All_Pro_Bills

As Satan is typically characterized as red I expect being orange would make someone Satan's assistant. As for Ivanka, it might be easier to date liberal women. I've put some thought into this social interaction. For starters, avoid any conversation defining the term "woman". Getting into this is an immediate deal killer. Then tell them how evil Trump is. That should get their interest immediately. Tell them you believe in Russian collusion and 1/6 is the greatest threat to democracy since the wars between Sparta and Athens. Go on and on about how you're a victim of numerous acts of oppression and bigotry. That will get them to go full virtue signal and they'll do just about anything you want. Just be warned, you'll have to deal with their constant droning on and on with what I've read described as "a quasi-religious frenzy that compels the performance of moral atonement scripts". Getting rid of them is easy. Just say you considered gender reassignment surgery but decided that its just not for you.

Its all conditional on the result rather than the means and methods of democracy. That would be when they win its all good. When they lose democracy is at risk. So they are therefore obligated to break any and all rules, ethical and moral limits, cheat as required, in order to win the election, in order to protect democracy, democracy must be suspended. All while rationalizing and blaming and finger pointing and saying the other guys are doing what they doing. But the liberals do it in the pursuit of "good", their opposition in the pursuit of "evil" and "hate". Its quite a fantasy they've created but I think the rest of the country has had enough of this crap.

Do you apply this philosophy when you go to a Bills game with your buddies? Does the person making the most coin buy tickets and food and drinks and pay for parking for everybody? If yes, where can I sign up for that? Call me Finland and throw in a couple Allen jerseys for me too!

A lot of Americans object to the US providing protection to additional countries like Sweden and Finland simply because we receive nothing in return for the arrangement. Let's face it, they're joining NATO to benefit from protections only America can provide. They're not joining NATO, for example, so the dynamic military forces of Italy or some other random European nation can defend them. How about they pay something like 10% of their annual GDP to the US treasury for the cost of defending them from any attack? That's in line with what the Roman Empire charged the provinces. Same for the rest of NATO protectorates. That seems fair they should pay something for the cost of our military defending them. Otherwise we bear the costs and they get off free and clear to pursue other activities besides war and defense. That doesn't seem fair to the US citizens and businesses that work to pay taxes to defend their country so their citizens are free to do things like take the month of August off for vacation while we work through the Summer to foot the bill.

I have an argument. I've made it several times. The 1/6 committee is a fraud. That's my argument in a sentence. But I conclude that expressing it to you again in any detail is pointless.

I've expressed similar thoughts but on this board you'll find several posters will accuse you of supporting Putin rather than pointing out a logical and strategic insight. Much like the Washington establishment which never attributes any cost to their actions, this anti-Russia obsession is their weakness as it muddles their thinking and blinds their eyes to more beneficial and alternative actions. I still have doubts were on the cusp of some major conflict as I'm not convinced Pelosi and a plane full of Washington insiders would put their own lives in harms way just to make a point if they thought hostilities were imminent and they'd be the first causalities. If they actually go through with this tour of Asia landing in Taiwan my guess is China imposes some serious economic penalties and actions such as cutting of specific exports to the U.S. market.

I ran from nothing. I'm just done rehashing the same old same old ground. We can agree to disagree and move on. At least I can. That clown show will result in nothing. Given the track record of failure on every one of these narratives why expect anything else?

So sorry I hurt your feelings sweetie. Call your mommy and cry to her.

Satire about oppressors, white straight males, is acceptable. Satire about woke defined victims (everybody but white straight males) or its sacred tenants is violence.

Its very scientific. Unfortunately, its "political" science.

Because they're a bunch of perverts and weirdos that need a good ass-kicking.

Somebody was caused anxiety. Does the pansy need their mommy to cuddle them? But the biggest joke here is that law enforcement drones are so friggin; stupid that they act to enforce this kind of crap. Must be that a lobotomy is a prerequisite to join the force there.

One problem is this. The people cheating in key Democrat controlled districts in several swing States, in general delivering just enough fake mail-in ballots to win the Statewide race, are the same local election officials and party members assigned the responsibility to manage the election process and ensure the vote is fair. Producing proof through auditing the vote counts require the cooperation of those people. In order for any audit to be performed the people cheating must be willing to assist in activities that will implicate them in cheating. How exactly would that work? Maybe we need United Nations observers at polling places to ensure the vote is fair like they do in places like Zimbabwe?

As long as the Saudi's support the mutually beneficial petrodollar system of oil payments initiated under Nixon, all US administrations will tolerate their brutal and discriminatory practices. They can kill and dismember anyone they desire. They can even support extremists destroying buildings in lower Manhattan. Bush let it go (he allowed the violation of FAA grounding orders of all civilian aircraft to let bin Laden family members escape the US while he made tough speeches at ground zero), Obama let it go, Trump let it go, and Biden will ignore it. And they will fight the release of information and justice for 9/11 families. The second they start taking payments in other currencies the knives will come out in Washington. Count on it. While I share Tib's admiration for democracies he should accept that our government does not subscribe to that practice.

Worse, social justice researchers have concluded its likely Francisco was a prominent leader in the pro-life movement of his era.

