Total posts: 4,363
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
This attribute is not confined to fascism, but it is central to all fascism.
So, admit that the attribute is not exclusive to fascism, but paint it as such, anyway? Sock puppet tactic.
I suppose most historians would bump Trump's "nationalism"
See above, speaking of tactis. Also, "...tactics ...is only a small part of generalship. For a general must also be capable of furnishing military equipment and providing supplies for the men; he must be resourceful, active, careful, hardy and quick-witted; he must be both gentle and brutal, at once straightforward and designing, capable of both caution and surprise, lavish and rapacious, generous and mean, skillful in defense and attack; and there are many other qualifications, some natural, some acquired, that are necessary to one who would succeed as a general." - attributed to Socrates
Fetishization of youth.
Joe Biden, on video, 12/22/2019 - Wilmington, DE, after gathering a bunch of kids around him] "Hey, all the kids... come up here... I want to setr the record straight on a couple of things... I got hairy legs that turned blond in the sun. The kids used to reach into the pool and rub my legs down..." yeah, okay [?]
Fetishization of masculinity
Joe Biden - same speech as above "... CornPop was a bad dude... but I was smart, then [as opposed to now?] , I said, 'When I tell ya to get off the [diving] board, ya get off the board..."
Leader cult
Trump is a leader. The head of an organization of over 535 companies, of which all of maybe six have been bankrupted by him for weak production. 6 of 535, that's still a 99% success rate. That's no cult; that's the American dream. Sorry you're opposed.
Lost-golden-age syndrome.
So, what is the Progressive's golden age? 1848 - the Marx/Engels publication of the Communist Manifesto. Some golden age. A philosophy that, everywhere tried, has never lasted more than 75 years [USSR], and typically lasts 40 years, because that's what happens when you run out of other peoples' money, and don't know how to create wealth yourself. Not to mention that there is no example of a country that began via Socialism/Communism, because nobody is sufficiently rich to syphon off their wealth to start a nation.
Self-definition by opposition
But then you say "Trump invents or exaggerates every threat..." but that's descriptive of the threat, not self-definition, as if threats do not, of their own accord, exaggerate their power.
Mass mobilization and mass party.
Yeah. kind of like when Madison anticipated that the United States would expand and populate, and allowed for that increase to have a system of expanding representation in Congress, based on a Census, which began in 1790. Was that fascist?
Hierarchical party structure and tendency to purge the disloyal.
Hmmm? Article I, Article II, Article III... Article I, sec. 21, sec. 3, Article II, sec. 4... so, the US Constitution is fascist?
Theatricality
Reagan? A fascist? Lincoln, assassinated by an actor? Lincoln calling America "the last best hope of earth" was just fascist rhetoric?
The fascist derby
Let's see.... Socrates, Joe Biden, the American Dream, Marx/Engels, Madison, Reagan, and Lincoln, and the Constitution all fit the fascist bill. You said it, I didn't. or, maybe not, after all. Yeah, seems exaggerated to me, too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Jasmine
Because they do not have sufficient personal critical thinking to know what either Trump, or Fascism is. They hear others say it, and just mimic. Pathetic sock puppets.
Created:
Posted in:
"Only the hand that erases can write the true thing." - Meister Eckhart
Too bad that today, the only erasers [counter culturers] are illiterate and afraid of any words at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
Who censors? Weak minds who refuse to hear alternative critical thinking. Of what are they afraid to hear? Democracy should not, and a real democracy is not afraid to hear anything. What can words do? Who is incited by words? Weak minds who do not have the strength of their own self control.
There are three kinds of people in the world:
make things happen [by action, not words]
watch what happens [too weak to be involved]
wonder what happened [too dumb to be involved]
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I watched and listened, then read the transcript of Trump's speech. Nothing said incited the rational person to do anything but what he asked, to march peacefully to the Capital. Perhaps an irrational mind woulkd interpret something else, but that irrationality is on them. Show me the incitation. When Trump talks about "Fighting," it is not joe biden talking about going to the backyard woodshed. Is Biden inciting to riot? He would say "no." I accept him at his word. You progs, however, hear Trump say "fight," and you start swinging. So, who was it who stormed the Capital? Best wait for the FBI iinvestigation, yeah?
