American Politics

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2925706]I'll bet Trump is so terrified of the risk it never occurred to him for one minute to defund and remove the Magic Mountain Dew Patrol Teams charged with making sure Biden doesn't sneak in an unmonitored quart before the debate.

BTW, I am already hearing infamously pro Repub Bothsider, former Meet The Press host Chuck Todd, making the rounds to lay the groundwork for the NBC / MSNBC networks to spin whatever loony shark, faucet, lather blather Trump uncontrollably launches into at Thursday's debate as a true and credible worry among the American Electorate, no giggling allowed, it must be taken seriously.

So, never fear, the Trump / Repub coddling and pro Repub Bothsiderism will be in full force during and after the debate. Any "mean" question directed at Trump by those CNN moderators will be cited for their "meanness" on the other networks every bit as much as if Sean Hannity had passed along Putin's scripted response to them.[/QUOTE]My Daddy used to say "if it looks like a Democrat, and it swims like a Democrat, and it quacks like a Democrat, it's a Democrat. " Well, Chuck Todd is a Democrat, no ifs, ands or buts. And MSNBC is Democratic Party Propaganda, 24/7. It's about as "Bothsider" as you or the Marquis de Sade.

"Mountain Dew Patrol Teams" are a great idea in theory. It's the logical beverage of choice for Biden, who may want to quickly (after the drug test) gas up on massive amounts of caffeine. Mountain Dew has more caffeine than tea and cola, and is easier to chug than Red Bull or coffee. Most people don't realize it's a potent stimulant. However, sadly Trump has no control over soft drink distributors. Or for that matter Partisan Democrat Doctors or the Mexican cartels that supply methamphetamines. As such I don't believe your idea is workable for Team Trump.

I'm not sure Biden would want to pursue the "Mountain Dew" option either. If he tanks up on an amount sufficient to improve his performance, he runs the risk of wetting his pants on stage. Undoubtedly though Partisan Democrats Jake Tapper and Dana Bash would lie and come up with an excuse for Joe. Maybe they'd falsely accuse Trump of pissing on his opponent's pant legs.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2925531]Shit Tiny! Every day I keep learning new things about myself. At my ripe age that can't be healthy.[/QUOTE]First Spidy and now you. I need to open a psychology practice to help Democrats with self awareness. Look at your posts in the Stupid Shit in Kyiv thread. And don't take it as an insult. Most of the people in this thread are neoconservatives. The only exceptions I can think of during the time I've posted here are JustTK, DramaFree, me, and possibly Elvis.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2925772]My Daddy used to say "if it looks like a Democrat, and it swims like a Democrat, and it quacks like a Democrat, it's a Democrat. " Well, Chuck Todd is a Democrat, no ifs, ands or buts. And MSNBC is Democratic Party Propaganda, 24/7. It's about as "Bothsider" as you or the Marquis de Sade.

"Mountain Dew Patrol Teams" are a great idea in theory. It's the logical beverage of choice for Biden, who may want to quickly (after the drug test) gas up on massive amounts of caffeine. Mountain Dew has more caffeine than tea and cola, and is easier to chug than Red Bull or coffee. Most people don't realize it's a potent stimulant. However, sadly Trump has no control over soft drink distributors. Or for that matter Partisan Democrat Doctors or the Mexican cartels that supply methamphetamines. As such I don't believe your idea is workable for Team Trump.

I'm not sure Biden would want to pursue the "Mountain Dew" option either. If he tanks up on an amount sufficient to improve his performance, he runs the risk of wetting his pants on stage. Undoubtedly though Partisan Democrats Jake Tapper and Dana Bash would lie and come up with an excuse for Joe. Maybe they'd falsely accuse Trump of pissing on his opponent's pant legs.[/QUOTE]In the modern pro Repub Mainstream Media world, it might be a good time for your Daddy to fine tune and update that concept:

"If it looks like a Democrat, and it swims like a Democrat, and it quacks like a Democrat, hire him to "Bothsides" as many Repubs Into election victory as possible so we can get plenrty of those "Once in 100 Years Repub Disaster Has Struck!" Headlines we crave. ".

