The Path forward for the Democrats

1741476722720.webp
 
Women, when trained as soldiers, can be as effective (or even more) than a man. Trying to keep them away from being soldiers is an extreme biased stupidity.
On the whole, women lack the body strength of men. Therefore they cannot be combat soldiers effectively.
 
Hey, we agree on something Lucky! I think you also should change the laws instead of ignoring them.

How about you get your band of merry Leftists to vote on opening the borders? We can help! Want us to have a lawyer write up a bill that your peeps can co author, and sign on to?

I will kick in the 1st dollar if you can get 75% of your legislators in congress to promote/sign on to the bill-) We are just trying to heeeeeeeeeeeelppppppp you!
Our immigration laws have been in disarray for over 50 years and no president (Democrat or Republican) has been able to fix it.
 
Our immigration laws have been in disarray for over 50 years and no president (Democrat or Republican) has been able to fix it.

HEHEHEHEHEHEHE, wrong answer. All that is important is----------->WHAT is the law! It is obvious to everyone that your side wants to break it, or ignore it. In essence, you are no better than the illegals you let in, that rape our women, and kill our kids.
 
It would be so much easier if the Democrats made out a list of which agencies they DIDN'T infect.
First show me what agencies that the Trump administration didn't "attempt" to infect. Attempt is because Trump is incompetent, and he fails at most everything.
 
Women, when trained as soldiers, can be as effective (or even more) than a man. Trying to keep them away from being soldiers is an extreme biased stupidity.
Would women be better in prisons at executing inmates?
 
The Third Way is still smelling after its failure in the 90s.


It's still leftist democrat who supports Obama care and peddles the climate change hoax.
 
Women, when trained as soldiers, can be as effective (or even more) than a man. Trying to keep them away from being soldiers is an extreme biased stupidity.
Of course they can. Didn't you see those 120 pound women picking up 320 pound football players and throwing them into the nearest wall? It's in all the movies.
 
You have female relatives that do not WANT men in their restrooms? What a egocentric biased desire.

I do not want to be old. I do not want my legs to not work. I do not want Trump as a leader. I do not want incompetence in our government. Nonetheless, I have to accept it.

Why can't your female relatives accept that? After all, the things that I do not want are actually having a severe effect on me and my friends and my loved ones. What severe effects are transgender men in their bathroom having on them?
Lucky, I thought that was a satiracal post by a conservative until I noticed your name.

No, Ma'am, my female relatives will never accept having their private spaces invaded by men, nor their sports ruined. That is absurd and hardly worth talking about now that it is quickly being put a stop to. I'm still disappointed in myself and my fellow men that we did not react more strongly to that utter nonesense.

I hope it is left to be a state issue, I really do. All the trannies who want to hurt women can move to states where they allow that sort of thing, and the decent women can come here to Texas or any of the states that find it as crazy as most normal people.

Your getting old and having legs that do not work (and I'm sorry to hear that) is a fact of nature, unless someone caused it. But you would be outraged and not accept it, if someone passed a law requiring your legs to be paralyzed or for you to get old befor your time. You would not "accept that."

If you REALLY want answers to your questions, why don't you do something as simple as going to Google and asking the question? Do you want others to do your work and then criticize them and say "they do not know what they are saying"

Here is the answer to your question

Some notable people associated with the "Third Act" organization, which focuses on mobilizing older adults for action on climate and justice, include Bill McKibben (founder), Akaya Windwood (lead advisor), and Jane Fonda, among others.

Here's a more detailed list of people associated with Third Act:
  • Bill McKibben: Founder of Third Act, an environmentalist and author.

  • Akaya Windwood: Lead advisor to Third Act, based in Oakland, California.

  • Jane Fonda: A prominent figure who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Rebecca Solnit: Author and activist who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Rev. Lennox Yearwood: A prominent figure who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Terry Tempest Williams: Author and environmentalist who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Gus Speth: Environmentalist who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Judith LeBlanc: Activist who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Kathryn Grody: Activist who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Robin Wall Kimmerer: Author and environmentalist who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • John Kerry: Former Secretary of State who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Nina Simons: Activist who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Tim Wirth: Former US Representative who has spoken at Third Act events.

  • Nancy LaPlaca: Energy and Climate Policy Consultant for Third Act's Power Up Communities Campaign

  • Bob Fulkerson, Anna Goldstein, Veronique Graham: Local leaders who are helping build out the infrastructure
The only name I recognize from that list is Jane Fonda. You have to be kidding. Jane Fonda is a leader of the New Way for Democrats? It was forty years ago that she posed on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun, to show her support for that totalitarian regime shooting down U.S. airmen. How are her views "new?"

This is the same old Dem nonsense with a new name. That will fool very, very few people. Maybe some old-school union guys whose dad and granddad were Democrats and they cannot stand to admit that the GOP is now the party of the working class. In other words, only those who really, really want to be fooled.
 
Women, when trained as soldiers, can be as effective (or even more) than a man. Trying to keep them away from being soldiers is an extreme biased stupidity.

You have a hard time answering the question. What did the man say?
 
15th post
Lucky, I thought that was a satiracal post by a conservative until I noticed your name.

No, Ma'am, my female relatives will never accept having their private spaces invaded by men, nor their sports ruined. That is absurd and hardly worth talking about now that it is quickly being put a stop to. I'm still disappointed in myself and my fellow men that we did not react more strongly to that utter nonesense.

I hope it is left to be a state issue, I really do. All the trannies who want to hurt women can move to states where they allow that sort of thing, and the decent women can come here to Texas or any of the states that find it as crazy as most normal people.

Your getting old and having legs that do not work (and I'm sorry to hear that) is a fact of nature, unless someone caused it. But you would be outraged and not accept it, if someone passed a law requiring your legs to be paralyzed or for you to get old befor your time. You would not "accept that."
The key to all of this is the law and human rights,

It is presently illegal to prevent men from going into women's bathrooms, though it may be wrong morally and ethically. A state can impose things like fines for doing something that is considered immoral and unethical but legally, it cannot be a crime to do so. For that to happen, you would have to change the human rights law.

You not liking it and me hating Trump being president are the same thing. We legally cannot change it unless one or the other breaks an existing law.
 
Last edited:
Stupid question and does not apply to Hegseth. That is not what he is talking about.
We both talked about women, and yes so did you. It is not stupid at all to apply women to executing convicts if they get to kill enemies instead of men doing it.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom