maybe walker did win on merit .. it's not like people didn't know what had happened the last couple of years. if the majority of voters in wisconsin (not just the occupy-esque people who took over the capitol) wanted walker out he would have been voted out and not won in a landslide. walker went up against the same guy as two years ago and won by a larger margin - after the dust settled the voters must like the direction wisconsin is going.
and regarding the teacher's union (in california) spending, they're buying much smaller races like the state senate and assembly. you also have to add in the nurse's union, the prison guard union, and all the other public 'servants' who, in california, donate almost exclusively to democratic legislators.
eventually, california must have a similar wisconsin moment. the current system is unsustainable, and y'all are all about sustainability, right?
the problem isn't union money, it's money in general for elections, get it completely out. both union and corporate. make the race actually on merit, and not buying your way, lying your way, conniving your way into office. shit, third party candidates would even have a legitimate chance. onoz!
no, the problem is that people are retarded and completely unaware that money = political power. don't buy shit from people you don't agree with. do your research. stop blaming the system for your shortcomings. the end.
What does buying shit from people have to do with campaign financing? I don't see what that has to do with anything (unless, perhaps, you are buying for a small city).
Woohoo! Politics are starting at full speed!
So far, this looks like another run of mucky policies (certainly Obama has plenty of faults/failures and Romney as a billion flip flops and vague promises, at best).
I am looking forward to more absurd lies from super pacs, completely skewed history lessons, and ambiguous speeches.
I hope, before I die, we can separate economic and international policy from ridiculous discussions of gay marriage and abortion.
Jun 7, 12 8:45 am ·
·
With all of the disgust that Americans seem to have for their two political parties, why doesn't that the name Ross Perot hasn't come up more frequently in recent times?
I'm no expert but wasn't his a platform of balanced budgets, fiscal responsibility, and protecting American jobs? At the very least, it seems he might have done a better job of avoiding the current financial/banking crisis-fest.
What does buying shit from people have to do with campaign financing? I don't see what that has to do with anything (unless, perhaps, you are buying for a small city).
koch industries, proud purveyors of air? i don't think so.
What's particularly amusing to me is that those who are most in favor of democracy as a form of government, seem to also believe that it doesn't actually work as a form of government. After all, if money can so easily sway elections, then elections aren't a very good way to determine governmental policy or leadership. In fact, if elections can be so easily influenced, then they aren't good for much at all and all this talk about the value of democracy is a farce.
So, which is it? Is democracy a good and stable system of government by the people, or is it prone to the whims of every fat bank account that comes along? You can't have it both ways. Pick one.
^^ what he said. i don't really have any issue with money in politics.
Jun 7, 12 2:12 pm ·
·
Good questions. And speaking of democracy, just today a an essay was posted suggesting the democracy and capitalism are incompatible. (via oftwominds.com):
"This base corruption of the Central State, which is now the dominant force in the economy, allows Elites to change the rules rather than accept failure (also known as losses). Thus we have Crony Capitalism: profits are private and yours to keep, losses are transferred to the taxpaying public.
This mechanism is well known and catches most of the attention. But M.M. highlighted the way the democratic majority can subvert capitalism. This is generally ignored for the simple reason that most commentators are part of the majority subverting capitalism to benefit their own self-interest.
This leads to a terminal state of self-delusion and self-justification: Half of US social program recipients believe they "have not used a government social program" (via Patrick.net)"
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
“When the taste for physical gratifications among them has grown more rapidly than their education . . . the time will come when men are carried away and lose all self-restraint . . . . It is not necessary to do violence to such a people in order to strip them of the rights they enjoy; they themselves willingly loosen their hold. . . . they neglect their chief business which is to remain their own masters.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Volume 2
“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
“Americans are so enamored of equality, they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
PHILADELPHIA — Debbie Wasserman Schultz is resigning under pressure as Democratic Party chairwoman, a stunning leadership shakeup as party officials gather in Philadelphia to nominate Hillary Clinton.
Wasserman Schultz's announcement Sunday follows a firestorm over hacked emails suggesting the Democratic National Committee favored Clinton during the primary, despite pledging neutrality. The leaked emails prompted primary runner-up Bernie Sanders to call for Wasserman Schultz's immediate resignation.
In a statement, Wasserman Schultz said she will step down at the end of the four-day convention. She said she plans to formally open and close the convention, as well as address delegates.
Her statement does not address the email controversy.
Wasserman Schultz's swift ouster underscores party leaders' desire to avoid convention confrontations with Sanders' loyal supporters. The chairwoman has been a lightning rod for criticism throughout the presidential campaign, with Sanders repeatedly accusing the DNC of backing Clinton.
Sanders said the 19,000 emails published by the website Wikileaks appeared to confirm his suspicions.
In one leaked email, a DNC official wondered whether Sanders' religious beliefs could be used against him, questioning whether the candidate may be an atheist.
reminds me a lot of Hunter S. Thompson's book that pretty much points out George HW Bush as a crook....Hillary the next George HW Bush. another 30 years of bad wars and the super rich doing what they want......bad guys look all egaltarian now.......
so the Democratic convention is like an Evangelical tent revival where the only assholes in the room are the Pastor and her husband. i love the little people so much we take their money and hope and take more money from the big people - everything will be awesome if you stay in this tent. i was just waiting for an 800 number to send in my money for the lord after the only honest man walked out (technically not actually stating an acclimation - or so at least one news source said, the others just assumed it was an acclimation). just wanted to bump this up with the other circus. go America!
before I get to work and be productive.....anyone, including the media mainly, who thinks its more wrong that some hackers exposed the DNC than the fact the DNC was doing wrong should pull their head out of their ass.
I find it very amusing that Sanders - who operated as an Independant before running for President, and who has said he'll return to Congress as an Independent after the election - got totally PO'd when the DNC didn't wholeheartedly embrace his candidacy. It's rather like a longstanding non-AIA member paying dues for one year to run for a national AIA office, then dropping out again when the membership doesn't see fit to vote for his candidacy.
As for the DNC e-mail scandal, can you imagine what sort of e-mail was circulating among the RNC hierarchy as Trump, Cruz and the other equally anti-establishment whack jobs began to gain some visibility in the GOP primaries. I have no doubt those RNC messages were WAY worse that anything that has surfaced from the DNC.
What's amusing about it, Babs? He had no choice. We're a two party country, unfortunately. Running as an independent would simply have guaranteed that he'd be marginalized - and he wasn't running a marginal campaign - he took more than 40% of the vote. The fact that he connected to so many primary voters, and common decency, should have kept the party bosses from smearing him.
But, yeah, the Republicans are worse across the board. Go Hillary (yawn.)
And the Republicans *are* worse, demonstrably, across the board. As I read on FB earlier today, Hilary Clinton could come to my house, delete every one of my emails, punch me in the face, and burn my house down, and I'd *still* vote for her over Trump. Why? Supreme Court. Period.
Yeah, the Republicans are worse. And they nominated a racist demagogue, a second rate huckster who anyone with a lick of sense should be able to see through at a glance.
But, he's competitive in this election. Who's fault is that? The Democratic Party's. If it hadn't spent the last twenty five years contributing to the neo-liberal evisceration of our communities, and if it hadn't nominated someone who two thirds of Americans find untrustworthy, it would be no contest.
And, no, Donna, it's not o.k. that they conspired to prop up Hillary, using things like Bernie's religious beliefs against him.
Most of what happens in politics is "not ok". I disagree with a huge portion of it, nationally and locally, from the school board to foreign policy, by both Repubs and Dems.
And it still for me comes back to: Supreme Court noms. Definitely one, probably two. I don't want Rs making those appointments.
Supporting Clinton is an exercise in complacency. Jill stein is running for liberals...Gary Johnson is running for liberal libertarians...you have options. Voting imo is not about the next 4 years...it's about the next 400 years. We should push for ideals we believe in...the impact on our personal lives will likely be minimal compared to what some people Face in other nations...its a sacrifice we should be willing to make for the long term benefit of the nation...
I'm so sick of the current "Lesser of two evils" argument. I'm voting for Hillary Clinton because her policy positions agree with mine the most out of anyone currently running. Sanders got my primary vote, but I'm happy to give my November vote to Clinton. I don't give a fuck what party or how "establishment" she is, I believe she'll do a good job running the executive.
a vote for jill stein or gary johnson is taking away a possible vote for hillary. that's not different that supporting trump. not recognizing where the difference is between the way the world works and the way you want the world to work is what makes trump an attractive candidate. same disconnect between real-life and fantasy.
supreme court appointments are for a lifetime. most monetary policy and environmental policy are felt years after they're implemented. of course this election is about more than the next 4 years. all of them are. 400 years is a bit of a stretch though. our nation isn't anywhere near that old, and the environment isn't going to last that long anyway.
...the impact on our personal lives will likely be minimal...its a sacrifice we should be willing to make
To steal a Facebook meme, jla-x, tell that to your local gay person, poor person, person of color, accidentally pregnant woman, handicapped person, person who might be eligible for a draft...if you think you're not likely to be impacted it's admitting you are privileged enough to not have to worry about pretty much anything.
But yes by all means let your ideological purity trump people's lives, we will all applaud you.
i think Trump is really just a really loud critic of the shit government we have, and that does not mean Obama is shit nor many politicians, it means the system is shit. Trump has come this far by simply expressing much of what many feel. voting for him i guess votes the crit into office? i will write Bernie in or something or maybe just stay out od this one....
LITS4FormZ, did you see my post above about Hilary coming to my house and punching me in the face? I'd still vote for her. I dare you to vote *not* for Hillary then continue feeling proud of yourself when Trump appoints Martin Shkreli to the Supreme Court.
OHmG I would pay big money to see either Hilary or Hillary go to D's house and punch her in the face. Maybe I'd even vote the straight democratic ticket for the rest of my life.
yeah I'm totally with Her on that.
Jul 28, 16 10:18 pm ·
·
LITS4FormZ, did you see my post above about Hilary coming to my house and punching me in the face? I'd still vote for her. I dare you to vote *not* for Hillary then continue feeling proud of yourself when Trump appoints Martin Shkreli to the Supreme Court.
That would be scare since Martin Shkreli is not an attorney at all in the U.S. from what I can tell. That wouldn't stop Trump from trying.
Donna, so you would rather go down a slow path to destruction than a bumpy path to something better? That really doesn't make any sense to me. Free access to birth control will be the last thing on our minds in 50-100 years if we keep on this self destructive path...we will be too busy fighting master blaster and his army of flesh eating warlords...(hyperbole) we have to at some point vote for the future of the nation and put our own interests in jeopardy...I have all members of your above "list" in my close family...so yes, their interests are important to me...they are also not voting for Hillary....even the black, female, and the gay family member of mine...they can think and weigh their own options...And they Hate being lumped into some fucking paradigm of how "they vote" or what issues "they oppose". The media loves doing this dumb shit...trying to make people's minds up for them...that's the most patronizing form of racism imo...
The Implosion of the Democrat Party (hang on while I get some champagne...)
so meg blew $142 million and lost
walker spent $34 million and won
maybe walker did win on merit .. it's not like people didn't know what had happened the last couple of years. if the majority of voters in wisconsin (not just the occupy-esque people who took over the capitol) wanted walker out he would have been voted out and not won in a landslide. walker went up against the same guy as two years ago and won by a larger margin - after the dust settled the voters must like the direction wisconsin is going.
and regarding the teacher's union (in california) spending, they're buying much smaller races like the state senate and assembly. you also have to add in the nurse's union, the prison guard union, and all the other public 'servants' who, in california, donate almost exclusively to democratic legislators.
eventually, california must have a similar wisconsin moment. the current system is unsustainable, and y'all are all about sustainability, right?
does that mean your about oil, insurance companies, and private prisons?
fighting the good fight i suppose.
the problem isn't union money, it's money in general for elections, get it completely out. both union and corporate. make the race actually on merit, and not buying your way, lying your way, conniving your way into office. shit, third party candidates would even have a legitimate chance. onoz!
no, the problem is that people are retarded and completely unaware that money = political power. don't buy shit from people you don't agree with. do your research. stop blaming the system for your shortcomings. the end.
What does buying shit from people have to do with campaign financing? I don't see what that has to do with anything (unless, perhaps, you are buying for a small city).
Woohoo! Politics are starting at full speed!
So far, this looks like another run of mucky policies (certainly Obama has plenty of faults/failures and Romney as a billion flip flops and vague promises, at best).
I am looking forward to more absurd lies from super pacs, completely skewed history lessons, and ambiguous speeches.
I hope, before I die, we can separate economic and international policy from ridiculous discussions of gay marriage and abortion.
With all of the disgust that Americans seem to have for their two political parties, why doesn't that the name Ross Perot hasn't come up more frequently in recent times?
I'm no expert but wasn't his a platform of balanced budgets, fiscal responsibility, and protecting American jobs? At the very least, it seems he might have done a better job of avoiding the current financial/banking crisis-fest.
Just my 2¢, yo!
I am looking forward to more absurd lies from super pacs, completely skewed history lessons, and ambiguous speeches.
I am not.
What does buying shit from people have to do with campaign financing? I don't see what that has to do with anything (unless, perhaps, you are buying for a small city).
koch industries, proud purveyors of air? i don't think so.
getting the money out of politics is pretty impossible.
invest in industries which run counter to the Koch paradigm.
Its more productive to see it as an economic development and technological innovation challenge.
What's particularly amusing to me is that those who are most in favor of democracy as a form of government, seem to also believe that it doesn't actually work as a form of government. After all, if money can so easily sway elections, then elections aren't a very good way to determine governmental policy or leadership. In fact, if elections can be so easily influenced, then they aren't good for much at all and all this talk about the value of democracy is a farce.
So, which is it? Is democracy a good and stable system of government by the people, or is it prone to the whims of every fat bank account that comes along? You can't have it both ways. Pick one.
^^ what he said. i don't really have any issue with money in politics.
Good questions. And speaking of democracy, just today a an essay was posted suggesting the democracy and capitalism are incompatible. (via oftwominds.com):
"This base corruption of the Central State, which is now the dominant force in the economy, allows Elites to change the rules rather than accept failure (also known as losses). Thus we have Crony Capitalism: profits are private and yours to keep, losses are transferred to the taxpaying public.
This mechanism is well known and catches most of the attention. But M.M. highlighted the way the democratic majority can subvert capitalism. This is generally ignored for the simple reason that most commentators are part of the majority subverting capitalism to benefit their own self-interest.
This leads to a terminal state of self-delusion and self-justification: Half of US social program recipients believe they "have not used a government social program" (via Patrick.net)"
Yo!
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
“When the taste for physical gratifications among them has grown more rapidly than their education . . . the time will come when men are carried away and lose all self-restraint . . . . It is not necessary to do violence to such a people in order to strip them of the rights they enjoy; they themselves willingly loosen their hold. . . . they neglect their chief business which is to remain their own masters.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Volume 2
“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
“Americans are so enamored of equality, they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/dnc-chair-wasserman-schultz-leaving-under-fire/ar-BBuKYdJ?li=BBnb7Kz
DNC chair Wasserman Schultz leaving under fire
PHILADELPHIA — Debbie Wasserman Schultz is resigning under pressure as Democratic Party chairwoman, a stunning leadership shakeup as party officials gather in Philadelphia to nominate Hillary Clinton.
Wasserman Schultz's announcement Sunday follows a firestorm over hacked emails suggesting the Democratic National Committee favored Clinton during the primary, despite pledging neutrality. The leaked emails prompted primary runner-up Bernie Sanders to call for Wasserman Schultz's immediate resignation.
In a statement, Wasserman Schultz said she will step down at the end of the four-day convention. She said she plans to formally open and close the convention, as well as address delegates.
Her statement does not address the email controversy.
Wasserman Schultz's swift ouster underscores party leaders' desire to avoid convention confrontations with Sanders' loyal supporters. The chairwoman has been a lightning rod for criticism throughout the presidential campaign, with Sanders repeatedly accusing the DNC of backing Clinton.
