"Your side, your side." Here's the problem you've got now. I used to be on the other side, and fairly firmly planted, sure. Barack did pretty well. But now I'm not.
Why? They defend things I don't agree with - like ignoring law, reducing us to race alone, and castrating children. So I left. I have principles. I will admit surprise that so…
"Your side, your side." Here's the problem you've got now. I used to be on the other side, and fairly firmly planted, sure. Barack did pretty well. But now I'm not.
Why? They defend things I don't agree with - like ignoring law, reducing us to race alone, and castrating children. So I left. I have principles. I will admit surprise that so few left with me - you should laugh at my naivete. I do.
Now I'm on your side. Well, not your side, but the right side. Minus Trump, this side is where my conscience leads. I would have picked Tim Scott - now that he's out, I suppose I'm undecided.
But I can promise you that no blue butcher will get my tick, come hell or highest water. Recanting won't redeem them either. They had a chance and didn't take it. It is a stain that will not out.
Trump is no Caesar - he is a painted clown. I fear not the man - I fear America beclowned. Already you jokers have pied Lincoln's party in his name. Ignominy is the best your silly ilk deserve.
Yet Caesarism is an ancient error. You - the led - are in truth no more beguilted than a bull who kills in the stampede. I merely must lasso the bull that leads you, or see that it be done, and raise a nobler longhorn to his place. It won't be me. I'm not ambitious.
The other herd, we see, is riddled sick with rot contagious. I have a proven cure for that as well - in careful and methodic reason - but it needs applying, steer by steer, and there simply isn't time.
I have a syndrome which, where I see wrong, compels me to say right. It's not my fault, you see, it is my mother's. She's like this too - and worse for you, she was reading for the LSATs while I [was] formed and nursed.
If I be the only one to keep the faith of the Republic - if I bear all her virtues on my narrow shoulders - if the Framers in their sacred graves have naught for hope but my weak strength - so be it!
Begone you, who know not Cato's name, nor mark a speck of his old virtue! Out you spots! Out! Out!
I rather prefer presidents with some experience in governing. If I started to feel elsewise, why, then, I'd vote myself.
I understand how someone with a background in environmental law could be deeply concerned about vaccines, but they are simply not a risk of the same magnitude as petrochemical & pharmaceutical pollutants. It is far more dangerous to take SSRIs, let alone to live downstream of a coal mine. May I say that he is a lawyer, and hasn't much chemistry, and should stick to enforcing laws proposed by we who do.
I'll thank him for Pelham Bay Park. Ukraine's a tough one, but "USA's war on Russia" it's not. It's his war who started it, and my America is still the arsenal of Liberty.
Yet I will say, I think he doesn't deserve having his Google & WIkipedia sidebars say "vaccine skeptic" first and foremost - and if you would like to help his campaign, I suggest seeing about removing those. I would like to have it read "convicted heroin user" but that would be just me!
Pleading guilty is different than being convicted by a jury of your peers. Having your uncle and then your father killed in front of millions of Americans when I was a teenager would have f,**ked me up too to be real honest. After cleaning up and practicing law and winning cases against corporations that were required to clean up the Hudson River and then winning hundreds of millions of Dollars for backyard gardeners who got cancer from Roundup should be enough to atone from his past addiction but it won't be. Since you are one who likes to read, read his book The Real Dr Fauci. You'll love it.
I've had tragedies in my life and I haven't touched the junk - nor has it ever been in my car, on my person or in my house, that I might ever be accused of doing so. And certainly, were I born in the public eye, I would be doubly and triply careful. I've known some people who went that way - they're great, but I wouldn't trust them with a loan, or a car. Some did, and learned not to do again.
Consider the Biden tragedies. Joe's a good-hearted guy, but I wouldn't vote for Hunter. One cannot atone for weakness. Our highest must be held to the highest. They who mistreat their own bodies so direly and knowingly are not to be trusted in care of the body politic. I may sip whiskey, and puff a plant betimes, but I'm not injecting anything, nor am I the least bit tempted - and I'm not asking you to vote for me.
Lawyering is well and good - one doesn't require the same faith and credibility wanted in a President. We may judge lawyers by their arguments, and press them as we like, and need not trust them, and are rubes if we ever do, whatever their apparent character.
Here is a small sample of the doubt which a junkie carries always: Why this campaign? Why now? Why vaccines? Who cares? The plagues of our youth are misery, obesity and suicide. Cui bono? Him, for one - many a recent Republican has proved that campaigning sells some books.
