bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
maybe, people get all bent out of shape about abortion...this is America for god sakesUmm I think he was joking with you. And irishidiot definitely was since he has idiot in his name.
maybe, people get all bent out of shape about abortion...this is America for god sakesUmm I think he was joking with you. And irishidiot definitely was since he has idiot in his name.
You’re quite the deep thinker.maybe, people get all bent out of shape about abortion...this is America for god sakes
Lol.Lets me know they have nothing....attack the user name....or grammar.....
I can’t fully speak for Mr. Sand but I think we reasonably assume he means it’s about speaking out/caring for the life that has no voice for itself not the diabolically framed, “I MUST FULLY CONTROL ALL WOMEN’S BODIES *cackle*”It's gonna be a pretty tough sell to women that pregnancy doesn't have anything to do with a woman's body.
Who's "we"?I can’t fully speak for Mr. Sand but I think we reasonably assume he means it’s about speaking out/caring for the life that has no voice for itself not the diabolically framed, “I MUST FULLY CONTROL ALL WOMEN’S BODIES *cackle*”
Sure. As always it’s how hostile you want the language to be...it’s the pro-choicers version of “baby killer”. WhateverSure. That's reasonable. But you're still proponents of forced birth, and that's absolutely controlling a woman's body whether or not it's the motivation behind your belief or not.
*we can.Who's "we"?
And is it really a "cackle"? Albeit, you've exaggerated it a bit...
Well not sure that includes me if it's a collective "us" you are inferring.*we can.
I don’t know who is advising her, but I would urge her to testify confidently instead.The New York Times reports that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford will, tentatively, testify Thursday about Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged attempt to rape her when they were teenagers:
‘You’ didn’t do anything...I was helping Sand clarify his sentence which on its own sounded silly.I'm sorry. I didn't mean to use a term that offended you. What term would you prefer I use for using the force of law to make sure a woman keeps her baby to term and delivers it?
That would be an interesting argument.Or that it has nothing to do with a woman's body at all.
that's a mighty big If.I should be clearer. I’ve been fairly focused lately on a rather high stakes game of pitch and toss I’m playing.
I dont think the GOP has any real concerns about losing the senate. Better safe than sorry though, I guess.Normally, this analysis would be exactly right. If Nominee A is compromised, just yank him and send up Nominee B. But in the actual world that we live in, Nominee B has no chance of being confirmed if the Democrats take the Senate. So Rs are being given the choice of confirm the lousy nominee or lose the seat to the blue tribe. That's what's driving much of this.
Obviously much of this is the red tribe's doing. The blue tribe's thirst for revenge isn't helping.
Lol. Ok. Well, I do agree it is "diabolical"Absolutely a cackle.
Deal. Oh wait, keep da vacuums off da babies.Lol. Ok. Well, I do agree it is "diabolical"
Keep your gubmint out of womens bodies.
Dere not "babies" I'm doneDeal. Oh wait, keep da vacuums off da babies.
There you go making me think of Star Trek again. Any talk of split infinitives . . . .I don’t know who is advising her, but I would urge her to testify confidently instead.
I found it to be succinct. These guys are (mostly) smart enough to know what's what. Guys like Henry respond just to poke and create a kerfuffle (<---Note: nothing wrong with that).‘You’ didn’t do anything...I was helping Sand clarify his sentence which on its own sounded silly.
I do not respond just to poke and create a kerfuffle. I respect your right to your opinion, I am not a fan of abortion and it would probably end any romantic relationship I’ve ever been in if a woman I was with had one while we were together, but I do tend to feel that banning abortion is analogous to enslaving women. I try to get that viewpoint across as inoffensively as possible.I found it to be succinct. These guys are (mostly) smart enough to know what's what. Guys like Henry respond just to poke and create a kerfuffle (<---Note: nothing wrong with that).
I’d be interested to see the Venn Diagram of people who are sympathetic to alleged victims of Catholic Priest abuse who didn’t report it for decades versus people who are outraged by Christine Blasey Ford’s claims.
Yes. But I never thought the “buzz” story made sense according to what Ford has said. Plus it came from a deleted Facebook post.Ford’s friend who was at the party with her has no recollection of the party and states she doesn’t know Kavanaugh.
To me, this really brings into question all the rumblings about there being a buzz around school right after the alleged incident.
Wait, so there is time to do an investigation? Let’s get these people interviewed by the FBI.Ford’s friend who was at the party with her has no recollection of the party and states she doesn’t know Kavanaugh.
To me, this really brings into question all the rumblings about there being a buzz around school right after the alleged incident.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/22/politics/kavanaugh-ford-accuser-nomination/index.html
I never gave the "buzz" story any credibility to begin with. It wasn't consistent with Ford's account and got retracted nearly immediately.Ford’s friend who was at the party with her has no recollection of the party and states she doesn’t know Kavanaugh.
To me, this really brings into question all the rumblings about there being a buzz around school right after the alleged incident.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/22/politics/kavanaugh-ford-accuser-nomination/index.html
I thought i had read very early on that i had heard there were four boys and two girls. I had said something about that and it was questioned and i could not find the link. I wasnt too hung up on the detail so i didnt really look that hard and figured i could have easily been confused by the whole therapist note discrepancy.I never gave the "buzz" story any credibility to begin with. It wasn't consistent with Ford's account and got retracted nearly immediately.
However, the story originally was that there were four boys at this party, plus Ford. Now all of the sudden there's another girl there. That's not a huge issue, but it is a change. If only there were some kind of bureau, perhaps at the federal level, that could investigate this thing.
Five people were at this party?Ford’s friend who was at the party with her has no recollection of the party and states she doesn’t know Kavanaugh.
