If you are a trump supporter on May 18, 2017 and you need a therapist, please holla at your boy. I might know a guy.The trump train is heading for a crash at warp speed, and the cable news outlets are having a hard time keeping up with all the BREAKING NEWS headlines.
The donald, as he has been known to do in the past, seems to be jumping ship and looking out for himself while throwing his people under the bus. (When the going gets tough the cowards get going.)
Anyway, check out E.J. Dionne Jr's article.
It seems that he, like the rest of us, just wants this nightmare to end.
"There is really only one issue in American politics at this moment: Will we accelerate our way to the end of the Trump story, or will our government remain mired in scandal, misdirection, and paralysis for many more months — or even years?
There is a large irony in the politics behind this question. The Democrats’ narrow interest lies in having President Trump hang around as close to the 2018 midterm elections as possible. Yet they are urging steps that could get this resolved sooner rather than later. Republicans would likely be better off if Trump were pushed off the stage. Yet up to now, they have been dragging their feet.
The reports that Trump asked then-FBI Director James Comey to drop his investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn may finally be concentrating Republican minds.
Speaker Paul Ryan signaled the changed mood earlier in the day not by what he said but by what he didn’t.
Ryan has been embarrassingly eager to defend Trump, but he did not rush to his support this time. Instead, Ryan called for a “sober” and “dispassionate” response, warned against “rushing to judgment,” and insisted that “our job is to get the facts.” When word got out (probably from Comey or his sympathizers) of what Trump had said to the FBI director about Flynn, Republicans (such as Rosenstein) were left with no choice but to pursue the matter further.
The speaker expressed faith in Trump only when prompted by a shouted question at the end of his news conference. After some thought, he replied with a soft “I do” when asked if he had “full confidence” in the president.
Nothing could be worse than slow-walking the Trump inquiries. The evidence is already overwhelming that he is temperamentally and intellectually incapable of doing the job he holds. He is indifferent to acquiring the knowledge the presidency demands and apparently of the belief that he can improvise hour to hour. He will violate norms whenever it suits him and cross ethical lines whenever he feels like it.
And Trump’s friend Vladimir Putin could not resist interfering yet again in our politics. Putin offered to provide Congress with a record of our president’s meeting with top Russian diplomats to shed light on exactly what highly classified intelligence information Trump shared with them. Adding to the insult, the Russian leader spoke of a “political schizophrenia” taking hold in the United States that was “eliciting concern” in his country.
The surest sign that the bottom is falling out from under Trump was a Wall Street Journal editorial that declared flatly: “Presidencies can withstand only so much turbulence before they come apart.” The Journal warned that Trump was on the verge of betraying his supporters, “as his Presidency sinks before his eyes.”
Any GOP leader losing the support of the semi-official organ of Republican conservatism should know that his partisans are headed to the exits.
But how can we speed our nation’s escape from the catastrophe Trump has created? The Senate Intelligence Committee took an important step by announcing a bipartisan invitation to Comey to testify. The sooner he tells his story, the better.
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer of New York proposed that both parties demand that Congress get any memos, tapes and transcripts shedding light on Trump’s meetings with the Russian diplomats and with Comey.
The naming of an independent counsel cannot become an excuse to pull back on congressional fact-finding. The country needs to know if there was collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia whether or not a crime was committed. And Democrats should ask Republicans to join them in pledging opposition to any appointee to head the FBI who is not universally seen as immune to Trump’s influence.
It shows how far along we are that fears are already being voiced of a political backlash from his supporters if Trump is railroaded out of office. But delaying the process of getting to the truth will harm our country far more. And Republicans who throw up roadblocks will be hurt most of all." [Source]
I found the number to that therapist. And he says that he does do house calls.
"The trump train is heading for a crash at warp speed, and the cable news outlets are having a hard time keeping up with all the BREAKING NEWS headlines."
ReplyDeleteKeep dreaming, progtards. Over half of the country is immune to all the FAKE NEWS headlines.
MAGA is happening, and you cannot stop it!
The media has voted no confidence in the American people. We just aren't getting the job done and we've let them all down for the last time.
ReplyDeleteAll of the news networks are now fake news 100% of the time.
ReplyDeleteOrwell's 1984 has arrived.
I have to keep wondering if anyone is surprised about any of this. As a candidate he was an immature, oafish, uninformed, bullying, tweeting goofball who screwed over every person who did business with him, a friend of a friend had to declare bankrupcy and lay off all of his employees because Trump reneged on a contract. This is not the kind of person we want running anything but decades of rightwing programming taught people to hate government and to believe they don't need it. This is what happens when we truly experience Republican rule. Pretty bad.
ReplyDeletePX
I'm not sure you Leftists have thought through this coup attempt you've got going here. Once you've formally announced to the public that their decisions simply do not matter, and that a niche subculture of the country gets to exercise an extra-constitutional veto on any decision they don't approve of -- once you've made it plain that America is a government with a nation, not a nation with a government -- what exactly is it that binds the people to a government that cannot in any way be described as "their" government?
ReplyDeleteThe old bromide was that we have to respect the will of the people when we lose, if for no other reason that we count on others respecting the will of the people when they lose.
But now that that social contract has been entirely disavowed by a large minority of the country -- now that they've made it plain that they will have no government except one they control at the expense of their enemies -- what possible reason could they suggest to citizens why they must respect the next president, or the one after that?
#Resistance is a two-way street, fellers.
fake news.Keep stockpiling weapons and ammo folks!!
ReplyDeleteFYI, James Comey said under oath just 15 days ago that he was never pressured to end an investigation:
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/Jd-BfTMPeFE
As Molly Ivins said about Clayton Williams: "A politician can trip over his dick a few times, but he shouldn't just stand there and stomp on it over and over."
ReplyDeleteAnd Williams was indeed stomping on it really hard at the time. But nothing he said, even though it was bad enough to get a Democrat elected governor of Texas at the time, is any worse than the stuff we have recordings of president four-year-old saying.
Pence would be a disaster as president, and he just formed his own PAC, so you know he's thinking about it. Whether the accumulation of brazen lies he has told the media will be any impediment to his ascension remains to be seen.
So we may morph from the current kakistocracy into Pence's attempt at a Christopathic theocracy, sort of a move from 1984 to the dark ages.
Oh well, they're both old as fuck and will hopefully die soon.
-Doug in Oakland
Ace: We're not a minority, we're the majority, and we will continue to expand on that majority as we have been for the previous few decades.
