.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Cryingdick
-
Posts
4,549 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Cryingdick
-
-
On 9/23/2020 at 3:51 AM, riclag said:
For the kids, the Sissler salad bars on a week end in Bakersfield ,Ca was finger dippin good! Grab a hand full of this or dip your finger in the salad dressing for a taste test
oowee
This is why Sizzler is going bankrupt. The unsanitary conditions of a salad bar are a big no no at this time. Anywhere that heavily relies on buffet style dining or salad bars is going to have trouble.
-
1
-
-
On 9/21/2020 at 3:53 AM, Tippaporn said:
A total of 61 SCOTUS Justices have been nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court since 1900. 70%, or 43 Justices, were confirmed in under 46 days (the number of days remaining until the election). I'd call that good odds. We'll have to see what Nancy has in her quiver.
They don't even have to hold hearings if they don't want to. They will do. it just for show and the result will be predictable. A partisan smear campaign and then each respective party will vote strictly along party lines. A few strays scared of the election will vote not to confirm or present.
It's pretty much a done deal. The dems can argue what they want to all day long everyday but opposing opinions won't change the reality that a new SJC will be appointed. As far as Pelosi goes she should stick to business in the house and stay in her lane.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
16 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:Remember:
The narrative was that police were serving a no-knock warrant and entered the wrong house, unannounced.
The reality is that they were serving a lawful warrant on the correct house, and announced themselves, and only when nobody answered the door did they enter by force, whereby the boyfriend shot at police.
The case of the guy charged with murder in Kenosha has taken a shocking turn after new video came out. The media is beginning to remind me of the movie The Running Man.
It's pretty sick what they do. I am not even outraged because it's par for the course but what they are doing is disgusting.
-
2
-
1
-
On 9/19/2020 at 2:48 AM, OneMoreFarang said:
A decent political leadership would make sure that there are enough resources for the transport and counting of all ballots. And they would do that because that is important for any working democracy.
What Trump and his followers clearly show is that they don't want democracy. Because if they would want it they would have spent the last months to prepare for all of this.
I just want one ballot per person. I don't like the idea of ballots being mailed out without being requested and have no unique security features. Wonder if anybody will come up with the idea of burning mailboxes to interfere with this?
We shall see. However if the dems really think they are so far ahead in the polls this might be a mistake on their part. The mail in votes are much more likely to be contested than those that are cast in person.
-
4 minutes ago, Morch said:
Seriously? You're gonna make 'evil man' an issue? Like, how many times did Trump change his tune on this or that person, with followers scrambling to alter narratives?
Trump does this Trump does that. It would be really refreshing for just one time, to see a dem own it when it is called. I realize politicians are hypocrites. You seem to think it is only on one side. It's a dirty game. Now let's get off this deflection.
The poll is meaningless and nothing more than tripe to stir up emotions.
-
Romney has decided he loves America more than he hates Trump and wants to take a vote. I wonder if the dems will go back to thinking he is an evil man. He was their darling during the impeachment. So it looks like a done deal and the vote is going to happen.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, heybruce said:
I never said Trump should not nominate a replacement. I have consistently maintained that McConnell should be consistent, instead of blatantly partisan, in his application of the rules he invents. Of course I don't expect consistency or anything but hyper-partisan behavior from McConnell.
Headline: Biden blasts Trump. Almost every post typed about Mitch is off topic. FYI Trump wasn't there when Obama's pick got shot down. So yes let's keep to the matter at hand and that imo is why is Biden blasting Trump, when Obama pushed for a SJC in his last year of office?
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, heybruce said:
You're dragging this way off-topic. I suspect if you were to provide sources for you claims about Biden you'd find the context paints a different picture.
Live right here (WV/PA border) where he was just telling those lies. Not everybody lives online and vicariously participates in civic Amrican life that way. I have no link I watch local news. Anyway sure let's get back on topic.
-
1 minute ago, heybruce said:
As explained before, it is not flip-flopping for Joe Biden and the majority of Americans to expect the Senate Majority Leader to be consistent in the application of the rules he applies.
The only rules that matter are the actual law. Everything else is just a suggestion.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
5 minutes ago, MajarTheLion said:I agree, expecting McConnell to live up to his words and play by consistent rules is not flip-flopping. But that is not why I am making the flip flop accusation. I am making it because Joe Biden was for seating a SCOTUS judge in year four of a presidency in 2016 but against it in 2020.
