jimmybcool

Well there are checks to buy a gun. And there are limits to free speech. And online threats are illegal. Note in the story he is under arrest for felony crimes.

That was one of the biggest divides between Trump and Kamala. Regardless of which side you are on it was easy to see Kamala was a chameleon changing roles and positions based on who was in front of her at the moment. She was fake. Trump, love him, hate him, or in between, is clearly a real person and had positions he staked out regardless of audience. The DEMs need to learn you can not be all things to all people.

That is a far cry from actively resisting proper policing by ICE and the Federal government with regard to immigration issues. Yes he has no authority to deport illegals. He also has no authority to prevent the federal government and ICE doing so. The separation of powers is clear and the Feds are 100% responsible for immigration issues. If he interferes with the Feds that would be illegal and only an act of defiance to be more woke.

Police should ruin some stings. Have some gay looking men or jewish garbed people walk there and when attacked swoop in and arrest them. If they are not born in Germany deport them. Win win.

That is a good point. I am projecting here but I think the leadership of the DEM party isn't stupid enough to repeat something like that. Maybe I give them too much credit. We shall see.

If they do they are retarded.. She would lose to any decent GOP candidate by a large margin. I suspect their candidate will come from someone not associated with the fringe of the party. Keep in mind they want to win and they have to convince the money people they can win.

You are right. Sinema and Manchin are done. I was merely pointing out the DEM party has to have better candidates than Kamala in 2028. IMO it will be someone we (well me anyway) aren't familiar with. I think the DEM party will drift back towards center before the midterms which will help them then.

I don't believe ANY of the DEM money sources will back a Kamala run in 2028. And if some did I don't think she stands a chance of winning the DEM primary. It was very clear how phony she is. There isn't a real person behind that facade and the electorate could see that. She has never won a single state in a DEM primary. I have to believe the DEM party learned something this year and decides to start running candidates not mired in the far left policies some DEMs endorse. They had some middle of the road members like Sinema and Joe Manchin. As a conservative I didn't agree with everything they did but they were SANE, had ethics they stuck with in the face of attack from their own party, and not living in an alternate reality. If one were elevated to winning the presidency I wouldn't be upset.

"""“Every single time we hear them say the word ‘trans,’ look what they’re doing with their right hand,” McBride stated. “Look at what they’re doing to pick the pocket of American workers, to fleece seniors by privatizing Social Security and Medicare.” """ 😅🤣🙄

🤣

I gave up on this conversation. None on the left wish to address the real issue. Not anti-trans which I don't see anyone here a part of. But pro woman meaning keeping locker rooms, women's sports and children apart from the "woke acceptance". And of course if you disagree in the slightest with their wide open world of fully intact men showering with teenage girls you are the bigot. Liberals and Democrats of the year 2000 would have laughed at the idea this would become a hill their side would die on but here we are.

How cute. Sorry to disappoint but no maga here. But that won't stop your inane insults to people who disagree with your positions I guess based on reading here.

And yet I am not a hater. And i don't hate anyone. But if it makes you feel more righteous to avoid the reasoning behind not allowing trans to compete in women's sports or shower in women only facilities have at it. Kind of weak though.

I notice a trend here where you assign hate and never actually address what is posted. You make up stuff to respond to. Are you in capable of civil disagreement or just spouting the hard left lines?

You are so entertaining. If endorsing trans rights was a Trump position you'd be on the other side with a hard on. So predictable.

Bwahahahaha. I need to get a grip? Rape exists despite your lack of concern. BTW rape isn't the only issue. The FEAR of assault while one is exposed with ones pants down in a public restroom is one of the reasons men are not allowed in them. A young girl in her early teens should feel comfortable using a public restroom which means no men in there. If a trans person actually LOOKS female and stays in her lane who cares? If it's a hulking brute with 5 o'clock shadow wearing a dress follows a 10 year old girl into a restroom that's wrong and sorry you can't see it. I find the left's obsession with forcing integration of transvestites weird. I'm fine if a man wants to dress as and try to present as a woman. No skin off my nose. Having lived 10 years in Pattaya I recognize them from afar even here in the states. They are everywhere. Most are harmless. The lines are simple. In areas where women disrobe like locker rooms and shared showers no one with a dick is allowed. And in sports defined as for women only no one who ever had a dick is allowed. Are these limits objectionable to you?

I am going to assume you are male and an adult. Easy to be strong and fearless when you are. Same here. I am fearless since I am probably in the top 5% size and strength of humans in the world. Now how about girls of 10 alone in a strange place followed into a public restroom by an adult male wearing lipstick and a boner? See YOUR feelings aren't the only ones. Personally I agree with above much of this is a tempest in a teapot. Most public restrooms have no shower facility and for women have enclosed spaces with a toilet. But there is also some sanity left in the world and there does need to be some spaces preserved for "natural born with a vagina" women. Like shared shower facilities and competitive sports. The real weirdos are those who think it doesn't matter.

For those misinterpreting what is happening ( or actually that is how it is presented in the WSJ article I guess most mainstream media channels trying to once again paint republicans as evil) there is a big part of this issue missing. Here is a statement by Johnson. """"All single-sex facilities in the Capitol and House Office Buildings — such as restrooms, changing rooms, and locker rooms — are reserved for individuals of that biological sex," Johnson said in a statement obtained by Fox News Digital. "It is important to note that each Member office has its own private restroom, and unisex restrooms are available throughout the Capitol." """ So I guess McBride will only be restricted from taking a shower in any shared women only locker room with shower facilities. Not such a burden to bear for a brave man transitioning to womanhood.

Might get interesting if it is one of the few remaining large cities in USA offering sanctuary status. Could end up getting a million more immigrants. Wonder how the business community and taxpayers will feel about that?

OK this is already described in here but I am a paranoid SOB. I am flying in on a USA passport arriving January 17, with return ticket for March 17. This is exactly 60 days including arrival and departure dates. Just to be clear I will have no paperwork to fill out on arrival and need no other documents to enter Thailand and I will get a 60 day stamp on the VE system correct? Sorry this is kinda a repeat but I've been doing this for so long and always got a tourist visa in advance before. I feel naked showing up with nothing and don't like the idea if I have to fill out forms at one of those side benches in Suvarnabumi.

Isn't it actually 1-2?

OK. Which countries have such laws? Are there any that aren't tyrannies or religiously dominated? But to put this in perspective when someone calls me a bigot for claiming there are only two genders am I then allowed to file a complaint? I mean I would feel offended and I would consider that a hateful thing to call me. And if a jury agrees with me the person calling me that gets punished? Can't figure out how it ends? Guessing it ends when the majority is able to silence the minority. Doesn't sound like free speech to me.

I'd still love to hear who will determine what is hate speech. I mean I don't think anyone here wants to stifle free speech. It is a cornerstone to freedom. And I hope we all recognize that no one has a right to go through life without feeling offended. So, where is the line, who defines it. That last is critical. Do those on the left want those on the right to define hate speech? I'm also curious has anyone provided any hard data that misogyny is on the rise? I confess I might have skimmed this thread and missed it. And I find it hysterical the spin some use to try and pretend there are actually more than 2 real genders. Funny considering every society on the planet that has a birth certificate has only two options for new born babies. Even Thailand the country of lady-boys considers them men if they have a penis at birth and regardless of surgeries they remain male on their passport for life. Would love to see the list of alternative options formalized by medical science or some legitimate national definition. I have an open mind but have never heard a legitimate explanation of how there are so many "new genders" in the last 3 years.

Yeah that pesky freedom of speech thing. Some people would be accused of hate speech if they simply said there are only 2 genders. Never mind that has been the scientific consensus for 1000s of years. The NEW thought is there are dozens and saying otherwise is hate speech. Would you jail someone for that? Twitter was banning people for so called hate speech for discussing the Hunter Biden laptop calling it untrue and hateful. Ermmmm well it was true. Any discussion of the side effects of the vaccines was considered hate speech. Soooooo again who defines hate speech or defines the test for voter rights? Jailing someone for a nazi salute is ridiculous. is it offensive? Yes, to most people. But unless they are advocating doing physical harm laugh at them. Seems people today think feeling offended equates to hate speech. No one has the right to go through life without being offended. Some groups today convert "feeling offended" into "being threatened". And expect society to make it stop. That is tyranny. On the original point who defines who gets to vote? What is the testing procedure? Will it be applied to all ages groups? Won't be here for your response. Sorry got a tee time and have to go. Cheers.

AHA. Someone is getting it. Just like hate speech. Who defines it? Who says what a rational answer is? Kind of exposes the whole concept of "testing seniors". Good for one group then all groups get "tested".