The Independent State Legislature Doctrine

[DMac]

ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote
beer summit???

Good idea. Probably gonna need a couple red solo cups and a keg for this one though.
Solo cups are easy to find and the beer...well, I'd recommend this one.

[laxman3221]

Now that's funny. Not like the Ds didn't run to a certain judge in Hawaii when they wanted something ruled their way.


[img]Typical%20Lax%20Dad%20new%20boobs[/img]

?

Now you're posting selfies. Thanks for enlightening us all on your journey.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Now that's funny. Not like the Ds didn't run to a certain judge in Hawaii when they wanted something ruled their way.


[img]Typical%20Lax%20Dad%20new%20boobs[/img]

?

Now you're posting selfies. Thanks for enlightening us all on your journey.

Reminded me of your avatar. Caitlyn Jenner like.

[laxman3221]

One man's opinion. Interesting that it falls right in line with the retired SC judge's opinion.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-yale- ... 13390.html

beer summit???

[laxman3221]

Now that's funny. Not like the Ds didn't run to a certain judge in Hawaii when they wanted something ruled their way.


[img]Typical%20Lax%20Dad%20new%20boobs[/img]

?

Now you're posting selfies. Thanks for enlightening us all on your journey.

Reminded me of your avatar. Caitlyn Jenner like.

You seem infatuated with men with breasts. Seems you think you have them memorized. Really, not surprising at all.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Now that's funny. Not like the Ds didn't run to a certain judge in Hawaii when they wanted something ruled their way.


[img]Typical%20Lax%20Dad%20new%20boobs[/img]

?

Now you're posting selfies. Thanks for enlightening us all on your journey.

Reminded me of your avatar. Caitlyn Jenner like.

You seem infatuated with men with breasts. Seems you think you have them memorized. Really, not surprising at all.

Thanks.

[laxman3221]

Now that's funny. Not like the Ds didn't run to a certain judge in Hawaii when they wanted something ruled their way.


[img]Typical%20Lax%20Dad%20new%20boobs[/img]

?

Now you're posting selfies. Thanks for enlightening us all on your journey.

Reminded me of your avatar. Caitlyn Jenner like.

You seem infatuated with men with breasts. Seems you think you have them memorized. Really, not surprising at all.

Thanks.

So you like chicks with dicks. And are transitioning to be a transsexual. Or are you getting the twig and berries cut off? Either way, congrats.

[holmes435]

It's funny how the most insecure people are usually the ones commenting inappropriately on stuff like that. Like they feel their manhood is somehow in question. #SAD

In other news, anti-semitic attacks are way, way up since Trump was elected, more than three times as many attacks as Bandito's supposed "Media supported attacks on Republicans".

The day of Kavanaugh's confirmation, JCC in NOVA vandalized with swastikas (painted incorrectly because you know they are idiots). https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... tikas.html

We were members of a JCC who had multiple bomb threats called in this past year. We're not Jewish, it was just a good place run by great people, a good pool and gym and a wonderful place to take our kids and participate in the community, pretty similar to a YMCA. Many people have been emboldened by Trump's election and the groups he supports and fails to condemn. And his supporters are becoming more and more complicit.

Shame.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Now that's funny. Not like the Ds didn't run to a certain judge in Hawaii when they wanted something ruled their way.


[img]Typical%20Lax%20Dad%20new%20boobs[/img]

?

Now you're posting selfies. Thanks for enlightening us all on your journey.

Reminded me of your avatar. Caitlyn Jenner like.

You seem infatuated with men with breasts. Seems you think you have them memorized. Really, not surprising at all.

Thanks.

So you like chicks with dicks. And are transitioning to be a transsexual. Or are you getting the twig and berries cut off? Either way, congrats.

Based on your avatar, that seems to be how you roll....not that there is anything wrong with that.....

[seacoaster]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

So it's just beating the Liberals? Not a case- or result-oriented issue?

[DMac]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

So it's just beating the Liberals? Not a case- or result-oriented issue?

