funjumper101

Just can't help shooting off childish bullshit can you? It's a shame what the younger generation has let themselves become. The stench of turtleshit is strong. The ignorance and inability to correctly interpret available information produces an awful result. Younger generation? Young people are not capable of reading history books and understanding the content? That is certainly correct for those that are conservative. I did my first static line jump in 1983. I did NOT vote for Ronnie the senile idiot. I did watch in horror as his administration fucked everything up. All of the Republican administrations have continued the hallowed tradition established by that useless piece of trash.

Emphasis mine. What a load of bullshit. It's never been a trip to 7/11. Never. How can you intellectually, honestly say, or believe that? Never? Really? NEVER? Bah - you know better. I would have given you more credit until you typed that. How many hookers have aborted to keep working? That is convenience. How many couples got drunk and created a child, and then, conveniently, aborted the kid to make their lives easy and more convenient? How many permissions women have showed up to hide and dispose of their societally imposed shame, because it is more convenient? Or do you really think that every aborted child is a product of rape and molestation? It was stated earlier in this thread that a poster here took the convenient way out. Things didn't match his and his partner's view, so they took the convenient way out. Honestly. . . . . People with blinders and willful ignorance. What ever you let yourself think, to let yourself live with what you have done, is up to you. I consider that thinking exactly like what it takes to believe in a book written by people supposedly being guided by a God, his son, and a Holy Ghost, all one and the same. It's all shades of what it takes to justify what you want to believe. Its killing - pure and plain and simple. In all of the examples you reference, I can't see anything that is your business, or anyone else's business. Is being a really nosy asshole an acceptable value these days? Not among civilized people. "Conservatives" rail about excess government regulations and government interference in one's personal freedoms. This philosophy apparently only applies to white males, of Northern European ancestry, based on the words and deeds of the "conservatives". Women don't have the brains or ability to make their own decisions about medical care and pregnancy, or so it seems. It is amazing that more women don't call out the assholes for their hypocrisy. It is very clear from everything that the anti-choice people write and do that their AMAZING concern for the children starts just after conception, and stops abruptly upon delivery. Voting against pre-natal medical care, the SCHIP progam, and all other forms of support for the less well off women with issues is how they roll. All the bullshit about how much they care about the fetus is just that, bullshit. All of the obstacles put in place that prevent normal medical care for US women affect the unwashed masses. Wealthy people use their resources to make sure that the laws that affect the "little people" have zero influence on their choices. Off to Switzerland for an abortion, and some shopping. And the worthless piece of trash that this thread is about should go to jail for his many crimes.

It seems that the Yale Law Review essay is too challenging a read for the people here. It makes sense. Deliberate ignorance is a defining character trait of conservatives. One must never read or listen to anything that conflicts with one's heartfelt opinions. That kind of thing is way too close to education and rational analysis. It could lead one to have to acknowledge the fact that the current POTUS, a former professor of Constitutional Law, is NOT a Kenyan Muslim socialist.

I know how you feel. Follow the Constitution as written? What a liberal concept... NOT. Tough concept, isn't it? People get elected to office, take an oath to perform that job, and then decide NOT to perform the job as written in the Constitution? Why would they not be expected to perform the tasks that are part of the job, as defined in the Constitution? Do tell.

Sometimes the best demonstration of the absurdity of Republican Conservative "reasoning" comes from the young. I agree with the young man. Following the Republican line of "reasoning" on the status of Obama's SCOUS nominee means that any Republican who is up for re-election in November must recuse themselves from participating in the SCOTUS nomination process. Let the PEOPLE decide in November. What a load of hogwash. I cannot believe that Conservatives despise the Constitution so much that they allow their leaders to subvert it. Time to step aside, or follow the Constitution as it is written. http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/readers/2016/03/29/grassley-step-aside-until-after-election/82255722/

The essay from the Yale Law review isn't an easy read. Take your time and you may start to understand the content. It is a well written and researched essay that has all of the documentation about the legal precedents that support the position of the writer. It is a cogent and clear articulation of what needs to be done to overcome the treasonous actions of Yertl and his minions.

