Civics education in this country is a disaster and this comment is proof.

This take is the mirror image of thinking Trump is a good public speaker. Walz did quite poorly; he’s never been good on a political debate stage. He salvaged it with a few timely punches and by being relatable and likable.

Walz has been going on Fox News as a progressive for the better part of a decade. This isn’t new for him. He does a good job on there, too.

It was revolutionary and changed a lot in game design on a significant number of fronts. It just aged poorly as others iterated and replaced its aspects. Halo has aged well mainly because (like most Bungie titles) it still feels like a modern title due to how tight, responsive, smooth, and intuitive the player’s interaction with the world is — mainly the controls and weapons.

Depends on how much it cost to pursue.

Strong emotions over something that will never affect you.

The internet (even pre-social media) is an exercise in group polarization, recursively and repeatedly.

You are making a lot of assumptions about my knowledge (or lack thereof) on the subject as well as a sizeable one about your depth of knowledge on it.

Makes sense.

I love that keyboard slacktivists think anything they don’t personally agree with is “neoliberalism.”

Happy to help! And, I totally feel you on the ragdoll thing. I've got a lot of dollars in loans in repayment from law school and it would be nice to just be able to work on a budget that I knew wasn't going to change drastically in a few months (again).

You've actually stated one of the main reasons that TROs are issued. One of the required showings by the petitioning party is to demonstrate "imminent" and "irreparable harm." In this case the imminent is shown by the plan's policies and planned implementation as well as the fact that there was a date promulgated for commencement. Irreparable harm would be demonstrated by something similar to your scenario -- the petitioner would argue that if it goes into effect and the final determination is that it should not have been permitted to go into effect, that monies which should have been rightfully collected are forever lost, absent an otherwise unnecessary affirmative and costly process of collecting on the marginal difference of payments owed.

To more directly answer your question, the court would direct the companies to collect in a manner which is least onerous to both parties (debtor and creditor); likely a long period of increased collections or (IMHO, more likely) extending the payment period to collect the now-again additional amount due.

I agree with you though, I think given the circumstances and gravity to individual debtors in this case the prudent thing is to stay implementation of the program.

Cool, real wages are up too. And, it's not at all misleading as the CEO pay figure in this article isn't adjusted for inflation, either.

It is and it’s certainly a better game than HL.

It's both. The case is being transferred and the program can go into effect (unless the new venue issues a TRO).

I work in healthcare. This is on the wall in most pain management exam rooms and hospital suites.

Not the best thesis, but people should have kids and more of them. That’s not open for debate.

Me too, buddy. Me too.

It’s not moving the race, at all. It may affect the VP candidates’ approval rating.

What line of work are you in, Bob?