Jump to content

SKJ

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1726
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SKJ

  1. This guy's a boxer. Beautiful to see.
  2. You know what would be even better? If the republicucks would just by their own values before they try and implement them on everyone else. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds
  3. You're thinking of Chips
  4. I'm guessing he's still trying to salvage a story that he's innocent... If he can shut down the investigation through firing at last ol' Rod, and if he can get cover from the Supremes, then maybe he can shut it all down
  5. This is just not factual
  6. Probably better than continually fucking over Chuck. What fails to remain unsaid is that one party could snap to what's right, correct itself, and win the Chuck's of the world right back. Republicucks could win more by being earnest than by being enemies.
  7. Or, and I'm just spitballin here, they could also be as good as third graders and love up to the standards they learned in kindergarten. Lulz. The very definition of hypocrisy kind of speaks directly to this situation. But who are we kidding, right? Except I'm a man of honor, and politicians are behaving in such a way that even my kids know is wrong. Of course, who needs standards, right? I don't expect republicucks to understand, but I hope you never forget, things go the other way, too.
  8. This is not quite accurate. The "other side" stated that they would not like anyone to be nominated before midterms, an assertion that the republicucks went with regarding Garland. So, in a sense, they just wanted the republicucks to live up to their own bullshit. (Which, of course, was too much to ask...) Once that was settled, by the republicuck's own actions, then became the questions of character of the nominee... (It's truly funny how hypocritical they have shown themselves to be during this whole process, though not surprising at all...) I mean, sure, if you can't separate those issues, one might think they are the same, but let's not be disingenuous about the whole deal. They created the precedent with Garland, so one might be led to believe that they would live up to their own standards, but that would be too much to ask. But to say that they would have "smeared" any nomination because of their own hypocrisy isn't the case, but it makes a good strawman. If the r-cucks cared anything at all about the quality of their nominee, they obviously wouldn't have jammed this guy through, and would have let the libcucjs prove their hypothesis, and withdrawn, and nominated someone without so much bullshit surrounding them, thereby proving their point. But alas, we are not a nation of honor after all.
  9. As I'm sure everyone knows. I don't even watch sports. I just love this place. That being said, I'm a fan of Sam (don't know how to spell his last name). That's some badass shit.
  10. With this post, you are making several assumptions that we cannot know. Did the "other side" bring up concerns about a nominee? Yes, but those concerns had to be there to be brought up. You act as if the "other side" manufactured these concerns. The nominee lied. A bunch. All throughout his hearing. They also refused to produce a shitload of information. As to your assertion that they would have smeared any conservative nominee, well, it's apparent that no one could know. It's a very strange argument. It implies a sort of prescience that I don't possess. I wish the republicucks would've pulled him and nominated a person without so much baggage so we could have seen if that were correct, but they didn't. They blew that chance.
  11. I think it's more likely that the definition of conservative has changed. Sure, he's a republican. I'll give you that. I really just wish everyone in this country could take a step back and look at it with fresh eyes. There's way too many posters here that are actually cheering for a supreme Court appointment. Actually cheering that their team rammed a nominee with glaring flaws through. You are not winning. We, as a country, are not winning. It's really not even a game.
  12. I believe that he's probably not even a strong conservative. He's, at best, a great politician. At worst, he's a complete hypocrite. I really don't understand how everyone sees him as a strong conservative. All of those values you think he holds are just some set of nonsensical ideals that only his supporters believe in, like a televangelist. Of course, it's most like modern day conservatives and their values... Strong opinions, absolutely no follow through. Just look at the deficit
  13. I just don't understand how the republicans, and their followers, think this is a win. But then again, I've never understood people that want to make enemies. Only complete fools enjoy having enemies
  14. No. I mean, especially now, what interests globally could align with an American? And no, I have never had representation.
  15. I don't really give a shit. Things are going to do what they do. Kavanaugh is a piece of shit, just like all the rest. And the games continue. I learned a long time ago that my beliefs will never be represented in government. Last thing I'm going to do is lose sleep over any of it.
  16. I guess it's working fine?
  17. And, so, 58 percent of white people voted for a racist...
  18. This sounds just a bit racist. I mean, are there white women who love their black, or Latino, or Asian men? Mixed race families? Just sounds a bit like a southern klansman...
  19. I think it's better that we show these Republicans where the safe space is, right? Why are they complaining so hard, the recucks?
  20. So, what's up with this judge guy?
  21. More like maneschewitz
  22. I mean, why can't we have a white lives matter? And what about white history month? /S Keep on whistling
  23. Ok. So we're going to force births. Are we then going to pay for those children for 18 years and give them a fair shake in life? Yeah, thought not.
  24. Eh, that's sort of a 'par for the course' thing
  25. In the feds they call it the "ringleader"
×
×
  • Create New...