Republicans , Conservatives you better PRIORITIZE

[Al Azar]

If Republicans were capable of any planning whatsoever they wouldn't be swirling around the drain.

You have sand in your carburetor.

Swirling the drain? Hey moron, who is in charge of the house and senate? How fucking stupid are you exactly?

and that's the other thing. and though i don't agree the senate stopped obama from picking a successor. god only knows what bader g is thinking, that's a forever missed opportunity. pretty smart huh ?

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are saying.

sorry, they hold the upper and lower house. and though i didn't think it was appropriate to do, they halted a nomination/confirmation using their power of advise and consent, for filling Scalia's seat.

. and Ruth Bader Guinsberg should have resigned so obama could pick her replacement. that was a real blunder in my opinion. they had eight years to work it out. if Trump wins, we go back to a more conservative court, i hope.

A nomination confirmation? We have 57 federal court justice nominations backed up, 14 months worth, due to Republican obstructionism.

These are the same Republicans complaining about deportation backlogs.

Idiots.

You want judges?

Empty the jails and prisons. Deport the illegal criminals.

Secure the border.

Then we can talk judges and immigration.

Your our-way-or-the-highway attitude is what has placed the White House out of your reach.

Keep it up. We're not done yet.

 

[washamericom]

Swirling the drain? Hey moron, who is in charge of the house and senate? How fucking stupid are you exactly?

and that's the other thing. and though i don't agree the senate stopped obama from picking a successor. god only knows what bader g is thinking, that's a forever missed opportunity. pretty smart huh ?

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are saying.

sorry, they hold the upper and lower house. and though i didn't think it was appropriate to do, they halted a nomination/confirmation using their power of advise and consent, for filling Scalia's seat.

. and Ruth Bader Guinsberg should have resigned so obama could pick her replacement. that was a real blunder in my opinion. they had eight years to work it out. if Trump wins, we go back to a more conservative court, i hope.

A nomination confirmation? We have 57 federal court justice nominations backed up, 14 months worth, due to Republican obstructionism.

These are the same Republicans complaining about deportation backlogs.

Idiots.

Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?

harry reid was the wet blanket of legislation, got pretty rich too.

 

[Ringel05]

and that's the other thing. and though i don't agree the senate stopped obama from picking a successor. god only knows what bader g is thinking, that's a forever missed opportunity. pretty smart huh ?

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are saying.

sorry, they hold the upper and lower house. and though i didn't think it was appropriate to do, they halted a nomination/confirmation using their power of advise and consent, for filling Scalia's seat.

. and Ruth Bader Guinsberg should have resigned so obama could pick her replacement. that was a real blunder in my opinion. they had eight years to work it out. if Trump wins, we go back to a more conservative court, i hope.

A nomination confirmation? We have 57 federal court justice nominations backed up, 14 months worth, due to Republican obstructionism.

These are the same Republicans complaining about deportation backlogs.

Idiots.

Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?

harry reid was the wet blanket of legislation, got pretty rich too.

Yup, sounds like politics as usual.......

 

[Yousaidwhat]

If Republicans were capable of any planning whatsoever they wouldn't be swirling around the drain.

You have sand in your carburetor.

and that's the other thing. and though i don't agree the senate stopped obama from picking a successor. god only knows what bader g is thinking, that's a forever missed opportunity. pretty smart huh ?

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are saying.

sorry, they hold the upper and lower house. and though i didn't think it was appropriate to do, they halted a nomination/confirmation using their power of advise and consent, for filling Scalia's seat.

. and Ruth Bader Guinsberg should have resigned so obama could pick her replacement. that was a real blunder in my opinion. they had eight years to work it out. if Trump wins, we go back to a more conservative court, i hope.

A nomination confirmation? We have 57 federal court justice nominations backed up, 14 months worth, due to Republican obstructionism.

These are the same Republicans complaining about deportation backlogs.

Idiots.

You want judges?

Empty the jails and prisons. Deport the illegal criminals.

Secure the border.

Then we can talk judges and immigration.

Your our-way-or-the-highway attitude is what has placed the White House out of your reach.

Keep it up. We're not done yet.

Nope.

I'll continue the my way or the highway attitude.

I'm not a Republican.

The White House is not out of reach.

And I'm not done yet.

Oops!

 

[Fenton Lum]

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are saying.

sorry, they hold the upper and lower house. and though i didn't think it was appropriate to do, they halted a nomination/confirmation using their power of advise and consent, for filling Scalia's seat.

. and Ruth Bader Guinsberg should have resigned so obama could pick her replacement. that was a real blunder in my opinion. they had eight years to work it out. if Trump wins, we go back to a more conservative court, i hope.

A nomination confirmation? We have 57 federal court justice nominations backed up, 14 months worth, due to Republican obstructionism.

These are the same Republicans complaining about deportation backlogs.

Idiots.

Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?

Same as your side, "principle".

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

 

[Ringel05]

sorry, they hold the upper and lower house. and though i didn't think it was appropriate to do, they halted a nomination/confirmation using their power of advise and consent, for filling Scalia's seat.

. and Ruth Bader Guinsberg should have resigned so obama could pick her replacement. that was a real blunder in my opinion. they had eight years to work it out. if Trump wins, we go back to a more conservative court, i hope.

