Jump to content

attrayant

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    5,202
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by attrayant

  1. 13 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

    Right then, so the party of emotionally irrational activists harassing and shouting down people, pouring drinks on innocent people on the right and an occasional attempted assissination of a congressman. And all of a sudden it is a retaliation and justified? 

     

    So I guess you're not going to stop whining then?  Perhaps it was too much to hope for.

     

    Did you see the examples I gave? 
     

    The Merrick Garland incident: republicans being obstructionists and refusing to allow hearings on judicial nominations, even below the supreme court.

     

    Gerrymandering: election hijacking, plain and simple.  In what kind of an election could your party win 53% of the vote but get 77% of the seats?  Answer: a hijacked one.

     

    Push-polls: Would you still vote for Trump if you knew that he fathered an illegitimate black child?

     

    Finally, there is Mitch McTurtle standing on the floor of the senate announcing his obdurate, obstructionist intentions.

     

     

    Show me where I said anything about attempted assassination.

     

    • Like 1
    • Sad 1
    • Thanks 1
  2. 51 minutes ago, impulse said:

    A lot of my so called friends never forgave me when I quit drinking.  My image with them worsened immensely when I quit getting drunk and spending a wad every weekend buying rounds.

     

    My image may have worsened, but the quality of my life and my self esteem (and my bank account) sure did benefit.

     

    You should call the FBI and inform them of this immediately.

  3. 5 minutes ago, NaamGin said:

    Link to BusinessInsider provided in my previous reply which referenced the AP author on the topic. 

     

    "People familiar with the contacts say the interactions have done nothing thus far to quell tensions over North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile advances, which are now fueling fears of military confrontation."

     

    "the interactions have done nothing"

     

    "But they say the behind-the-scenes discussions could still be a foundation for more serious negotiation, including on North Korea's nuclear weapons, should President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un put aside the bellicose rhetoric of recent days and endorse a dialogue."

     

    "could still be"

     

    The AP gave Trump the equivalent of a participation trophy.  Better luck next time, Donald.

     

    Meanwhile, how are things progressing?  Trump blames stagnant North Korea talks on US-China trade war (that he started).

     

     

     

     

    • Like 2
  4. 8 minutes ago, NaamGin said:

    I have facts. 

     

    Why don't you present them?

     

    8 minutes ago, NaamGin said:

    After decades of isolationism, why would Kim all of a sudden end this era and extend an olive branch to SK? Simply because he announces that his nuclear program is complete, so now he wants to dismantle it? All of this happened in a vacuum, right?

     

    After decades of isolationism, why would Kim all of a sudden end this era and extend an olive branch to the USA? Simply because he announces that his nuclear program is complete, so now he wants to dismantle it? All of this happened in a vacuum, right?

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  5. 11 minutes ago, NaamGin said:

    As far as "progress" being made, name one negotiation that led to NK denuclearization and normalization of relations with SK. Again, I will be waiting patiently.  

     

    April 27th, 2018: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un met with South Korean President Moon Jae-in. It's the first time a member of the Kim dynasty has set foot on southern soil since the end of the Korean War in 1953 and the latest bid to settle the world's last Cold War standoff.

    • Like 1
  6.  

    9 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

    85769194_integrityofthecourt.PNG.007e1afd6213718e5245fbc2c73b2ce6.PNG

     

    By the way, you've got some nerve claiming that scrutinizing an appointee might "ruin the integrity of the court" when Kavanaugh himself has already done that with his spittle-filled rage directed at the committee, his claim that allegations against him are part of a left wing conspiracy to seek revenge on behalf of the Clintons.  Does that sound like somebody who'll be impartial?  Appointing him will only serve to further divide the court.

     

    You yourself are hoping for him to wreak havoc purely out of spite:

     

    9 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

    I also hope that Kavanaugh goes even harder right in his future rulings just out of spite for what Democrat politicians did to him, his family, and his future on the court. 

     

    How can you claim to have any interest in maintaining the integrity of the court with that kind of deplorable trash talk?   

    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...