Biden one day says he will end fracking and miners can go learn to code if they can shovel coal. The very next day he is showing up in Pennsylvania saying some fracking is okay.
Anyway I digress. It seems one side of the aisle thinks they and they alone have some moral upper high ground. All politicians lie and are hypocrites it's a necessary evil to get elected. Want a friend get a dog.
-
3
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
5 minutes ago, heybruce said:Expecting McConnell to live up to his words and play by consistent rules is not flip-flopping.
Actually you posted "It would be unprecedented". I explained that McConnell established the precedent.
McConnell "might be a hypocrite"? There is no "might" about it.
It would be unprecedented for a sitting president not to move to confirm a SJC if the opportunity presents itself. If I mistyped it so be it but that was what I was getting at. I have never seen you in the whole time of being on TV ever concede even the smallest point. We will agree to disagree because I do not think you are able to consider any view that isn't your own at this point.
-
3
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 minute ago, heybruce said:As has been explained repeatedly, McConnell established the precedent he now intends to break.
You must have mistaken what I said. Any sitting POTUS will move to confirm a SCJ. I don't care what McConnell did or didn't do. He might be a hypocrite. Far enough he will have his own place in hell for it. However Trump is completely with in his rights to move to confirm as he is the one who decides it not Mitch.
It would be no different with any other president. That's the precedent I am speaking of not some minor footnote in history like Mitch changing his view.
-
3
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
3 minutes ago, MajarTheLion said:The fact also remains that Trump and McConnell will move forward on this and get a new justice seated. There's no reason to leave the spot empty. And politically speaking, there's no reason to leave it undone and leave a campaign issue for Biden. It'll be done and over and Biden will have to complain about other things.
It would actually be somewhat unprecedented to not move to put a SCJ if you are the sitting President. Something like 26 SCJ were confirmed in the last year of a presidency.
The dems can twist it however they want to but it's just sour grapes. What makes their tears so bitter is they are helpless to stop it.
-
4
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Just now, stevenl said:The right to appoint is a fact, the opinion of quite a few trump supporters here on it is hypocritical. Some are honest enough to admit that.
It would be refreshing if the dems actually did the same. Now you can apologize to me for stating facts and accusing me of being a hypocrite.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
2 minutes ago, stevenl said:A hypocritical opinion.
It's actually a fact.Cry as much as you want but if you have the WH and senate you have the green light. That's a fact. FWIW I wasn't in the USA in 2016 and never opposed the nomination of Obama's pick. So nothing I have said is remotely hypocritical.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
accidentally repeated myself.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, RJRS1301 said:Was it not theRepublicans who refused to allow Obama appointment to be named during 2016?
Okay let's go through this again. Whoever shall control the WH and the senate gets to choose the SCJ. The dems didn't control the senate at that time. Now the GOP has a majority in the senate and controls the WH. It becomes their prerogative, they can do what they want to do.
If Obama had the senate we wouldn't be discussing this, his appointee would have been confirmed. This gets as tiresome as explaining the EC.
It seems that if you don't control a majority of the senate elections are somewhat less consequential.
-
6
-
2
-
2
-
1 hour ago, Morch said:
Let's try again - was this ever a thing with other candidates? Or is this an ad hoc 'issue' ?
If you don't have an 'issue' with it that's fine. However many people do want to know what Biden's vision for a replacement is. Many people wonder if he knows who to appoint or if he is actually hiding his choice. The SC has become the 'issue' of the entire campaign right now. If you do not grasp that I am not sure anybody can explain it more clearly.
Why is it so hard for Joe to come up with a name or two? What's the 'issue'?
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Sujo said:
Biden says he is chosing a woman as running mate. Trump supporters deride him.
Trump says he is chosing a woman for supreme court, trump supporters, crickets.
Because we all know it's simply to avoid any #metoo nonsense. Trump knows how nasty and treacherous the dems are. So choosing a woman is a necessity to avoid their outrageous antics. You could consider it a small democrat victory for women's rights I suppose. Forcing people to do things out of fear of the reproach of the mob seems to be the woke way of life these days.
The thing is it works both ways can you imagine Trump nominated a heterosexual white guy with ten fingers and toes. You would never hear the end of it. What you people on the left should start to realize is it isn't in Trump's or any conservatives interests to heed a word of advice or even take seriously anything you say. Period.
