The Next Election, Political News, and Other Forms of Comedy (US, UK, & Intl)

I knew he wasn't serious about winning when he didn't lose weight. He was unemployed wasn't he? At the very least make the effort to lose weight for your presidential bid.
 
Fwiffo said:
I knew he wasn't serious about winning when he didn't lose weight. He was unemployed wasn't he? At the very least make the effort to lose weight for your presidential bid.
Click to expand...

Mike was unemployed? I think he became a news commentator with Fox after his governorship, could be wrong though
 
If someone running for local mayor were to do this type of gag, he'd be laughed out of town. But such theatrics are expected for contestants for the highest office in the land.
 
Russell Street said:
If someone running for local mayor were to do this type of gag, he'd be laughed out of town. But such theatrics are expected for contestants for the highest office in the land.
Click to expand...

That's just texan bullshit. He'd get the LOL treatment anywhere outside the red state welfare belt.
 
1370952726138621476.png
 
Apparently Donald Trump doesn't have time for "total political correctness" - whatever that is.
 
Re: Megayn Kelly's accusatorial "question" (Binders Full Of Oppressed Women)
The fact of the matter is that insulting people is part of Trump’s public persona. Someone has made a ten hour supercut of Trump insults. But the question isn’t really about his temperament; it’s about his decision to insult women the same way he insults men.
Isn’t that one of the goals of the equalist society? To have men and women treated in exactly the same manner? To eliminate all vestiges of charity, chivalry, and deference? Ask any feminist and that’s what you will be told. But when it actually happens — when men dare to treat women like men, all of a sudden IT’S AN ISSUE.
Click to expand...
 
I wish Harold falcon were here to chide the use of the Gawker blog. Rubio is indeed correct here, and he totally pwned the lying liars with their clumsy artificial construct shenanigan definitions used to dehumanize a human life.
 
The article ducked actually providing this "scientific" definition of human life, since heart beat and brain waves and response from a life form with human DNA somehow misses the mark (if you really squint and hit your head hard enough). Is it the lack of independent viability, like a preemie or a dialysis patient?
When a life is alive and made of human...it's a human life. No contrived loophole changes that truth.
 
So you also support the life is a life at this stage even if half the life was contributed by a rapist?

Or that that immature human should be allowed to grow to full term even if it is blessed with confirmed birth defects?

What about your thoughts on a woman's right to control her body and her health?

Frankly I don't care either way because no matter what the scientific definition is and may become in future the law defining that will be an artificial construct made by legislators.

Pro-choice. More power to you.

Pro-life. More power to you.

Just don't have half an arguement predicated upon your interpretation on what was or was not inferred on purpose or accidentally by a news outfit they you already write off.

Give us the non-gawker scoop on the whole story
 
Funny how these goofballs showed up at my company in months leading up to the debate. I think Donald Trump was the only who did make his stop. I think he's hilarious.

Edit: NOT. Trump was the only one who did NOT
 
Last edited:
Thruth said:
So you also support the life is a life at this stage even if half the life was contributed by a rapist?
Click to expand...
See, this is exactly the shenanigens. A human life can not be dehumanized by fiat dictate just because it is deemed inconvenient. Need I invoke Godwin's law? Rubio (not a supporter) is absolutely correct that you can't nullify a life because of an act of violence of which that life was innocent.
What if the child is bi-racial? Or about to be "born gay"? Is it still a human life???:facepalm2:
Thruth said:
What about your thoughts on a woman's right to control her body and her health?
Click to expand...
Something with separate genetics is in her body, it is not her body. In cases where pregnancy actually poses a serious physical risk to the mother's life, it's not unfair to treat the birth as a malignancy. Regret won't kill anyone.
 
Russell Street said:
See, this is exactly the shenanigens. A human life can not be dehumanized by fiat dictate just because it is deemed inconvenient. Need I invoke Godwin's law? Rubio (not a supporter) is absolutely correct that you can't nullify a life because of an act of violence of which that life was innocent.
What if the child is bi-racial? Or about to be "born gay"? Is it still a human life???:facepalm2:
Something with separate genetics is in her body, it is not her body. In cases where pregnancy actually poses a serious physical risk to the mother's life, it's not unfair to treat the birth as a malignancy. Regret won't kill anyone.
Click to expand...

I respect you position. It is a contentious issue whatever side one is on. I just like to see complete answers that deal with the inevitable "I do support_________ excerpt when ________ or ________

The low hanging fruit is yes/no
 
Russell Street said:
Something with separate genetics is in her body, it is not her body. In cases where pregnancy actually poses a serious physical risk to the mother's life, it's not unfair to treat the birth as a malignancy. Regret won't kill anyone.
Click to expand...
Not to get too inside baseball here , but isn't this hypocritical? I honestly don't understand how one can take the former position of "all lives matter" but then simultaneously take the position of "well, in certain circumstances...". No judgment, just curious.
 
^ It's a Sophie's choice where somebody is going to die regardless, so one is actually ensuring that both don't die.
And back on topic, Hilrod comes off as totally honest typically insincere in explaining that she went to Donald Trump's wedding for fun and not for the duckets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom