Why do they believe these 'rumors' that are so obviously lies? I honestly don't get it. Why are rumors so powerful?

We don't have enough children, our birth rate is too low. Yet allowing young immigrants to come in? Terrible idea for some reason.

Maybe I'm explaining the joke, but Jon is supposed to be an Everyman.

I'm a huge long-term fan of the Garfield comics. Lyman basically ditches Jon with Odie. It's never explained in detail because it's a 3 frame comic. More optimistically, and "cannon" Jon was enthusiastic about inheriting Odie while Lymon left for unexplained reasons. Jon thought owning a dog would help him meet women.

As for the quote you referenced. Garfield has thought bubbles. Jon talks. Lyman exists because he can talk while Garfield can only "think". Jim Davis originally thought it would be confusing to have thought clouds and talk bubbles interacting. Like how does a cat talk with a person? But that quickly became the norm in the comic. Once talking and thinking could interact, Lyman no longer needed to exist.

Wow 57 people were hospitalized I didn't realize it was so many.

Rare appearance of Jon's friend Lyman, who doesn't appear in hardly anything after 1980.

Or when you're on the treadmill and then one of your steps is an inch too far to the side.

The metric system is a tool of the devil! My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it.

The article makes it sound like he was tied to the trunk of a tree, not hanging from a branch, and also that there was no knot in the rope. I'm definitely having trouble putting those details together into suicide or murder or lynching, the whole thing is very odd.

What was the rope for if it was a suicide? Seeing that we know he wasn't hung by it.

I can see why the sheriff doesn't want to rush to call it lynching when there isn't evidence of lynching specifically. BUT it appears to be a horrific and violent crime that surely should be their first priority. Sheriff's statement is downplaying the whole thing.

The numbers are close-ish to correct if you are looking only at House/Senate voting. They still needed to be ratified by 3/4ths of states and these numbers clearly ignore what the voting results in each state was. They also did not have 100% Republican support, but close. Democrat support of 0% for the 14th and 15th amendments appears to be accurate.

Also worth mentioning that all 3 of those amendments passed in just 6 years. It's a very specific moment in history.

This is a real photo? It's worse than anything AI could have imagined.

Damage already done. But I'm happy to see she's sorry.

Lousy Smarch weather.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_boxing

Prior to Trump it was mostly fringe candidates like Storm Thurmund (1948), George Wallace (1968), David Duke (1988, 1992), Pat Buchanan (1992, 1996).

In terms of major candidates, there are some questionable endorsements for candidates like Nixon and Reagan. But you have to go all the way back to Woodrow Wilson to find a president who was openly happy about receiving those endorsements.

Sounds like real life.

That's illegal to sell in a lot of places. Report the listing they should take it down.