If Trump squeaks out an EC win by less than 45,000 -78,000 votes sprinkled among 2-3 battleground states, which is MSM's dream "neck in neck" horse race business model for every general election, in fact is how many votes decided each of the previous two presidential elections and why they are under immense corporate pressure to be as pro Repub Bothsider as necessary to get it there and keep it there, I will be blaming Chuck Todd, Bill Maher and other MSM pundits as much as the foolish voters who fell for their methods for bringing us back to the next Great Repub Depression / Great Repub Recession and Massive Repub Jobs Destruction.

Those are great headlines and comedy monologue topics for MSM to attract more eyes and ears to their product. But they are really shifty outcomes for America. They will never get that if a Dem is in the White House and they know it.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2925774]First Spidy and now you. I need to open a psychology practice to help Democrats with self awareness. Look at your posts in the Stupid Shit in Kyiv thread. And don't take it as an insult. Most of the people in this thread are neoconservatives. The only exceptions I can think of during the time I've posted here are JustTK, DramaFree, me, and possibly Elvis.[/QUOTE]Interesting. So my opposition to a state and a leader that started a full-blown, unprovoked war in Europe makes me a neoconservative? I wonder how you'd brand people who had strong reservations against Hitler back in the day.

P.S. I'm a left-leaning centrist, not Democrat, and I've said that before.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2925789]Interesting. So my opposition to a state and a leader that started a full-blown, unprovoked war in Europe makes me a neoconservative? I wonder how you'd brand people who had strong reservations against Hitler back in the day.

P.S. I'm a left-leaning centrist, not Democrat, and I've said that before.[/QUOTE]Again, please don't take it as an insult. As you correctly imply I'm a borderline pacifist who believes the USA generally shouldn't interfere in other countries' affairs. That is, it should be like Switzerland. And that's viewed more negatively by most Americans than "interventionist" or "neoconservative. " That's not the first time the Hitler analogy's been directed at me. A good friend, an ex-paratrooper, said something similar back in 2003 when I said Bush was dead wrong to go into Iraq.

Was the war in Ukraine unprovoked? Or was it the result of meddling and false promises by American and European governments dating back to 1990? Russia would be a member of NATO if our leaders and military and defense establishments hadn't wanted to preserve the status quo (hostility toward the Russians) at all costs.

What's the difference between a rational Democrat and a left-leaning centrist if he votes and lives in the USA? Who do you vote for? Those are rhetorical questions, I'm just engaging in my new hobby, amateur psychology to help Democrats become more self aware.

"Centrist" would imply that you'd be more likely to vote for, say, Kyrsten Sinema than Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. And Kyrsten's now an ex-Democrat. So maybe I was wrong. Hard to tell.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2925557]But it wasn't until Clinton's 2nd term as POTUS that I fully recovered and vowed never to vote for a non Democrat again. Ever. At any level.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2925788]Those are great headlines and comedy monologue topics for MSM to attract more eyes and ears to their product. But they are really shifty outcomes for America. They will never get that if a Dem is in the White House and they know it.[/QUOTE]I'm not sure what you mean by "shifty outcomes," but you're missing the big picture. A Democratic president usually isn't a bad outcome, PROVIDED Republicans control Congress, or at least one house. You missed that about Clinton's 2nd term, which was very positive. Without the Republicans, Clinton wouldn't have balanced the budget, reformed welfare or cut the capital gains tax. McCarthy and Republicans managed to claw back $1. 5 trillion of Democrats' profligate spending last year while Biden was president. A Democratic President and Republican Congress isn't a bad combination from the perspective of controlling the deficit. When you put one party in complete power, the bastards spend like drunken sailors. No offense to drunken sailors. And the Democrats are worse than Republicans.