Silence is consent, on this matter. Yertl and his minions are going to have a very interesting time of it. See the new thread I just started. Take some time to wade through the Yale Law Review essay linked.

All he has to do is wait a bit, and he's in. This is a great read - http://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/1129_pb467jtz.pdf A great read for those that can understand the words and the reasoning behind them. I say GO FOR IT!!! For more details - http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2016/03/how_merrick_garland_can_outfox_republican_obstructionists.html If Yertl and his minions don't want to perform the tasks that they swore an oath to perform, they need to bypassed for the government to run as mandated in the Constitution. Once their lack of performance is made clear, we can hope that voters wake up and stop electing those kind of nitwits to important public offices.

Shrub = small tree , aka, Bush. Shrub, when referring to dubya, is an intentional perjorative. Considering that he and his administration is directly responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of displaced people, and has yet to be arrested for his war crimes, calling him Shrub is mild, compared to what he deserves. I hope that the next Administration has the courage to arrest him and Darth Cheney and send them off to the Hague for trial. Those bastards need to go on trial, along with the CIA operatives and the contractors that violated the Geneva conventions by torturing prisoners. Why is the rule of law so trivial to Conservatives? In theory, that is one of their key values.

Trump has been extremely effective at showing the true character of what the modern Republican party is all about. In great detail, the true colors have been revealed. He clearly loves the USA. Exposing the Republicans true values, he succeeded in running off those candidates that might fool the general public like Shrub did. All that are left are unelectable in a General election, including Trump himself. Trump know that the only hope for the USA is to get the federal government back in the hands of the adult party that always has to fix the disasters wrought by the Republican operatives. The USA's general population can't survive another Republican administration. The last two Republican administrations fucked thing up so badly the effects will be felt for generations, especially in the mid-east. ISIS is a direct result of the invasion/occupation of Iraq. Shrub wouldn't have ginned up an excuse to go into Iraq if Saddam hadn't threatened to kill Poppy. The destruction of the world economy wasn't part of the plan, just collateral damage. Thank you Donald. A real patriot, even though is he a low life maggot in real life.

A third one.

Another one that is quite accurate.

The attached cartoon says it all. Advise and Consent. Not obstruct and rewrite the Constitution.

God works in mysterious ways. Thank you, Lord!!!! I wonder who Speaker's Corner's favorite POTUS has in the queue for nomination to replace a fallen member of SCOTUS? The fact that the paid for politicians will likely game the rules is what we get for allowing money to infest how politicians operate.

God works in mysterious ways. Thank you, Lord!!!! I wonder who Speaker's Corner's favorite POTUS has in the queue for nomination to replace a fallen member of SCOTUS?

We have a black justice who's wife makes over a million a year working for conservative organizations, peddling her influence on that justice. He shows up at those organizations fund raising events, helping raise money to further their agenda. He never should have been confirmed. Anita Hill was not lying about the content of his character. If any of the more respectable members like Kagan or Sotomayor had a partner that was making bank from progressive organizations and using them for fundraising, the reich wing owned media would go off the charts crazy and be calling for impeachment. Scalia is the lowest of the low. It appears that dementia has set in.

I am sorry to hear that your son is so intellectually challenged that he cannot be taught to deal with wildlife that he is likely to come across while engaged in normal activity. It must be difficult. You have my sympathy. If you kill off the natural predators for mice, rats, ground squirrels, etc, you may end up with an infestation problem. It would be a lot smarter to learn to live with the wildlife in your area, and teach the kids that can be taught how to handle themselves. Randomly killing a rattlesnake that has done nothing to anyone is nothing to be proud of. Quite the opposite. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Good job by the property owner. http://thefreethoughtproject.com/video-business-owner-flexes-rights-attempting-tow-illegally-parked-police-car-lot/#Uu4CwqpIWMv1HJWE.16 More interesting reading is available from the Bad Cop No Donut reddit site https://www.reddit.com/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut/

What if the lion was a menace to villages, was old and sick, or was affecting the herd of other lions and would be better off dead for the herd as a whole. What if winged pigs fly out of your ass? You can string "what ifs" to infinity and all you have a load of bullshit. Wealthy dirtbags who take pleasure in killing animals for fun and trophys deserve to be eliminated from the gene pool. It is a very short step in psychotic behavior from killing animals for fun to killing people for fun. Given that wealthy people own the politicians and run the USA to their benefit, no laws will ever be enacted to stop trophy hunting. Extra-judicial justice should be administered. That murdering cunt in Wyoming should be taken out in tandem with the dentist.