ReplyDeleteThe more pressing question is what to do about a political party that takes power and denies large and growing segments of the population the right to vote.
-Doug in Oakland
"So we may morph from the current kakistocracy into Pence's attempt at a Christopathic theocracy, sort of a move from 1984 to the dark ages."
ReplyDeleteAt least the Constitution provides us some form of protection against jeesus freaks, assuming the new and improved SC doesn't jam their beliefs down our throats. Even Scalia kept the most egregious attempts at theocracy at bay. Most people are smart enough to understand why it's a bad idea to mix government and religion to throughly.
PX
"Most people are smart enough..."
ReplyDeleteI agree. Pence, Sessions, and Gorsuch I have my doubts about on that score, though.
-Doug in Oakland
The long rang game is being played. How else can you describe this fantasy other to say it is entertaining. Each day I look forward to "what else can he say or do?" on the news reporting his latest. I was locked to the set during the years of President Nixon. Living in DC at this time, it was a daily feast of corruption and power.
ReplyDeleteNow, like then the people are powerless to the rich and powerful. We can only sit on the sidelines and grieve that once again we are shown how the powerful have such a disdain for the people that support them and the people that don't. This I feel, common sense tells me that Mr. Trump is going to Saudi Arabia for his pockets. This country that extends few rights to it's citizens want arms from the US, therefor Donald is just another "bagman" going to get his. This country does produce weapons of death.
The Vatican, with all that stolen African gold is the next pick-up for the Don. Lastly he will get with the Jewish capital to round out his first "cash circuit". How nice is it for to be investigated by the USA law enforcement and still can fly all over the globe pimping ALL people.
This guy should stop with the pity party. He has Nixon as an example. Nixon went down swinging, not like this crybaby president. But the again, his record and past shows how scared he was from circa 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968. Think of all the heroes that gave their lives so this man-baby can be crying 2017.
I'll post a comment again because it applies to today's topic. A lot of people can't objectively look at criticisms of the sides of issues they take. They believe what they want to believe. My contention is both sides are bad. I think anyone who realizes that has an informed opinion. You could vote for a racist game show host or a corrupt war monger. But you should realize that is what the choice was. I don't think everybody should have the same priorities as me, by any means. Putting up with some racism to oppose war atrocities is white privilege. At least Hillary told us she was for regime change wars. Trump said he wasn't, and he has already bombed Syria twice. Hillary's email about funneling support to ISIS was technologically verified as authentic. Do you think Debbie Wasserman Schultz would have resigned if the Wikileaks emails weren't true? You can disagree with my conclusions, but many of the basic facts are easy to verify.
ReplyDeleteRobert Mueller was the FBI Director during the 9/11 cover up. He will do what the Deep State wants him to do. Don't expect the truth from government investigations. The 9/11 Commission found that buildings fall through themselves at the speed of gravity. First they left out Building 7 out of their report entirely. Then after complaints about that they wouldn't admit it fell as fast as if you dropped a bowling ball off the roof, until an independent scientist proved it. Their findings were roadrunner cartoon "science". Even though Saudi Arabia financed the hijackers we have been fighting Saudi Arabia's enemies ever since. That's what the Russia bashing is about. Plus things like wanting a pipeline from Qatar to Europe that would go through Syria. Russia doesn't want it because they would have to compete with cheaper oil.
An Indiana Democrat, Lee Hamilton, chaired the Iran/Contra investigation. He ended it and declared Reagan innocent when investigators started to find that Reagan and Bush Sr. had made a pre-election deal with Ayatollah Khomeini to not release the America hostages while Carter was still president, in exchange for weapons. Years later Hamilton was pulled out of retirement to co-chair the 9/11 Commission. They even had a PNAC (New Pearl Harbor) Committee member on the 9/11 Commission, John Lehman. Ask Anita Hill what she thinks about government investigations.
The Benghazi hearings were a witch hunt. Only Rand Paul even asked what the CIA was doing in Benghazi and they didn't have him back to the subsequent hearings. They were moving weapons from terrorists in Libya to terrorists in Syria. Investigating the fake Russia scare will uncover some wrong doings and drag out innuendo opportunities. Like investigating Whitewater led to the Monica Lewinsky scandal. But their premise is false. It is hard to believe we are ruled by such corrupt slimy people. Looking in to the Wikileaks Vault 7 leak of CIA spying techniques might shed some light on how they blackmail people. Who better to control with blackmail than pedophiliacs. Look at what happened to Anthony Wiener after he ranted about shipping off the World Trade Center steel before it could be inspected. The government admitted that they never even looked for evidence of explosives, by the way. Scum that can be blackmailed and/or bribed rises to the top. And that applies in the war profiteer sponsored corporate media too.
Republicans would likely be better off if Trump were pushed off the stage.
ReplyDeleteI'm not so sure. Yes, getting rid of Trump would free them from having to deal with his moronic antics, but it would also whip up the hard-core Trumpanzees into a white-hot frenzy of rage against them. Even during the election they looked upon the Republican establishment as the enemy and supported Trump as a rebellion against that establishment. Impeaching Trump would take the cooperation of a significant number of Congressional Republicans -- which would instantly inflame the Trumpanzees as they saw their man "stabbed in the back". They're completely blinkered to all the real-world reasons for impeachment -- just look at the first few comments on this very thread. Completely delusional.
And that rage would not die down by the time the 2018 election arrived, especially since Trump wouldn't disappear after being impeached -- he'd be out there all the time bitching about what happened and keeping his hordes whipped up. It would make the Republican losses in 2018 even worse, maybe even permanently split the party.
They're damned if they don't impeach and damned if they do.
The old bromide was that we have to respect the will of the people when we lose, if for no other reason that we count on others respecting the will of the people when they lose.
ReplyDeleteWhat, were you dead the past eight years and didn't see how wingnuts did everything in their power to disrupt Obama's legally elected (twice) tenure as Potus?
Is yer memory that short? Drumpf did not win a fair election, just as dumbass dubya didn't play by the rules in2000 and 2004.
Save yer sermpns for the fsithful. This has been long time coming and now it is payback.
Bon't forget, wingnuts set the impeachment bar at lying about sex and so far mass murder and war crimes against humanity failed to reach that bar for wingnut potus.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of therapists, is anyone following the 'President Show" on Comedy Central? usually lame, but last night a fantasmagoria when Deepak Chopra was a guest and got the Orange One to meditate, e.g. visit his own mind. Halloween!