(Which you are attempting to do here - If you want me to read something, send me a link to the text. Do you expect this poor farmer to pay?)
The phone and the "app" are brazenly acuter dangers - it's plain to anyone with eyes - why does he not doomsay on these? "The Real Zuckerberg"? "The Real Jack Dorsey"? "The Real YouTube"? Why not? - I know why not - because those books wouldn't sell. A brave elucidator must speak truth to people, as well as to power, whether or not each wants to hear it.
And a sage does not charge for the privilege of his words.
You are a strong person! For me I have too many logs in my own eye to think I can hold anyone else accountable for the splinters in theirs. In any event, as well read as you are you should still read The Real Anthony Fauci. And look up RFK On Wikipedia. It's obvious he didn't write it. Lol
It is impossible to prove anything to the willfully blind.
Well, I suppose I could ask you to provide an innocent explanation for the synchronized stopping of reporting across multiple states followed by statistically impossible jumps for Biden, observers being kicked to tricked out of the counting rooms followed by the count resuming (in one case them literally covering the windows so the observers couldn't see what they were up to), the sworn eyewitness statements, the miscellaneous statistical irregularities, etc.
However, no election fraud denier I've interacted with has provided any explanation that wasn't laughably stupid, and I have no reason to believe you're any different.
Even if your allegations were entirely true, they would pale in comparison to the average Gilded-Age election's level of skullduggery.
Somehow they refrained from shitting the bed over it quite so bad back then - and that's after they just got done literally killing each other for a fair while.
Maybe it was the cigars, but I suspect it was the book learnin', of which you are evidencing little.
Your forefathers put it all back together after the fucking Civil War. Compared to that, you are screaming murder over spilt milk. Read a fucking book.
> Even if your allegations were entirely true, they would pale in comparison to the average Gilded-Age election's level of skullduggery.
Yes election fraud always existed, but it had previously mostly been much more limited, i.e., only legitimately close presidential elections got swung.
> Your forefathers put it all back together after the fucking Civil War.
You really should look into how much violence that involved.
"Your side, your side." Here's the problem you've got now. I used to be on the other side, and fairly firmly planted, sure. Barack did pretty well. But now I'm not.
Why? They defend things I don't agree with - like ignoring law, reducing us to race alone, and castrating children. So I left. I have principles. I will admit surprise that so few left with me - you should laugh at my naivete. I do.
Now I'm on your side. Well, not your side, but the right side. Minus Trump, this side is where my conscience leads. I would have picked Tim Scott - now that he's out, I suppose I'm undecided.
But I can promise you that no blue butcher will get my tick, come hell or highest water. Recanting won't redeem them either. They had a chance and didn't take it. It is a stain that will not out.
Trump is no Caesar - he is a painted clown. I fear not the man - I fear America beclowned. Already you jokers have pied Lincoln's party in his name. Ignominy is the best your silly ilk deserve.
Yet Caesarism is an ancient error. You - the led - are in truth no more beguilted than a bull who kills in the stampede. I merely must lasso the bull that leads you, or see that it be done, and raise a nobler longhorn to his place. It won't be me. I'm not ambitious.
The other herd, we see, is riddled sick with rot contagious. I have a proven cure for that as well - in careful and methodic reason - but it needs applying, steer by steer, and there simply isn't time.
I have a syndrome which, where I see wrong, compels me to say right. It's not my fault, you see, it is my mother's. She's like this too - and worse for you, she was reading for the LSATs while I [was] formed and nursed.
If I be the only one to keep the faith of the Republic - if I bear all her virtues on my narrow shoulders - if the Framers in their sacred graves have naught for hope but my weak strength - so be it!
Begone you, who know not Cato's name, nor mark a speck of his old virtue! Out you spots! Out! Out!
Not all the pomp and majesty of Rome
Can raise her senate more than Cato's presence.
His virtues render our assembly awful,
They strike with something like religious fear,
And make even Cæsar tremble at the head
Of armies flush'd with conquest.
RFK Jr. Kennedy24.com. A two day read. Then search YouTube for his polling numbers. We don't have to choose between two dictators.
I rather prefer presidents with some experience in governing. If I started to feel elsewise, why, then, I'd vote myself.
I understand how someone with a background in environmental law could be deeply concerned about vaccines, but they are simply not a risk of the same magnitude as petrochemical & pharmaceutical pollutants. It is far more dangerous to take SSRIs, let alone to live downstream of a coal mine. May I say that he is a lawyer, and hasn't much chemistry, and should stick to enforcing laws proposed by we who do.
