Because he retired from the show in 2015. Hence why he's only coming back part time. It was his choice to leave the first time, so that's probably why he was the last one to reach out to.

Propaganda does not have to have a hidden agenda. Literally the "I want you" uncle Sam poster is propaganda. That agenda was pretty obvious, there was no question who was behind it and it was pretty clear why it was commissioned in the first place.

There has been propaganda encouraging car-pooling, reusing materials, conserving electricity, promoting employment etc, and many of them even had credits as to who the message was coming from.

Propaganda is not inherently evil, but it's important to understand the context and where it's coming from.

Yes, but people who order a burger medium can still get sick. Not to mention heightened risk of cross contamination with ready to eat foods.

It's just safer to not use meat from a source known to have food-borne bacteria. Food safety is designed with many layers of protection, if you already know the first layer has failed, an unsafe source of food, then you're now counting on kitchen staff to protect you.

Not to say kitchen staff are inherenrly unreliable, but during a weekend dinner rush with low pay and high pressure, things can go wrong, so it's just best to take out food that is already a risk.

Close. He died on 4/30, he was born on 4/20. But there were many deaths at Columbine High School on 4/20/1999.

Yeah I'm going to have to agree. I'm an alcoholic myself and this is a problematic way of living with it. Moderation seldom works for alcoholics as it is and by putting your choice to drink on someone else's offerings seems to just be a way to escape any blame should it end in full relapse.

Everybody's journey is different though so I'm not going to judge. But at no point was I able to stop drinking until I straight stopped drinking. As they say "one drink is too much and a hundred isn't enough."

"Hard lemonade could mean anything."

They have signs up listing how much caffeine is in them, which by the way, isn't legally mandated. The only requirement the FDA has on caffeine labeling is that it's listed as an ingredient. That's it. The amount of caffeine doesn't have to be disclosed.

So if the amount of caffeine is known, what more do they need to do before it becomes the consumer's responsibility? Your argument is that it's dangerous, but alcohol is much more dangerous than what is known from the surgeon General warning, and its dangerous to those not consuming it as well.

You can't treat it different because of the novelty of the item, in which case maybe the FDA needs to mandate all drugs to have warning labels, not just OTC and alcohol.

Alcohol has warning labels on it, why are bars allowed to exist?

Don't forget a charger, otherwise you'll be screwed for awhile

Well the Toybox killer for one...

Where I pulled that statistic out actually kept them separate...

Seconds is based on speed though. It's literally how speed is defined. Distance over time. At 60mph you travel 88 feet per second. So if you count out the seconds between when the car ahead passes say a road sign and you pass the same road sign and it's two seconds, there's roughly 176ft between your two vehicles. If you're going 25 mph, then two seconds equates to 73ft of space.

Which really gives you more space than car lengths per 10mph, so it's safer. 10mph=~14fps. The average length of a car is 14ft. So you end up giving double the space if you count out 2 seconds.

To further your point, there's a reason Republican law makers and red states are attacking and demonizing education, and stepping it down. Critical thinking skills aren't really developed in a lot of curricula as it is, it's a lot of date memorization and fact regurgitation unless a student takes an AP or honors class or their school's equivalent.

A lot of people, especially politicians and law makers, don't seem to understand that the best tools to give students is the ability to think critically, do actual research (not just watch jimbob's YouTube rants), media literacy, and to question what their leaders tell them. The amount of times I've asked for sources from right-wingers and they give me links to articles and studies published by organizations with an obvious bias or funded by groups with an obvious agenda and they don't understand how that impacts their credibility.

The same thing with abortions. You really think Republican politicians care that much about abortions? Their loudest constituents might on "religious" grounds. But for them it helps prevent an educated voting population from growing. Forcing a woman to birth and care for a child impacts their ability to get an education.

A lot of it just comes down to educating people with the proper skills rather than preparing them for some standardized test.