Created:
-->
@dustryder
No. Although the allowance for Congress to entertain the engagement of the 25th on their initiation when the 25th was proposed in 1966, they have never seen fit to legislate it, perhaps thinking that "oversight" [a word that does not exist constitutionally, by the way] to remove a president but by impeachment, which Pelostomy was also irrational to attempt [what crime, high or low?} was a step too far for Congress, or else why didn't Congress write it into the amendment in the first place? So, why is Pelostomy thinking about it, now [even a few months ago? Because she hates Trump with an irrational loathing. So, no, my characterization of Pelostomy's intelligence is spot on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I believe the 1A contains an unwritten sub-text: We have the right to be offended, but censure is not how that offense taken is properly resolved
Created:
-->
@dustryder
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
Precession’s beginning would have to be calculated back in time to determine at what celestial point Earth’s axis was directed at Earth’s beginning… 4+ billion years ago. Of course, 4B years ago, no star we see today was in its present location, so there’s further complication to the calculation. Not to mention that those changes continue. We only know that, presently [over a scope of thousands of years] the circle described by Earth’s axial rotation [if even that is a constant, and it's probably not] requires approx. 26,000 years to complete its rotation and that currently, about 14,000 years into the current rotation, our axis points to Polaris, and in roughly 12,000 years, assuming a stable and still galaxy [but it’s not], our axis will point to Vega.
However, in 12,000 years, Vega will have moved, Polaris will have moved, from our perspective, and Leo, coincidentally, will look more like a constellation appearing virtually identical to a radio telescope today – effectively a dish. I know this because when I passed my Astronomy Merit Badge in Boy Scouts [some 50 years ago], when I lived in L.A., the administrator of Griffith Park Observatory & Planetarium, was my badge counselor. After passing the test, he asked if I would like to see the night sky in 10,000 years. I did. He fired up the device, which took about ten minutes to complete its changes, and projected the result on the dome overhead. I had just passed off identification of 40 constellations, but not one of them was recognizable. So, it’s all a senseless discussion.
Created:
Pelostomy’s Lament
With eight days left to go
Donald Trump must still blow.
We said he could not candidate
We said he would not electate
We said no one would nominate
But 16 proved we made mistakes.
We tried impeachment first day out
For walking Melania out and about,
The inaugurate was high, high crime
All his tweets not worth a dime
We said six months would be his end
We said one year would be his end
We said mid-term would be his end,
We said Muellergate would be his end
That Russiagate was the very end
We hoped a Storm would be his end
We threw impeachment in again
We said Ukraine was it, and then
I sent my kids, those keystone cops,
But Schiff and Nadler blew their tops
I’m at wits end, my hair’s a mess,
It’s blowout time; it’s in distress,
What now? I hear an old refrain…
Trump is still here, but where’s my brain?
©2021 by Faux Law
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Pelostomy’s Hair
Paul asks me why I need my hair blown,
Covid? What’s that; I need my hair done,
My hair’s all wet; don’t ask; not known,
My pelostomy means my brain is blown
So, Darlin, give me head with hair,
Such flighty, tighty beautiful hair,
Shining, gleaming, sniffing, flaxen, wax on,
Turn on, give me hair blown to there
Hair that thrills when you stare,
Hair, baby, hair, pappa, hair wherever,
Hair----
Show it, but don’t mow it, God, can I grow it!
Flies in the breeze, tangles in the trees,
Give a home to the fleas, a hive for the bees,
A nest for the birds, don’t Joe love sniffing yours,
There ain’t no words for the wonders of coiffeurs,
Nan’s hairy, Joe’s hairy, every hair in all my pores,
Hair…
©2021 by fauxlaw
Paul asks me why I need my hair blown,
Covid? What’s that; I need my hair done,
My hair’s all wet; don’t ask; not known,
My pelostomy means my brain is blown
So, Darlin, give me head with hair,
Such flighty, tighty beautiful hair,
Shining, gleaming, sniffing, flaxen, wax on,
Turn on, give me hair blown to there
Hair that thrills when you stare,
Hair, baby, hair, pappa, hair wherever,
Hair----
Show it, but don’t mow it, God, can I grow it!
