Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu: She's "meh". Not completely ugly. Theoretically she should be attractive but something throws her face off a bit. Her mouth maybe? By Congress standards she's Miss America but personally I'm not super attracted to her. AOC is pretty. Damn smart too......but......saw Nancy Mace as a panelist in the video below a couple weeks back and OMG!! .....very nice!
I mean, is she smart? Based on what? I'm not saying she's dumb but she definitely comes off as ditzy sometimes.
Mace is another where in some pictures she's pretty hot and in others she's so so. When you throw those bittties in the equation though... Let's just say I wouldn't kick her out of bed for eating crackers.
R.I.P. #94 MARSHAWN KNEELAND - DC4L
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu: She's "meh". Not completely ugly. Theoretically she should be attractive but something throws her face off a bit. Her mouth maybe? By Congress standards she's Miss America but personally I'm not super attracted to her. AOC is pretty. Damn smart too......but......saw Nancy Mace as a panelist in the video below a couple weeks back and OMG!! .....very nice!
I mean, is she smart? Based on what? I'm not saying she's dumb but she definitely comes off as ditzy sometimes.
Mace is another where in some pictures she's pretty hot and in others she's so so. When you throw those bittties in the equation though... Let's just say I wouldn't kick her out of bed for eating crackers.
AOC threatens to write up impeachment articles for a SCOTUS judge....
This ditz thinks people take her serious. You go ahead, sweetie, write away. While you're at it, stomp your feet & hold your breath til you turn blue, lol.
AOC threatens to write up impeachment articles for a SCOTUS judge....
This ditz thinks people take her serious. You go ahead, sweetie, write away. While you're at it, stomp your feet & hold your breath til you turn blue, lol.
AOC threatens to write up impeachment articles for a SCOTUS judge.... This ditz thinks people take her serious. You go ahead, sweetie, write away. While you're at it, stomp your feet & hold your breath til you turn blue, lol.
AOCheese is at it again.
She wants to impeach the SCOTUS......just not sure which one yet.
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:
AOC threatens to write up impeachment articles for a SCOTUS judge.... This ditz thinks people take her serious. You go ahead, sweetie, write away. While you're at it, stomp your feet & hold your breath til you turn blue, lol.
AOCheese is at it again.
She wants to impeach the SCOTUS......just not sure which one yet.
You two are actually giddy over this partisan mess, why is that?
You think it is a good thing that the SCOTUS is as partisan as Covers and the real true purpose of the supreme court is so completely screwed up and partisan that it actually harms the citizens it is meant to protect?
This ruling is a joke so was Roe Wade so is many things this stacked partisan slop fest keeps wrecking the country. They are supposed to represent all of the citizens not just the ones that their ultra conservative wives tell them to represent. You two replying like this is very poor and narrow minded and quite disturbing.
You two are actually giddy over this partisan mess, why is that?
You think it is a good thing that the SCOTUS is as partisan as Covers and the real true purpose of the supreme court is so completely screwed up and partisan that it actually harms the citizens it is meant to protect?
This ruling is a joke so was Roe Wade so is many things this stacked partisan slop fest keeps wrecking the country. They are supposed to represent all of the citizens not just the ones that their ultra conservative wives tell them to represent. You two replying like this is very poor and narrow minded and quite disturbing.
And that is the problem. This country isnt Uniman HOA community where people are all like you and in fact MOST people are not like you. When you live in a society you have to think of OTHERS are as how you vote, not yourself. Your political, religious and social views are not important to society, in fact often times you have to do the OPPOSITE of what you personally want or think is correct.
What you do inside your home with your family is where your beliefs are to be put in action, outside that your only objective is to be a functioning, positive, accepting, considerate member of society and NOTHING ELSE.
You are correct about this SCOTUS group, they are partisan pikers and are wrecking this country because they decide based on what their spouses tell them to and what partisan political beliefs they have, and that is NOT THEIR JOB.
This is a total wacked out mess and the more partisan we make it the worse it gets for everyone, so stop thinking about yourself and start thinking of the better good for everyone else and especially those who are NOT like you.
@UNIMAN
And that is the problem. This country isnt Uniman HOA community where people are all like you and in fact MOST people are not like you. When you live in a society you have to think of OTHERS are as how you vote, not yourself. Your political, religious and social views are not important to society, in fact often times you have to do the OPPOSITE of what you personally want or think is correct.
What you do inside your home with your family is where your beliefs are to be put in action, outside that your only objective is to be a functioning, positive, accepting, considerate member of society and NOTHING ELSE.