Sanders said the 19,000 emails published by the website Wikileaks appeared to confirm his suspicions.
In one leaked email, a DNC official wondered whether Sanders' religious beliefs could be used against him, questioning whether the candidate may be an atheist.
(clicky linky for full text ...)
Effing Bernie Bros at work again, or Wikileaks, funded by Russia at work again?
reminds me a lot of Hunter S. Thompson's book that pretty much points out George HW Bush as a crook....Hillary the next George HW Bush. another 30 years of bad wars and the super rich doing what they want......bad guys look all egaltarian now.......
so the Democratic convention is like an Evangelical tent revival where the only assholes in the room are the Pastor and her husband. i love the little people so much we take their money and hope and take more money from the big people - everything will be awesome if you stay in this tent. i was just waiting for an 800 number to send in my money for the lord after the only honest man walked out (technically not actually stating an acclimation - or so at least one news source said, the others just assumed it was an acclimation). just wanted to bump this up with the other circus. go America!
before I get to work and be productive.....anyone, including the media mainly, who thinks its more wrong that some hackers exposed the DNC than the fact the DNC was doing wrong should pull their head out of their ass.
Haha. Internal corruption is our own, an we love our own. It's the commies we need to fear.
Really the only reason to watch the convention is to see Debbie Wasserman Schultz get booed.
+++Olaf
I find it very amusing that Sanders - who operated as an Independant before running for President, and who has said he'll return to Congress as an Independent after the election - got totally PO'd when the DNC didn't wholeheartedly embrace his candidacy. It's rather like a longstanding non-AIA member paying dues for one year to run for a national AIA office, then dropping out again when the membership doesn't see fit to vote for his candidacy.
As for the DNC e-mail scandal, can you imagine what sort of e-mail was circulating among the RNC hierarchy as Trump, Cruz and the other equally anti-establishment whack jobs began to gain some visibility in the GOP primaries. I have no doubt those RNC messages were WAY worse that anything that has surfaced from the DNC.
What's amusing about it, Babs? He had no choice. We're a two party country, unfortunately. Running as an independent would simply have guaranteed that he'd be marginalized - and he wasn't running a marginal campaign - he took more than 40% of the vote. The fact that he connected to so many primary voters, and common decency, should have kept the party bosses from smearing him.
But, yeah, the Republicans are worse across the board. Go Hillary (yawn.)
babs get your head out of your ass.
I 100% agree with babs.
And the Republicans *are* worse, demonstrably, across the board. As I read on FB earlier today, Hilary Clinton could come to my house, delete every one of my emails, punch me in the face, and burn my house down, and I'd *still* vote for her over Trump. Why? Supreme Court. Period.
Olaf ... you first !
Yeah, the Republicans are worse. And they nominated a racist demagogue, a second rate huckster who anyone with a lick of sense should be able to see through at a glance.
But, he's competitive in this election. Who's fault is that? The Democratic Party's. If it hadn't spent the last twenty five years contributing to the neo-liberal evisceration of our communities, and if it hadn't nominated someone who two thirds of Americans find untrustworthy, it would be no contest.
And, no, Donna, it's not o.k. that they conspired to prop up Hillary, using things like Bernie's religious beliefs against him.
Most of what happens in politics is "not ok". I disagree with a huge portion of it, nationally and locally, from the school board to foreign policy, by both Repubs and Dems.
And it still for me comes back to: Supreme Court noms. Definitely one, probably two. I don't want Rs making those appointments.
Supporting Clinton is an exercise in complacency. Jill stein is running for liberals...Gary Johnson is running for liberal libertarians...you have options. Voting imo is not about the next 4 years...it's about the next 400 years. We should push for ideals we believe in...the impact on our personal lives will likely be minimal compared to what some people Face in other nations...its a sacrifice we should be willing to make for the long term benefit of the nation...
^ agreed, this essay is compelling us to think that way https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.tvur5i1lb
Stein is a quack.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/07/27/jill_stein_is_not_the_savior_the_left_is_looking_for.html
I'm so sick of the current "Lesser of two evils" argument. I'm voting for Hillary Clinton because her policy positions agree with mine the most out of anyone currently running. Sanders got my primary vote, but I'm happy to give my November vote to Clinton. I don't give a fuck what party or how "establishment" she is, I believe she'll do a good job running the executive.
a vote for jill stein or gary johnson is taking away a possible vote for hillary. that's not different that supporting trump. not recognizing where the difference is between the way the world works and the way you want the world to work is what makes trump an attractive candidate. same disconnect between real-life and fantasy.
supreme court appointments are for a lifetime. most monetary policy and environmental policy are felt years after they're implemented. of course this election is about more than the next 4 years. all of them are. 400 years is a bit of a stretch though. our nation isn't anywhere near that old, and the environment isn't going to last that long anyway.
Tduds, read that this morning too. Quack quack quack!
American politics are so amusing.
...the impact on our personal lives will likely be minimal...its a sacrifice we should be willing to make
To steal a Facebook meme, jla-x, tell that to your local gay person, poor person, person of color, accidentally pregnant woman, handicapped person, person who might be eligible for a draft...if you think you're not likely to be impacted it's admitting you are privileged enough to not have to worry about pretty much anything.
But yes by all means let your ideological purity trump people's lives, we will all applaud you.
i think Trump is really just a really loud critic of the shit government we have, and that does not mean Obama is shit nor many politicians, it means the system is shit. Trump has come this far by simply expressing much of what many feel. voting for him i guess votes the crit into office? i will write Bernie in or something or maybe just stay out od this one....
^ write Rick Balkins' name down.
According to a totally unrelated thread, he appears to have a trillion year's worth of experience. Not sure even Trump can claim that.
So true ....
bitch, please.
VOTE JILL STEIN!
Stein is a quack.
Hillary is the anit-christ! ok n.s. writing in Balkarino
I dare you to still vote Democrat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LYRUOd_QoM
democrat very similar to demon. illuminatit 666 the russians are hacking us......where is my budha....ricky any thoughtful comments?
LITS4FormZ, did you see my post above about Hilary coming to my house and punching me in the face? I'd still vote for her. I dare you to vote *not* for Hillary then continue feeling proud of yourself when Trump appoints Martin Shkreli to the Supreme Court.
OHmG I would pay big money to see either Hilary or Hillary go to D's house and punch her in the face. Maybe I'd even vote the straight democratic ticket for the rest of my life.
yeah I'm totally with Her on that.
LITS4FormZ, did you see my post above about Hilary coming to my house and punching me in the face? I'd still vote for her. I dare you to vote *not* for Hillary then continue feeling proud of yourself when Trump appoints Martin Shkreli to the Supreme Court.
That would be scare since Martin Shkreli is not an attorney at all in the U.S. from what I can tell. That wouldn't stop Trump from trying.
Donna, so you would rather go down a slow path to destruction than a bumpy path to something better? That really doesn't make any sense to me. Free access to birth control will be the last thing on our minds in 50-100 years if we keep on this self destructive path...we will be too busy fighting master blaster and his army of flesh eating warlords...(hyperbole) we have to at some point vote for the future of the nation and put our own interests in jeopardy...I have all members of your above "list" in my close family...so yes, their interests are important to me...they are also not voting for Hillary....even the black, female, and the gay family member of mine...they can think and weigh their own options...And they Hate being lumped into some fucking paradigm of how "they vote" or what issues "they oppose". The media loves doing this dumb shit...trying to make people's minds up for them...that's the most patronizing form of racism imo...
oh man I'm so fired up! watchin' hill's speech and picturing her walking off stage and punching a sink SO GOOD!!!
I'M WITH HER!
My God, how do we make this happen ?!???!?!!
rick, maybe he's an attorney in sweden. he could call him self attorney then.
jla, reasonable education about and access to birth control might prevent master and blaster from being born....
Yeah yeah yeah ... hey when's the next time either Hilary or Hillary is scheduled to visit Indianastan?
I'm picturing all this going down with 'FIGHT SONG!' blaring in the background
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.