Pretty interesting little study there, eh, sc? A fair and reasonable question and a few posts later we're into chicks with dicks. Actually speaks volumes.
I'll give your questions a shot:
1. Yes, it's all about just beating the liberals.
2. No, not about case or result-oriented issues as the vast majority of staunch BK supporters could tell you very little about that. What they know most about him comes from what they saw of him at his interview.

Interesting side note, if you try to write ALL (all) in caps, that's what you end up with.

[Bandito]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

If you have no idea why Republicans won by getting Kav confirmed to the SC, you really are an idiot. This isn't about cases. It is about rule of law and defeating the leftist mob. Republicans stood up against an evil smear campaign and defeated it. If they had lost, the new norm would be guilty before proven innocent which is the opposite of what we stand for here in America, or should I say what Republicans stand for. Democrats are truly an evil party advocating socialism, open borders, and physical injury (even death) to people they disagree with. That is Nazism, Fascism and dangerous behavior. It isn't surprising if you are a student of history because the Democrats have always acted this way.

[youthathletics]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

So it's just beating the Liberals? Not a case- or result-oriented issue?

Pretty interesting little study there, eh, sc? A fair and reasonable question and a few posts later we're into chicks with dicks. Actually speaks volumes.
I'll give your questions a shot:
1. Yes, it's all about just beating the liberals.
2. No, not about case or result-oriented issues as the vast majority of staunch BK supporters could tell you very little about that. What they know most about him comes from what they saw of him at his interview.

Interesting side note, if you try to write ALL (all) in caps, that's what you end up with.

I do not believe you can lump the "winning mentality" into one category of people. I believe it is a culmination of things. (i) in the recent past, almost all R's wanted McConnells and Grahams head on a platter, if not more of them for being dead beats...they turned that around and fought back quite hard this time; long overdue. (ii) the less informed voter, who has just begun investing in as Trump announced, the "winning" class...maybe even call them low information voters but recently invested in politics, (iii) those that saw this logically, where the FBI found no evidence, followed the Flake request for more FBI intervention with Mike Judge et al. and multiple prosecutors agreed , even Mitchell who asked the questions during the hearing who would not bring this case to a trial, (iv) and yes, the hard-lined political types that just wanted beat the snot out of the democrats, and finally (v)those that knew just enough to believe this was a political hit job (against Trump) and were not going to be swayed.

IMO - the left is still trying to play stupid games, yes both sides do it to an extent. I believe by "following the money", the "(D")donors are interested in shifting the true democrat party so far left that the true democrat party has lost their own identity. They are trying to play in too many sandboxes at the same time, coupled with the majority of news outlets backing them.

I would love to see the D party call timeout and sever ties with Soros type funded groups, let them hemorrhage away like pouring salt on a slug, and come out with a new fresh message. Just like MDlax said about BK, if were just frank with us, we would have been more understanding. The authentic democrats need to do the same.

[Typical Lax Dad]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

So it's just beating the Liberals? Not a case- or result-oriented issue?

Pretty interesting little study there, eh, sc? A fair and reasonable question and a few posts later we're into chicks with dicks. Actually speaks volumes.
I'll give your questions a shot:
1. Yes, it's all about just beating the liberals.
2. No, not about case or result-oriented issues as the vast majority of staunch BK supporters could tell you very little about that. What they know most about him comes from what they saw of him at his interview.

Interesting side note, if you try to write ALL (all) in caps, that's what you end up with.

A great deal of it is about “beating the other team”. It’s the way politics have become polarized.

[MDlaxfan76]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

So it's just beating the Liberals? Not a case- or result-oriented issue?

Pretty interesting little study there, eh, sc? A fair and reasonable question and a few posts later we're into chicks with dicks. Actually speaks volumes.
I'll give your questions a shot:
1. Yes, it's all about just beating the liberals.
2. No, not about case or result-oriented issues as the vast majority of staunch BK supporters could tell you very little about that. What they know most about him comes from what they saw of him at his interview.

Interesting side note, if you try to write ALL (all) in caps, that's what you end up with.