You are correct about this SCOTUS group, they are partisan pikers and are wrecking this country because they decide based on what their spouses tell them to and what partisan political beliefs they have, and that is NOT THEIR JOB.
This is a total wacked out mess and the more partisan we make it the worse it gets for everyone, so stop thinking about yourself and start thinking of the better good for everyone else and especially those who are NOT like you.
I'm more apt to respect the opinions of people versed in Constitutional law than some airhead with an economics degree. I'm actually surprised at the partisanship as well. The ruling should've been unanimous, not 6-3, with libs dissenting. Your opinions are yours.....I could also say that your reply is narrow-minded & poor but it wouldn't change anything.
@wallstreetcappers
I'm more apt to respect the opinions of people versed in Constitutional law than some airhead with an economics degree. I'm actually surprised at the partisanship as well. The ruling should've been unanimous, not 6-3, with libs dissenting. Your opinions are yours.....I could also say that your reply is narrow-minded & poor but it wouldn't change anything.
My opinion is about society not my personal religious or political beliefs. I vote and support what best serves OTHERS not what I think is best for ME and my narrow mindset. The fact you think the decision should have been a ZERO shows you really are not concerned about checks and balances and accountability. Nobody even the POTUS is above being responsible for their actions, especially when the impact to society is large. It doesnt matter that they have a law degree and experience because they are not serving the constitution and society by ruling as they have been.
Its pretty obvious they are completely wishy washy like that abhorrent states rights scam they pulled, they did not rule decisively it was generalizations and caves to which a slick politician and lawyers will hide and feast. This was not a ruling it was a copout and a raid on the constitution. Politicians and especially the POTUS need to have the highest of standards and no exclusions or loopholes when their actions have such tremendous consequences.
My comments have absolutely nothing to do with my personal beliefs or how I behave in my home with my family, it is too bad that people here and in political power cannot be intelligent enough to serve everyone equally and fairly and uphold the law for everyone no matter what.
@THEMUGG
My opinion is about society not my personal religious or political beliefs. I vote and support what best serves OTHERS not what I think is best for ME and my narrow mindset. The fact you think the decision should have been a ZERO shows you really are not concerned about checks and balances and accountability. Nobody even the POTUS is above being responsible for their actions, especially when the impact to society is large. It doesnt matter that they have a law degree and experience because they are not serving the constitution and society by ruling as they have been.
Its pretty obvious they are completely wishy washy like that abhorrent states rights scam they pulled, they did not rule decisively it was generalizations and caves to which a slick politician and lawyers will hide and feast. This was not a ruling it was a copout and a raid on the constitution. Politicians and especially the POTUS need to have the highest of standards and no exclusions or loopholes when their actions have such tremendous consequences.
My comments have absolutely nothing to do with my personal beliefs or how I behave in my home with my family, it is too bad that people here and in political power cannot be intelligent enough to serve everyone equally and fairly and uphold the law for everyone no matter what.
So you think a president has no immunity for presidential actions?
What the dems have done is open Pandora's box. Biden said get the vaccine and you won't get COVID. Thousands of fully vaccinated died from COVID. So let's put Biden on trial in North Dakota with a jury of his "peers". And the family's of immigrant rape and death victims should have their turn.
The foaming at the mouth hatred of Trump has you all insane!
@wallstreetcappers
So you think a president has no immunity for presidential actions?
What the dems have done is open Pandora's box. Biden said get the vaccine and you won't get COVID. Thousands of fully vaccinated died from COVID. So let's put Biden on trial in North Dakota with a jury of his "peers". And the family's of immigrant rape and death victims should have their turn.
The foaming at the mouth hatred of Trump has you all insane!
Says Trump who while the urinal is still steaming starts to try and worm out of his legal woes.
I didnt mention Biden or Trump, that is your scheme not mine. I did not get the vac, nobody was forced to get the vac and in fact it was bipartisan from all sides to get the vac. You cant pin Covid on Biden no more than you can Trump, that is just stupid partisan rhetoric deflection.
Your reply is more of the same deflective partisan useless nonsense, it would be cool to discuss content and not that you adore Trump and despise Biden.
@UNIMAN
Says Trump who while the urinal is still steaming starts to try and worm out of his legal woes.
I didnt mention Biden or Trump, that is your scheme not mine. I did not get the vac, nobody was forced to get the vac and in fact it was bipartisan from all sides to get the vac. You cant pin Covid on Biden no more than you can Trump, that is just stupid partisan rhetoric deflection.
Your reply is more of the same deflective partisan useless nonsense, it would be cool to discuss content and not that you adore Trump and despise Biden.
