Bryan

I missed this when you first posted it. This is a common misconception. There are LOTS of modern cars in Cuba. American 1950's autos are a small minority of the traffic on the road. Russian and Chinese vehicles outnumber them by far.

Yeah, you have to jump on deals like that when you get them. I've done the "found an unbelievable price, booked it, then tried to get the time off" game a few times. Never regretted it.

I've done that -- lots of people do. You still need to get someone else to check it for you, because it's easy to leave stragglers in places you can't see.

Yes. It's a more polite word for exactly the same thing.

Yes it is.

They are synonyms.

They will still objectively either have a Y chromosome or not. It's not a choice one can make. You can have surgery to correct a birth defect, it won't change what you actually are.

As long as it keep the democrats apoplectic, it's all good.

Hackles of people with nothing better to do than complain. A leader called to congratulate him on his win, there's nothing else there.

The gender question has nothing to do with how you feel about it, it's giving you the choice to reveal objective facts about you -- should you choose to reveal them. You can also keep that private if you like.

He didn't call Taiwan.

I think it's hilarious that some of the worst perpetrators of fake news this past election cycle are the ones now complaining about it.

I don't, but many do. My larger point is about provocation in general: Legal or not, your mouth should never write cheques that your ass can't cash.

They is either plural, or used to bridge awkward sentences when not referring to anyone in particular. One person cannot singularly be a "they".

Of course there is an excuse. Just because you have rights doesn't mean your actions don't have consequences. There are plenty of situations where assaulting someone else is an appropriate response. Then we are on the same page. ...or at least looking at books by the same author...

Perhaps. Provoking is a step further than presenting though. Either way, an illegal act is an illegal act. It wouldn't make it a good thing. But people who provoke should not feign surprise when the bear they poke actually attacks. If you do what you can to avoid an issue and it blindsides you, that is completely different than running right up to it.

Lets say you step off a curb and get hit by anything, and maybe you do survive. Perhaps the cross walk lights were on, and the cars were supposed to stop. Legally the driver that hits you is in the wrong, but you are still the one that stepped in front of a moving car. You still caused a collision to happen that would not have otherwise occurred.

It's the same premise, just a more abhorrent outcome. You shouldn't have to be careful what you wear, where you go, who is there, how much you have to drink, etc, etc. But you absolutely do have to be careful about these things. There are bad people out there, and if you deliberately present yourself to them in a manner that allows them to take advantage of you, you are still the one who put yourself in danger.

Both things are true at the same time. Illegal actions remain illegal, but if you put yourself into harms way, you are also responsible for what happens to you.

WHEN they are provocateurs. There is a difference.

Totally cool? No. But if I do it right in front of a Mosque that is just letting out, and they attack me, that is MY fault. I put myself in that position and incited a situation that otherwise would not have happened.

Not at all. Exactly the opposite.

Depends on your definition of "OK". Would the person retaliating be legally responsible for their actions? Of course. Would I have sympathy for a provocateur who gets responded to with violence? None whatsoever.

If I wrap you in something, it's literally on you.

Burning isn't talking though. It's deliberate provocation. Getting people upset is the purpose. If you do it, don't be surprised if people do actually get upset.