"Copsuckers" is an excellent new adjective that has come into use to describe the people who support all actions of LEOs, no matter how heinous or horrifying the LEOs behave. Unconditional support, no matter what the facts are. It is a very apt description that sums up that kind of person in one word. You don't have to like it or use it. I like it and I will use it. The accuracy of the adjective is 100%. There is a really short list of people whose opinions actually matter to me. No one on this board makes the cut. I don't care, not one bit, what you or anyone else here thinks of me. You aren't on the list. Deal with it. No one forces you to read or reply to what I post. You want links with proof? Here you go. More preschoolers shot than LEOs - http://www.businessinsider.com/guns-have-killed-more-preschoolers-than-police-officers-2015-10 http://m.snopes.com/preschoolers-killed-police/ LEOs not on top ten dangerous jobs - http://www.bankrate.com/finance/personal-finance/10-most-dangerous-jobs-us-1.aspx http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/08/22/americas-10-deadliest-jobs-2/ http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf Nicholas Kristof has been proven to be correct in his op-ed. My statement that the LEO profession is not in the list of the top ten most dangerous jobs is 100% accurate. Having been victimized by multiple LEOs conspiring to commit perjury and being convicted of crimes I did not do, based on the perjured testimony, did provide me an early education about the LEO profession. This occurred when I was a juvenile and the record is sealed. The lesson learned lasts forever.