I do not believe you can lump the "winning mentality" into one category of people. I believe it is a culmination of things. (i) in the recent past, almost all R's wanted McConnells and Grahams head on a platter, if not more of them for being dead beats...they turned that around and fought back quite hard this time; long overdue. (ii) the less informed voter, who has just begun investing in as Trump announced, the "winning" class...maybe even call them low information voters but recently invested in politics, (iii) those that saw this logically, where the FBI found no evidence, followed the Flake request for more FBI intervention with Mike Judge et al. and multiple prosecutors agreed , even Mitchell who asked the questions during the hearing who would not bring this case to a trial, (iv) and yes, the hard-lined political types that just wanted beat the snot out of the democrats, and finally (v)those that knew just enough to believe this was a political hit job (against Trump) and were not going to be swayed.

IMO - the left is still trying to play stupid games, yes both sides do it to an extent. I believe by "following the money", the "(D")donors are interested in shifting the true democrat party so far left that the true democrat party has lost their own identity. They are trying to play in too many sandboxes at the same time, coupled with the majority of news outlets backing them.

I would love to see the D party call timeout and sever ties with Soros type funded groups, let them hemorrhage away like pouring salt on a slug, and come out with a new fresh message. Just like MDlax said about BK, if were just frank with us, we would have been more understanding. The authentic democrats need to do the same.

I think some of this is fair, youth. Dems really could benefit from an overhaul. Thankfully the Clinton machine is no longer dominant. First step. IMO, the party leadership needs to become both younger and more focused on practical matters, along with ethical reform. That's going to be difficult, so I doubt they'll get it just right.

But folks who think that the current ascendancy of Trumpism is actually a long-term path to "winning" are either 1) going to crash on the rocks of democracy and demographics or 2) actually rooting for some new form of fascist-like authoritarianism/nativism.

Given the ugliness of #2, I'm hoping for #1 though I suspect it will take more than the current election cycle for that to happen.

[Bandito]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

So it's just beating the Liberals? Not a case- or result-oriented issue?

Pretty interesting little study there, eh, sc? A fair and reasonable question and a few posts later we're into chicks with dicks. Actually speaks volumes.
I'll give your questions a shot:
1. Yes, it's all about just beating the liberals.
2. No, not about case or result-oriented issues as the vast majority of staunch BK supporters could tell you very little about that. What they know most about him comes from what they saw of him at his interview.

Interesting side note, if you try to write ALL (all) in caps, that's what you end up with.

I do not believe you can lump the "winning mentality" into one category of people. I believe it is a culmination of things. (i) in the recent past, almost all R's wanted McConnells and Grahams head on a platter, if not more of them for being dead beats...they turned that around and fought back quite hard this time; long overdue. (ii) the less informed voter, who has just begun investing in as Trump announced, the "winning" class...maybe even call them low information voters but recently invested in politics, (iii) those that saw this logically, where the FBI found no evidence, followed the Flake request for more FBI intervention with Mike Judge et al. and multiple prosecutors agreed , even Mitchell who asked the questions during the hearing who would not bring this case to a trial, (iv) and yes, the hard-lined political types that just wanted beat the snot out of the democrats, and finally (v)those that knew just enough to believe this was a political hit job (against Trump) and were not going to be swayed.

IMO - the left is still trying to play stupid games, yes both sides do it to an extent. I believe by "following the money", the "(D")donors are interested in shifting the true democrat party so far left that the true democrat party has lost their own identity. They are trying to play in too many sandboxes at the same time, coupled with the majority of news outlets backing them.

I would love to see the D party call timeout and sever ties with Soros type funded groups, let them hemorrhage away like pouring salt on a slug, and come out with a new fresh message. Just like MDlax said about BK, if were just frank with us, we would have been more understanding. The authentic democrats need to do the same.

I think some of this is fair, youth. Dems really could benefit from an overhaul. Thankfully the Clinton machine is no longer dominant. First step. IMO, the party leadership needs to become both younger and more focused on practical matters, along with ethical reform. That's going to be difficult, so I doubt they'll get it just right.

But folks who think that the current ascendancy of Trumpism is actually a long-term path to "winning" are either 1) going to crash on the rocks of democracy and demographics or 2) actually rooting for some new form of fascist-like authoritarianism/nativism.

