BAYBAY!

Sounds fake.

Do you face the wall?

Asking the real questions.

My impulse would be to say something like, “excuse me, but the gentleman behind me is still waiting in line!” in a loud enough voice to draw a bit of attention. Gives the cashier space to pretend they didn’t notice him while letting him know you noticed that shit and you’re not OK with it. Also gives other cashiers and patrons nearby the opportunity to be cool and let him jump in line or help him on another lane. As long as it’s focused on the rude behavior of closing a lane without ringing up everyone in the queue, hopefully not too embarrassing for the poor dude behind you.

That cashier was a fucking dickhead. Not your fault you didn’t react in the heat of the moment, that would catch me off guard too!

They said 90%, your mom was just part of the lucky 10%!

Spinosaurus!

Gigantic crocodile-faced sail-finned bitey boy supreme.

Student loans are tax deductible (in the US at least). So if a large portion of your salary is paying off loans you don’t get taxed on that portion at all.

That’s not how immunity works. It’s not a defense at trial. It’s presumptive, and prevents you from even filing charges. If you look at my screenshot above, their stated intent is to protect the president from having to go through trials.

What trial court? He’s immune from prosecution.

Look, I recommend reading the decision, especially the first few pages, instead of basing your opinions on what you think makes sense. I’m done trying to convince you about what’s in the document, it’s there for you to read if you actually care and aren’t just arguing in bad faith.

So how do they prosecute then? If the president commits a crime, let’s say he accepts a bribe for a pardon, you aren’t allowed to bring a prosecution unless a court deems the act unofficial. And the court isn’t permitted to find that the act was unofficial because the bribery is merely an allegation and hasn’t been proved. And you can’t prove the allegation because you can’t prosecute a president for official acts.

It’s all over the Syllabus section, but here’s a specific quote:

Unfortunately I think you’re missing something here. The court ruled that the president has immunity. Like the kind of immunity diplomats get in foreign countries that enables them to run over people in their cars. Immunity as a concept only makes sense if the action performed is actually illegal. Nobody can be prosecuted for legal actions. The president is now unprosecutable for both legal AND illegal actions.

It’s a nonsensical and horrifying ruling. The fact that the president would be violating his oath of office doesn’t cancel out the immunity, it just makes the crime that much more disgusting, and the impossibility of justice that much more galling.

Rust Cohle sees you and has a vision about the vast emptiness of space, where he realizes that life has no meaning and time just repeats endlessly in an inescapable loop. He numbs himself every night trying to forget you, but he can’t escape the gravity of your memory. He’s pulled under the darkness, like a crashing ocean wave, and he’s drowning, over and over, in the inky blackness. He realizes you’re trans five years later, after everything he loves is dead, because he’s the only one who can.

Would you use the term “bitch” when talking about dogs? Or just say female dog to avoid being misunderstood? It used to be used that way, but now you’re going to sound like an asshole if you use it.

Once people start using a technical term as a slur, it gets tainted by that additional meaning. You can’t forcefully separate the technical term from the slur. If you don’t want people to think you’re throwing around slurs, you need to find a new word to use.

Don’t blame the people hurt by the slurs, blame the assholes who misused the word so often that they fucked up its meaning.

If it’s popular in Germany, given by a German parent to a German child and based on a Hebrew root word, I’d argue it’s a German name as much as it is Portuguese, Spanish, or Italian.

It’s all semantics though, I assumed your original question was about how common the name was in Germany, not about its linguistic roots. It seems fairly common. If you’re looking for a deep dive on the history of the name I’ll let you do your own research because I honestly don’t give a shit and you’re being kind of rude.

Wikipedia says the root is Hebrew. So…. a European name? Seems pretty popular in Germany.

Yep, I know a Manuela from Germany!

It’s VERY mild approval. Like a step above OK. I’m acknowledging the existence of the thing and maybe nodding my head or giving a thumbs up, but I’m forgetting it immediately as soon as it leaves my field of view.

Are you disagreeing with the thesis of the comment above, or just critiquing the quality of their data?

If you disagree with the thesis, can you explain what your position is?