A nomination confirmation? We have 57 federal court justice nominations backed up, 14 months worth, due to Republican obstructionism.

These are the same Republicans complaining about deportation backlogs.

Idiots.

Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?

Same as your side, "principle".

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

Do you always construct false dichotomies or is this a new failing at understanding the English language on your part?

 

[Fenton Lum]

A nomination confirmation? We have 57 federal court justice nominations backed up, 14 months worth, due to Republican obstructionism.

These are the same Republicans complaining about deportation backlogs.

Idiots.

Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?

Same as your side, "principle".

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

Do you always construct false dichotomies or is this a new failing at understanding the English language on your part?

If you need it explained to you some one else will have to.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?

Same as your side, "principle".

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

Do you always construct false dichotomies or is this a new failing at understanding the English language on your part?

If you need it explained to you some one else will have to.

I digress, please do 'splain.

I would think I'm not the only one who understood his post.

 

[Ringel05]

Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?

Same as your side, "principle".

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

Do you always construct false dichotomies or is this a new failing at understanding the English language on your part?

If you need it explained to you some one else will have to.

Obviously you're looking in a mirror when you say that......
Apparently your cognition (what it is) is colored heavily by your paradigm inferences (assumptive conclusions)........

 

[Fenton Lum]

Same as your side, "principle".

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

Do you always construct false dichotomies or is this a new failing at understanding the English language on your part?

If you need it explained to you some one else will have to.

I digress, please do 'splain.

I would think I'm not the only one who understood his post.

Good, help him out then.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Same as your side, "principle".

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

Do you always construct false dichotomies or is this a new failing at understanding the English language on your part?

If you need it explained to you some one else will have to.

Obviously you're looking in a mirror when you say that......
Apparently your cognition (what it is) is colored heavily by your paradigm inferences (assumptive conclusions)........

I said someone else love, take care.

 

[Ringel05]

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

Do you always construct false dichotomies or is this a new failing at understanding the English language on your part?

If you need it explained to you some one else will have to.

Obviously you're looking in a mirror when you say that......
Apparently your cognition (what it is) is colored heavily by your paradigm inferences (assumptive conclusions)........

I said someone else love, take care.

Regardless, you've made your political leanings absolutely clear often enough to draw a logical conclusion, I have too but you're new enough not to know what those leanings are. Wanna try again?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Republicans , Conservatives you better prioritize

You folks like to support Israel, War Profiteers, and Wall Street Bankers

and so does Hillary.

Refusing to vote for Trump will result in a vote for Hillary.

But Hillary also supports nominating SCOTUS "justices" who are anti firearms.

So subjecting Trump to some kind of religious test is counter intuitive..


So stop the bullshit, the infighting. Step up to the plate and PRIORITIZE.

.

.

This is a lie: Clinton advocates no such thing.

In fact, any justice she nominates for the Supreme Court will respect and acknowledge current Second Amendment jurisprudence as the settled and accepted law of the land, as do all liberals.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

My side.......?

So then it's "your side" when it's someone else and you want to profess to have no side? That's it?

So then "Sooooo, it's obstructionism when it's the opposition. What do you call it when your side does it?" is just straight up bullshit.

Do you always construct false dichotomies or is this a new failing at understanding the English language on your part?

If you need it explained to you some one else will have to.

I digress, please do 'splain.

I would think I'm not the only one who understood his post.

Good, help him out then.

Oh no!

It's not my pay grade.

Please do es 'splain.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If Republicans were capable of any planning whatsoever they wouldn't be swirling around the drain.

I am trying to help them. We are in this together.

.

You’re together in trying to divide the American people – this ‘us against them’ thread is proof of that.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Trump is a solid candidate."

lol

You can't be serious.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Republicans , Conservatives you better prioritize

You folks like to support Israel, War Profiteers, and Wall Street Bankers

and so does Hillary.

Refusing to vote for Trump will result in a vote for Hillary.

But Hillary also supports nominating SCOTUS "justices" who are anti firearms.

So subjecting Trump to some kind of religious test is counter intuitive..


So stop the bullshit, the infighting. Step up to the plate and PRIORITIZE.

.

.

They're too busy obsessing about made-up medical reports and catheters. Recipe for defeat. But entertaining to watch. They're already setting themselves up for failure. "Waaaah, it's all the media's fault!"

The so-called media beginning with the New York Times , is diametrically oppose to Trump. They are useless.


.

Actually, Trump is useless.

 

[Ringel05]

If Republicans were capable of any planning whatsoever they wouldn't be swirling around the drain.

I am trying to help them. We are in this together.

.

You’re together in trying to divide the American people – this ‘us against them’ thread is proof of that.

You have room to talk??!!!!

 

[HUGGY]

If Republicans were capable of any planning whatsoever they wouldn't be swirling around the drain.

Swirling the drain? Hey moron, who is in charge of the house and senate? How fucking stupid are you exactly?

It's not the dems.. HHhhhMMmmmm????? It must be the aliens from the outta spaces.

 

[Ringel05]

If Republicans were capable of any planning whatsoever they wouldn't be swirling around the drain.

Swirling the drain? Hey moron, who is in charge of the house and senate? How fucking stupid are you exactly?

It's not the dems.. HHhhhMMmmmm????? It must be the aliens from the outta spaces.

You've been watching the They Live historical documents again, haven't you.......