ADVERTISEMENT

The New Lounge

Guys, remember when you were all labeled a conspiracy theorists and propagating Russian disinformation when you dared say that the Hunter Biden laptop was real? Yeah, me too.

NYT finally admitted it was real.


Enjoy the tournament.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fourteen44, KDSTONE and smashmouth5
The entire administration's spokespeople are poor communicators....they speak in staccato sentences, add loads of nonwords, um and er through the entire press conference, and cannot seem to avoid nonsensical sentences...Blinken, Psaki, Harris and Biden are all awful communicators...and that doesnt even cover any of the messaging
 
Discount Dr Fauci crawled out of his hole today to say that masks are going to be necessary again. Good luck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KDSTONE
  • Like
Reactions: pisgah101 and The_Only_Blue
www.washingtonexaminer.com

Ketanji Brown Jackson’s worrying, outdated thinking on child pornography - Washington Examiner

In recent weeks, Florida has been the scene of an incredible propaganda campaign to mainstream the sexualization of very young children. In concert with the far Left's agenda to intimidate people about the science of sex and gender, major media outlets participated in a deliberately misleading...
www.washingtonexaminer.com www.washingtonexaminer.com

Come on everybody...we all know the Libs have children best interests at heart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QC Dukie and Mac9192
Y'all clearly have a problem with her because she's a woman. Or because she's black/Indian. Or because she is a woman of color. That's the only reason why you are critical of her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pisgah101 and QC Dukie
GhostOf301 said:
Y'all clearly have a problem with her because she's a woman. Or because she's black/Indian. Or because she is a woman of color. That's the only reason why you are critical of her.
Click to expand...
This is about Biden’s Supreme Court pick who lets child porn pushers off? Oh sorry, you’re talking about his VP who he picked strictly on her many illustrious qualifications
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fourteen44, pisgah101, KDSTONE and 1 other person
timo0402 said:
This is about Biden’s Supreme Court pick who lets child porn pushers off? Oh sorry, you’re talking about his VP who he picked strictly on her many illustrious qualifications
Click to expand...
This is where we are now. Biden tells the American people point blank that he is nominating a black woman. And if you question this exclusionary decision somehow you are the racist
 
  • Like
Reactions: QC Dukie
timo0402 said:
This is about Biden’s Supreme Court pick who lets child porn pushers off? Oh sorry, you’re talking about his VP who he picked strictly on her many illustrious qualifications
Click to expand...
What did you think of her answer?

Here you go, around 2h, 44m, some seconds.
 
Dattier said:
What did you think of her answer?

Here you go, around 2h, 44m, some seconds.
Click to expand...
That answer she gave is exactly why it’s appalling that she doesn’t or didn’t hand out the most severe sentences for these heinous acts. She goes onto explain in other answers during this process that essentially she’s making excuses- it’s only 15 min, it’s not the same bc of the internet, it could happen to anyone where you click a link and pass it on. She contradicts her own record as a judge and those same victims that she spoke about, she spits in their faces with reduced sentences.

Now. How did you feel about her answer that she’s not able to say what a woman is because she’s not a biologist? Is that like me saying I don’t know what corn is because I’m not a farmer? I don’t know what rain is bc I’m not a meteorologist? Or maybe I just don’t know what the definition of “is” is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fourteen44, KDSTONE, pisgah101 and 1 other person
timo0402 said:
That answer she gave is exactly why it’s appalling that she doesn’t or didn’t hand out the most severe sentences for these heinous acts. She goes onto explain in other answers during this process that essentially she’s making excuses- it’s only 15 min, it’s not the same bc of the internet, it could happen to anyone where you click a link and pass it on. She contradicts her own record as a judge and those same victims that she spoke about, she spits in their faces with reduced sentences.

Now. How did you feel about her answer that she’s not able to say what a woman is because she’s not a biologist? Is that like me saying I don’t know what corn is because I’m not a farmer? I don’t know what rain is bc I’m not a meteorologist? Or maybe I just don’t know what the definition of “is” is.
Click to expand...
Her answers demonstrate an understanding of multiple factors and complexities. She isn't trying to score political points like Senators from both sides. She isn't making kneejerk emotional judgments like you and practically everyone else here. "Excuses"? That's what y'all call just about anything that addresses complexities you don't want to consider. When they are explained thoroughly, calmly, repeatedly, logically, and cite numerous legislative parameters, they're called "legit reasons." Even the Senators I can't stand would acknowledge that, despite their disagreement.

I haven't seen the part about defining what a woman is yet, but it's a pretty loaded question to ask a judge, and it deserved the answer it got. It's also well established that this thread is filled with insufferably transphobic people, so I'm going to take a page from her book -- but several rungs lower -- and refuse to entertain your ignorance and hate.

That you're a mod here is really messed up. You're a partisan hack protecting an echo chamber.
 
Dattier said:
Her answers demonstrate an understanding of multiple factors and complexities. She isn't trying to score political points like Senators from both sides. She isn't making kneejerk emotional judgments like you and practically everyone else here. "Excuses"? That's what y'all call just about anything that addresses complexities you don't want to consider. When they are explained thoroughly, calmly, repeatedly, logically, and cite numerous legislative parameters, they're called "legit reasons." Even the Senators I can't stand would acknowledge that, despite their disagreement.

I haven't seen the part about defining what a woman is yet, but it's a pretty loaded question to ask a judge, and it deserved the answer it got. It's also well established that this thread is filled with insufferably transphobic people, so I'm going to take a page from her book -- but several rungs lower -- and refuse to entertain your ignorance and hate.

That you're a mod here is really messed up. You're a partisan hack protecting an echo chamber.
Click to expand...
And there it is. When in doubt resort to suggesting others are bigots. Defend child sex abusers because of some warped sense of righteousness and different “levels” of pedophilia. Label people you don’t know haters. Classic.

Being a mod here - I’ve allowed any and all discourse to voice their opinions and sides. And as an American I’m allowed to do the same. I haven’t stopped you, or anyone else from voicing yours. It’s called freedom of speech. But you don’t want that, you want to censor anyone that doesn’t agree with your ever moving progressive views.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Fourteen44, KDSTONE, pisgah101 and 5 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back