To me, this really brings into question all the rumblings about there being a buzz around school right after the alleged incident.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/22/politics/kavanaugh-ford-accuser-nomination/index.html
Yeah, I'm trying to avoid getting too worked up over every little twist and turn in this story. But as I think it about, it seems like this is possibly a big deal.It’s also interesting that Keyser says she doesn’t “know” Kavanaugh. I’d like to see a diagram of the five people connecting who claims to “know” whom.
The psychiatrist's notes said Ford said there were 4 boys in the room, and Ford corrected that by saying that it was a misunderstanding and actually there were 4 boys at the party. Now there were 3 boys, 2 girls (including Ford).I never gave the "buzz" story any credibility to begin with. It wasn't consistent with Ford's account and got retracted nearly immediately.
However, the story originally was that there were four boys at this party, plus Ford. Now all of the sudden there's another girl there. That's not a huge issue, but it is a change. If only there were some kind of bureau, perhaps at the federal level, that could investigate this thing.
Huh. Ford's name is shared with the WH before article publishes. Someone immediately contacts Whelan who immediately views her LinkedIn Page and then coordinates with a conservative hatchet-job PR firm to defame an innocent man and divert attention away from Kavanaugh.it appears someone communicated her name to Whelan before it was made public. (Last Sunday, “Ford alerted an associate via email that Whelan had looked at her LinkedIn page, according to the email, which was reviewed by The Post. LinkedIn allows some subscribers to see who views their pages. Ford sent the email about 90 minutes after The Post shared her name with a White House spokesman and hours before her identity was revealed in a story posted on its website.”
Has that swayed your opinion any?Yeah, I'm trying to avoid getting too worked up over every little twist and turn in this story. But as I think it about, it seems like this is possibly a big deal.
Brett Kavanaugh has an obvious incentive to lie. So does Mark Judge, who isn't even reliable to begin with. I don't know enough about the "PJ" person to have an opinion about him, and I don't see it as noteworthy that he doesn't remember a party that would have been just another get-together for him.
I do find it noteworthy that a lifelong friend of Ford says that not only does she not recall this party (again, not surprising) but that she doesn't even know Brett Kavanaugh. This is coming from someone who says she believes Ford's accusation, is a personal friend of her's, and is apparently a Democrat. This is somebody who has every reason to weigh in on behalf of Ford, and instead she's adding a detail that seems pretty exculpatory to me.
I need to think it over. I'm heading out to the Bills-Vikings game in a couple of minutes so I'm going to step away from this story for a while.Has that swayed your opinion any?
You have to remember that these kids did not go to school together. So lots of parties are at peoples homes who you don’t really know, as compared to coed HS where you see the people every day.I do find it noteworthy that a lifelong friend of Ford says that not only does she not recall this party (again, not surprising) but that she doesn't even know Brett Kavanaugh. This is coming from someone who says she believes Ford's accusation, is a personal friend of her's, and is apparently a Democrat. This is somebody who has every reason to weigh in on behalf of Ford, and instead she's adding a detail that seems pretty exculpatory to me.
Story broke on Thursday where we found out that it was somebody that lives in the bay area and is affiliated with Stanford and knew kavanaugh from high school. How hard would it be for somebody inside Kavanaugh's circle to find a woman on linkedin with that criteria before sunday evening? I think he should be asked some questions about it to be sure, but definitely not as damning as many people are making it seem.Huh. Ford's name is shared with the WH before article publishes. Someone immediately contacts Whelan who immediately views her LinkedIn Page and then coordinates with a conservative hatchet-job PR firm to defame an innocent man and divert attention away from Kavanaugh.
Seems like we'd better get to the bottom of that before we confirm. Put The Post reporter and Whelan under oath in front of the committee to find out who told him and what Kavanaugh knew about the scheme.
Would certainly be grounds for Impeachment if Kavanaugh denies involvement and it was later shown that he was in the middle of it. Exactly how did the WH know to contact Kavanaugh's friend (Whelan) in the first place?
(Can't believe Republicans haven't ditched the cement boots yet. The water is rising and there's still a lot of rain to fall.)
There were only 5-6 people at this partyYou have to remember that these kids did not go to school together. So lots of parties are at peoples homes who you don’t really know, as compared to coed HS where you see the people every day.
Given there is very little else to grab onto this is true.By far the most important piece of evidence thus far is the note from the therapist back in 2012.
I don’t know if we want to to set a precedent where one accusation with zero corroboration is enough to block the confirmation of an otherwise highly qualified judge.I don't get it, whats so hard here......screw this guy and nominate someone else......
#8 is awesome.Matthias said:Politico collated some political cartoons from this week. Since Republicans only know how to attack it's not a good look for them.
https://www.politico.com/gallery/2018/09/21/the-nations-cartoonists-on-the-week-in-politics-003005?slide=0
Kavanaugh’s pattern of behavior of not telling the truth and his handlers’ pattern of behavior of concealing information at every opportunity should be compelling.Given there is very little else to grab onto this is true.
I don’t want to, either. Fortunately, that’s not even remotely close to what’s going on here.I don’t know if we want to to set a precedent where one accusation with zero corroboration is enough to block the confirmation of an otherwise highly qualified judge.
Practice. Lots of practice.Matthias said:I'm not sure how Republicans are holding onto the doublespeak ideas of this investigation being flawed because there's no evidence but that conducting an investigation to see what evidence could be uncovered is a waste of time.
New to Republican ideas?Matthias said:I'm not sure how Republicans are holding onto the doublespeak ideas of this investigation being flawed because there's no evidence but that conducting an investigation to see what evidence could be uncovered is a waste of time.