ReplyDelete"Don't forget, wingnuts set the impeachment bar at lying about sex and so far mass murder and war crimes against humanity failed to reach that bar for wingnut potus."
ReplyDeleteWell said, Mike. With the sort of cognitive dissonance American conservatives are suffering right now, no therapy could ever fix that. We'll simply have to watch them flail and fail and hope they don't do much more damage along the way. Eventually, enough will around to finally bury the poor, beaten, dead horse of Modern American Conservatism.
JMJ
dinthebeast said...
ReplyDelete"Ace: We're not a minority, we're the majority, and we will continue to expand on that majority as we have been for the previous few decades."
--------------
If you pull back from the media shitstorm of deception and outright bald-faced lies, it seems that a significant number of Americans are not falling for it. Even the leaders on the left, from the relatively sane like Feinstein to the batshit crazy like Waters have publicly stated that there is zero evidence of Russian/Trump collusion, Flynn guilt and whatever else the President is being smeared with; there are no actual, specific charges, merely "insinuendos" as Don Logan malaproped.
Two anecdotal items hint at this: The record-breaking haul Trump's latest fundraising effort took in and the story about the Democrats telling people to cool it with the impeachment talk. Really? Could it be your internal polling shows that going forward with this insanity will wipe you out politically in '18 and '20?
Whatever the Dems and their Media Overlords do or say, the appointment of the special counsel will allow Trump to focus on getting his domestic agenda enacted through his true opposition: The GOP Establishment.
"Is yer memory that short? Drumpf did not win a fair election, just as dumbass dubya didn't play by the rules in 2000 and 2004"
ReplyDeleteEvery election we lose is illegitimate. We will never accept losing.
Resist!
"At least the Constitution provides us some form of protection against jeesus freaks, assuming the new and improved SC doesn't jam their beliefs down our throats"
ReplyDeleteThe Constitution is a piece of paper that has been increasingly ignored for over 80 years now.
Progressives have been jamming their beliefs down our throats for decades. They have found the rights to abortion, gay marriage, eminent domain for corporations, property confiscation, tranny bathrooms, mandatory purchase of a commodity and racial favoritism in the document created by the founders of America.
Bake the cake.
Pay for the abortifacient.
Hire whom we tell you to hire.
Associate with whom we tell you to associate.
You can't keep your doctor.
The Constitution is whatever five justices on the Supreme Court says it is. For the past decade, it's been whatever Anthony Kennedy says it is. When there are five conservative justices, we keep the status quo. When there are five progressive judges, we move toward the an ideal of everything not mandatory is forbidden; everything not forbidden is mandatory.
You don't fear living in theocracy, you already live in one whose official state religion is Progressivism.
A Black Panther Forever said...
ReplyDelete"Now, like then the people are powerless to the rich and powerful"
Who do you think elected Trump, and who is it that is trying to drive him out?
Infidel753 said...
ReplyDelete"They're damned if they don't impeach and damned if they do."
Trump is your last chance, not ours.
We can all keep playing by the rules or we can call game over.
What comes next will wipe away all the delusions.
"We're not a minority, we're the majority"
ReplyDeleteRiiiiight. If you were a majority, you wouldn't have had to cheat Clitlery into the nomination. You wouldn't be catching the vapors about efforts to clean up voter rolls.
You're not only a minority, you're not even American. Yes, even White ones like you, Doug. You stand for betrayal of everything America is, starting with your own people.
You all need to go. You don't need to go back (wherever that is), but you can't stay here.
"The more pressing question is what to do about a political party that takes power and denies large and growing segments of the population the right to vote."
I hear Liberia is nice this time of year, if you don't mind a little cannibalism and people using the beaches as open toilets.
"What am I talking about? Why, using the 25th Amendment to the Constitution to declare Trump mentally unfit and replace him with Pence."
And millions of men would descend on Washington DC and burn it to the ground.
"They're damned if they don't impeach and damned if they do."
If they don't do the bidding of their masters, they get thrown off the gravy train (at best; at worst, their pedophilia pictures are leaked and they go to prison if they don't off themselves first).
If they do do the bidding of their masters, they get Cantored out of office.
America is fed up with the oligarchy and its cucks.
Trumpenreich: Trump is your last chance, not ours.....What comes next will wipe away all the delusions.
ReplyDeleteWhat are you gonna do, seize another bird sanctuary visitor kiosk? At least remember to bring the Cheetos this time.
James Bawled: And millions of men would descend on Washington DC and burn it to the ground.
You guys have been holding multi-million-man rallies in Washington for years now and generally about 200 people show up.
Totally delusional.
I do agree that the Constitution says what Kennedy says it does but what you're aaying is quite the opposite. Abortion is legal because religious opponents can't ban it. That's called freedom. Go back to how Row v. Wade was decided, it was decided on an expectation of privacy because it's no ones' business why someone is going to a doctor. Bakers baking for gays? Well there is that idea that if you are a business that serves the public you have to serve the public. If you hate gays/negroes/short people then don't open a business because they have a right to public accomodations. We've been through this before. In essence conservatives seem to want to discriminate and cry about the outcome when the freedom they brag about wanting is extended to people they don't like. We've been down this road before and yes the liberal argument usually wins because it is generally correct. And no, there is no provision in the constitution that says you an keep the doctor you want. Shrug.
ReplyDeletePX
New York Times today nails the tips for handling Trump.
ReplyDeleteTips for Leaders Meeting Trump: Keep it Short and Give him a win
"Keep it short, no 30 minute monologue for a 30 second attention span. Do not assume he knows the history of the country......Compliment him on his Electoral College victory. Contrast him favorably with President Obama".
PX
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/18/world/middleeast/trump-saudi-arabia-foreign-trip.html
ReplyDeletePilotX's Boss said..I has a sad. Bully libs make me just an equal to people I despise and hate. They won't let us discriminate. Wah freakin' wah.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/2017/05/trump_thinks_he_is_the_target_of_a_witch_hunt_nixon_thought_so_too
ReplyDeleteThe parallels are just astonishing.
PX
"PilotX's Boss said..I has a sad. Bully libs make me just an equal to people I despise and hate. They won't let us discriminate. Wah freakin' wah."
ReplyDeleteExactly, there is a difference between being free to hold discriminatory thoughts and actually being able to act on those thoughts. Conservatives have interesting ideas about freedom.
