WhitewalkerInPhilly

It's funny, I had the same reaction, but for a completely different party

Look, if it wasn't clear to you that this year would be a step back, I don't know what to tell you. I didn't think it would be this bad, but this year was always about getting rid of dead cap and seeing what we had for 2019. I was actually impressed with some of Daboll's playcalling, but he's handcuffed by some truly awful QB play in Peterson and Anderson.

You know, I seem to notice that...no one who seems offended is disputing that Bolosaro has a record of anti-Democratic principles, advocated that the military murder people, or that he has publically stated that he wants the police killing more people. No, instead it's just insulting me, and making up some random personal anecdote about how "the left doesn't think democracy works" and "he says something I don't like, let's compare him to a journalist I don't like and therefore he's just a drone" You can't actually refute me, so you like to stroke yourselves to not feel quite so small.

It kind of is! "Today I learned that the reason why DR, 3rdnlong and Koko seem to say deranged things is because they like fascist dictatorships. That's why democracy, representation of the people and not brutally killing people who disagree with you seems like such a crazy idea to them!"

I think I finally figured it out. You get rock hard over a guy who says this: And then you move over to snark at the appearance of two other heads of state. This is what you like. You a-holes are happy about a guy who has explicitly said that Pinochet should have murdered more people, that democracy is weak and should be replaced. It is enlightening.

Again...if you want to hammer her, go ahead. But come on, how many times do you have to be cheated and pull out every bit of mental gymnastics to justify why you're not. It's honestly sad. It's like watching a senile retiree being conned by a psychic while his children desperately try to save him from losing the house.

Actually, that's a fair point. If you want to poke her for still getting all the advantages of being white and then also for claiming that he's Indian, that's fine by me. Whether Warren is deserving of scorn is not mutually inclusive to Trump being a lying sack of **** who couldn't be trusted to keep a promise to not light himself on fire.

You mean, the professor whose specialty is "tracking population migration via DNA analysis". Literally, someone whose job it is to see how populations move. https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/10/15/warren-addresses-native-american-issue/YEUaGzsefB0gPBe2AbmSVO/story.html So, when I respond to your question of "are you really this stupid?" I should really be asking you that. A big loudmouthed bully made a bet. Someone did what he asked. He responded like a mewling coward and reneged on a promise...again. Like when he repeatedly stiffed his contractors. He denied what he said on camera, despite the fact that there is literally a recording of it, like when he mocked a disabled person and then denied it. So it tells me a great deal when your response is "Well, she isn't AS Native as I think should count, so anything Trump says doesn't count"

I'm sorry, I'm sure that was funny, but I couldn't understand you over the incredible mental gymnastics people here are doing trying to work out how 45 isn't a lying POS, and that he totally didn't promise to make a donation, and how it's all really Warren's fault for complying his challenge. ? Or hell, maybe he's just senile.

Hey, she took the test! That means Trump will live up to his deal and donate a million dollars to charity, right? I mean, here is Fox News video of him saying it. Not some "liberal cabal", Fox News: Annnnnnd he won't. Here's him denying what he said on video. Again https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/411414-trump-denies-offering-1-million-for-warren-dna-test-even-though-he It is hilarious that people here believe this putz.

I'll be honest, that would be big

I heard someone on Philly radio say they would give a 5th. To that, I say "get the hell out" Shady is on the down side but he's easily the most explosive player we have on offense. You don't get better by trading star players for peanuts. We should know by now

I love Shady. He has been a delight to watch these past 3+ years. When my wife (the Eagles fan) called me to tell me Shady had been traded to the Bills she prefaced it by saying "Something terrible has happened" But if we can snag a 2nd and 3rd for him, and considering the money we save, I am for it. We are wasting him this year, and we can pick up someone serviceable in the 1st or 2nd next year.

I know it does. So I was a bit hesitant when I first heard. I mean, I disliked the choice because I find his ruling on contraceptives to be laughably stupid, but there was a grain of salt. And then two more, independent claims cane in. And then the FBI has not allowed to corroborate or disprove them. Then I saw this rambling incoherent mess of explanations. I'm sorry for you man, but at this point the way Kavanaugh handled it is indefensible. And yet....so many nutbags are intent on doing so.

You clearly sliding down Trumps. How is that working out for you? Source please

So...what *is* happening, since you claim to know? And if I am accused, I would want to clear my name. And I don't think I could look guiltier testifying if I had a death wish to be strapped to Ole Sparky So...you are saying that she wasn't grilled over her fear of flying? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/donald-trump-jr-mocks-christine-blasey-ford-twitter-selective-fear-of-flying-kavanaugh-hearing-today/ So, what you are saying is that you better trust the exploding, rambling, conspiracy spewing person who broke down crying over his accuser, who sat and took stupid questions because people were desperate to prove her wrong.

Did you actually check in? She was raked over the coals so hard she got grilled about her fear of flying. That's how far the Republican appointed lawyer had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find anything. In contrast, Kavanaugh looked like he had the fortitude of Nick the Squealer from the Simpson's. But somehow, he is the victim of a conspiracy so vast that we can't bother to investigate. ?

Jesus. I listened a bit to Kavanaugh. Between his pouting, the petulance, his random asides about spaghetti on ketchup and how he made varsity, refusing to answer questions and a desire to see his name cleared....but not actually let people investigate I don't think I could imagine a guiltier looking perp. How people here can defend him makes me fear for the future of the species.

I love how people get a massive stiffie on the idea to "go and declassify them" Do you honestly think that if they were of any use, we wouldn't have seen them declassified by now? Now many times has Nunes released stuff that was supposed to taint the entire investigation?

I don't think I have ever seen a player paid so much to do so little. This isn't even Haynesworth bust money, he continuously gets contracts to be meh and lose the job to the next guy.

I am a little surprised that I am not hearing more about Allen from the pundits. I mean, I know they have labelled him a bust and they are loath to move on from that, but he put together a far better game than Darnold or Rosen in a spectacular upset.

It wasn't perfect, and those illegal formation penalties certainly show it. But overall, this was a tremendous bounce back. His numbers would be even better if Benjamin and Foster didn't have a case of the dropsies. He managed the clock, he managed down and distance and he looked a lot more relaxed. I think we are going to keep seeing rookie mistakes all year, and gradual growth, and then I hope it's off to the races next year.

The thing is, I like the Big Nickel. But with our scheme, I have zero idea why we are going to a 3-3-5 when we are far better suited to a 4-2-5. I thought the whole point was to get Alexander out of SLB, and onto the line. You get a safety to pair off against TE and plug the run. We should have the personnel for it.

Well, I will owe up to one thing: it doesn't seem to be perjury, just intensely misleading. But as to the others: But in regards to prosecution of crimes, here is his law review article: http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf Here are the quotes from it. And here is the clip of him on C-Span explaining his argument in backing Catholic charites over providing birth control: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4747818/kavanaugh-calls-birth-control-abortion https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/09/06/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-confirmation-abortion-inducing-drugs/1217561002/

The man should be disqualified for a number of reasons. First and foremost his unfounded belief that a sitting president is immune from prosecution for any and all crimes. Close runners up are Perjuring himself under oath during his hearing, and his complete lack of understanding of the difference between birth control and abortion. So while I think that some healthy skepticism about the accusation of sexual assault is warranted, what the hell made people think he was a good choice to begin with?