DougieMax

A very expensive experiment when it inevitably goes wrong.

Can you really tell one from the other? Or does that only apply to opinions that are contrary to your own?

What difference does it make what I want or don't want. Go ahead and read the comments under the X posting about it. Seems the idea is a real gutbuster. Do you remember some years ago the push to promote more women as fighter pilots resulted in several crash landings on carriers? And there is always Demi Moore's swan song in "GI Jane" where she uttered what is probably the most iconic line in any movie: "Suck my d!ck!!" Certain fields just don't dovetail well with XX chromosomes. Who will ever forget this iconic photo?

If you are up for some humor, check out the comments under the X item about this ...

As if the US and its military are not already enough of a laughing stock. I have a link to this story... https://thepostmillennial.com/us-navy-introduces-first-gender-neutral-submarine?utm_campaign=64466 Here's a short pull quote: "Modifications to the submarine to reach this goal include additional doors and washrooms to create separate sleeping and bathing areas and lowering some overhead valves to be easier to reach and installing steps by triple-high bunk beds and stacked laundry machines." The world can now breath a sign of relief.

We Know Trump is disliked by your side. After all, it's you people who tried to murder him twice. Is this really what you support? It begs the question: What kind of person are you? It certainly makes my case that truly despicable people are rooting for Harris at any cost. And all for what? Or is not for anything but only for the purpose of being against Trump? I think you need to spend some time in front of a mirror.

My take on what you say is that only the worst sort of people who hate America and anything decent want Harris. She's perfect for the job they want her to do.

"Are you his daughter?" "No, but I wish I was so we could call what we do incest."

Not just the last phase leading up to the election. If and when he wins, this sort of thing could easily escalate further. Remember, it's practically a given that law enforcement is part of the problem, not the solution. Maybe time to hire a 1,000 private security people to protect him from the US government.

And there is still about 50 more days to go to the actual election. Bush & Co. allowed the Twin Towers to be obliterated killing more than 3,000 for political purposes. Makes you wonder what extreme they will go to in order to kill Trump, for example, a massive bomb blast as a crowded Trump rally. The article I saw on ZeroHedge showed a photo of the shooter. As you can guess, he's a wokie weirdo with half his head dyed blue. Why are anti-Trumpers such a cadre of freaks? If you are one, please get help.

I'm not sure I agree with everything here. What really got Clinton elected in 1992 was the entry of Ross Perot into the race. He was there because Bush Sr. refused to address the debt problem. He got almost 20% of the vote, mostly from the Republican side. Nor am I certain that Democrats they have given up on this year either. In 2020, they ran an absolutely rotten candidate who couldn't talk very well and hid out in his basement away from the media. But a combination of election interference and outright fraud was enough to get him elected. Kamala is just doing the same thing now. Who knows what kind of tricks will happen on election day late at night after the polls close. As for 2028, it is too early to tell. But I believe that if Kamala is "elected," the country will not survive in its current form to even have another election.

No surprise there. Seems these people never learn. Disney has lost billions cling to its intention to make every a ludicrous gender-swaped race-swapped pronoun-coated travesty. And Dylan "Bud Lite" has resulted in a permanent loss of market share for that product. It's really astonishing to watch. Not that she cares so much about not making as much money, but the loss of attention and adulation will stay with her for the rest of her life as she screams headlong into the wall. There's also the farce of bulky guys with manhood bulging from their crotches competing in women's sports. Let's just hope that the wokie left has also taken things too far by shoving the likes of Harris-Walz into the nation's face.

Totally ridiculous. Not even Napoleon faced such ridiculous restrictions on his freedom after the loss of Waterloo. No, Trump is not Hitler, not Stalin, not Napoleon. Time for wokies to grow up about this.

It looks like we will never know who was actually behind it. It could be a coalition of garbage republicans like Cheney and garbage democrats of which there are just too many to name. Add into the mix any coalition of letter agency heads and perhaps even foreign influences. Maybe powerful bankers and assorted other interests who are profiting from the combination of earning interest on printed money which is funneled into the defense industry for the manufacture of weapons for endless wars.

I disagree completely. Trump could have made all the misery he has endured for the last four years go away by simply retreating from politics. The entire sh!tshow of lawfare and abuse by law enforcement agencies was aimed at making him ineligible. When that failed, they tried to put a bullet in his head. Something truly evil and sick does not want him back in the White House.

Outstanding and correct observation.

No, it was a counter-rebuttal statement to a challenge consisting of the assertion that Bush has never endorsed Harris. I just wanted to know how he knew that and he supplied an indirect quote which is not the same thing. Unlike a wokie, I'll admit I'm wrong if he can supply one. Besides trends being what they are, it is indeed garbage republicans who are coming out for Harris, and according to the wokie left, Bush personifies republican garbage. So why not make the tiny hop to a perfectly reasonable assumption?

Again, "Bush's office" does not constitute a direct quote. Keep trying.

It's an indirect quote. Not the same thing as him making a direct quote in public. Alas, no retraction for you. But keep digging.

For supposedly being a smart guy and having lots of potential legal exposure by virtue of being a media figure, he should have consulted his legal team about that statement of Loomer having sex with Trump. That is a basic tort taught in first year law school: falsely accusing a woman of sexual immorality. Believe it or not, there is also one that gives rise to liability for attributing sterility/impotency to a man. Laura Loomer has a juicy cause of action which I hope she pursues.

Wow, guess I need to prostrate myself and cry out "I'm not worthy." 5555

Gonna need a source for that. If you find it, I will post a retraction that you and your fellow wokies can quote til Kamala forgets how to cackle.

Yeah, so? Is there a sprig of wisdom there somewhere?

Indeed, after the farce that has been the Harris-Biden thus far, there is very little that would not be better.

If anything, wokies are certainly predictable. You can be sure that whatever they accuse the other side of doing, they are twice or thrice as guilty of doing. And unoriginal too which means we'll be seeing a post here which simply reverses the terminology saying the opposite of something like "you hated them and now you love them" with a peppering of "orange man bad."