Your MSM argument doesn't make a lot of sense. The corporations only care about profits. They're trying to sell commercials. And they'll sell more if they appeal to their viewership. MSNBC viewers don't want to hear the views of a bunch of Republicans so you're not going to see many Republicans or "both siders" on MSNBC. And vice versa for Fox. Your side has the advantage that journalists overwhelmingly identify as Democrats. I read a WSJ article the other day which went to great lengths to point out Trump's big lie, and had a chuckle when I thought about what you wrote here, that the WSJ NEWS reporters have a Republican bias. I'm shaking my head about your view on Chuck Todd as well. He got Ronna McDaniel fired, for goodness sake.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2925889]I'm not sure what you mean by "shifty outcomes," but you're missing the big picture. A Democratic president usually isn't a bad outcome, PROVIDED Republicans control Congress, or at least one house. You missed that about Clinton's 2nd term, which was very positive. Without the Republicans, Clinton wouldn't have balanced the budget, reformed welfare or cut the capital gains tax. McCarthy and Republicans managed to claw back $1. 5 trillion of Democrats' profligate spending last year while Biden was president. A Democratic President and Republican Congress isn't a bad combination from the perspective of controlling the deficit. When you put one party in complete power, the bastards spend like drunken sailors. No offense to drunken sailors. And the Democrats are worse than Republicans.

Your MSM argument doesn't make a lot of sense. The corporations only care about profits. They're trying to sell commercials. And they'll sell more if they appeal to their viewership. MSNBC viewers don't want to hear the views of a bunch of Republicans so you're not going to see many Republicans or "both siders" on MSNBC. And vice versa for Fox. Your side has the advantage that journalists overwhelmingly identify as Democrats. I read a WSJ article the other day which went to great lengths to point out Trump's big lie, and had a chuckle when I thought about what you wrote here, that the WSJ NEWS reporters have a Republican bias. I'm shaking my head about your view on Chuck Todd as well. He got Ronna McDaniel fired, for goodness sake.[/QUOTE]"Shifty outcomes" was simply this site's auto-correct version of what I actually wrote, "sh*tty outcomes" that I did not catch until before I submitted the post. Since my posts are held for moderation, I don't see the posted version of them for several hours after I submit them and I can not edit them.

I should stick to accurately describing Repub potus economic results as "crap" or "crappy". The auto-correct feature here seems to be ok with that.

Nope. History shows a Dem president with a Dem Congress is just fine. Any encroachment by Repubs in Congess, however effectively the Dem president overrides their efforts to destroy the economy, as Clinton so successfully defeated Nude Grinbitch's efforts at every turn, is utterly beside the point. Clinton's economy would have been immeasurably better with a Dem-controlled Congress for all 8 years. As would Obama's.

The absolute worst combination is a Repub president with a Repub House and Senate. LOL. Do you actually think the Party that, when left to its own devices produced the absolute worst economic results in USA history and NONE of the many Great American legislative achievements I have cited several times here that Dems achieved when they controlled the WH and both Houses of Congress, would suddenly and miraculously behave themselves and not devote their entire time to creating the same historically crap results when a Dem is in the WH? LOL. They can only slow down or lessen the positive economic achievements of the Dem president, that's all.

Allowing Repubs any meaningful presence in Congress while the Dem in the WH is achieving great things for America only fools careless observers into thinking Repubs might not be so bad after all, even ok enough to be trusted in the WH again or maybe in the WH and controlling one or both Houses of Congress.

And once America has been lulled into that state of complacency, bingo, another colossal Repub economic disaster follows.

Too risky.

Better to just have a Dem in the WH and Dems controlling both Houses of Congress at all times. At most, America should have no more than 25-30% Repubs in each House of Congress and, it should go without saying, never a Repub in the WH.

You're still not getting how the typically pro Repub MSM Bothsiderism works. Of course many pundits on MSM walk, talk and swim like Democrats. They would come across as utterly ignorant numbskulls if they didn't. Leave that to Fux News.

But as an election approaches, that is when they trot out the pro Repub Bothsiderism in order to at least keep the horse race tight, sometimes so much the Repub wins. Their business model requires it. Worst case scenario (for America) is they keep the horse race so close the Repub actually wins. But that is also great for the MSM business model in that there will be plenty of horrific, bad news headlines for them to publish that will attract eyes and ears to their product.

