unicorn

Minor correction: 3/4 of the state legislatures must approve the change, in addition to 2/3 of the HR and Senate.

See how easy it is with google translate? You don't even need a different keyboard... Конечно แน่นอน 当然 ពិតប្រាកដ অবশ্যই निश्चित रूप से

Google Translate is your friend. Seriously. I use it when communicating even with languages in which I'm fluent. Even helps with spelling!

True. That being said, they did change some of the words. As for 1776, in casting mostly women of color to play the founding fathers, I'm sure they're trying promote a narrative that the founding fathers were sexist and racist, looking at it from 21st Century eyes. The truth is that the declaration of independence had to be unanimous, and there was no way of getting southern states on board at that time without postponing the issue of slavery. And I don't think there was a democracy on the planet which allowed women to vote at that time. Very unfortunate, yes, but that was the truth of the 18th Century. And the founding fathers very much risked their lives to support an independent democracy. As America fast approaches its semiquincentennial, I can honor the courage of the founding fathers without having to point out advances they were unable to achieve at that time.

Dude. Re-read NIrishGuy's post. It presented an offensive stereotype of American tourists, which he bemoaned with his post. Most Americans don't appreciate these stereotypes any more than he'd appreciate stereotypes of the Irish--of being whiskey or beer-guzzling drunks, for example.

Well, travel has simply returned to normal. Unless NBC News is lying, the State Department cut their workforce by half. That's going to hurt. Of course, aren't passport fees supposed to be going to pay for these salaries?

If you're not changing a word of the text (which they did), you're not changing the plot.

So glad you don't feel the need to perpetuate any stereotypes regarding Americans. So do you travel with UK or Irish/EU passport, or both?

On NBC news today, they said the reason is the State Department laid a lot of people off during the pandemic due to low demand. Very forward-thinking.

Wow. What generosity.

You're putting words in my mouth incorrectly. I did know that there would be bizarre casting. And this is one of my favorite musicals, so I did appreciate the performance (at least the music). I didn't know the group was going to change the plot (in fact, in their blurb, they stated the plots and the song were going to be unchanged, only the latter of which was true). So while I appreciated the music, I didn't appreciate the plot changes. The same group will soon be putting on a production of 1776, another of my favorite musicals. In this production, not one of our founding fathers will be played by a white male. It's this group that's trying to make political points, and this time we won't be going.

Then his statement was an irrelevant/non-responsive post. The question is whether or not the two have legally married. I pointed out that marriages are a matter of public record. Marc pointed out that in California (and, as it turns out, only in California) there is such a thing as "confidential marriages," of which I was not aware. Apparently, this quirk in the law, which dates to the 19th century, is unique in California. Since these two live in California, therefore, I was wrong about the marriage being a matter of public record, if it was performed as a confidential marriage. One learns something new every day. California is an exception (if the spouses want to make the effort) to the rule of all marriages being public: https://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/06/19/go-ahead-keep-your-marriage-secret/ideas/connecting-california/ "I’m going to let you in on confidential marriage, an only-in-California concoction that is little known but deeply relevant to today’s debates about marriage. Confidential marriage is in most respects the same as any old legal marriage—solemnized and binding. But confidential marriage licenses, unlike regular marriage licenses, are not part of the public record. And confidential marriage is limited to couples who are already living together...". I've lived just about my entire life in California and never heard about this, nor have I known anyone to get a confidential marriage. That being said, it is out there--presumably for big-name celebrities to keep things secret.

Made in Taiwan, of course:

I don't find the resemblance that striking. Maybe Xi is being a bit paranoid?

I guess you're right. What the F did you mean by "There's no registry of "linked" or common law partners in the USA."?

I will certainly admit that I didn't know California allowed confidential marriages. I'd obviously never heard of this, and if they're granted routinely, then I was wrong about all marriages in California being a matter of public record. Other than that, there's no difficulty in finding the record, nor, according to what you wrote, even any cost involved as long as one doesn't ask for more than 5 records at the same time. There are websites which will apparently do it for a fee. Never tried them, though.

The point is that every county (or parish in Louisiana) has public records of all marriages, which anyone can access if they're interested (obviously also available to news reporters). There is no such thing as common-law marriage in most US states, including California, where Mr. Geffen resides. And the OP wasn't speculating on a possible common law mariage. Since same-sex marriage became legal in California, few people avail themselves of registered domestic partnerships (it has all of the problems of marriage with few of the benefits), but those are a matter of public record as well.

Don't leave home without them: Reducing noise from 60 dB to 28 dB leads to a noise level most can tolerate for sleep:

My sense is that if one could lie flat in Premium Economy, there wouldn't be much of a market for business class seats...

Marriage certificates are a matter of public record in California. If someone's interested in whether this report is accurate or not, finding out the truth's not difficult.

Apparently the censors felt that the Winnie-the-Pooh character resembled Chairman Xi too much for this "cinematic masterpiece" to be seen in China! 😂 Cracks me up!

You think that the US didn't acquire most of its territory from Mexico from conquest? When the Mexicans sent 80 troops north of the Rio Grande to support their claim over that area, the US sent troops to attack Mexico all the way to Mexico City then pretty much forced the Mexicans to sign the treaty giving the US most of the territory the US wanted. The victor in wars usually sets the rules. C'est la vie.

Hell, should the Ruskies have to give back St. Petersburg and Murmansk back to the Swedes?

Waah, waah, waah. What a bunch of crybabies. If they're so big on history, maybe they should give all of their territory back to Mongolia. After all, in the past China was part of the Mongol Empire: There are many countries, maybe most, which were bigger at some point. Turks: British: French: And what would Africa look like?