Rule number one is don't believe your own propaganda. If you want to believe Ukraine is "winning" then be my guest. Reality I expect is much different. But that aside, the fundamental problem with your view here is the US has no strategic interest in Ukraine outside of a desire of some actors inside our government intent on containing or weakening Russia. As Loydd Austin admitted. Focusing on Russia is a major policy error out of Washington. As the major threat is China. If threats against the US Speaker of the House don't make that clear, then I expect nothing will. In my opinion obsessing over Russia and close to ignoring China is perhaps the biggest policy error committed by Washington in the history of the nation. It ignores the most vital interests and the biggest threat. What targeting Russia has resulted in is a 2 on 1 arrangement with China and Russia vs. the US. Biden attempted, and failed, to alter this arrangement by meeting with Chinese leadership and pleading his case with Xi. But the Chinese know the game too. They clearly see the US as the number one threat to their ambitions, not Russia. Xi was not receptive to an arrangement with Biden and the US against Russia. Now we're odd-man-out in the game. Being the odd-man-out is a clear disadvantage. A strategic alternative of a policy of engaging with Russia would have put the US in a position to contain China or at a minimum exert more leverage. I believe Russia would have been receptive to such an arrangement, establishing a 2 on 1 deal with the US vs. China. For very little of any significance. Getting Russia, OPEC, other producers to act against China or at least present the capacity to do so to Bejing. And save Europe from social and economic disaster caused by sanctions. Along with other consequences such as food shortages and higher prices. And facilitating a peaceful resolution and avoiding conflict in Ukraine. Such an arrangement would have left China as odd-man-out. But at this point it's an opportunity lost.

This is what 40 years of "engagement", most favored nation trade status, encouraging US businesses to set up shop in China and transfer proprietary technology to their government sponsored enterprises, allowing CCP to influence domestic media, sports, entertainment, cultural, political, and social elites, and other actions beneficial to the Chinese government and party members has produced. Everyday low prices at Walmart and iPhones from Apple in the hand and back pocket of every American, and sneakers from Nike, and NBA exhibitions and TV broadcast contracts didn't lead to the development of democracy and freedom in China. It created a powerful and dangerous authoritarian global adversary that oppresses and persecutes its own people with the aim of spreading their influence around the world. Who could have seen that coming? Like, almost everybody. And today, we're witnessing a scenario where a delegation to Taiwan led by the 3rd highest ranking US government official is being threatened by the Chinese government. Like most US government arrangements around the world for the past 40 years a host of policy and strategy miscalculations have painted us into a corner with no good options available. One big advantage for China is their leadership thinks strategically and long term. You don't have to be a brutal authoritarian regime to employ this approach. Obviously, our leadership doesn't think that way at all. China likely foresaw and planned for this day and such a situation. For our side everything appears to be a surprise. There's a lesson in there somewhere.

One of my favorite bloggers. https://kunstler.com/cluster*****-nation/playing-chicken-with-the-fates/

I hear what you're saying. And while as a man I don't know how a woman feels, that doesn't stop my wife from trying to let me know at every opportunity!

I think you make a sound and reasonable argument. Although my view is slightly different. Biological "sex" is a fact of genetics and science. You are what your genes say you are. There is no choice or arbitrary distinction to make here. No amount of debate or thinking is going to change that biological fact. As for gender, I saw somewhere there are some 68 gender "types". I'm of the opinion you can identify or believe you are what you want to identify or believe you are in regard to gender distinction. As it's none of my business, you're not hurting or impacting me in any way. And I'm reciprocating and have no intent to harm you. If an individual wants to make a specific gender identification for themselves, then fine. But don't expect or demand that such identification bestows or grants or provides some special privileges or rights or designations to you in situations where biological sex is a higher priority attribute when making some distinction or choice. I think that's the crux of the entire argument. In the case of women's sports if you're a biological male no type of gender identification nor any amount of debate and discussion on the "logic" and reasoning for that identification is going to change the fact you're not a biological female. What I also wonder about regarding this debate is why is sex/gender the only trait that can be identified with? If I'm a 5-foot tall, white man, 45-year-old with brown eyes and brown hair why can't I choose to identify as a 7-foot-tall, 65-year-old, native American women with green eyes and blonde hair? What's so special about gender rather than another trait? And derive social benefits from that identification my biological traits do not provide.

You're point proves my point. As you're correct, but not in the way you expect. Trump is an outsider. Therefore he is not protected. So its open-season on anyone associated with that administration. The last 5 years proves it.

Like a nuke dropped on Beijing? That's the kind of message they might understand.

You're wrong. Washington uni-party establishment & perpetual war supporting politicians in good standing with the rich and powerful benefactors and rulers of the Empire are above the law. And until they decide Joe needs to go, Mr. Biden, his family, and people under his protection, are above the law.

You're most likely to get a copy/paste of somebody else's tweet or some talking point narratives as they have no original ideas. Just general responses blaming Trump & Putin for everything while Saint Joe and his flock of misfits get a pass.

And yet every other officer on duty that day assessed the threat differently and choose not to discharge their weapons in that situation. So a trigger happy police officer who has a reported history of incidents shot and killed an unarmed person that posed no immediate danger. But no big deal, right? I think a lot of the pissing and moaning is the allegation that Trump suggested and "encouraged" replacing some electoral college representatives in states he lost with others that would override the voters choice and change their vote in the Electoral College. But in 2016 numerous Democratic officials went on the record suggesting the electors be pressured and coerced to change their votes to Hillary. So how many of them got indicted, charged, tried, convicted, and sentenced? None. Because 1) they were Democrats, 2) they were members of the political class, 3) they were members of the perpetual war uni-party. I guess the logic is they did it, anything goes for them, and the rules and laws don't apply in the pursuit of "good". Only the other guys need to follow the law.