Starting around the middle of Reagan's 1st term in office there is no way a Repub presidential candidate should have gotten more than 30% of the vote. By rights it should have been a blowout victory for the Dem every time since then. But it is really hard for MSM to get customers very excited over a race between a horse and a turtle. Consequently, MSM's ultimate election season mission is to elevate Repubs and their crap results and denigrate Dems and their far superior results in order to keep the race close.

LOL. Polls show a huge percentage of respondents thinking the Stock Market is down this year instead of repeatedly closing at All-Time Record Highs, that the Unemployment Rate is at a 50 year high instead of at or near 50 year lows, that Repubs are better at handling the economy than Dems, that Trump is better at defending democracy than Biden and a whole slew of utterly preposterous conclusions contrary to all available data and easily observable reality. That can not happen unless MSM is working overtime to put or allow that silliness to enter Americans' minds.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2925774]First Spidy and now you. I need to open a psychology practice to help Democrats with self awareness. Look at your posts in the Stupid Shit in Kyiv thread. And don't take it as an insult. Most of the people in this thread are neoconservatives. The only exceptions I can think of during the time I've posted here are JustTK, DramaFree, me, and possibly Elvis.[/QUOTE]Maybe you can get through to them. I cannot. If you look at the three legs of the stool of the Republican Party, excessive defense, social conservatism / religious fundamentalism, and fiscal conservatism / libertarianism, I only am for the last set. My ideal politicians are Rand and Ron Paul.

What you call neoconservatives Tiny are really a group led by prowar Eastern European Jews. They swayed GW Bush after 9-11 and they got their wish of killing and torturing as many Arabs, and often innocent Arabs, as possible. Once I saw what this movement was, it made a mockery of GWB and his compassionate conservatism. Because of his civil rights abuses and shitty economic policies, I could not wait to see GWB go.

Thing is the necons just switched parties. All that Biden is doing is out of the GWB playbook. Karl Rove was fired for using prosecutors to hunt down political opposition. We are seeing massive expenditures once again for foreign wars. The tension that Trump brought down in the world has ramped up again. The conservative kooks have been replaced by liberal kooks.

9-11 was a tragedy and so was October 7. Thing is in both cases the response has not been to get those responsible but kill as many Arabs as possible. So the neocons have started waving their antisemitism flags now again while they are excessively killing Arabs, and it is not being bought this time. The truth is Biden is just as prowar as GWB was and with the exception of the LGBTQ stuff, Biden has more in common with GWB than an other recent president because they are both being led around by the nose by the necocons.

With you, Tiny, I think our biggest difference is you are not libertarian enough. You still buy the government narrative and bullshit when it destroyed our freedoms over a cold virus with a 0. 2% mortality. I think Fauci is as evil as Nazi doctors were and funded the creation of the Covid virus and caused the pandemic while you think he is a hero.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2925774]First Spidy and now you. I need to open a psychology practice to help Democrats with self awareness. Look at your posts in the Stupid Shit in Kyiv thread. And don't take it as an insult. Most of the people in this thread are neoconservatives. The only exceptions I can think of during the time I've posted here are JustTK, DramaFree, me, and possibly Elvis.[/QUOTE]

Now that's hilariously funny! You, Tiny 12, open up a "psychology practice", when you can barely get past your own oxymoron "Republican Libertarian" identity issues. (...kkkk!)

That opinionated nonsense, sounds more like an upcoming episode in "Hypo World", where "Hypo-pathetical Boy", doubles as the gay mild-mannered "Dr. Hypo-Pathetical", by day? (...kkkk!)

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2925731]OMG. The horror. The horror. Spidy / Joy, if my female loved one needed an abortion, why would I not buy a $100 plane ticket to Vegas and have an abortion on my loved one done there versus this "abortion hack" crap?

And now this WSJ article, Without telehealth, one in seven women would have to drive over 200 miles to the nearest provider. OMG. Say it ain't so. Shouldn't get an abortion be as easy as buying a candy bar? It is soooo hard to get an abortion. Wah, wah! Whine, Whine! Only 1,037,000 Americans got one last year.

Like I said, the days of hysteria are done. Roe v. Wade was overturned and women can get abortions if they want. It may be a little inconvenient but BFD. Why should this be so much easier to get than other medical procedures? I do not want it to be easier than this. Women need to think about this a little bit before they do it.[/QUOTE]

Not sure that "$100 plane ticket" is gonna do any good, if she decides to go out of state or decides to keep the pregnancy and (if God forbid) has complications or miscarriages in the 2nd or 3rd trimester.

[QUOTE][b]So let's get (like $10k) REAL, for just a moment now:[/b]

[u][b]Out of State:[/b][/u]

Gas, food, and a hotel: Americans seeking an abortion out of state already shell [b]out up to $10,000 ($10K)[/b] for the procedure. Experts warn that cost could rise. [URL]https://www.businessinsider.com/abortion-costs-roe-v-wade-out-of-state-supreme-court-2022-5?international=true&r=US&IR=T[/URL]

[u][b]In State (Blue State if your lucky):[/b][/u]

"An in-clinic abortion can cost up to around $800 in the first trimester, but its often less. The average cost of a first trimester in-clinic abortion at Planned Parenthood is about $600. The cost of a second trimester abortion at Planned Parenthood varies depending on how many weeks pregnant you are. The average ranges from about $715 earlier in the second trimester to $1,500-2,000 later in the second trimester."

"Your abortion may be free or low-cost with health insurance. But coverage for abortion varies depending on a lot of factors, like the laws where you live, what type of insurance you have, and the reason you need an abortion."

[URL]https://www.plannedparenthood.org/blog/how-much-does-it-cost-to-get-an-abortion[/URL]
[/QUOTE]

Since your idea of an out of state abortion, is a [b]"$100 plane ticket"[/b], nobody is expecting either an INCEL or misogynist and least of all you Elvis 2008, to fully understand what is playing out, in the struggle for abortion rights with American families and hospitals, around the country, post Roe v Wade.

It is especially in red states, where emergency rooms refused to treat pregnant women, leaving many to miscarry in a lobby restroom. Or another woman who learned that her fetus had no heartbeat at a Florida hospital, the day after a security guard turned her away from the facility. And in North Carolina, a woman gave birth in a car after an emergency room couldnt offer an ultrasound. The baby later died.

[i]Two years after Roe was struck down, the conversation has focused on the complications that can come with pregnancy and fertility, helping to drive more support for abortion rights.
...

Only now, two years after the Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to abortion, and just six months before the presidential election, has the slogan taken on the force of reality.

The public conversation about abortion has grown into one about the complexities of pregnancy and reproduction, as the consequences of bans have played out in the news. The question is no longer just whether you can get an abortion, but also, Can you get one if pregnancy complications put you in septic shock? Can you find an obstetrician when so many are leaving states with bans? If you miscarry, will the hospital send you home to bleed? Can you and your partner do in vitro fertilization?

Abortion Debate Shifts as Election Nears: Now Its About Pregnancy June 24, 2024
[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/24/us/politics/abortion-roe-wade-pregnancy.html[/URL][/i]

[b][u]In this episode of "Paycheck Superhero":[/u][/b]

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2925731]In the mean time, you Democratic douches have told doctors if they stare at a patient too long, they can get in trouble. Look at a penis too long, and your license is in jeopardy. Fondle it or breasts and your license will be taken for sure. But if you cut off a dick or pair of breasts, you are a progressive surgeon and can get paid tens of thousands. Shouldn't the new Democratic douche model be easier access to people getting their dicks chopped off? The average woman / man has to drive 400 miles to get their breasts cut off. Come on, Spidy / Joy. You need to take the right of gender affirmation surgery to SCOTUS.

