Romney to vote this year on Trump nominee. McConnell has the votes.
Romney to vote this year on Trump nominee. McConnell has the votes.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Romney to vote this year on Trump nominee. McConnell has the votes.
Great. Republicans will have the majority for 6 months tops.
trollism wrote:
YMMV wrote:
I grew up in the '60s, when free speech was a counternarrative to governmental and corporate warmongering. Today the shoe is on the other foot, and it is the left which is on the side of corporate greed and strives at every turn to censor speech, promote hate and spin the narrative.
Like most libs, I spent the '80s to 2010s sucking at the teat of CNN/NPR/PBS. Their pseudo-liberal bias is baked into every broadcast, every take on every issue. Today I rely more on thoughtful counterculture libs and former libs such as Jimmy Dore (a hardcore Bernie supporter who is against the DNC corruption) Bret Weinstein, Douglas Murray, Dave Rubin, Tim Poole, Tony Heller as well as conservative voices like Victor David Hanson, Brandon Tatum, Steve Turley. Of course I am surrounded by my liberal frineds who still toe the DemoCrap line, as they cannot fathom the degree to which they are being brainwashed by mono-sourced news and commentary. Good people with lack of awareness of culture and history. Without diversity of sourcing, you are crippling your perspective, destroying your own freedom and knowledge.
History will not be kind to those that do not question the dominant, spoon-fed corporate paradigm. They will be and are blindsided by the violence, the turn to mob rule and destruction of true liberal values by those that pull the strings and call the tune. I have witnessed the destruction and decline in my own city and state, and refuse to be silent in the face of the systematic destruction of Western Liberal Democracy that I see on a daily basis.
You seem unhinged gramps. I would calm down a bit considering you don't have that long left and this sort of high blood pressure craziness could cut that even further.
Sad to think that you'll be long gone before we see another Republican Senate majority or president.
Can't make a counterargument? Name call.
Whodunit wrote:
trollism wrote:
You seem unhinged gramps. I would calm down a bit considering you don't have that long left and this sort of high blood pressure craziness could cut that even further.
Sad to think that you'll be long gone before we see another Republican Senate majority or president.
Can't make a counterargument? Name call.
My counterargument is that YMMV is a senile lunatic.
It's not really 'name calling', just objective fact.
Sorry if that's painful for you.
trollism wrote:
Whodunit wrote:
Can't make a counterargument? Name call.
My counterargument is that YMMV is a senile lunatic.
It's not really 'name calling', just objective fact.
Sorry if that's painful for you.
Typically, the inverted-logic "progressive" is projecting their own, as well as their candidates' profound cognitive disability onto others as that represents their deep-seated fear and reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9Pp3YXiLRwSo sorry to see that your vegan, protein-starved brain has rendered you utterly unable to form a coherent counterargument. Try a nice juicy 16 oz. ribeye and get back to us when your brain fog and anxiety subside.
YMMV wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9Pp3YXiLRw
Holy crap, that's honestly just sad to watch.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Romney to vote this year on Trump nominee. McConnell has the votes.
Romney is officially Trump's b#tch. Of course, he could still vote no and have his McCain moment. But that is doubtful.
Schumer and AOC are promising a no holds barred response. Pelosi says she is not ruling anything out. I think dems will wait until after the election to do anything on the hope that they make the election of Biden more urgent and to have a better argument for impeding the process in a lame duck session.
https://www.deseret.com/utah/2020/9/4/21423567/donald-trump-mitt-romney-dog-catcher-worst-senator-election-mike-lee-evan-mcmullinYMMV wrote:
Typically, the inverted-logic "progressive" is projecting their own, as well as their candidates' profound cognitive disability onto others as that represents their deep-seated fear and reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9Pp3YXiLRwSo sorry to see that your vegan, protein-starved brain has rendered you utterly unable to form a coherent counterargument. Try a nice juicy 16 oz. ribeye and get back to us when your brain fog and anxiety subside.
Do you think that everyone who doesn't support the low-IQ, low-energy president is a vegan?
The American dairy and meat industry must really be struggling.
CarbonFiberJoe wrote:
YMMV wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9Pp3YXiLRwHoly crap, that's honestly just sad to watch.
I don't understand how anyone can say he's fit for office.
YMMV wrote:
History will not be kind to those that do not question the dominant, spoon-fed corporate paradigm.
If you don't like the dominant, spoon-fed corporate paradigm, I have a suggestion for you.
Watch Free Speech TV. Problem solved.
trollism wrote:
Whodunit wrote:
You seem unhinged gramps. I would calm down a bit considering you don't have that long left and this sort of high blood pressure craziness could cut that even further.
Can't make a counterargument? Name call.
My counterargument is that YMMV is a senile lunatic.
It's not really 'name calling', just objective fact.
You seem rather confused.
Sorry if that's painful for you.
wow YMMV...A completely original and not expected tale of some former hippie getting old and scared and conservative.
That’s never happened before.
Don’t act like you’re some middle of the road independent. We know you were a Trumper
fact checker 642572498 wrote:
CarbonFiberJoe wrote:
Holy crap, that's honestly just sad to watch.
I don't understand how anyone can say he's fit for office.
Given that he can walk down a ramp and lift a water cup with 1 hand, isn't he more fit than the current guy?:)
Good for Romney. What's the point of electing a Republican senators if they're not allowed to confirm good originalist judges? Because of some normz and precedentz that don't actually exist? We've already seen that senate Democrats will go as far as to hurl BS last-second allegations on a nominee in hopes to stall the confirmation, win back a majority of the Senate and hold the seat open for another two years. I say confirm a new justice, let them throw another hissyfit and move on.
trollism wrote:
YMMV wrote:
I grew up in the '60s, when free speech was a counternarrative to governmental and corporate warmongering. Today the shoe is on the other foot, and it is the left which is on the side of corporate greed and strives at every turn to censor speech, promote hate and spin the narrative.