Given the ugliness of #2, I'm hoping for #1 though I suspect it will take more than the current election cycle for that to happen.

We aren't a democracy, we are a constitutional republic. Division brought Trump, he did not cause it. That was started by Obama and the Democrats and their hatred towards cops and white people.

[DMac]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

So it's just beating the Liberals? Not a case- or result-oriented issue?

Pretty interesting little study there, eh, sc? A fair and reasonable question and a few posts later we're into chicks with dicks. Actually speaks volumes.
I'll give your questions a shot:
1. Yes, it's all about just beating the liberals.
2. No, not about case or result-oriented issues as the vast majority of staunch BK supporters could tell you very little about that. What they know most about him comes from what they saw of him at his interview.

Interesting side note, if you try to write ALL (all) in caps, that's what you end up with.

A great deal of it is about “beating the other team”. It’s the way politics have become polarized.

You betchya. Have long said the crew that hangs out here (LP) is more informed than your average Joe. To the average uniformed Joe it's about beating the other team and the media cashes in big time on that. Referring back to sc's question, they don't know jack about BK but they know Prez Tough Guy wanted him on the SC and that's good enough for them. I'd tend to put more stock in the ex SC judge's, and the former Yale law school dean's opinions than most others. Too many of them just want to turn the whole deal into suck it, you're an idiot, a moron, etc discussion.

[MDlaxfan76]

Sure, those Dems absolutely "hate cops and white people".
Trump Derangement Syndrome and possibly much worse on full display.

I have a whole lot of Dem friends, all races and creeds, and not a one of them "hates" either "cops" or "white people". Some do have a problem with "trust", based on their personal experiences.

I get a particular kick out of you 'correcting' me with "constitutional republic" and "not a democracy," and earlier "rule of law," as if you actually have a clue... as opposed to just talking points from whatever right wing screed blog you read.

[Bandito]

Sure, those Dems absolutely "hate cops and white people".
Trump Derangement Syndrome and possibly much worse on full display.

I get a particular kick out of you 'correcting' me with "constitutional republic" and "not a democracy," and earlier "rule of law," as if you actually have a clue... as opposed to just talking points from whatever right wing screed blog you read.

Oh the irony of having a clue. Any other brain busters for me Mr. Ivy League who doesn't even know what type of government we have?

[Typical Lax Dad]

"Oh, and suck it. Glad I am on the right side. You aren't and you lost. We won. That is how the game is played now."

What did you win, in terms of results in cases? Or was it just to beat the Democrats with your majority in the Senate. I keep asking.

So it's just beating the Liberals? Not a case- or result-oriented issue?

Pretty interesting little study there, eh, sc? A fair and reasonable question and a few posts later we're into chicks with dicks. Actually speaks volumes.
I'll give your questions a shot:
1. Yes, it's all about just beating the liberals.
2. No, not about case or result-oriented issues as the vast majority of staunch BK supporters could tell you very little about that. What they know most about him comes from what they saw of him at his interview.

Interesting side note, if you try to write ALL (all) in caps, that's what you end up with.

A great deal of it is about “beating the other team”. It’s the way politics have become polarized.

You betchya. Have long said the crew that hangs out here (LP) is more informed than your average Joe. To the average uniformed Joe it's about beating the other team and the media cashes in big time on that. Referring back to sc's question, they don't know jack about BK but they know Prez Tough Guy wanted him on the SC and that's good enough for them. I'd tend to put more stock in the ex SC judge's, and the former Yale law school dean's opinions than most others. Too many of them just want to turn the whole deal into suck it, you're an idiot, a moron, etc discussion.

Exactly. I watched Kavanaugh and my thought was “we can do better”...I don’t recall having that strong a reaction to any other Supreme Court nominee during my lifetime. Maybe I wasn’t paying close attention. But many people with more insight than most opposed and that kind of confirmed my initial thoughts. I don’t want a guy with a political agenda on the SCOTUS. A bias or a judicial philosophy is one thing. Executing an agenda is very different. Might be the first of his kind to ascend to the court.