I'll thank him for Pelham Bay Park. Ukraine's a tough one, but "USA's war on Russia" it's not. It's his war who started it, and my America is still the arsenal of Liberty.
Yet I will say, I think he doesn't deserve having his Google & WIkipedia sidebars say "vaccine skeptic" first and foremost - and if you would like to help his campaign, I suggest seeing about removing those. I would like to have it read "convicted heroin user" but that would be just me!
Never trust a junkie. Sorry. No.
Pleading guilty is different than being convicted by a jury of your peers. Having your uncle and then your father killed in front of millions of Americans when I was a teenager would have f,**ked me up too to be real honest. After cleaning up and practicing law and winning cases against corporations that were required to clean up the Hudson River and then winning hundreds of millions of Dollars for backyard gardeners who got cancer from Roundup should be enough to atone from his past addiction but it won't be. Since you are one who likes to read, read his book The Real Dr Fauci. You'll love it.
I've had tragedies in my life and I haven't touched the junk - nor has it ever been in my car, on my person or in my house, that I might ever be accused of doing so. And certainly, were I born in the public eye, I would be doubly and triply careful. I've known some people who went that way - they're great, but I wouldn't trust them with a loan, or a car. Some did, and learned not to do again.
Consider the Biden tragedies. Joe's a good-hearted guy, but I wouldn't vote for Hunter. One cannot atone for weakness. Our highest must be held to the highest. They who mistreat their own bodies so direly and knowingly are not to be trusted in care of the body politic. I may sip whiskey, and puff a plant betimes, but I'm not injecting anything, nor am I the least bit tempted - and I'm not asking you to vote for me.
Lawyering is well and good - one doesn't require the same faith and credibility wanted in a President. We may judge lawyers by their arguments, and press them as we like, and need not trust them, and are rubes if we ever do, whatever their apparent character.
Here is a small sample of the doubt which a junkie carries always: Why this campaign? Why now? Why vaccines? Who cares? The plagues of our youth are misery, obesity and suicide. Cui bono? Him, for one - many a recent Republican has proved that campaigning sells some books.
(Which you are attempting to do here - If you want me to read something, send me a link to the text. Do you expect this poor farmer to pay?)
The phone and the "app" are brazenly acuter dangers - it's plain to anyone with eyes - why does he not doomsay on these? "The Real Zuckerberg"? "The Real Jack Dorsey"? "The Real YouTube"? Why not? - I know why not - because those books wouldn't sell. A brave elucidator must speak truth to people, as well as to power, whether or not each wants to hear it.
And a sage does not charge for the privilege of his words.
You are a strong person! For me I have too many logs in my own eye to think I can hold anyone else accountable for the splinters in theirs. In any event, as well read as you are you should still read The Real Anthony Fauci. And look up RFK On Wikipedia. It's obvious he didn't write it. Lol
> I have a syndrome which, where I see wrong, compels me to say right.
And yet you seemed to have no problem with the brazen election fraud.
You really need to work on your concern trolling.
Please show me this "election fraud." Prove it exists, or it doesn't exist.
> Prove it exists, or it doesn't exist.
It is impossible to prove anything to the willfully blind.
Well, I suppose I could ask you to provide an innocent explanation for the synchronized stopping of reporting across multiple states followed by statistically impossible jumps for Biden, observers being kicked to tricked out of the counting rooms followed by the count resuming (in one case them literally covering the windows so the observers couldn't see what they were up to), the sworn eyewitness statements, the miscellaneous statistical irregularities, etc.
However, no election fraud denier I've interacted with has provided any explanation that wasn't laughably stupid, and I have no reason to believe you're any different.
That's exactly what a beta male would say.
Even if your allegations were entirely true, they would pale in comparison to the average Gilded-Age election's level of skullduggery.
Somehow they refrained from shitting the bed over it quite so bad back then - and that's after they just got done literally killing each other for a fair while.
Maybe it was the cigars, but I suspect it was the book learnin', of which you are evidencing little.
Your forefathers put it all back together after the fucking Civil War. Compared to that, you are screaming murder over spilt milk. Read a fucking book.
> Even if your allegations were entirely true, they would pale in comparison to the average Gilded-Age election's level of skullduggery.
Yes election fraud always existed, but it had previously mostly been much more limited, i.e., only legitimately close presidential elections got swung.
> Your forefathers put it all back together after the fucking Civil War.
You really should look into how much violence that involved.