stevenash

And I suspect they also learned that actions have consequences.

[Hidden Content]

Translation- Did MSNBC cover this?

I prefer tangibles rather than inferences. Makes it more transparent. Wouldn't you agree?

So his comment is an example/illustration of bigotry? How so?

Where is Ted Cruz's mouth? You must remember that Mr. Cruz is a Republican and does not always spout the party line. Very much UNLIKE members of another party.

Do tell. How does Mr. Ryan control the House of Representatives. I anxiously await this education.

Englebert, are you being yanked around and manipulated by the" enlightened"?

Accepting the economic opinion of Van Jones is akin to believing Nancy Pelosi's opinion on who will win the NCAA basketball tourney.

Then you are declaring the current candidate unqualified? Please expound.

Maybe Weiner should be introduced to Lorena Bobbit.

S. Schumer Urges Filibuster to Block Gorsuch Confirmation To save nomination, GOP likely needs to find Democratic votes or change Senate rules WASHINGTON—The Senate’s top Democrat will oppose Judge Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the Supreme Court and urged his Democratic colleagues to block the nomination. On the Senate floor, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York said that he couldn’t support President Donald Trump’s nominee, saying he feared he was insufficiently independent of the Trump administration and concerned about his testimony this week before the Senate Judiciary Committee and his history of decisions on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. “I’ve thought long and hard about this nomination and what it means for the future of the Supreme Court and the future of our country,” said Mr. Schumer, the Democratic minority leader. “What is at stake is considerable.” Mr. Schumer urged his Democratic colleagues to block the confirmation by using a procedural maneuver known as a filibuster, which takes 60 votes to overcome. Mr. Schumer’s decision sets up a quandary for Republicans in the Senate. Democrats will insist Judge Gorsuch meet the 60-vote threshold to end the filibuster, in a body where Republicans control only 52 seats. The party will need either to win eight Democratic votes or change the rules to eliminate the 60-vote threshold. The Democrats, when they were in the majority in 2013, eliminated the 60-vote requirement on lower court judges and cabinet nominations but preserved it on Supreme Court nominees. Republicans have enough votes to change the Senate rules, but such an action is considered drastic. It has drawn concerns from institutionalists in both parties concerned about the comity and working order of the Senate. “The answer isn’t to change the rules. It’s to change the nominee,” Mr. Schumer said. Some within the Democratic caucus have discussed cutting a deal with some Senate Republicans to preserve the 60-vote threshold on Supreme Court nominees, according to a person familiar with the matter. Under the proposal, the Democrats would give Republicans enough votes to confirm Judge Gorsuch in exchange for a commitment to vote against a rules change on future Supreme Court nominees. Such a deal would take at least eight Democrats and three Republicans and could be cut independently of the Senate leadership of both parties. The idea is still tentative, a source familiar with the caucus said. In addition to Mr. Schumer, Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania also said he would oppose Judge Gorsuch’s nomination. “I have serious concerns about Judge Gorsuch’s rigid and restrictive judicial philosophy,” said Mr. Casey on Thursday. That brings the total number of Democratic “no” votes to eight, with many more in the caucus leaning against voting to confirm him to a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court. His nomination has drawn nearly unanimous support from Republicans in the Senate, who say he is unquestionably qualified. “If you can’t vote for somebody like Judge Gorsuch, you’re not going to be able to vote for any nominee from a Republican president because there simply isn’t anybody better qualified by virtue of his experience, his education, his training, and his temperament for this job,” said Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican. Judge Gorsuch has been testifying all week in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. In his testimony, he has stressed his independence and has portrayed himself as above the political fray and willing to give any litigant a fair shot in his courtroom. “Putting on a robe reminds us that it’s time to lose our egos and open our minds,” Judge Gorsuch said. “Once in a while, of course, we judges do disagree. But our disagreements are never about politics—only the law’s demands.” Judge Gorsuch vowed to one GOP senator that he would have “walked out the door” if Mr. Trump had asked him for a commitment to overturn abortion rights, an important priority for many Republicans.

Can you elaborate a bit on what makes you proud of this circumstance?

Subject: Fw: Fwd: GOOD ONE > A union boss walks into a bar next door to the factory and is about to order a drink, when he sees a guy close by wearing a TRUMP for President button, and two beers in front of him. He does not have to be an Einstein, to know that this guy, is a Republican. > > > So, he shouts over to the bartender so loudly that everyone can hear, "Drinks for everyone in here, bartender, but not for the Republican." > > > Soon after the drinks have been handed out, the Republican gives him a big smile, waves at him then says, "Thank you!" in an equally loud voice. This infuriates the union boss. > > > The union boss once again loudly orders drinks for everyone except the Republican. As before, this does not seem to bother the Republican. He continues to smile, and again yells, "Thank you!" > > > The union boss once again, loudly orders drinks for, everyone except the Republican. > > > As before, this STILL doesn't seem to bother the Republican who continues to smile, and again yells, "Thank you!" > > > The union boss asks the bartender, "What the hell is the matter with that Republican? I've ordered three rounds of drinks for everyone in the bar but him, and all the silly ass does, is smile and thank me. Is he nuts?" > > > "Nope," replies the bartender. "He owns the place." > > > > > ADVICE TO DEMOCRATS, LIBERALS AND ALL LEFTIES: > WHEN THE HORSE DIES, DISMOUNT >

[Hidden Content]

Yes, but I am one of the deplorables who thinks the death of Kate Steinle deserved the same coverage/concern as the death of Michael Brown.

Don't forget James Rosen.

Think I could find a sanctuary city out there?

It means that, deep down inside, you only like white milk and have the chocolate milk in your fridge for "appearances" in an effort to imply you are not racist.

Doesn't that have a direct relationship with being a lefty voter?

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer vs. the Phoenix Suns owner The owner of the Phoenix Suns basketball team, Robert Sarver, came out strongly opposing AZ's new immigration laws. Arizona's Governor, Jan Brewer, released the following statement in response to Sarver's criticism of the new law: "What if the owners of the Suns discovered that hordes of people were sneaking into games without paying? What if they had a good idea who the gate-crashers are but the ushers and security personnel were not allowed to ask these folks to produce their ticket stubs, thus non-paying attendees couldn't be ejected. Furthermore, what if Suns' ownership was expected to provide those who sneaked in with complimentary eats and drink? And what if, on those days when a gate-crasher became ill or injured, the Suns had to provide free medical care and shelter?" Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer

Can you expound a bit more on "acholholics" and "integrty"? Am not familiar with either word. Did you feel this way about President Trumps predecessor or was he always truthful, had the most transparent administration in history, and brought you change you could believe in?

Permit me to recommend investing in play dough makers.

She calls them IDOITS

Translation- Liberalism