PX
"Bakers baking for gays? Well there is that idea that if you are a business that serves the public you have to serve the public. If you hate gays/negroes/short people then don't open a business because they have a right to public accomodations"
ReplyDeleteHas that been extended to Muslim bakers? Would the government force a black-owned bakery to make Confederate Flag cakes for a Klan picnic? How about making a Jewish tailor make swasitka shirts?
You know the answer to those hypotheticals. Our government selectively enforces the law based on conformance with an official values system.
Forcing someone to accommodate beliefs that violate their values is tyranny.
We live in a Progressive Theocracy.
Bawl baby wingnuts like Baldy demand special rights because of his special white privilege. Wingnut religious outfits find filling out a single page form to opt out of buying contraceptives is too much of a burden and the activist wingnut Scotus agrees. Then wingnuts dump every silly ass rule and regulation on poor women so they can't exercise their constitutional right to have an abortion. No restriction is too onerous, no hoop too big or small to force poor women to jump through to exercise their rights. Fucking pathetic, whiny little wingnut, fauxknee kristians want to force every embryo to be born and then the cowardly assholes turn their backs on all these poor babies. They don't want to pay to keep them alive, to feed them, to educate them, to provide healthcare. But they are sure enough giddy when the children of color are murdered by cops or commit heinous crimes so whitey wingnuts can execute them before these kids know there is life outside the projects, except whitey don't want them outside.
ReplyDelete"Abortion is legal because religious opponents can't ban it. That's called freedom."
ReplyDeleteI do not support a federal ban on abortion. But the Constitution grants no authority to the federal government to force religious institutions to specifically pay for it. That's called tyranny.
"Exactly, there is a difference between being free to hold discriminatory thoughts and actually being able to act on those thoughts."
ReplyDeleteDiscriminatory thought: "I would rather hire this person who is competent rather than this idiot the government is mandating I hire because of their race."
Discriminatory act: Hiring the competent person.
Discriminatory result: Government lawsuit, fines, and forced hiring of idiot.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"PilotX's Boss said..I has a sad. Bully libs make me just an equal to people I despise and hate.
The only ones I despise and hate are the ones who force false equalitariansim on me.
Everyone should be equal before the law.
@mike from iowa 1:42 PM
ReplyDeleteYou are seriously fucked in the head.
In 2006, the Democrat establishment wanted to prevent illegals from collecting welfare and voted for a border wall. Way back in 2011, Obama was against gay marriage. In the dark old days of 2014, no one knew that tranny bathrooms were an essential feature of a humane society.
ReplyDeleteIt's satisfying to know present day liberals will be called Nazis by future liberals for not embracing some hideosity they haven't even considered yet.
Pilot: Has that been extended to Muslim bakers? Would the government force a black-owned bakery to make Confederate Flag cakes for a Klan picnic? How about making a Jewish tailor make swasitka shirts?
ReplyDeleteLaws against discrimination refer to discrimination against customers, not refusal to produce certain goods or services.
If a lunch counter would serve a sandwich to a white person but not to a black person, that's discrimination against the customer and is rightly illegal.
If a baker would make a wedding cake for a straight couple but not for a gay couple, that's discrimination against the customer and is rightly illegal.
If a baker wouldn't make a Confederate-flag cake for anybody, then he's not discriminating by refusing to make one for a particular customer. Same with a Muslim baker refusing to make ham sandwiches or a Jewish tailor refusing to make swastika shirts -- they wouldn't do those things for anyone, so they aren't discriminating against a particular class of people. It's only discrimination if you refuse to provide a particular category of customer (blacks, gays, etc.) with goods or services that you would provide for people who were not members of that category.
It's a simple concept, but a lot of conservatives seem to have difficulty with it.
Say 1 plus, any word on Roger Aile's condition?
ReplyDeleteAnymoose @ 1:55--you should all be so fucked in the head.
Infidel753 said...
ReplyDelete"Laws against discrimination refer to discrimination against customers, not refusal to produce certain goods or services."
Come on man, think that through. The bakers in these cases didn't refuse service to gay customers, they refused to make a cake that celebrated an event they found morally offensive. They did not discriminate against a particular class of people, they just refused to make a specific, custom product that conflicted with their values.
Your analogy is ridiculous and rests on a false equivalency. Gay marriage and traditional marriage are not the same thing, exactly in the way a Confederate flag cake is not the same as an American flag cake.
You are correct in that laws against discrimination refer to discrimination against customers, not refusal to produce certain goods or services. In the cases of the gay weeding cakes, the law was used to punish people who refused to produce certain goods or services.
It's a simple concept, but you seem to have difficulty with it.
"It's a simple concept, but a lot of conservatives seem to have difficulty with it."
ReplyDeleteFrom a comment Lockswriter left at Driftglass' place:
I've about given up trying to communicate with the Children of Trump. Practically every word out of their mouth is an allusion to some myth or legend that only they understand.
"OBUMMER! His face black, his birth Kenyan! Pizzagate's children, their faces wet! Killary, her army at Benghazi… ARRRGH! Seth Rich when the walls fell!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3N0dlL2NU8
On the lighter side:
Roger Ailes is still dead.
Andrew Breitbart is still dead.
Ronald Reagan is still dead.
I think I like where this is heading.
-Doug in Oakland
"Discriminatory result: Government lawsuit, fines, and forced hiring of idiot."
ReplyDeleteThe government cannot force you to hire anyone. Big misconception but they can fine you if it can be proven that you discriminated based on race, religion or any number of specific criteria. Have you ever run a business in which you were forced to hire someone by the government? I ran a business and never had a problem and neither have many people I know of all genders, races and religions. The only people who seem to have a problem A. don't inderstand anti-duscrimination laws and B. have never run a business. That does make sense, if one has never run a business why would they know the rules?
PX
Actually Boss Infidel is right. If you bake wedding cakes you bake wedding cakes right? You can't refuse to make a wedding cake because the people getting married are gay. And for the record gay marriage and straight marriage is the same thing. That's the law of the land. Sorry but Infidel's argument isn't a false equivalency. You seem to be using the same argument that was used to ban interracial marriage. Sorry man but in 2017 marriage is marriage no matter the gender of the participants and this is a settled matter and I agree with the outcome.
ReplyDeletePX
So Ryan has not sent the AHCA to the senate yet because he is afraid it won't meet reconciliation rules there, which it probably won't.
ReplyDeleteSo he is waiting for the CBO score to tell him what any bright fourth grader would know, that it doesn't make muster.
When he finds this out, he may have to rewrite the bill and try to pass it again.