Like most libs, I spent the '80s to 2010s sucking at the teat of CNN/NPR/PBS. Their pseudo-liberal bias is baked into every broadcast, every take on every issue. Today I rely more on thoughtful counterculture libs and former libs such as Jimmy Dore (a hardcore Bernie supporter who is against the DNC corruption) Bret Weinstein, Douglas Murray, Dave Rubin, Tim Poole, Tony Heller as well as conservative voices like Victor David Hanson, Brandon Tatum, Steve Turley. Of course I am surrounded by my liberal frineds who still toe the DemoCrap line, as they cannot fathom the degree to which they are being brainwashed by mono-sourced news and commentary. Good people with lack of awareness of culture and history. Without diversity of sourcing, you are crippling your perspective, destroying your own freedom and knowledge.
History will not be kind to those that do not question the dominant, spoon-fed corporate paradigm. They will be and are blindsided by the violence, the turn to mob rule and destruction of true liberal values by those that pull the strings and call the tune. I have witnessed the destruction and decline in my own city and state, and refuse to be silent in the face of the systematic destruction of Western Liberal Democracy that I see on a daily basis.
You seem unhinged gramps. I would calm down a bit considering you don't have that long left and this sort of high blood pressure craziness could cut that even further.
Sad to think that you'll be long gone before we see another Republican Senate majority or president.
You are pathetic Trollism.
Hardloper wrote:
Good for Romney. What's the point of electing a Republican senators if they're not allowed to confirm good originalist judges? Because of some normz and precedentz that don't actually exist? We've already seen that senate Democrats will go as far as to hurl BS last-second allegations on a nominee in hopes to stall the confirmation, win back a majority of the Senate and hold the seat open for another two years. I say confirm a new justice, let them throw another hissyfit and move on.
I call BS...soooo much BS. It's a travesty this is the system we have.
McEnany is yapping about a President is elected for 4 years not 3+. Yapping about the President has the Constitutional authority to appoint SCOTUS judges etc.......what about Garland then? The fact that same or diff parties control the WH or Senate means jack squat.
Anyway....I hope this bites all Republicans in the ass and Roberts and Kavanaugh continue to be stone cold moderates.
Alan
masterbader wrote:
You are pathetic Trollism.
And switching to an anonymous account just to call me pathetic is certainly not pathetic at all Hardloper.
Good for you. You're so impressive.
Runningart2004 wrote:
I call BS...soooo much BS. It's a travesty this is the system we have.
McEnany is yapping about a President is elected for 4 years not 3+. Yapping about the President has the Constitutional authority to appoint SCOTUS judges etc.......what about Garland then? The fact that same or diff parties control the WH or Senate means jack squat.
Anyway....I hope this bites all Republicans in the ass and Roberts and Kavanaugh continue to be stone cold moderates.
Alan
Alan -
BIDEN WAS THE FIRST TO FLIP-FLOP ON THIS ISSUE - Direct quote from Biden in 1992:
(spoiler - he argues for exactly what McConnell did in 2016)
"As a result, it is my view that if a Supreme Court justice resigns tomorrow or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed.
The Senate too, Mr. President, must consider how it would respond to a Supreme Court vacancy that would occur in the full throes of an election year. It is my view that if the President goes the way of Presidents Fillmore and Johnson and presses an election year nomination, the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over.""
DIRECT QUOTE FROM BIDEN IN 2016 " "Biden's comments since Scalia's death directly contradict his earlier stance. In an interview with Minnesota Public Radio's Cathy Wurzer on February 18, Biden mocked the idea of waiting until after the election to appoint a nominee: "To leave the seat vacant at this critical moment in American history is a little bit like saying, 'God forbid something happen to the president and the vice president, we're not going to fill the presidency for another year and a half.'""
dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:
Hot Pot Beefpork wrote:
Uncle Pervert:
You do realize that two of your three claims would require more than just control of both chambers plus the White House, or did you miss the one day they taught you civics in school?
Changing the constitution requires 2/3 vote in both houses PLUS ratification by 3/4 of the states. So your gun and religion ideas are simply ridiculous, which for a liberal such as you, probably don't seem ridiculous.
None of them require changing the constituion
c) And the 2nd admendment doesn't say anything about you carrying a rifle around. I am sure we will keep it legal when you are part of the organized state militia and just ban it the rest of the time. Just like we do with machine guns. Heck this isn't even a liberial position. St. Ronnie was a big fan of gun control and was the guy who banned open carry in CA. Probably because blacks had the guns:)
Amazing how little knowledge conservatives have of the consitution. You would think they never read the document but that is impossible right? Nobody gets out of 7th grade without reading it...
Read the Heller decision. You might earn a clue or two. But probably not.
Question. Are saying something and doing something the same thing? Or are they different in some way?
Colin Sahlman runs 1:45 and Nico Young runs 1:47 in the 800m tonight at the Desert Heat Classic
Molly Seidel Fails To Debut As An Ultra Runner After Running A Road Marathon The Week Before
Megan Keith (14:43) DESTROYS Parker Valby's 5000 PB in Shanghai
Hallowed sub-16 barrier finally falls - 3 teams led by Villanova's 15:51.91 do it at Penn Relays!!!
Need female opinions: I’m dating a woman that is very sexual with me in public. Any tips/insight?