DC Tom

I used to believe that. Until it became pretty clear a few years ago that they'd completely lost interest in doing so.

Which is the entire purpose of the accusation.

That's a weird definition of "annual salary." More of a pension, or a stipend.

Those are clearly metaphors, not literal threats.

Which is what they want. They WANT that fight. That "oppression" justifies their revolution.

You're assuming they're trying to expand their base of support. But that's clearly not their goal.

Once again, you're crazy... ...except it's the best explanation yet for why Senate Democrats didn't go this apeshit over Gorsuch.

"Cross a red line?" Please, anything but crossing another red line. We all know what happens when someone crosses a red line. We defer to the Russians. Wait...never mind...

Working pretty well so far.

Reminder to all Democrats: Feinstein sat on this for months, then slow-rolled it out. She does not have the accuser's interests at heart, like you're all saying. Feinstein is not championing women's rights here. Feinstein's just using the her for political purposes.

And Feinstein will complain to the media that Senate Republicans are raping her all over again, just like Kavanaugh did 35 years ago.

I'll do you one better: even false rape accusations are true, because women are systematically victimized by rape culture whether they're raped or not.

Interesting, too, that this explicit refusal to testify and challenge his appointment is also a subtle call to investigate the accusation, despite the FBI already passing on it... ...i.e., yet another delaying tactic. Unless it's a "bimbo eruption." I really wish some junior Republican senator would come out and call this a "bimbo eruption," just to force the Democrats to face their bull **** head on. You know that this is a common argument, right?

Shooting should start soon...

What? The accuser has no burden of proof any more? What the !@#$?

They're actually shocked that the president isn't deferring to the Deep State they claim doesn't exist.

I find I appreciate his live shows much more now that he's dead.

Yes. In fact, I've heard that it's hard to win in the NFL.

I think THIS time the mods have to admit I'm fully justified in posting the following: You're a complete moron. I don't know that they'll let me post that. But they can't argue I'm not right.

Y'know, you really nailed this one.

What's not a big deal? That you smoke pot? Or that the Obama Administration took a stricter line enforcing the law against pot smokers owning guns? Keep in mind, this time I'm not giving you **** for being a stoner (else I would have mentioned Tom Petty.) I'm just pointing out the objective fact: you smoke pot, so Obama's ATF was literally coming for your guns.

And she's showing her support for the workers by wearing them. Kulaks like you who don't understand that will be the first against the wall.

I'd say the Republicans do in this case, since they actually followed the Constitution and Senate procedure in denying Garland. Admittedly, it's not exactly the highest of high ground. Just higher than the Democrats' perpetual temper tantrum.

You smoke pot, right? Then it's illegal for you to own a gun. As ATF reaffirmed in a letter on 9/21/2011. Literally, the Obama administration went after your guns.

Don't you just hate it when you misplace your helmet in your workforce's personal finish zone? At least he walked off his sector beneath his personal energy, though.