Paul Ryan is a retarded fraud, who wants his trillion dollar tax cuts for the wealthy so bad that he is willing to parade this obscenity of a bill in front of the country again despite the damage doing so will cause his party, let alone the damage the bill would do to the country were it to pass.
But hey, he delivered a "win" to president four-year-old for the hundred day party.
-Doug in Oakland
"The court’s opinion rejects arguments that forcing Phillips to supply a cake to Charlie Craig and David Mullins violated Phillips’ freedom of religion or his 1st Amendment right against being compelled to convey a “celebratory” message he doesn’t believe in."
ReplyDeleteSorry Boss but the courts have rejected your argument.
PX
https://www.google.com/amp/www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-gay-marriage-wedding-cakes-courts-20150817-story,amp.html
ReplyDelete"Actually Boss Infidel is right. If you bake wedding cakes you bake wedding cakes right? "
ReplyDeleteNo.
Try applying "If you bake flag cakes you bake flag cakes right?" to his defense of a black baker not making a Confederate Flag cake for the Klan. Either it applies to that case as well or it is a selective enforcement of the law.
It's a simple concept, but you seem to have difficulty with it.
Gay marriage and straight marriage are most certainly not the same things, no matter what year it is.
Straight marriage is a cultural institution with thousands of years of history. It is the core unit of every human society. It has been held in such importance because of the social stability it provides and because it is the best way to raise and provide for children. Every society has a vested interest in guaranteeing its survival through ensuring the creation of subsequent generations.
Gay marriage does not offer the prime benefit to society of producing children. While not all straight marriages can or do produce children, gay marriage cannot. You can argue that it provides other benefits, but it is at its core not the same thing as straight marriage, and therefore it does merit the same considerations.
This is not "unfair", this is biology. Marriage is not "marriage no matter the gender of the participants" and this is settled science, whether or not you agree with the outcome.
As a society, we can be nice and let two people of the same sex get "married", but that does not make the institution equivalent.
"Sorry Boss but the courts have rejected your argument."
ReplyDeleteThat was my whole point: We live in a progressive tyranny that selectively enforces the laws in ways that impose its moral code on everyone.
I should fire you.
Hey Field: Regarding the Time Magazine cover illustration merging the White House with the Kremlin, why do you think Time removed the crosses from the tops of the Kremlin towers?
ReplyDeletehttp://townsofusa.com/travels/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Kremlin.jpg
"That was my whole point: We live in a progressive tyranny that selectively enforces the laws in ways that impose its moral code on everyone.
ReplyDeleteI should fire you."
Ah go ahead, I need some time off. But to your point of progressive tyranny I have to disagree. Most laws are born out of the necessity to prevent the trampling of rights of the minority by the majority. It seems a simple concept and I have no difficulty understanding it. If you are holding yourself out to conduct business you have to accomodate all customers and not discriminate based on certain characteristics. We've been down that road before and it doesn't end well so as a society we ended such practices. One is free to hate anyone for anything or disagree with their lifestyle choices but you have to serve them if that's your business.
You are also free to have any belief about marriage you choose but the courts have decided that your opinion is wrong, even the comservative leaning Supreme Court. Sorry buddy but times change so marriage is now open to everyone regardless of gender or sexual orientation. Good discussion though.
PX
"You can argue that it provides other benefits, but it is at its core not the same thing as straight marriage"
ReplyDeleteSure it is, gay marriage checks off every single box straight marriage does with one exception which as you note is the same as an infetile couple or one that decides to not have kids. No difference at all. And the courts are just allowing same sex people to do what opposite sex folks have been doing for years. That's increasing freedom not diminishing it. You are free to marry a dude if you want, not marry a dude if you want, marry a chick or stay single. How ia that tyranny?
PX
BTW Boss, you never told me if you were ever forced by the government to hire an idiot. Ha!
ReplyDeletePX
Besides you?
ReplyDeleteThe difference is ... refusing to serve someone because they hate you ... as opposed to refusing to serve someone because you hate them
ReplyDeleteGot 556??
ReplyDeleteGay marriage and straight marriage are most certainly not the same things
ReplyDeleteEven if one grants for the sake of argument that that's the case, it does not undermine my point. The wedding cake is the same in either case. The only difference is who the customer is (gay vs. straight).
It is still analogous to the Jim Crow lunch-counter example. Black people and white people are "most certainly not the same" in the trivial sense of skin color. Back in the Jim Crow era, some people had a deep belief that that difference was very important, just as today some people have a deep belief that the difference between gay and straight marriage is very important. That did not give them the right to discriminate.
As for the "celebrating an event they find offensive" argument, again, 60 years ago some people were extremely offended at the idea of black and white people being able to use the same public accommodations. That feeling was just as strong as the current prejudice of some religionists against gay marriage. The lunch-counter owner would probably have argued that by being unable to refuse service to blacks, he was being forced to "celebrate", or at least participate in, the "offensive" situation of blacks and whites being allowed to eat in the same place. It didn't fly then and it doesn't fly now.
Sorry, but a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If you'd bake one for a straight couple's wedding but not for a gay couple's wedding, you're discriminating solely based on who the customer is. That means you stand with the Jim Crow lunch-counter owner -- on the wrong side of history.
PS: More generally, prejudice rooted in a religious taboo system is not privileged over prejudice rooted in something else. The fact that your religion has a taboo on homosexuality does not make your prejudice any more acceptable than prejudice against blacks (which many people also claimed had a Biblical basis). That seems to be another point that conservatives miss.
ReplyDeleteWH has a presentation for foreign leaders to make bawl baby poopy John Drumpf happy when he shows up. Don't assume he knows any of the country's history or current events and praise him on his electoral win.
ReplyDeleteIvanka was a last minute hire to be Dad's favorite grope toy and wet nurse so baby Drumpf gets his milk for the day.
"MAGA is happening, and you cannot stop it!"--Hail the Trumpenreich, May 2017
ReplyDelete"The Thousand Year Reich is happening, and you cannot stop it! Steiner will save the day!"--Someone very much like HtT, May 1945
-_^
Infidel753 said...
ReplyDelete"It is still analogous to the Jim Crow lunch-counter example."
No, it is not. No one was denied access to a bakery. They could have bought a standard wedding cake like anyone else could. A straight couple who tried to buy a cake for a homosexual wedding would have been denied too. You are really struggling here, aren't you?
"The lunch-counter owner would probably have argued that by being unable to refuse service to blacks, he was being forced to "celebrate", or at least participate in, the "offensive" situation of blacks and whites being allowed to eat in the same place."
