Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
He can't blame himself, he already looks bad enough.
At this point, perhaps blaming himself might help?
He can't blame himself, he already looks bad enough.
So Jeb blames Obama for Trump's rise.
Is Jeb just trying to ignore his own weaknesses as a candidate, or is he genuinely this stupid? At the beginning of the cycle, I wasn't sure. Now I'm leaning toward an intelligence issue.
Any explanation for why liberals have never confronted Bill over this, or the general assumption that all the women are lying?The media eating up Trump's rhetoric bothers me, calling Bill Clinton one of the great abusers of the world and just taking that at face value because it makes for a fun text scroll and discussion about how ugly the battle is going to be is gross.
Ted Cruz is falling and Carson might pass him.
Any explanation for why liberals have never confronted Bill over this, or the general assumption that all the women are lying?
Just thought I'd post this fun little thing. The Comedians in Cars getting Coffee episode with the president is up and it's great lol. http://comediansincarsgettingcoffee.com/president-barack-obama-just-tell-him-you-re-the-president
Dear President Obama - you are the leader of the free world, the most powerful man on the planet. You are NOT a celebrity...you are NOT an actor....you are NOT a pro golfer. Do something about mental Illness...do something about immigration....do something about Isis. Do SOMETHING besides play...ugh! 😖
Any explanation for why liberals have never confronted Bill over this, or the general assumption that all the women are lying?
You...you keep a bottle of wine around for two weeks? This may be the most unbelievable and offensive thing you've ever posted on this board, and that includes buying into climate change denial over a Ted Cruz video.
It's funny that even otherwise reasonable conservatives who realize Trump would be a disaster, understand Carson is running a horrible campaign, etc., etc. (it's basically a conservative version of Daily Kos Elections - aka. the only section of Kos still worth visiting) still think Cruz can beat Hillary or that it'd even be close.
Get a job. Anything. And then look for something better until you're satisfied.Daniel B·;190888586 said:Oh, I'm sorry; those of us on a very low income, so have to make wine last, are not allowed to enjoy wine, now?! You should banish yourself to your ivory tower, while I continue to enjoy my excellent value Merlot, and for the record, although it may not remain in peak condition, it still remains quite good, until the very last drop!
The other day I had a "spend $30 and get $3 off" coupon at my local Martin's (Giant) supermarket, which coincided with a 20% off wine deal (actually, voucher wasn't supposed to be used with alcohol, but they gave it to me anyway - Martin's 4 life ), and I splashed out on some somewhat more expensive Merlot's, and of those, the cheapest, Barefoot (~$6, at regular price), was excellent, the mid-range, Bogle (~$8) and some other, weren't good, and 14 Hands (2013; ~$10) was sublime (very clean taste, and for a special occasion, totally worth it), and again, with the 14 Hands, I don't recall it degrading hardly at all! My $3.5 Tisdale, although not in the same league as others, also has a clean taste, and remains my go to budget choice.
Start with the 1992 Presidential campaign. Emanuel persuaded Clinton to prioritize raising money. This, to put it lightly, caught up with him. And while Emanuel was never tied to the fund-raising chicanery involving forgotten names like James Riady, Yah Lin Trie, and John Huang, it was that zeal for cash that provided Clinton’s Presidency its original taint of scandal. Obsessive fund-raising is also the foundation of Emanuel’s political operation in Chicago. When two reporters for the Chicago Reader filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the mayor’s private schedule in 2011 (unlike previous mayors, his public schedule was pretty much blank), they discovered that he almost never met with community leaders. He did, however, spend enormous blocks of time with the rich businessmen, including Republicans, who had showered him with cash.
But return to Washington in the early nineteen-nineties, when a grateful Clinton awarded his young charge a prominent White House role. There, Emanuel’s prodigious energy, along with his contempt for what he called “liberal theology,” rocketed him higher and higher into the Clinton stratosphere. “He gets things done,” Clinton’s chief of staff, Erskine Bowles, enthused late in 1996, when Emanuel usurped George Stephanopoulos as senior adviser for policy and strategy. Among his special projects was helping to pass the North American Free Trade Agreement and the 1994 crime bill. He also tried to push Clinton to the right on immigration, advising the President, in a memo in November, 1996, to work to “claim and achieve record deportations of criminal aliens.” These all, in the fullness of time, turned out to be mistakes.
