trump is president now.
And, of course, most of the media are just as guilty as the Democrats are of bending and twisting the truth. No wonder the public's trust in the media is so low right now.
-8 ( +1 / -9 )
Not news. It's okay to use email this way if classified national-security information isn't involved (which Indiana's state government wouldn't be dealing with). Unlike the private email use of a certain former secretary of state who we all know.
This is just another distraction and deflection by the left-leaning media to try to de-legitimize the Trump presidency.
-7 ( +2 / -9 )
And yet there are so many Hollywood liberals who call Trump racist and sexist. Hollywood should check its own racism and sexism first before it starts sticking those labels on political leaders they disagree with.
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
BUT with THEIR history, I just can't help to wonder HOW THEY CHEATED this time !
Not a Patriots fan (not a fan of any team in any sport, really) but I'm getting tired of hearing all this "Patriots cheat" and how that's supposedly the ONLY reason they've won 5 Super Bowls.
Brady is the best QB ever, hands down. This game proved that and sealed that. Don't want to hear about "Deflategate." That happened two years ago and the NFL delivers game balls to stadiums in armored cars now. Yet Brady still went out and won every game but one this year. He still went out and set all sorts of records.
"Deflategate" is NOT the reason why the Pats won or why Brady is the best. It was the hockey equivalent of using a stick with too much curve on the blade. Illegal, yes, technically, but that's not what makes a player great. "Deflategate" was much ado over nothing -- a media-driven "scandal" in which the NFL, in its zeal to make the fans think it was "taking things seriously," suspended Brady for 25% of the season over something that really warranted a wrist-slap. Yet the Patriots STILL went 14-2 this year. With Brady sitting out the first four games!
And "Spygate"? I was at that game. "Spygate" wasn't the reason why New England destroyed the Jets that day. It wasn't the reason why Brady had all day to throw, without a Jet anywhere near him every time he stepped back to pass. (Did I mention I was at that game?) It wasn't the reason why New England ran a kickoff back 108 yards for a touchdown. Again, much ado over something that was illegal, yes, but New England is far from the first team to try to push the envelope on the rules.
"Cheating" isn't the reason why the Patriots take low-draft choices and undrafted free agents (Brady, Gronkowski, Branch, Butler, Edelman, Hogan, Brusci and many others) and mold them into a true team who keep their egos in check. Again, I'm not a fan of theirs. But too many people these days seem to want to punish achievement and think the worst of people who've been successful in their endeavors -- whether it's getting rich, or winning Super Bowls, or whatever. Whenever someone or some organization is markedly successful in life, lots of people automatically think it's because they "cheated" and ONLY because they "cheated." It's ridiculous.
You don't win 5 Super Bowl in less than 2 decades ONLY by cheating! Especially when the NFL office has a target on your back, basically hates you, and is watching your every move like a hawk.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
He needs to be in the loony bin. He will attack again.
Yes, IF he is guilty. But until that's proven, he's to be presumed innocent.
If he's guilty, then yes, lock him up. But let's remember that "innocent until proven guilty" even applies to men who've been accused of sexual crimes.
There have been men falsely accused of such crimes, you know. Quite a few, in fact.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
If I were Japan, I'd just ignore it. The more of an issue Japan makes of it, the more of an issue it becomes.
There is not one country anywhere on earth -- not a single one -- that doesn't have shameful marks on its history. Japan, Korea, America, China, Russia, you name it. No country has a perfectly unblemished historical record.
At some point we have to recognize that on a nation-by-nation level, none of us are perfect. All countries have done things to hang their heads in shame over. Best thing to do is to learn from the past, avoid repeating its mistakes, and move forward.
7 ( +10 / -3 )
"I don't answer questions."
"I don't consent to searches."
"Am I being detained under suspicion of a specific crime, or am I free to go?"
The only things you should ever say to the police.
Be polite, be respectful, but be firm in exercising your rights.
5 ( +6 / -1 )
He sounds like one of those possessive, jealous and abusive types. Don't get mixed up with such guys, ladies.
And there are women like that, too. More than a few, in fact. Don't get mixed up with such women, guys.
2 ( +6 / -4 )
Another multi-tasking Japanese driver killing people. This reckless and careless inattentiveness is a terribly dangerous part of Japanese driver culture that I see everyday!
Riiiight. It only happens in Japan. Never in any other countries.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Koreans again prove their inability to hold a deal.
No, that's not true here. The Korean government is holding to the deal. Certain private citizens (activists) are opposing it.
Just because some private individuals disagree with the deal doesn't mean that the government isn't abiding by it.
Whether to put statues up was never part of any deal between the Japanese and Korean governments.
3 ( +11 / -8 )
It's funny how, whenever a religious figure behaves badly, many people attack and demean religion in general for it. But when scientists engage in misconduct -- and it happens a lot; Riken is just the tip of the iceberg! -- nobody ever bashes science in general. I'm not saying science should be bashed for the misbehavior of a few scientists. But neither should religion be bashed for the misbehavior of a few clergymen.
0 ( +0 / -0 )