I don't know if they found it offensive as much as it was a violation of their freedom of association, but in any event yes, the government coerced business owners to cater to people they did not want to. That is not what happened in the gay wedding case situation, when someone came into a business and asked for a product they did not make, and the government coerced business owners to make that product.
"Sorry, but a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If you'd bake one for a straight couple's wedding but not for a gay couple's wedding, you're discriminating solely based on who the customer is."
Again, that is not what happened. Anyone could buy a wedding cake. No one could buy a gay wedding cake. No discrimination between customers.
"That means you stand with the Jim Crow lunch-counter owner -- on the wrong side of history
Straw man argument, because I asserted nothing like that.
And when it comes to history, I'd rather be on the right side of reality.
Well sir actually you're wrong. 111 Bakery made custom cakes and they only had a policy of not making cakes that had violence, alcohol or drug themes. A gay ceremony doesn't fall into any of those categories. The law agrees with me so it has been argued but your side lost. I would say move on, this is settled law.
DeletePX
I see HailTT and Boldilocks are still nurturing their fantasies of the Great Rebellion Against Cucklibtard Tyranny.
ReplyDeleteFuhgeddabowdit.
Your own kind who wear military and police uniforms will shoot your dumb @$$es dead if their masters order it.
Their masters will order it, because civil war is bad for business.
By the time the Corporate Media gets through bossplaining your pathetic putsch attempt to the Great Unwashed, the majority of your own kind will breathe a sigh of relief at your demise, if indeed they do not applaud the government for delivering them from you scary extremists.
Selah.
But seriously Boss, have you run a business? Have you ever been forced bb the government to hire someone?
ReplyDeletePX
Top WH official under FBI investigation over Russia. Wapo
ReplyDeletePX
"The law agrees with me so it has been argued but your side lost. I would say move on, this is settled law."
ReplyDeleteAgain, that does not contradict my point that the government has a policy of selectively enforcing its moral code over the moral codes of its citizens.
If this were strictly a legal matter, then it would be applied in lots of other ways - arresting the owners of Muslim lunch counters who won't sell ham, arresting Jewish publishers who won't print Nazi posters - but it's not. It is only enforced against those who the regime seeks to oppress.
Man Boss you are totally missing the point, the law exists to prevent discrimination based on certain criteria and yes of course there will be exceptions but your example of trying to force a Muslim to sell ham is just wrong and weird. If they don't sell that product to ANYONE how is that discriminatory? I guess you just don't want to understand the law and want to play the victim. Have at it if that's your intention.
DeletePX
There are times I feel sorry for The Donald... but you know, he's really got to stop being his own worst enemy.
ReplyDeleteOh noes! Pilot X's Boss is being repressed!
ReplyDeleteHe's being repressed!
Have it your way then ... The regime seeks to oppress haters like yourself ... That is a good thing not a bad thing
ReplyDelete"You guys have been holding multi-million-man rallies in Washington for years now and generally about 200 people show up."
ReplyDeleteReally? You think this TEA party rally was about 200 people?
I think there would be several times this many willing people, and THEIR take on "BURN THIS BITCH DOWN" will show just what complete slackers and fuckups Googles are.
"Totally delusional."
Yes you are. And totally projecting too.
"Black people and white people are "most certainly not the same" in the trivial sense of skin color."
And in the highly non-trivial sense of histocompatibility for transplants. And in the highly non-trivial sense of effectiveness of certain drugs (e.g BiDil). Also little things like sickle-cell anemia being a very specific Black disease...
"60 years ago some people were extremely offended at the idea of black and white people being able to use the same public accommodations."
Ah, yes. We've replaced this with allowing you NAPAs to drive out the White people who built those accomodations, which is followed very quickly by them being shut down as unprofitable or physically destroyed by looting and plain mean-spirited vandalism. This is the same process which turns a thriving neighborhood into a ghetto. So much more enlightened.
"Your own kind who wear military and police uniforms will shoot your dumb @$$es dead if their masters order it."
Odds are well over half of them won't recognize whoever comes up after a counter-Trump coup as their masters. Lots will go AWOL en masse with their gear.
"Their masters will order it, because civil war is bad for business."
A healthy fraction of that half will be on the front lines. If not in Washington, wherever they are—going after the supplies, personnel and families of those who DO support the illegitimate junta.
Yes, it'll be bad for business. It'll be even worse when the billionaires are dug out of their bunkers and executed in gruesome ways. But if they won't back down, that's obviously how they want it.
"But seriously Boss, have you run a business? Have you ever been forced bb the government to hire someone?"
ReplyDeleteYes, indirectly. Not my own business, but as part of my job with several very large companies. I have hired many people over the years, all types of people. I have had situations where HR would send me candidates whose qualifications did not begin to meet those in the job description, because they were trying to fill the position with a diversity hire to get the government off their back. These were engineering positions and the pool of qualified individuals was overwhelmingly white and male. Minority and women engineers are extremely hot commodities and would likely have better options than what I was offering. They would send me people without engineering degrees and no relevant job experience. In one particularly egregious case, I wound up eventually not hiring anyone.
"If they don't sell that product to ANYONE how is that discriminatory?"
ReplyDeleteIf a bakery doesn't sell gay wedding cakes to ANYONE how is that discrimanatory?
Ivory Bill Woodpecker said...
ReplyDelete"Oh noes! Pilot X's Boss is being repressed!"
I'm not, Christian business owners are. Over next to nothing. It's not right.
If course, the old engineering hire. This has been trotted out a million times over. A white guy who works as an "engineer" is sent over (fill in the blank) who is woefully unqualified and can barely spell their name and is forced to hire them over white males whobhave PhD's in engineering and helped design the Space Shuttle. C'mon man, I wasn't born last night. Your example never happened and is a tired internet meme.
ReplyDeletePX
"I'm not, Christian business owners are. Over next to nothing. It's not right."
ReplyDeleteWell Christians aren't exempt from the law. If they don't want to do business with heathens then don't go into business. Problem solved.
PX
Not sure I believe your account but here are the obvious flaws. 1. Your company had a shitty HR department. Why couldn't they find qualified candidates? They obviously don't know how to do their job so that's a reflection on them not the candidates. Either they are incompetent or purposely sent unqualified people which means there was a culture or racist/sexist behavior. 2. What "government" agency was on your company's back? Did they call? Did they send a letter? 3. To be more specific, if an engineer was desired why didn't HR contact a professional organization or university to help find qualified candidates? It seems that HR department was horrible because I can find several qualified candidates within hours and I'm not an HR professional.