NAFTA, in alienating the Party’s working-class base, contributed to the Democrats losing control of the House of Representatives in 1994. As for the crime bill, which included a “three strikes” provision that mandated life terms for criminals convicted of violent crimes even if their other two offenses were nonviolent, Clinton himself has apologized for it, saying that the policy “made the problem worse.” The attempt to out-Republican the Republicans on immigration never took off. Republicans are the party solely associated with vindictive immigration policies, which leaves them in the long-term crisis they’re finding themselves in now—identified as anathema by Latinos, the nation’s fastest-growing ethnic group. If Rahm had had his way, that never would have happened.
After Washington, Emanuel made eighteen million dollars in two and a half years as an investment banker. (His buddy Rauner helped get him his job.)
His next step was chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, in charge of recruiting House candidates. In 2006, he got credit when Democrats took back the lower chamber.... But many of his hand-picked choices fared poorly, losing in general elections. Some even lost in their primaries, to candidates backed by liberals—many of whom won congressional seats resoundingly, even after the D.C.C.C. abandoned them....
Brace yourselves for this one:Victory, like defeat, can have a hundred fathers, and we can’t know what was ultimately responsible for the Democrats’ success that November. Anger at Republicans for the Iraq War (which Emanuel supported) certainly drove many voters’ decisions. What is indisputable is that the 2006 majority proved to be a rickety one. Critics argue that, even where Emanuel’s strategy succeeded in the short term, it undermined the party over time. One of his winners, the football star Heath Shuler, of North Carolina, would not even commit to vote for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the House, and was one of many Rahm recruits to vote against important Obama Administration priorities, like economic stimulus, banking reform, and health care. Many are no longer congressmen. Some Democrats now argue that, in the long run, 2006 might have weakened the Party more than it strengthened it. “Rahm’s recruitment strategy” was “catastrophic,” the retired record executive Howie Klein, who helps run a political action committee that funds liberal congressional challengers, said, and it contributed to the massive G.O.P. majorities we have now, the biggest since the nineteen-twenties.
Why THE FUCK Obama hired this tool? We never know. Chicago politics is absolutely horrid.Emanuel’s signature strategy—committing Obama only to initiatives they knew in advance would succeed, in order to put “points on the board”—nearly waylaid the President’s most historic accomplishment: health-care reform. Emanuel wanted to scale it back almost to the vanishing point. It took a concerted effort by Speaker Pelosi to convince the President otherwise. This time, it was Emanuel who apologized: “Thank God for the country he didn’t listen to me,” he said after the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare, in 2012.
Daniel B·;190852812 said:O.k., please give a specific example of where you should be able to sue a gun manufacturer, but can't presently.
Get a job. Anything. And then look for something better until you're satisfied.
Yaaas,
Another of my heroes has endorsed HIllary!
How do you know it's not Fiorina?
Get a job. Anything. And then look for something better until you're satisfied.
Daniel B·;190891890 said:Nah. Despite my $5k/year lifestyle, I'm still enjoying my retirement, hunting down bargains, the supermarket treks (8+ miles / week), and baking my own tasty "yeast free" whole wheat bread and delicious snacks (currently enjoying Oatmeal Craisin cookies), which is all part of the fun .
Daniel B·;190891890 said:Nah. Despite my $5k/year lifestyle, I'm still enjoying my retirement, hunting down bargains, the supermarket treks (8+ miles / week), and baking my own tasty "yeast free" whole wheat bread and delicious snacks (currently enjoying Oatmeal Craisin cookies), which is all part of the fun .
Why in the world is yeast free in quotation marks...
Only oligarchs eat yeast.
Daniel B·;190891890 said:Nah. Despite my $5k/year lifestyle, I'm still enjoying my retirement, hunting down bargains, the supermarket treks (8+ miles / week), and baking my own tasty "yeast free" whole wheat bread and delicious snacks (currently enjoying Oatmeal Craisin cookies), which is all part of the fun .
Yaaas,
Another of my heroes has endorsed HIllary!
Daniel B·;190893318 said:Fail! Gene Roddenberry's vision of the future, with the Star Trek universe, is far closer to Bernie's than Hillary's.
It's almost as though he's not actually Sulu and has his own priorities and positions about the real world that are not defined by a sci-fi show from 50 years ago.Daniel B·;190893318 said:Fail! Gene Roddenberry's vision of the future, with the Star Trek universe, is far closer to Bernie's than Hillary's.