Biden was pandering and there is a big difference. At least Trump hasn't gone for the ground field double and declared his choice also must be black. Like the whole thing is some cheap BOGO sale.
-
1
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
1 minute ago, mikebike said:Oh, OK... you do agree it is not the "huge win" you declared in your fist post.
Why do you even bother? Is it joy of self-adulation?
Google the last time the court has added or detracted justices. I don't think it is as easy as you seem to think.
-
1
-
2
-
- Popular Post
Just now, mikebike said:Not really. If Dems win potus and senate they will just expand the court to 11 or 13 justices.
See your rushed appointment and raise you a larger court...
If you are going to use poker analogies at least get them right. You can't see and raise that's an illegal bet. You simply raise. To see is technically a flat call and to raise is a completely separate bet. You can not call and raise in one in the sequence of the official rules. It would be considered angle shooting to see a reaction before you finally raise. So don't lecture me about what is possible when you seem to have a hard time understanding basic rules.
Anyway you are assuming the dems gain the senate and can simply appoint whoever they want at will. If that was the case Obama would have not left a vacant seat. I am not sure what would be involved to change the law to load the court. If it's that easy both sides will do it until we have more judges than people
-
3
-
1
-
- Popular Post
1 minute ago, LomSak27 said:Uh oh did you have a meltdown and forget Merrick Garland in 2016? The Republicans did an 11 month blockade to prevent them from being on the Supreme Court.
This is how how Republicans do things. Easy to forget when the shoe is on the other foot, but that is the hypocritical nature conservative Republicans are known for.Republicans broke the unwritten rules and you/they blame that on dems,
hah, one should expect no less from the modern Republican party.
It would be wise not to expect anything if winning is important.
-
3
-
1
-
- Popular Post
Just now, Matzzon said:Why would you believe that anyone thinks Biden will unify the US in such a small amount of time? Has anyone tried to tell you that? The devastation that Trump leaves after his 4only 4 years is severe, and will take years to repair both in confidence and economy as well as in all other areas. Also maybe Biden can´t unify the country to the point you are aiming for. However, I can assure you that he will do a hell of a better work than Trump.
Anyway, back to Ginsburg and that so many are focusing on her and that she died. Let´s say like this, Only in USA!!!! Amazing US! How come there is a storm because an 87 year old lady has died? How can she die on her post? She was supposed to be retired and replaced many years ago. Why is that a problem today? The virus ain´t enough?Biden and the dems say they will unify the country once again. That won't happen no matter what. This thread is more about the impact on the election than it is about RBG dying. She should have retired long ago. But she didn't and now the worst fears of the dems have been realized. Just a dumb move in the line of many moronic tactical errors on the dem side of the aisle.
-
4
-
2
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
27 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:Interesting recent poll numbers. I suspected the burning, looting and rioting would not impress voters. I was right. I suspected candidate Biden hiding in a basement and badly mangling his teleprompter feeds while looking bewildered would not install confidence in the electorate. I was right. Trump is polling much better than Obama was at the same stage.
"President Trump ended the polling week with a daily job approval of 53%.
Three-out-of-four voters who’ve had violent anti-police protests in their community rate those protests important to their vote in the presidential election. Among these voters, a sizable majority like the job President Trump is doing."
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/weekly_updates/what_they_told_us_sep19
What will be interesting, is whether Reuters or Rasmussen's prediction was closer. Which is more credible? We will soon see.
If the dems themselves believed the numbers they would be elated. They aren't, wonder why that is? They are afraid of losing again so had to come up with mail in ballots. This will go down is the dumbest blunder in political history. That is of course if you believe you are actually this far ahead and still force a contested election.
I know I would go for the clean sweep with out changing anything if I was so far ahead.
-
2
-
1
-
1
hah, one should expect no less from the modern Republican party.
Sizzler USA files for bankruptcy
in World News
Posted
I avoid going to places to dine in. People don't wear their masks properly and you tend to get herded together in the entry while they find a table that is socially distanced. It defeats the whole point when the bottleneck is in the front of the restaurant.
I also would rather gouge my own eyes out with a red hot poker than engage in indoor salad bars with everybody touching the food. Talk about a gigantic Petri dish of viral infections.