ReplyDeletePX
"A white guy who works as an "engineer" is sent over (fill in the blank) who is woefully unqualified and can barely spell their name and is forced to hire them over white males whobhave PhD's in engineering and helped design the Space Shuttle."
ReplyDeleteNo, these were entry level positions that required an engineering degree.
Minorities who have engineering degrees are a scarce resource. They are snapped up by higher paying positions than those I was attempting to fill. HR was committed to diversity, and sent me applicants who did not meet the hiring criteria. This is not an internet "meme", this is my experience in my industry. You asked if government policy affected the hiring decisions I was involved with, and I answered honestly.
The Sky God says we can't bake cakes for homos! It's right here in this book, if I can just find it...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiGZQHgWqzM
"You can't run a country
By a book of religion
Not by a heap
Or a lump or a smidgeon
Of foolish rules
Of ancient date
Designed to make
You all feel great
While you fold, spindle
And mutilate
Those unbelievers
From a neighboring state"
...
"That's what they say
Every night...
Everyday. ..
Hey, we can't really be dumb
If we're just following
God's Orders
Hey, let's get serious...
God knows what he's doin'
He wrote this book here
An'the book says:
He made us all to be just like Him,"
so...
If we're dumb...
Then God is dumb...
(An' maybe even a little ugly on the side)"
"Got 556??"
Nope. .223s are kinda little. .243 is the smallest I've got.
-Doug in Oakland
Not sure I believe your account but here are the obvious flaws. 1. Your company had a shitty HR department. Why couldn't they find qualified candidates? They obviously don't know how to do their job so that's a reflection on them not the candidates. Either they are incompetent or purposely sent unqualified people which means there was a culture or racist/sexist behavior. 2. What "government" agency was on your company's back? Did they call? Did they send a letter? 3. To be more specific, if an engineer was desired why didn't HR contact a professional organization or university to help find qualified candidates?
ReplyDelete1. Yes, they were terrible. Most HR departments are. The reason they couldn't find qualified minority candidates is that qualified minority candidates had better opportunities.
2. Every major corporation has highly prioritized diversity hiring. This is strongly correlated with the threat of government action if found to be deficient.
3. IDK. Again, scarce commodity.
"You asked if government policy affected the hiring decisions I was involved with, and I answered honestly."
ReplyDeleteWhat government agencies? How did they put pressure on your company?
Don't take it personally but this IS actually a common meme on the internet. Someone claims to have been forced to hire unqualified women/POC and it is always a company that need engineers. Maybe in this case you may be telling the truth but hey it IS the internet afterall.
PX
dinthebeast said...
ReplyDeleteThe Sky God says we can't bake cakes for homos!
-----
The Sky God says we can't burn coal to make electricity!
The Sky God says race is a social construct but there are an infinite amount of genders!
The Sky God says all the different varieties of humans have exactly the same distribution of abilities!
http://societyofwomenengineers.swe.org/career-center-mobile/for-job-recruiters/3340-enhance-your-talent-search-with-insights-from-an-expert
ReplyDeleteIf I were looking here's where I would start. That is if I were serious about diversity.
PX
Boldilocks, to quote one of my favorite super-villain lines:
ReplyDelete"You do not dream small dreams."
I expect you're an Internet Tough Guy(tm) who will never so much as throw a stink bomb at the masters and their enforcers--but if you are a genuine McVeigh-wannabe, then enjoy your jail cell and/or early grave, Twinklenuts.
All of the above, of course, assumes that you are not actually an unemployed Lower Slobbovian whom Tsar Vlad is paying to pretend to be an Angry White Male Real Murkan on the Intertoobz.
"The Society of Women Engineers (SWE), founded in 1950, is a not-for-profit educational and service organization in the United States. SWE has over 33,000 members in nearly 100 professional sections and 300 student sections throughout the United States.".
ReplyDeleteOf course this does not mean that all 33,000 are available but with such rich resource the whole "we couldn't find any qualified candidates" arguments should fall on deaf ears.
PX
"What government agencies? How did they put pressure on your company?"
ReplyDeleteNo one I have worked for has been targeted by the government. You don't have to be targeted specifically to know what the score is.
If you don't have a workforce that "looks like America", you can get unwanted attention from the EEOC. The DOJ has gotten involved in numerous cases.
The problem is that your qualified applicant pool doesn't look like America. The business I work in is not a high prestige, top dollar, glory position industry. You can do well, but if you have what companies are looking for, you can get easier jobs that pay better. That's where the minority engineers wind up.
"The National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE), was founded in 1975 Purdue University located in West Lafayette, Indiana by six undergraduates and a faculty advisor. It is one of the largest student-run organizations in the United States, with core activities centered on improving the recruitment and retention of Black and other minority engineers, in both academe and industry. NSBE is an organization that provides opportunities for personal and professional success, and remains unmatched by any other organization to date.[1]
ReplyDeleteNSBE has more than 30,000 members world-wide, with 2,000 elected leadership positions, 18 regional conferences, an annual international conference, and an annual national convention. Since its inception over forty years ago, NSBE has grown to include approximately 310 collegiate student chapters, 99 pre-college programs, and 88 professional chapters with their 6,000 technical members. A professional staff operates NSBE's World Headquarters in Virginia."
If you are still employed at the same company you now have some resources to find qualified candidates.
PX
"No one I have worked for has been targeted by the government. You don't have to be targeted specifically to know what the score is. "
ReplyDeleteSo basically neither you nor any company you worked for has been "forced" by the "government" to hire a woman or a POC? Just as I suspected. And as I stated they won't be unless they have a history of discrimination.
PX
"Of course this does not mean that all 33,000 are available but with such rich resource the whole "we couldn't find any qualified candidates" arguments should fall on deaf ears"
ReplyDeleteI think I've explained this adequately. I'll bet there aren't many unemployed minority or female engineering degree holders.
" You can do well, but if you have what companies are looking for, you can get easier jobs that pay better. That's where the minority engineers wind up."
ReplyDeleteAh, the old women and POC have it sooooo easy meme. We're hitting all the high notes tonite.
PX
"So basically neither you nor any company you worked for has been "forced" by the "government" to hire a woman or a POC? Just as I suspected."
ReplyDeleteI've never been "forced" by the "government" not to commit murder either.
What's your point? No one obeys the law until forced to?