@UNIMAN Says Trump who while the urinal is still steaming starts to try and worm out of his legal woes. I didnt mention Biden or Trump, that is your scheme not mine. I did not get the vac, nobody was forced to get the vac and in fact it was bipartisan from all sides to get the vac. You cant pin Covid on Biden no more than you can Trump, that is just stupid partisan rhetoric deflection. Your reply is more of the same deflective partisan useless nonsense, it would be cool to discuss content and not that you adore Trump and despise Biden.
No it is not nonsense you just refuse to face it. And you never answered the question as usual.
Do you think a president should have immunity for presidential actions?
I didn't mention steaming urinals that's your scheme, not mine. And I never mentioned forced vacs. Cannot tell you how many idiots told me, "Oh, I'm OK, I can cozy up to any large crowd, I'm fully vaxed and boostered!" I am not pinning COVID on Biden. He said get the shots and you won't even get COVID two days after the UK announced 40% of COVID hospitalizations were the fully vaxed!! HE LIED, ON PURPOSE. HE KNEW DELTA WAS GETTING PAST THE VACCINE, ANYBODY WITH EYES AND EARS KNEW. Yet idiots died because they listened to him. Those that survived sought mental therapy for COVID SHAME.
Bottom line is what dems have started needs to stop NOW! That BS NY trial exposed it all, just like Joe's debate performance.
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@UNIMAN Says Trump who while the urinal is still steaming starts to try and worm out of his legal woes. I didnt mention Biden or Trump, that is your scheme not mine. I did not get the vac, nobody was forced to get the vac and in fact it was bipartisan from all sides to get the vac. You cant pin Covid on Biden no more than you can Trump, that is just stupid partisan rhetoric deflection. Your reply is more of the same deflective partisan useless nonsense, it would be cool to discuss content and not that you adore Trump and despise Biden.
No it is not nonsense you just refuse to face it. And you never answered the question as usual.
Do you think a president should have immunity for presidential actions?
I didn't mention steaming urinals that's your scheme, not mine. And I never mentioned forced vacs. Cannot tell you how many idiots told me, "Oh, I'm OK, I can cozy up to any large crowd, I'm fully vaxed and boostered!" I am not pinning COVID on Biden. He said get the shots and you won't even get COVID two days after the UK announced 40% of COVID hospitalizations were the fully vaxed!! HE LIED, ON PURPOSE. HE KNEW DELTA WAS GETTING PAST THE VACCINE, ANYBODY WITH EYES AND EARS KNEW. Yet idiots died because they listened to him. Those that survived sought mental therapy for COVID SHAME.
Bottom line is what dems have started needs to stop NOW! That BS NY trial exposed it all, just like Joe's debate performance.
Would the SCOTUS had to make this ruling if the Dem's didn't go full out political hit job on Trump? Who started this fight, who threw the first punches? Actions have consequences, and sometimes they backfire in your face
@wallstreetcappers
it is too bad that people hereand in political power cannot be intelligent enough to serve everyone equally and fairly and uphold the law for everyone no matter what.
I agree with this statement, but you should've omitted the 'people here' part. That clearly makes you think you are above everyone else here and our opinions mean squat.
the rest of it I agree with, these dirtbag politicians on both sides of aisle get the power and won't give it up
When you hear the saying 'money is the root of all evil' it should also say POWER too. Money and Power don't change people, but it does bring out the worst side of people. These people haven't changed, the money and power has just allowed them to become who they really are
Would the SCOTUS had to make this ruling if the Dem's didn't go full out political hit job on Trump? Who started this fight, who threw the first punches? Actions have consequences, and sometimes they backfire in your face
@wallstreetcappers
it is too bad that people hereand in political power cannot be intelligent enough to serve everyone equally and fairly and uphold the law for everyone no matter what.
I agree with this statement, but you should've omitted the 'people here' part. That clearly makes you think you are above everyone else here and our opinions mean squat.
the rest of it I agree with, these dirtbag politicians on both sides of aisle get the power and won't give it up
When you hear the saying 'money is the root of all evil' it should also say POWER too. Money and Power don't change people, but it does bring out the worst side of people. These people haven't changed, the money and power has just allowed them to become who they really are
Justice Sotomayor writes "if President wants to send in Seal Team 6 and kills their political opponent, and he's still Immune".. refers to this case as making a President "KING"..The dangerous and reprehensible obvious disdain for this case IS what's very very disturbing AND narrow minded. How could any Justice write that in a dissent.... talk about deranged, From a Justice fingertips..??? Doesn't HELP whatsoever. Pretty Divisive. From a SCOTUS Justice no less.
SCOTUS is our 3rd Branch trying to keep other 2 in line with Constitution. Sorry you're so upset with these decisions.
I really enjoy perusing your posts and informing this Forum of your positions. Let's just say we agree to disagree Civilly if that's OK .
@wallstreetcappers
Justice Sotomayor writes "if President wants to send in Seal Team 6 and kills their political opponent, and he's still Immune".. refers to this case as making a President "KING"..The dangerous and reprehensible obvious disdain for this case IS what's very very disturbing AND narrow minded. How could any Justice write that in a dissent.... talk about deranged, From a Justice fingertips..??? Doesn't HELP whatsoever. Pretty Divisive. From a SCOTUS Justice no less.
SCOTUS is our 3rd Branch trying to keep other 2 in line with Constitution. Sorry you're so upset with these decisions.
I really enjoy perusing your posts and informing this Forum of your positions. Let's just say we agree to disagree Civilly if that's OK .
One thing that keeps getting buried by heads of the DNC or the 'Deep State' is why haven't there been one charge or lawsuit in these Epstein files?
If they had Trump dead to rights over the photo of them together how come that has never been brought? Because the list has some very BIG names on it, very damaging and it is a complete cover up. That perv had every shithead in DC now on tape, and the dirty Dems won't push this for the obvious reasons.
He flew Clinton on his private jet with underage girls...had him dead to rights after that. How deep does the shithole go?
One thing that keeps getting buried by heads of the DNC or the 'Deep State' is why haven't there been one charge or lawsuit in these Epstein files?
If they had Trump dead to rights over the photo of them together how come that has never been brought? Because the list has some very BIG names on it, very damaging and it is a complete cover up. That perv had every shithead in DC now on tape, and the dirty Dems won't push this for the obvious reasons.
He flew Clinton on his private jet with underage girls...had him dead to rights after that. How deep does the shithole go?
Your question is a blanket statement so given that you are baiting I will play along. The answer to a general question since you posed it exactly that way is NO I do not agree that a president or anyone should have a blanket generalized immunity for their actions.
Question though...its obvious I do not support the decision, does that not give the answer you were asking already? If you pose a silly generalization then I will answer it in the way you asked it. If my choice is YES to all or NO to all as you asked, I answer NO to all.
Now would you actually like to ask the real question or are you just looking to make a fool out of yourself with a baited question as we all can see?
@UNIMAN
Your question is a blanket statement so given that you are baiting I will play along. The answer to a general question since you posed it exactly that way is NO I do not agree that a president or anyone should have a blanket generalized immunity for their actions.
Question though...its obvious I do not support the decision, does that not give the answer you were asking already? If you pose a silly generalization then I will answer it in the way you asked it. If my choice is YES to all or NO to all as you asked, I answer NO to all.
Now would you actually like to ask the real question or are you just looking to make a fool out of yourself with a baited question as we all can see?
I have no sympathy for Trump, the actions he took had consequences and the jury found him guilty. Trump never takes responsibility for his actions. At the trial Trump thinks he is above respect and consideration in how he spoke towards the judge and his staff, over and over. Trump needs to give respect and consideration to others, if you notice that most of his issues in life legally are for not giving respect and consideration to others. Trump has one agenda and it is to do whatever he wants to forward his ambitions without consideration and respect for others.
You Trump fans need to seek out higher value, higher character individuals to support and revere. Trump is scraping the lowest gene pool in the barrel and he is causing serious divide in society and we can demand much much better.
@unplucked_gem
I have no sympathy for Trump, the actions he took had consequences and the jury found him guilty. Trump never takes responsibility for his actions. At the trial Trump thinks he is above respect and consideration in how he spoke towards the judge and his staff, over and over. Trump needs to give respect and consideration to others, if you notice that most of his issues in life legally are for not giving respect and consideration to others. Trump has one agenda and it is to do whatever he wants to forward his ambitions without consideration and respect for others.
You Trump fans need to seek out higher value, higher character individuals to support and revere. Trump is scraping the lowest gene pool in the barrel and he is causing serious divide in society and we can demand much much better.
Are you attempting to get banned saying crap like that to me? Inform the forum of my views? What the crap does that mean?
You fault the dissenter for stating a path and outcome that COULD come from this decision? So what if she used the word KING, it is actually applicable as in other countries this identical situation takes place, the legal rights of a single leader to take power irrespective of the rights of others and do great harm in the process. Her words might seem strong but she has good reason to say them. The Supreme Court is to make sure our freedoms and rights are protected if another branch is not properly doing so or if there are reasons for clarification and legal explanation The purpose of the court is not to shift the balance of power to the executive branch as they DID, it is not to remove the rights of women as they did, it is not to deflect responsibility and balance by giving one body that repeatedly shows they cannot have responsibility which is the state, this group is doing largely inversely what they are there to do.
I hope that these abuses they are taking will lead to reform of the bench and that changes will come to that group and give them reason to return to the true purpose they are meant to serve which is an unbiased, partisan free protection of the laws of this country and to protect all citizens. They are completely unable to check their political partisanship and in doing so are not properly performing their jobs.
@Crusher13
Are you attempting to get banned saying crap like that to me? Inform the forum of my views? What the crap does that mean?
You fault the dissenter for stating a path and outcome that COULD come from this decision? So what if she used the word KING, it is actually applicable as in other countries this identical situation takes place, the legal rights of a single leader to take power irrespective of the rights of others and do great harm in the process. Her words might seem strong but she has good reason to say them. The Supreme Court is to make sure our freedoms and rights are protected if another branch is not properly doing so or if there are reasons for clarification and legal explanation The purpose of the court is not to shift the balance of power to the executive branch as they DID, it is not to remove the rights of women as they did, it is not to deflect responsibility and balance by giving one body that repeatedly shows they cannot have responsibility which is the state, this group is doing largely inversely what they are there to do.
I hope that these abuses they are taking will lead to reform of the bench and that changes will come to that group and give them reason to return to the true purpose they are meant to serve which is an unbiased, partisan free protection of the laws of this country and to protect all citizens. They are completely unable to check their political partisanship and in doing so are not properly performing their jobs.
It's not a baited question at all. Congress is charge of the President and can remove him/her for presidential and even private actions.
My pointing out Biden and what he could stand trial for are examples. We cannot go down this road if this country expects to survive.
MSN; An obscure New York state election law that has rarely been prosecuted over five decades has been dusted off by Manhattan prosecutors and elevated to a prominent role in Donald Trump’s criminal trial over allegedly falsifying documents related to a hush money payment during the 2016 election campaign.
The underlying crime that motivated Trump’s alleged misconduct, prosecutors said in court, was a conspiracy to defraud voters in his presidential campaign.
Now, saying in a presidential debate that "50 former intellegence officers say the laptop is Russian disinformation" is NOT DEFRAUDING VOTERS??? ALL THE MEDIA AND INTERNET BANNING THAT IMFORMATION???? Your hypocrites of the highest degree.
It's not a baited question at all. Congress is charge of the President and can remove him/her for presidential and even private actions.
My pointing out Biden and what he could stand trial for are examples. We cannot go down this road if this country expects to survive.
MSN; An obscure New York state election law that has rarely been prosecuted over five decades has been dusted off by Manhattan prosecutors and elevated to a prominent role in Donald Trump’s criminal trial over allegedly falsifying documents related to a hush money payment during the 2016 election campaign.
The underlying crime that motivated Trump’s alleged misconduct, prosecutors said in court, was a conspiracy to defraud voters in his presidential campaign.
Now, saying in a presidential debate that "50 former intellegence officers say the laptop is Russian disinformation" is NOT DEFRAUDING VOTERS??? ALL THE MEDIA AND INTERNET BANNING THAT IMFORMATION???? Your hypocrites of the highest degree.
@UNIMAN Your question is a blanket statement so given that you are baiting I will play along. The answer to a general question since you posed it exactly that way is NO I do not agree that a president or anyone should have a blanket generalized immunity for their actions. Question though...its obvious I do not support the decision, does that not give the answer you were asking already? If you pose a silly generalization then I will answer it in the way you asked it. If my choice is YES to all or NO to all as you asked, I answer NO to all. Now would you actually like to ask the real question or are you just looking to make a fool out of yourself with a baited question as we all can see?
@wallstreetcappers
You answered it and the majority agree with that position.
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@UNIMAN Your question is a blanket statement so given that you are baiting I will play along. The answer to a general question since you posed it exactly that way is NO I do not agree that a president or anyone should have a blanket generalized immunity for their actions. Question though...its obvious I do not support the decision, does that not give the answer you were asking already? If you pose a silly generalization then I will answer it in the way you asked it. If my choice is YES to all or NO to all as you asked, I answer NO to all. Now would you actually like to ask the real question or are you just looking to make a fool out of yourself with a baited question as we all can see?
@wallstreetcappers
You answered it and the majority agree with that position.
Hot Forum Topics