Oh, Joy, did Whoopi steal your vibrator again? Well, I hope you got off after all that mental masturbation. No one wants to read that stupid MM shit.[/QUOTE]

It looks like the supervillain, has cracked that "nut" and found, one of many in "Paycheck Superhero"'s weaknesses. [b]One of them is indeed "whining"!!! [/b]

It would seem, the more supervillains whine, the angrier the outbursts and tirades get. {...Here's hoping he doesn't get angry, large and green at the same time...kkkk!}

[u]Stay Tuned to find out:[/u]

• Will our "Paycheck Superhero", really live up to his superhero status and shell-out the $10K big paycheck, required for an out of state abortion, for his economic pussy hustling sidekick chick?

• Will the supervillains be able to exploit this weakness before "Paycheck Superhero" can get help?
• Will "Paycheck Superhero" overcome his mental and emotional psychological affliction to whining? And Joy Behar?

• Will "Paycheck Superhero" write a big-fat paycheck, to see [b]his gay buddy "Dr. Hypo-Pathetical"[/b], at his [b]newly formed "psychology practice"[/b] over in "Hypo World"?
• What (if any) superhero meds will "Dr. Hypo-Pathetical" prescribe? And what's the cure for "Paycheck Superhero"'s Joy Behar fixation?

• Will "Dr. Hypo-Pathetical", he tell his gay superhero pal (as he tells all his patients), "...it's all in your head. You're not who you think you are. [b]You're really just a neoconservative![/b]" (...kkkk!)

Stay Tuned...

[QUOTE=Spidy;2925949]Not sure that "$100 plane ticket" is gonna do any good, if she decides to go out of state or decides to keep the pregnancy[/QUOTE]Uh, if she keeps the kid, she does not need a $100 plane ticket. It sounds like you have given up the abortion fight.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2925949]It is especially in red states, where emergency rooms refused to treat pregnant women, leaving many to miscarry in a lobby restroom.[/QUOTE]Okay, so we are talking miscarriages now and not planned abortions. I guess blue states do not have women with miscarriages then. What is the cure for miscarriages Spidy / Joy? Because I have not heard of any cures.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2925949]Or another woman who learned that her fetus had no heartbeat at a Florida hospital, the day after a security guard turned her away from the facility. And in North Carolina, a woman gave birth in a car after an emergency room couldnt offer an ultrasound. The baby later died.[/QUOTE]So now the diagnostic test of ultrasound saves lives? Cough, cough. Uh okay. Thank God you can buy your own ultrasound on Groupon for a whopping $9. 99. Here is a deluxe model going for $39.99, [URL]https://www.fetaldoppler.net/fd-200b.html[/URL].

[QUOTE=Spidy;2925949]The public conversation about abortion has grown into one about the complexities of pregnancy and reproduction, as the consequences of bans have played out in the news.[/QUOTE]The banned procedure that over a million Americans had last year. Gee, lie much?

[QUOTE=Spidy;2925949]Can you get one if pregnancy complications put you in septic shock? Can you find an obstetrician when so many are leaving states with bans? If you miscarry, will the hospital send you home to bleed? Can you and your partner do in vitro fertilization?[/QUOTE]IVF? LOL. You got to be fucking kidding me. Who is for banning that? Or treating septic shock?

In fact, the only thing I see in the abortion universe is when a woman has a miscarriage and does not fully expel the fetus. That can be a bloody mess, and the doctor would have to scrape the uterus to get out all that fetal tissue to stop the bleeding. Thing is that is the same procedure as performing an abortion. The concept that a woman bleeding to death is not being treated is fucking hysterical.

On the flip side, maybe you are taking about doctors who break the law and find a nurse who will on purpose not found a fetal heart beat, claim a miscarriage is ongoing, and perform not an evacuation of a miscarriage, but a full on live abortion and bill for it in a red state that bans abortion? Yeah, fuck that greedy piece of shit. Where is your "rule of law" bullshit now?

[QUOTE=Spidy;2925949]Will "Dr. Hypo-Pathetical", he tell his gay superhero pal (as he tells all his patients), "...it's all in your head. You're not who you think you are. You're really just a neoconservative! (...kkkk!)