"I think I've explained this adequately. I'll bet there aren't many unemployed minority or female engineering degree holders."
ReplyDeleteHow would you know the employment status of female and engineers of color? Got some stats to back that up or are you just making that up? I would love to see your data.
PX
"What's your point? No one obeys the law until forced to?"
ReplyDeleteAnd that's my point. You bitch and moan about being forced by the government yo do something that has never happened to you nor anyone you know soooooooooo. See where we're going?
PX
"Discriminatory thought: "I would rather hire this person who is competent rather than this idiot the government is mandating I hire because of their race."
ReplyDeleteDiscriminatory act: Hiring the competent person.
Discriminatory result: Government lawsuit, fines, and forced hiring of idiot."
So you were lying about the "government" forcing a company to hire someone? I kinda guessed. Just as I guess persecution of Christians isn't really a thing and liberal tyranny. Not making a good case for your ideas Boss.
PX
"See where we're going?"
ReplyDeleteSo...worrying that there might be legal consequences from the government for say, burning my neighbor's house down or embezzling from my employer is just bitching and moaning about something that has never happened to me? Are you drunk? I'm glad you're not flying tomorrow.
"So you were lying about the "government" forcing a company to hire someone?"
ReplyDeleteThe United States government has never brought legal action against anyone based on racial hiring patterns?
Are you for real?
"I've never been "forced" by the "government" not to commit murder either."
ReplyDeleteI have. Good thing, too. There were about forty witnesses.
-Doug in Oakland
"So...worrying that there might be legal consequences from the government for say, burning my neighbor's house down or embezzling from my employer is just bitching and moaning about something that has never happened to me?"
ReplyDeleteHow is this analogy even remotely relevant to our discussion? You went out there extra with that one.
PX
"The United States government has never brought legal action against anyone based on racial hiring patterns?"
ReplyDeleteSure, in cases of outright discrimination. I already stated that earlier. You might want to read more carefully. At the same time you admit it has never happened to you or any company you worked for. Ironically enough it's happened to my company but there was clear evidence of discrimination.
PX
"Not sure I believe your account but here are the obvious flaws. 1. Your company had a shitty HR department. Why couldn't they find qualified candidates? They obviously don't know how to do their job so that's a reflection on them not the candidates. Either they are incompetent or purposely sent unqualified people which means there was a culture or racist/sexist behavior."
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Coward has obviously never looked at the students taking engineering courses in American universities. There are Whites. There are Indians (call center, not casino). There are some Arabs. There are LOTS of Chinese in the top institutions.
There are next to NO Blacks in most of the top tech schools. They're admitted with SAT scores hundreds of points below their putative peers, so they're grossly underprepared. They enroll, get their first whiff of calculus (or even linear algebra), and switch their major to African-American studies.
Six years later, after submitting a rap album as their master's thesis, they get a job in HR somewhere and badger the engineering manager to take on more Black guys.
"Odds are well over half of (the police and military personnel) won't recognize whoever comes up after a counter-Trump coup as their masters. Lots will go AWOL en masse with their gear."--Boldilocks
ReplyDelete"Lots" and "en masse"?
This phrase is brought to you courtesy of the Department of Redundancy Department.
So Boldilocks thinks large numbers of police and military personnel will abandon the relatively high respect they enjoy from many members of our society, and the relatively cushy retirement packages awaiting them, and face the hardships of guerrilla life, and risk imprisonment, and/or dying on a gurney or in a hail of bullets, all for the sake of Boldilocks's witless ideology?
Sh'yeah, riiiight...
"So Boldilocks thinks..."
ReplyDeleteNo. No, it doesn't.
-Doug in Oakland
IBW, let dumb ass dream. He has nothing else in his life except to dream about his white revolution. Funny how others do the work but he just sits on his couch. James will lead the lazy revolution. Ha!
ReplyDelete""Lots" and "en masse"?"
ReplyDeleteYes. Both large numbers and in groups rather than individually. You get what you pay for; if you don't like the phrasing, hire me an editor.
"So Boldilocks thinks large numbers of police and military personnel will abandon the relatively high respect they enjoy from many members of our society"
You must be kidding. These people have seen what the oligarchs have done to the VA and the people who rely on it. They treat veterans like shit. Disposable.
"and the relatively cushy retirement packages awaiting them"
Labor camps at starvation rations await the pawns, once their usefulness to the oligarchs is over. If they take over, the military isn't made up of citizens. It's made of slaves.
"and face the hardships of guerrilla life, and risk imprisonment, and/or dying on a gurney or in a hail of bullets, all for the sake of Boldilocks's witless ideology?"
This may surprise you, but members of the US armed forces swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution and a large majority take it seriously. Do you remember them removing Obama by force? That's because he was at least putatively the legitimately-elected president (though not really). A regime which takes over via a coup is illegitimate and un-Constitutional, and it becomes the military's duty to remove it.
Two hundred and forty one years ago, give or take, a bunch of men who had all the prospects of nice lives and cushy retirements instead pledged "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor" to get rid of an illegitimate, oppressive government. Being the sub-human that you are, I do not expect you to be able to understand such sentiments. But I do.
If by "coup" Boldilocks means impeachment or the 25th Amendment procedures, he does not know what he is talking about.
ReplyDeleteHis sick dream will never come true, and he needs to get a life--oh wait, as the late, great Molly Ivins observed, that is the problem of him and his kind: they can't get a life.
And they blame uppity Negroes and uppity wimmin and uppity furriners and uppity eggheads and uppity whoevers for that (so much for "The Party of Personal Responsibility").
As their President would say: Sad!
I guess James' "revolution" will happen the same time his book is released. Never.
ReplyDeleteBwahahahahahahaha!
150 IQ bwahahahahahaha!
The sad part about it is James is lonley. No normal woman would put up with an inbred loser who spends his time prepping for some massive race war that his great-grand daddy talked about 70 years ago but they swear will happen. The only women these guys might have a chance with are fellow inbreds with massive foreheads. Just imagine how horrible your life would be if all you did was hang around a bunch of stupid racists with bowl haircuts. I'd be upset all the time too but I'm normal and can pull attractive smart womens unlike Jamieboy. That pisses him off even more. I can pull the fine blondes he likes but don't give him the time of day. Hey James, next time I get with one of "your" womens I'll let her give you a shout out. Probably the closest you'll ever come to a real woman. Nyuk nyuk nyuk.
ReplyDeleteBaiting these mooks never gets old, does it? xD
ReplyDelete