Flies in the breeze, tangles in the trees,
Give a home to the fleas, a hive for the bees,
A nest for the birds, don’t Joe love sniffing yours,
There ain’t no words for the wonders of coiffeurs,
Nan’s hairy, Joe’s hairy, every hair in all my pores,
Hair…
©2021 by fauxlaw
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Joe’s Hair
Jill asks me why I’m such a hairy guy,
I’m hairy night and day, enough for you to buy,
I’m hairy high and low; don’t ask; don’t know
Just stroke it smooth, t’will rise and show…
So, Darlin, give me head with hair,
Such long, beautiful hair,
Shining, gleaming, sniffing, flaxen, wax on,
Turn on, give me hair down to there
Hair that thrills when you stare,
Hair, baby, hair, momma, hair wherever,
Hair----
Show it, but don’t mow it, God, can I grow it!
Flies in the breeze, tangles in the trees,
Give a home to the fleas, a hive for the bees,
A nest for the birds, don’t they love my sniffing yours,
There ain’t no words for the wonders of coiffeurs,
Legs, hairy, pits, hairy, everywhere I’m hairy, Harry.
Hair…
©2019 by fauxlaw
Jill asks me why I’m such a hairy guy,
I’m hairy night and day, enough for you to buy,
I’m hairy high and low; don’t ask; don’t know
Just stroke it smooth, t’will rise and show…
So, Darlin, give me head with hair,
Such long, beautiful hair,
Shining, gleaming, sniffing, flaxen, wax on,
Turn on, give me hair down to there
Hair that thrills when you stare,
Hair, baby, hair, momma, hair wherever,
Hair----
Show it, but don’t mow it, God, can I grow it!
Flies in the breeze, tangles in the trees,
Give a home to the fleas, a hive for the bees,
A nest for the birds, don’t they love my sniffing yours,
There ain’t no words for the wonders of coiffeurs,
Legs, hairy, pits, hairy, everywhere I’m hairy, Harry.
Hair…
©2019 by fauxlaw
Created:
-->
@dustryder
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
It boils down to this: There are three kinds of people in the world:
Make things happen
Watch what happens
Wonder what happened.
The third drawer down comprises sheep, at least, and is a heavily populated sock drawer. Sock puppets.
Created:
So, the House, via Speaker Pelostomy, who has had a few essential things removed from her brain, has launched an effort to allow Congress to engage the 25A, according to Section 4 of that amendment. However, a few things stand in her way;
1. The 25A allows for the President to declare his incapacity to discharge his duties.
2. Section 4 allows for the VP, plus a majority of the Cabinet, to make such declaration.
3. Section 4 also offers Congress to make legislation to appoint a commission to make the same declaration. However, to date, since the amendment’s ratification in 1967, Congress has never enacted such legislation. Today, in spite of Pelosotomy’s call for such legislation, that legislation does not exist. Such legislation would require Congress, both houses, to declare by 2/3 vote to declare the President incapacitated, but only if they have the legislation to do so. They don’t.
Too bad, Nancy. Got to plan accordingly for these things. But, doing your hair is so much more important in a pandemic, isn't it? Maybe she needs more removed? Is her hair doing her thinking for her these days? See Joe. He knows hair.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Why do you worship the Bleached Blond Man?
Why do you insist it is a matter of worship. or it is nothing? Do progressives live only on the edges of excesses? That is the place where most contradictions occur. that's where progressivism lives.
Created:
Posted in:
I have just posted a debate to argue this point of Trump/supporters and their censorship by social media, et al.
Created:
Posted in:
If the left is so bent on censorship as a response to the 1A, tell me who is to be qualified as the censor? You? I, for one, disagree. Censorship is an admission that you lack a backbone when you are offended. You have the right to be offended, yeah? Or don 't you? You must believe the latter, or p.c. would have never made it off the ground.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Gee, should we also ban all the progressive threats to followers of the Prince of Peace? Goes both ways, my friend, so be careful what you advocate censoring. I think maybe the 1A has it right in its unstated, but obvious interpretation: You have the right to be offended, but you do not have the right to censor by way of response.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
et we have a mod team openly hostile to religion and philosophy.