Why do the citizens of Georgia allow their elected representatives to provide special rights to LEOS that are NOT provided to regular citizens? The last paragraph of the quoted story makes clear why this is evil. Quoted text >>> Oct. 13, 2015 (Mimesis Law) — As the Atlanta Journal Constitution http://investigations.myajc.com/overtheline/#prosecuted reports, the system really can work. A grand jury heard evidence that a police officer subdued a man who had attacked him with a box cutter, and that, as the man lay on the ground, the officer shot him in the back of the head. Because the other officer had already holstered his firearm, the grand jury decided an indictment for involuntary manslaughter made sense. This is particularly remarkable because, as one grand juror (illegally?) http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1108786.html recounts, the district attorney told him there would be no trial “regardless of how we voted.” And true to his word, hours after the indictment was returned, District Attorney Scott Ballard requested that the charges be dropped. “I don’t know, with the benefit of hindsight, (that) it was necessary to shoot that man in the back of the head,” Ballard said, but “I would have prosecuted if I thought there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” Perhaps Ballard should not have given up his indictment so lightly. Although Georgia officers have killed 171 people in the past five years, his office was the first to successfully (if accidentally) secure an indictment for the death. There are a few reasons for this. For one, prosecutors are reluctant to seek an indictment against officers whose cooperation they depend on. When Walton County officers were caught using a confidential informant to plant drugs in a woman’s car, the District Attorney said that they committed no crime. When officers burst into a family’s home looking for drugs and threw an explosive device into a baby’s crib, no indictment followed. Sometimes, prosecutors seek an extra excuse not to prosecute by assembling a “civil grand jury” to determine if the officer’s actions were justified or unjustified. In one case, a police officer shot a teenager to death for coming to his front door holding a Wii video game controller. A civil grand jury found the shooting unjustified, at which point, the case was shunted off to a second grand jury. That grand jury refused to return an indictment. Why, you might ask? Because the prosecutor called an expert who testified that the officer’s actions were lawful. Then, they played a video of another officer being shot to death at a traffic stop… from 1998. Neither Mann nor Greene believe the video prejudiced the Bartow grand jury and they don’t think they drew any conclusions about the Roupe case from seeing it. If the prosecutor and the expert witness did not think the video would affect the grand jury’s deliberations, then why play it? Is there a tradition of playing gruesome shooting videos for kicks when seeking an indictment? We’ll never know, because Georgia shrouds its grand jury proceedings in the utmost secrecy. And here’s a particularly telling quote from the DA in question: I would not say I was seeking an indictment,” Greene said. “I don’t know that I would say that about any case that I have. That’s not my job. My job is to make sure justice is served. Yes, yes, it is difficult for prosecutors to deal with a grand jury’s legendary skepticism. But presumably, a prosecutor who routinely failed to get indictments for drug charges, burglaries, and child molestations would not last long in the job. For good or for ill, prosecutors are not generally expected to simply shrug their shoulders at a loss and say that justice has been served. And there’s another wrinkle. Georgia, unlike other states, allows police officers to give an unrebutted statement to the grand jury at the end of every grand jury proceeding. If an officer is not given that opportunity, the indictment is thrown out and he has to be retried. No cross-examination or scrutiny of any kind is allowed. Here’s the law: The accused [police officer] shall have the right to appear before the grand jury to make such sworn statement as he or she shall desire at the conclusion of the presentation of the state’s evidence. The accused shall not be subject to examination, either direct or cross, and shall not have the right individually or through his or her counsel to examine the state’s witnesses. The accused and his or her counsel shall have the right to be present during the presentation of all evidence and alleged statements of the accused on the proposed indictment, presentment, or accusation, after which the accused and his or her counsel shall retire instanter from the grand jury room to permit the grand jury to deliberate upon the indictment. If a police officer is not given this privilege, his conviction is reversed and he must be retried, even when prosecutors call the privilege “manifestly unfair.” So even when Georgia prosecutors do seriously seek indictments against police officers for killing citizens, they often run into problems. Paul Howard, the District Attorney for a large chunk of Atlanta, sought to indict an officer for “fatally shooting an unarmed black teenager twice in the back.” But because the officer got the last word, Howard said, he just had no way to rebut the officer’s emotional testimony. Officers claim this is necessary to ward off frivolous indictments. And this might make sense, if private citizens were allowed to pursue claims due to a grudge. But generally speaking, the only person in Georgia who is going to indict an officer is the District Attorney who works closely with that police department in every case. To keep their numbers up, DAs need police officers to show up to trial on time, to present the most favorable version of their testimony, and to avoid speaking with defense attorneys before trial. All that potentially goes out the window when indictments are sought for conduct that the police department thinks is justified, or at least forgivable. This is not to say that lenity in our justice system is a bad thing. It might be a very good idea to let people view grand jury proceedings to make sure that they’re fair, and to present their version of events before the grand jury decides. What makes much less sense is creating a two-track system: one for police officers, who are given every benefit of the doubt, and one for ordinary citizens, who typically find out about their indictment when it’s handed to them at the local jail. When we create special privileges for public officials, shielding them from scrutiny on the basis of their status, we abandon an important part of our national heritage. Maybe there are good policy reasons for giving officers the benefit of the doubt, but in a country premised on the hope of equality, there are even better reasons to ensure that such protections adhere to everyone.

Wow. All that anger. All that wish to harm another human being. How tolerant of you. Sick sadistic right wing scumbags like the dentist absolutely deserve the worst possible outcomes. It is called "justice". Maggots that support such people are totally deserving of extreme contempt and public ridicule. No sane person goes out of their way to kill animals for "entertainment" and "fun". Those that do should be erased from the gene pool.

The lies about a "war on cops" spread by the copsuckers is a load of BULLSHIT. So is the lie spread by the copsuckers that being a police officer is an extremely dangerous profession. It isn't. The links that back up this posting are as follows - http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cop-top-10-dangerous-jobs-country-tanks/#zS6ALy5OLpVGprOt.99 http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cop-top-10-dangerous-jobs-country-tanks/

I am hoping that a nice person takes it upon themselves to gutshoot that chickenshit asshole with a crossbow and let him suffer for a few days before shooting him a few times up close. Just like he did to the lion Cecil. All for the thrill of killing an magnificent animal for no reason. Cecil suffered gutshot with a crossbow bolt for almost two days before the dentist shot him. These so called "trophy hunters" are sick sadistic assholes that deserve to same treatment they inflict upon their victims. A pox on the two legged psychotics that kill this way.

Big leg Emma!