Stay Tuned...[/QUOTE]Joy, Joy, Joy, we talked about this. I am begging you to get your lithium level checked.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2925886]Again, please don't take it as an insult. As you correctly imply I'm a borderline pacifist who believes the USA generally shouldn't interfere in other countries' affairs. That is, it should be like Switzerland. And that's viewed more negatively by most Americans than "interventionist" or "neoconservative. " That's not the first time the Hitler analogy's been directed at me. A good friend, an ex-paratrooper, said something similar back in 2003 when I said Bush was dead wrong to go into Iraq.

Was the war in Ukraine unprovoked? Or was it the result of meddling and false promises by American and European governments dating back to 1990? Russia would be a member of NATO if our leaders and military and defense establishments hadn't wanted to preserve the status quo (hostility toward the Russians) at all costs.

What's the difference between a rational Democrat and a left-leaning centrist if he votes and lives in the USA? Who do you vote for? Those are rhetorical questions, I'm just engaging in my new hobby, amateur psychology to help Democrats become more self aware.

"Centrist" would imply that you'd be more likely to vote for, say, Kyrsten Sinema than Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. And Kyrsten's now an ex-Democrat. So maybe I was wrong. Hard to tell.[/QUOTE]Well, you're almost right. Not for Sinema, because I don't believe she's honest, but I wouldn't vote for AOC or any of them squad be*ches ever. I wouldn't vote for someone like Menendez who I might agree with politically (mostly), but I won't vote for a crook.

Being an independent centrist means I don't follow party lines and hate extremes both on the right and the left. It also means that I somewhat immune to political bullshit on both sides. Hope that helps.

If you honesty believe that Russia was wronged and Putin was [B]legitimately[/B] provoked by the West, you need to direct your psychoanalysis toward your inner self. Do you believe that a newly-formed nation must remain in the orbit of its former colonizer, or does it have the right to chose its own destiny? And if it wasn't Russia, but someone smaller, like Serbia -- would you feel the same way?

As for Russia being the part of Nato, that's beyond funny man. Why do you think all former USSR clients ran -- not walk -- toward Nato in the first place?

[QUOTE=Woodman09;2918041]Calling it Now Senile Fake pres Shit Stained Joe will not show up in June debate or will be so incomprehensible and they shall use this incident to replace him with the scumbag newsome.[/QUOTE]So Will The scumbag Newsome be the replacement?? Or Kamala?

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2925966]Uh, if she keeps the kid, she does not need a $100 plane ticket. It sounds like you have given up the abortion fight. [/QUOTE]
That's right, she won't need $100, [b]she'll need $10K[/b] [i](according to the article, [b]here:[/b] [URL]https://www.businessinsider.com/abortion-costs-roe-v-wade-out-of-state-supreme-court-2022-5?international=true&r=US&IR=T[/URL])[/i] , especially if (God forbid) she has complications or miscarriages in the 2nd or 3rd trimester, in a red state.

Here's is a list of other "planned" pregnancy complications, Elvis 2008 and "Economic Pussy Sidekick Chick", might want to "plan" for:

• Amniotic Fluid Complications
• Bleeding
• Ectopic Pregnancy
• Placental Complications
• Fetal Loss (or Miscarriage)
• Preeclampsia or Eclampsia

Just hope she can find a good OBGYN (or competent doctor), in a red state, when the time comes. Cause the good ones are getting the fuck outta Dodge!

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2925966]Okay, so we are talking miscarriages now and not planned abortions. I guess blue states do not have women with miscarriages then. What is the cure for miscarriages Spidy / Joy? Because I have not heard of any cures. [/QUOTE] Is there a [u]cure[/u] for [b]stupid[/b] and [b]ignorance?[/b] No, but like miscarriages, they can be treated with the right kind of help! (hint, hint). But in your case, be thankful that, stupid and ignorance isn't necessarily fatal.

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2925966]So now the diagnostic test of ultrasound saves lives? Cough, cough. Uh okay. Thank God you can buy your own ultrasound on Groupon for a whopping $9. 99. Here is a deluxe model going for $39.99, [URL]https://www.fetaldoppler.net/fd-200b.html[/URL]. [/QUOTE]That should be good news for "Economic Pussy Sidekick Chick"

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2925966]The banned procedure that over a million Americans had last year. Gee, lie much?