Spot on! But then, who isn't openly hostile to religion and it's own brand of philosophy if one disdains religion as a valid set of values? I'll just say, No shyte, Sherlock.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm not sure
Argue for your limitations, but they are not mine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
By rationally thinking that, given that conditions are not likely to cause a life-ending experience, the risk of smaller-scale injury may be exceeded by the thrill of accomplishment, even for selfish motivation. one may be motivated by something that appears irrational, but there is rational thinking in comparing risk/reward.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Agreed, no prob. Unfortunately, I've already received an acceptance on the debate [ didn't expect it so soon], but, please do comment as it proceeds. For practicality, as it may influence the debate, should you comment, I may reply by way pf PM rather than in comments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
the difference between an ABSTRACT noun and a CONCRETE noun?
I have a PhD in English Lit
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Not if it is willed otherwise. Mind over not just matter, but feelings, as will. In fact, the response to any feeling is: "The secret is not minding." Thus, the ability of some to walk over burning coals.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
There is little objective doubt that Hillaryous Balloon Girl destroyed email evidence that had been under congressional subpoena. That alone, should have been prosecuted [because those emails were DOS business, and not yoga or Chelsea's wedding planning], but I have felt the DOJ under Trump has had a lackluster performance, meaning, in my view, that the DOJ has been an under-performer for at least 12 years, and probably longer. That lack of performance has more to do with no finding of criminal activity on the part of Ms. Clinton than any claim of lack of evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Sorry, I didn't check the origin of the string, and thought you had.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
The human mind is an ABSTRACT CONCEPT.
If a thought process is measurable, how abstract can it be? True, we have not yet developed the tech to measure what a person is thinking, but in very broad stroakes, but, according to MIT, that the person is actively thinking at all is measurable. https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/how-are-thoughts-measured/
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Every single choice you make is motivated by your e-motion.
Do you segregate the concepts of emotion and reasoning? I disagree that we are exclusively emotional creatures.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
@Theweakeredge
Note that I have challenged a debate on the subject of denial/opposition. I will leave remaining commentary in that venue.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Wow, I'd forgotten about this thread. Relative to the subject of online classes, I've since had personal acquaintance to the phenomenon. My married-with-children daughter has two grade school children whose charter school in Calif is closed for in-classroom instruction and they are limited to internet access from home. She decided to engage an 8-week EMT course as a change of career that is available in my state, but not in CA, so she brought the kids with her to take her course, and her children are unaffected, but I witness the difference in them in just the time they have spent in online education. The physical presence of classmates, and even their competitive spirit is dampened by the online experience. I'll acknowledge the advance of high tech, but I am concerned with some of its impersonal results.
But, as for short-term existence, I'll again acknowledge your self-imposed limitations. Meanwhile, an eternity waits for me. Perspective dictates limitations. Myopia is also an attitude.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
To oppose that which does not exist is a waste of effort. You've more important things to do. Logic has practicality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
However, your original question defeats you. privilege implies "more," when the right already enforces it. Therefore, the "privilege" is not needed. If the police overstep their bounds, you have legal recourse.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
"God does not exist," you say, "therefore, I oppose him."
I reply: "How? If he does not exist, what exists to oppose it? There is no 'it' to oppose."
I am merely using your logic. It isn't.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Can you not believe
No, and neither can you. How do you prove a negative by opposing it?
I mean, why would you even care?
By choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Where is it said I must have a substantial objection? This is not debate, it is an open forum. The argument is not substantial, it is merely a separate commentary of ridicule, i.e., to propose an alternative: Biden must go [entertain the children with his hairy legs].
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
No exception. I did not say that protection is equal, i.e., the same level of protection across the board for all players. The protection fluctuates according to need, individually, therefore, all are protected, by constitutional decree, to the degree necessary based on what situational forces oppose. That is the true understanding of due process. Due process, as each individual requires; some less, some more, but all equally protected according to their need.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Whether a character is fictional, or not, is not the issue. Suspension of disbelief equalizes fiction and non-fiction. Within the context of a fictional or non-fictional story, the reader becomes an integral participant by reaction to the story. Therefore, all characters in it either exist, or do not. If a character is written out of the story by the reader, there is no longer an entity to oppose for that reader. The negation eliminates the need to deny existence, so one cannot have it both ways.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Wrong. To have equal rights does not alter because one is targeted more or less than others. Equality implies that protection is equal regardless of frequency, intensity, or any other 'y' one can apply to any greater or lesser degree across the entire spectrum of protection. The protection increases or lesses in equal protective force for all needing it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Can you not belive that the Joker does not exist and also be against him?
Nope. And neither can you. The entity that does not exist cannot be opposed, for there is no one nor no thing to oppose. That is not a cheap gotcha, that is logic. It is the logic of the inability to negate a negation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
You made it to hot topics. congrats. It's not exactly an unpopular opinion, after all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Either gays should have the same protection as others, or they should have more protection than others, but to have it both ways is oxymoronic. C'mon, man. You're better than that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
To deny the existence of God [atheism], yet to be against, or opposed to God [antitheist] is an oxymoron.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
In your darkest hour comes the opportunity to serve another. You will, and it will bring the light. Best wishes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Jasmine
how do I edit a comment?
At the bottom right of your post, there will be an icon that is a pencil w/eraser. It's the last icon on the far right. Tap that, you will then be able to edit, then re-post. However, the icon is there for only a few minutes after you first post, then it is gone and your post is frozen; it can no longer be edited. All you can do is what you did; post another comment, but it's best to refer to the post # given in red in the top right of your post.
Created:
Posted in:
As James Madison once said, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.”[1] But men are not angels, and, being imperfect, in spite of legislation, in spite of a documented, systemic policy, some people will ignore the system and act by their own, reimagined, anecdotal volition. But such individual and sub-group action cannot ever be blamed on the systemic construct. Blame the one or the few who violate the system. As the author, Richard Bach, wrote, “Argue for your limitations; they’re yours.”[2]
A scholastically-sourced definition of racism by the OED is, “beliefs that members of a particular racial or ethnic group possess innate characteristics or qualities, or that some racial or ethnic groups are superior to others; an ideology based on such beliefs.”
By this scholastically-accepted definition, even a phrase like “Black Lives Matter” must be cast in suspicious light, particularly in light of the following statement as a policy of BlackLivesMatter.com: “We are working for a world where Black lives are no longer systematically targeted for demise.”[3]
The quoted statement above, let alone the movement’s title, represents a policy of singling out Blacks as an unprotected class, specifically, as if to say the other racial entities do not matter, and declaring, without evidence provided, that Blacks are “systematically targeted,” and not just for generic prejudice, but for specific “demise.” Alleged systematic targeting is a claim made without properly interpreting the definition of systemic. There are proper, scholastically-accepted definitions, and there are re-imagined, wish-balloon definitions. The former prevails, or, rather, it should but apparently does not.
If Blacks are “systemically targeted,” by definition, it must be demonstrated by those advocates that the U.S. Government has, by legislation and policy, demonstrated a denial of at least the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment [1868], which declares the Equal Protection Clause: “..nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” It follows that every federal, state, and local statute must be in accordance with this Clause, or it is unconstitutional.
I offer from a list of 10 Supreme Court cases directly concerned with the Equal Protection Clause [EPC] of the 14thAmendment the following three cases having race as a substantive issue demonstrating the Court’s consistency in compliance with the 14th:
1. Plessy v. Ferguson [1896] found that there was systemic discrimination against Blacks in Louisiana by that state’s enforcement of a rule marking trolley cars with signs, “for blacks only,” and “for whites only,” because the signs, themselves, demonstrated unconstitutional violation.
2. Brown v. Board of Education [1954] based on a proper interpretation of Plessy, the Court found that some States had incorrectly applied Plessyto allow segregation of schools if the school facilities were “equal.” Brown overturned unconstitutional state laws, applying the notion in Plessythat “separate but equal” was not even equal just because the facilities were “equal,” but that even by signage, alone, segregated facilities are unconstitutional.
3. Loving v. Virginia [1967] overturned Virginia’s state law prohibiting interracial marriage. Virginia argued that their case did not violate the EPC because their argument applied penalty to both marriage partners, the Lovings. The Court determined that the EPC required strict scrutiny to race-based classifications where a ruling was a consequence by racial discrimination.
These cases demonstrate evidence of the negating argument, that impose a disclaimer on the Black Lives Matter policy quoted above.
