DC Tom

I'll vote for him only if his running mate is named "Yin."

Plus...she's not that pretty. She's just got nice teats. We don't hate that either.

You seem to be oblivious to her pushing the "international Jewry" shtick popularized by the Nazis. It's all there, from the "allegiance" claims to the purchasing of governments to the sub rosa control of the world economy. She's not criticizing Israel. She's demonizing Jews.

All I remember of that game is watching it with someone who got up in the middle of the second quarter and said "I feel sorry for the Raiders. They have to be here for the whole game." And walked out.

And Keith Richards is still alive...

So @The_Dude...how do you like my new browser extension?

This one, hands down.

Oh, sweetie. You wish.

I still can't see what you're posting, chucklehead. It's awesome, really.

Not that clear. I still laugh at the memory of they breaking in to Iraq war coverage so Neil Cavuto could interview Rupert Murdoch about the launch of his new "conservative news" satellite. Like the satellite has a political position. What they ARE clear about is that they are a conservative news organization. It makes it slightly easier to separate the spin from the facts - significantly easier right now, actually. At worst, I'd say Fox tells you what they think, whereas CNN tells you what you should think (and MSNBC just tells you to be angry.)

What a chucklehead.

Yep. I don't know what the internal analysis actually is...but you never see it portrayed publicly as anything that makes a lick of sense. Basically, everyone argues a multivariable equation as though it's a single-variable problem. I'm not at all sure that anyone has any real idea how many people cross the southern border.

But he'd still be a chucklehead.

But is she well-spoken? Let's ask @transplantbillsfan

And someone throwing a cup at Ron Artest.

It's why I just call him an idiot.

The supremes haven't ruled yet, they just agreed to hear it. But even then, if the two cases are based on different legal principles, a lower court might decide differently in one case than SCOTUS would decide in the other. I would expect that SCOTUS would review the lower court's decision in that case, however. But in this situation, the lower court's ruling is practically moot, since the Supreme Court hasn't even heard their case yet. In fact, that's probably why this asinine judge made the ruling: to set a precedent for the Supreme Court to have to consider.

Yes, he does. He's an #######.

Different cases.

No, he thinks a lack of bread lines means bread isn't available to the poor because the rich are stealing their food. So bread lines are a sign of a healthy economy in which the poor are participating in economic activity and have plenty to eat. While living in a country without bread lines, where for the first time in the history of the world obesity is a health issue. He praised bread lines, in a manner far stupider than 3rd even implied.

Simplest way to reduce illegal border crossings: reduce enforcement. Apprehensions are used as a proxy for crossings, which presumes the rate of apprehension must remain steady. If the Trump Administration is enforcing the border more stringently, then apprehensions should go up if the rate of attempted crossings stays the same...which would mean the "crisis" is manufactured, and being handled. Conversely...I want to hear the Democrats explain why more people want to enter a country they insist is a shithole run by a tin-pot dictator, than the paradise run by the previous president.

And he'll probably be German.

They're also very well-spoken societies.

BREAKING NEWS: Emergency declared at border by NYT.

Yes, actually, she can set up her own IT department. And declassify *****, so that "protecting classified information" becomes a moot point. And protecting our constitutional form of government, which requires checks and balances that require the availability of information, is more important than keeping secrets.