IVF? LOL. You got to be fucking kidding me. Who is for banning that? Or treating septic shock?[/QUOTE]
Like I said, nobody is expecting either an INCEL, misogynist or an Elvis 2008, to fully understand pregnancies. As if miscarriages is something families "plan" to have, let alone the myriad of complications that can occur during a pregnancy. So you may as well quit trying to explain yourself!

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2925966]In fact, the only thing I see in the abortion universe is when a woman has a miscarriage and does not fully expel the fetus. That can be a bloody mess, and the doctor would have to scrape the uterus to get out all that fetal tissue to stop the bleeding. Thing is that is the same procedure as performing an abortion. The concept that a woman bleeding to death is not being treated is fucking hysterical.

On the flip side, maybe you are taking about doctors who break the law and find a nurse who will on purpose not found a fetal heart beat, claim a miscarriage is ongoing, and perform not an evacuation of a miscarriage, but a full on live abortion and bill for it in a red state that bans abortion? Yeah, fuck that greedy piece of shit. Where is your "rule of law" bullshit now?[/QUOTE]

Sigh!...There's just no accounting for, or explaining the twisted logic of an INCEL, misogynist or that of an Elvis 2008, especially when they declare themselves, the arbiters of women's bodies and health.

[b]Supreme Court officially allows emergency abortions in Idaho, for now, June 27, 2024 [/b]
[URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/27/supreme-court-abortion-emergency-room-hospital-impact/[/URL]

I know [b]women's issues[/b] can be a bit of a [b]blind-spot for INCELS[/b], misogynists and Elvis 2008, but take a good look, doctors are fleeing Idaho, Texas emergency rooms and OBGYN's are closing down all over red states, in fear of unjust abortion laws. Women, in red states, should take solace, that SCOTUS just restored emergency room abortion rights...well at least for now.

But I'm sure, as a Repub and a law abiding Texan, who loves to follow The Rule of Law, you'd be the first in line to turn-in said "hot GF", for the $10K abortion bounty, 'cause that's how Repubs like 2x abortion deniers like Herschel Walker roll, right?

[b][u]In this episode of "Paycheck Superhero":[/u][/b]

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2925966]Joy, Joy, Joy, we talked about this. [b]I am begging you[/b] to get your lithium level checked.[/QUOTE]

It seems "Paycheck Superhero", is coming around to the realization, that the originator of the series "Paycheck Superhero", is one of his own making and based on the originator's alter-ego?

It seems "Paycheck Superhero", is struggling between The Rule of Law and his bank checking account. As he contemplates the $10K abortion bounty and turning-in his econo-pussy sidekick.

But why is "Paycheck Superhero" begging? (It's so undignified!) Did the supervillain's whining finally, get to the superhero? Or was it his Joy Behar fixation?

[u]Stay Tuned to find out:[/u]

• Will "Paycheck Superhero", again seek help from his gay buddy "Dr. Hypo-Pathetical", over in "Hypo World"?
• Will "Dr. Hypo-Pathetical", have to again remind "Paycheck Superhero" that "...it just all in your head, son"

• Will "Economic Pussy Sidekick Chick", realize an abortion can take upwards of $10K and not just the $100 plane ticket, "Paycheck Superhero" is lying to her about?

Stay Tuned...

Both candidates were absolutely awful and petty, even arguing over their golf handicaps! Really? Trump dodged question after question and told lie after lie after lie! And Biden was low energy with a hoarse voice and often unable to keep his train of thought. They said he had a bad cold (after the fact), and I'll give him that, but definitely not a good look. Both candidates sucked, and it's hard for me to say that anybody "won". At the end of the day, for me like most people, it's not going to make a difference. I'm a Democrat. I vote for Democratic candidates. When it's for President, my vote isn't just about the one person, but everybody else who they will bring with them too. Joe Biden may belong in an old folks home, but Chump belongs in jail making him (and his not ready for prime time players) the far worse choice in my mind. Biden can stand up there and drool for all I care. [B]Never Trump[/B]!