But why the quotation marks?! Who is he quoting? Is there really yeast in his yeast free bread?
Daniel B·;190894340 said:If I didn't add 2 tbsp of crushed flax seed (using mortar and pestle, which adds ~10 min), without yeast, it only takes about fifteen minutes to make, where I thoroughly combine 1 tbsp extra virgin olive oil, flax seed, 1 1/2 cups of water, 1/2 tsp salt, 1 tbsp aluminium free baking powder (Rumford's) and 3 cups of whole wheat flour, pressing into oiled and floured loaf tin, and baking at 375º for 20 minutes.
I never gave carson the coveted retro endorsement. Despite all the goofy shit he says I do have some affinity for the guy, for succeeding in life despite his upbringing as well as flourishing in that bastion of white male dominance and conservatism that is the american republican party. Make no mistake, I am a rand/sanders man right nowRetro, you so fickle, Jindal to Carson to Bernie? I mean even Don Quixote was able to decide on a windmill.
Nope.So...does it have yeast or not?
Also happy new year poligaf. If only there were a nixon pic that related to this holiday
Nope.
Real question is why he used quotation marks.
Baking powder bread, dear gods.
But hating that many minority groups and still getting possiblel support? Just sounds insane.
Nope.
Real question is why he used quotation marks.
Baking powder bread, dear gods.
-
Wait. a whole tablespoon of baking powder? wtf....
I read an article saying that he's been telling his staff "really important stuff happens in the 4th quarter" and that he intends to make the most out of his last year. He's relatively popular, so there's no need to duck and hide like Dubya.So what's Obama's game with this executive action? I thought you were supposed to keep things quiet during an election year.
I read an article saying that he's been telling his staff "really important stuff happens in the 4th quarter" and that he intends to make the most out of his last year. He's relatively popular, so there's no need to duck and hide like Dubya.
Yeah, but won't this work negatively for Hilary (or Bernie jlawyeahright.gif)? Or is this some sort of chess move where he thinks it will further expose the crazies on the right which will motivate the left to come out and vote?
Why would it hurt Hillary? She is running on even stricter gun control measures.
And this is why you're considered a joke character. At least admit when Bernie fucks up, dude. Answer my question first, why should gun manufacturers be the only industry in America with immunity from lawsuits?
Here's an article that explains how gun advertising changed in the last 60 years, they're getting away with shit we decided that tobacco companies couldn't.
Tell me why they should get immunity from lawsuits and other industries shouldn't? They're selling guns based not only on fear, but on how deadly they are. They're selling guns based on how deadly they are and then the people that buy them go out and use them to kill a lot of people. Why should they be immune from lawsuits when this is happening? Why?
Daniel B·;190888586 said:Oh, I'm sorry; those of us on a very low income, so have to make wine last, are not allowed to enjoy wine, now?! You should banish yourself to your ivory tower, while I continue to enjoy my excellent value Merlot, and for the record, although it may not remain in peak condition, it still remains quite good, until the very last drop!
The other day I had a "spend $30 and get $3 off" coupon at my local Martin's (Giant) supermarket, which coincided with a 20% off wine deal (actually, voucher wasn't supposed to be used with alcohol, but they gave it to me anyway - Martin's 4 life ), and I splashed out on some somewhat more expensive Merlot's, and of those, the cheapest, Barefoot (~$6, at regular price), was excellent, the mid-range, Bogle (~$8) and some other, weren't good, and 14 Hands (2013; ~$10) was sublime (very clean taste, and for a special occasion, totally worth it), and again, with the 14 Hands, I don't recall it degrading hardly at all! My $3.5 Tisdale, although not in the same league as others, also has a clean taste, and remains my go to budget choice.
By energizing the right, I mean. Getting pro-gun legislation in the works to drive the right to the polls in 2016, for example.
Plenty of Americans, but perhaps not a majority, including you, Adam, and I, would prefer to see an America where guns are far less prevalent, but that's likely to remain a dream, and back on planet Earth, both Bernie and Hillary have proposed sensible improvements to gun legislation, such as banning future sales of assault rifles, and closing purchasing loopholes. Also, for the record, I only respect hunting (with a rifle), required for survival, in very rural areas, and to keep a lid on animal numbers, both of which should be done humanely (aiming for a clean kill).