These cases also demonstrate that even in the apparent innocuous effort to achieve racial equality, an organization declaring that one race matters at the exclusion of others [i.e., Black Lives Matter] may be found to be in violation of the EPC. Whereas, given a total of 10 Supreme Court cases over the 230-plus years of the Court’s existence, in cases specifically concerned with racial issues, the three cases highlighted demonstrate the consistency of the Court’s [part of the system, after all] compliance and protection of the EPC, and all citizens’ rights to expect equal protection by the system.
Created:
Posted in:
Ode on the Inauguration of 2021
For the benefit of Mister Joe
There will be just empty rows to see his show,
Obama clan will not be there,
To celebrate the Mister’s hair, shout hurrah!
The Biden clan will burn the stage,
Burning Donald’s legacy in real fire,
In this way, Mister Joe will challenge the world!
The celebrated Mister Joe
Performs his feat, O, don’t you know, on the stairs.
The Party line will sing and stare,
As Mister Joe feels through your hair; don’t be late!
Madams’ H & P assure the public
This production will be second to one,
To be sure, Mr. T censors a tweet!
The band begins at six to six
When Mister Joe performs his licks on all the girls.
And Mister S will socialize
With everyone in Lucy’s skies; give it a whirl!
Having been some days since winning all
He promises a night of ginger ale.
And tonight, Mister Joe is going to fail!
For the benefit of Mister Joe
There will be just empty rows to see his show,
Obama clan will not be there,
To celebrate the Mister’s hair, shout hurrah!
The Biden clan will burn the stage,
Burning Donald’s legacy in real fire,
In this way, Mister Joe will challenge the world!
The celebrated Mister Joe
Performs his feat, O, don’t you know, on the stairs.
The Party line will sing and stare,
As Mister Joe feels through your hair; don’t be late!
Madams’ H & P assure the public
This production will be second to one,
To be sure, Mr. T censors a tweet!
The band begins at six to six
When Mister Joe performs his licks on all the girls.
And Mister S will socialize
With everyone in Lucy’s skies; give it a whirl!
Having been some days since winning all
He promises a night of ginger ale.
And tonight, Mister Joe is going to fail!
Created:
Posted in:
Ode on the Inauguration of 2021
For the benefit of Mister Joe
There will be just empty rows to see his show,
Obama clan will not be there,
To celebrate the Mister’s hair, shout hurrah!
The Biden clan will burn the stage,
Burning Donald’s legacy in real fire,
In this way, Mister Joe will challenge the world!
The celebrated Mister Joe
Performs his feat, O, don’t you know, on the stairs.
The Party line will sing and stare,
As Mister Joe feels through your hair; don’t be late!
Madams’ H & P assure the public
This production will be second to one,
To be sure, Mr. T censors a tweet!
The band begins at six to six
When Mister Joe performs his licks on all the girls.
And Mister S will socialize
With everyone in Lucy’s skies; give it a whirl!
Having been some days since winning all
He promises a night of ginger ale.
And tonight, Mister Joe is going to fail!
For the benefit of Mister Joe
There will be just empty rows to see his show,
Obama clan will not be there,
To celebrate the Mister’s hair, shout hurrah!
The Biden clan will burn the stage,
Burning Donald’s legacy in real fire,
In this way, Mister Joe will challenge the world!
The celebrated Mister Joe
Performs his feat, O, don’t you know, on the stairs.
The Party line will sing and stare,
As Mister Joe feels through your hair; don’t be late!
Madams’ H & P assure the public
This production will be second to one,
To be sure, Mr. T censors a tweet!
The band begins at six to six
When Mister Joe performs his licks on all the girls.
And Mister S will socialize
With everyone in Lucy’s skies; give it a whirl!
Having been some days since winning all
He promises a night of ginger ale.
And tonight, Mister Joe is going to fail!
Created:
-->
@oromagi
If that was so, the Court would be vulnerable to denial-of-service attacks
Thems the breaks when SCOTUS is declared exclusive original jurisdiction. And Alito cited numerous cases in which his claim of original jurisdiction sgould have been upheld. What? You don't believe SCOTUS ever makes mistakes? Hah! 200 times in its history since 1790. Now, 201.
Created: