tantric superman

Here's Reich clocking her at 1:29.

While I applaud the "Georgia State Lunatic, Idiot, and Epileptic Asylum, where Marjorie Taylor Greene" shtick, life's too short to even consider this moron. I think Georgia did a good job last election cycle, and all I can really do is hope they try to hold shit together next cycle. We're all counting on them.

Commie as fuck:

Bit of a spoiler:

When those two lovebirds weren't grab assing while they were farming, they were making out in the hills (are alive with the sound of music). As depressing as TM flicks can be, I always come away feeling like I haven't spent enough time staring into my wife's eyes with deep intense passion. If I ever looked at my wife in the way a TM character looks at his girlfriend/spouse, she'd say: "WTF dude. You're freaking me out." I'm not a romantic man.

Three of the four people under guard by Khmer Rouge in this picture are not commies (hint - find the dudes who can't squat worth a squat).

Finally got to see this. Clearly should have been nominated for best picture 2020. Holy shit I bought it completely and loved it. Now I feel like eating some strudel, moving to Austria, buying a place in the hills, and marrying a young bride who can work the fields and milk the cows while I contemplate shit I'm going to post on surly.

I was going to make a funny about "like Nazis and Klansmen" but this thread is stupid enough as it is. I say the coaches who are talking with this guy will know best how to deal with it. I realize you could say that about every recruiting issue, but this one more than most.

Good song.

Dems should never have wasted time on a commission. They should have investigated hard through executive agencies until the Republicans tried to stop them. And THEN the issue of a bipartisan commission could have come up as a compromise (so that Republicans wouldn't feel butthurt). I'm all for payback but only after I'm convinced that this Administration is putting efficiency first, and payback second.

I know it sounds pie in the sky, but my recommended is 90% surly shitposting, 10% participation in elections to elect reasonable politicians. I like my state rep and state senator (John Turner and Nathan Johnson). If you don't like yours, help to drive them out. What means block walking and dollar$.

How the hell do we know whey there were Nazis? We don't even know how the can opener works.

Okay, very basic question. On January 6, 2021, a group of seditionists attacked the US Government. Why do we need Congress to vote on anything. Shouldn't some executive branch unit just go off and investigate whatever they need to with subpoena power, and then write up a report, and present it to the President, who can then present it to Congress before one of their committees? At that point, Congress can decide if some sort of independent commission is needed. Why doesn't the Department of Homeland Security just do what seems like it should be its fucking job?

Yeah, rereading WTB's post and my reply, I think you are correct. I don't see any way to move forward if one party and not the other is making a religious argument, but a good counterargument on the religious person's playing field would be a valuable asset.

You seem like you'd be great at unthinking.

I think both are in my top 10.

and Catholics.

So the Catholics are sort of like the Susan Collinses of legitimizing a harmful, poverty increasing, female disenfranchising policy? (I kid -- I get your point.)

Seems to me the only legitimate argument to prohibit some or all abortions is favoring the life of the developing fetus over the liberty and potentially the life of the mother. Roe v. Wade set out the conflict in non-religious terms. It's a weak argument to me, and it makes a mockery of the liberty interest outlined in the constitution, but it has the benefit of not being based on a man made religion. It allows for the weighing of interests. To me, the only issues that should have followed the original Roe v. Wade decision were issues related to late term abortions where there was no evidence of danger to the woman, no health issues related to the fetus, and the woman had plenty of time to make a decision within the confines of pre-viability. I could certainly see some non-religious logic to a state having an interest in protecting a viable fetus. But instead the anti-abortion folks focused on trying to control women and limit abortions in earlier stages. It makes sense, because abusing young women is a lot easier than proving a case against a doctor who is lawyered up.

I think you are being a bit cavalier with this statement. Their stance on abortion has increased poverty and pain and suffering in the world. I don't think their position is moral, and I'm not sure with what you are trying to establish it as being consistent with. I think mainline, practicing Catholics hide behind their position the way they do about more prohibitions in the Church. They simply ignore them. Most don't appear to be hypocritical about them, because they remain silent when they are involved in abortions. And for those who speak out in favor of criminalizing or prohibiting abortion, they hide behind the numerical power of the Catholic church.

People who try to destroy democracy, policies which promote pollution and destruction of the planet, violent religious fanatacism, the conglomeration of wealth in the hands of the very few when poverty still exits -- these are unacceptable in modern society and we should focus policy on these types of issues. Individuals who are irresponsible and have too many abortions -- we should provide counseling and education to decrease the instances of such activity.

Given that the bible is a unreliable, non-credible piece of fiction, that's not a particularly relevant point.

This is the primary and best argument. But to me the most persuasive is whether you would want any of these pro-life assholes involved in any of your family decisions. This roles back around to your argument. This is a method of control, pure and simple. And at it's most basic level a grotesque denial of liberty for women and those who they include in their personal decisions.

I guess because the public policy is to transfer dollars to lower wage workers, and therefore businesses that can better navigate that change are better for the community as a whole. Why WOULDN'T you want increased wages if your net profit to small business owners stayed the same or increased.

Like F. Murray Abraham, he saved his best work for Louie.