16 thoughts on “1,012 Words

  1. Three of the Democraps that are rumored to be candidates for POTUS in 2020, did their grandstanding to oppose Kavanaugh. I think Senator Fluff spoke more words that day (no matter how stupid she sounded), than she has during her entire time in office.

  2. In the pic of Booker I’m pretty sure he is making a racist hand signal with his hand, there.

  3. It’s been awhile since I’ve seen an inane DG comment that just refuses to admit that humor exists.

  4. So, assume you believe the public should know something and the opposition is using procedure to hide it.

    What do you do? Nothing? Ask the Russians to (illegally) disclose it? Disclose it knowing it’s not a matter of national security? Which, to you, is the bold act?

    So, let’s say you believe in something very strongly but you are prevented by law from doing so.

    What do you do? Nothing? Ignore the law and subvert the Constitutional checks and balances as Reagan and Ollie North did in Iran/Contra and yet try to hide it to shield yourself from consequence – thereby putting lie to your “conscientious” stance? or conscientiously violate the law openly and declare you’ll accept the consequences, whatever they may be?

    Irony, you have a home on this site.

    Mitch, I have something about which I likely agree with you regarding Trump and the recent Op-Ed in the NY Times. I agree with you (I suspect) and Trump that the person who penned that editorial acted improperly. If you don’t agree with the actions of your boss, you don’t interfere with his/her execution of duties. You stand-up and object, and take the consequences, including being fired or leaving, or you LET him/her do as he/she intended and take the impacts that such actions will bring about. That’s how it’s supposed to work. In reflection on this op-ed, I think the author is a coward. Unwilling to face consequence (like North), and interfering in the proper course of the business of the Presidency. If Trump (or Obama or Bush or Reagan) choses to assassinate Assad, in violation of US and international law, then he/they deserve to suffer the consequences of their actions and the US public deserves to be the judge, just as they were the judge at election time, and doing something to “save” Trump from himself is subverting the will of the people – and is wrong.

  5. It’s been awhile since I’ve seen an inane DG comment that just refuses to admit that humor exists.

    And then fauxhautanus goes off about how Trump should be removed via the 25th amendment. This was fringe lefty Daily Kos talk until now. Expect the left to make it a chanting point befgore the midterms, and for it to backfire wildly

  6. Penigma wrote: “So, let’s say you believe in something very strongly but you are prevented by law from doing so.
    What do you do? Nothing?”

    I suppose Booker believes that I should obey the laws that he passes, regardless of how I feel about them. Hating Trump does not create a halo around the head. The word for being a legislator who doesn’t believe that laws apply to him is “pissant.” Is that racist?

  7. Prince of Darkness_666 on September 7, 2018 at 2:26 pm said:
    . . .
    And then fauxhautanus goes off about how Trump should be removed via the 25th amendment.
    . . .

    Based on an anonymous opinion piece in the Trump-hating New York Times. Imagine the Justice that Warren would inflict on you, if she had a chance. And she wants that chance very, very badly.

  8. Fauxcahontas’ tin foil war bonnet is more than a smidge too tight.

    Booker had his moment, an Andrew Tiernan moment.

  9. Swiftee: in your 7:49 you used one misspelled word that disguised blasphemy, seven single syllable anglo-saxon words, and just one four syllable Latinate word.
    In the future, you can avoid moderation by using more words that indicate your high social class. Words and phrases used in fox hunting would be ideal. You can find a glossary here: http://www.harvardfoxhounds.com/HFH_Fox_Hunting_Terms.html
    Note “bitch pack” is acceptable usage in fox hunting parley.

  10. No moderation for me. I suppose that Akismet knows that I have three (three!) college degrees. Thank God Akismet doesn’t cross reference college ranking!

  11. MP, actually Penigma is full of it. From The Hill, otherwise no friend of Trump:
    Booker acknowledged that he would be “knowingly violating the rules.”

    But according to a spokesman for the Senate Judiciary Committee, Booker was not breaking any confidentiality rules.

    “Restrictions were waived before 4:00 AM this morning and made ready for release,” the spokesman said in an email.

    Unless Penigma knows of some other brave act of defiance by that fraud Booker, he’s – heck, they’re both telling porkies (as they call lies in the UK). Again.

  12. I don’t know what kind of Privilege y’all are using to keep out of the moderation queue, and I don’t care. All I know is I don’t have it, and I want some damn reparations.

  13. I think, Swiftee, for this post, a number of us were Spartacus (aka in the moderation queue). I was, for a while. All except for MP with the three college degrees and the fancy lingo.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.