Sounds like a moral judgment.No, the Democrats are more like the Patriots or the Yankees - they expect their opponents to play by the rules but themselves, not so much
Especially since they play the same rules
Sounds like a moral judgment.No, the Democrats are more like the Patriots or the Yankees - they expect their opponents to play by the rules but themselves, not so much
Executive Order 13988 of January 20, 2021Ya know, I honestly don't ever remember doing that, but I'll stop short of saying I didn't do it. But as a general rule, I only oppose EOs if I believe that they circumvent authority that's supposed to be placed in different hands. So, I have no issues with any EOs that Biden had submitted, unless they are beyond his authority. Maybe you have an example that you might provide. I will call it out if it is.
Bending over was/is Obama's favorite positionWhen he was not bending over...
Whose rules are, "If you don't like the election results, just storm the capitol?"No, the Democrats are more like the Patriots or the Yankees - they expect their opponents to play by the rules but themselves, not so much
Waitasecondnow.Whose rules are, "If you don't like the election results, just storm the capitol?"
Don't the 'same rules' forbid tampering with the characteristics of the game balls or stealing the other teams signs and signals via video spying?Sounds like a moral judgment.
Especially since they play the same rules
So you are not of the crowd they did it to Trump so it's payback time?Don't the 'same rules' forbid tampering with the characteristics of the game balls or stealing the other teams signs and signals via video spying?
Don't the election rules forbid creating needed votes that are untethered to any actual eligible citizen?
Sounds like a claim of the morality needed to sit in judgement
I read the order, and it's clear that the enforcement of the EO should be "consistent with applicable law." That's a direct quote from the EO. That does not appear to circumvent the legislative branch, because obviously "applicable law," has been passed by the legislative branch, and "consistent," means to follow said laws. You got another one you want throw my way?Executive Order 13988 of January 20, 2021
Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation
That is 'circumventing the authority' of the legislative branch
So you are not of the crowd they did it to Trump so it's payback time?
I will await your rebuke of Printcraft.
I interpret what you say as whats good for the goose is good for the gander.Oh, I didn't say "payback" time.
I said, "don't bitch, enjoy it" because you have no room to complain now.
Those high minded ideals should have been aimed at all of the squids crying "orange man bad" at everything and ever opportunity the last 4 years.
I don't consider 'gender identity' consistent with transsexuality as used in Bostock v Clayton County. I believe the ruling was meant to protect people actually transitioning but not the more dilettante forms of 'gender dysphoria' and believe determining where that line should be drawn to be a legislative prerogative. I do not believe that merely believing yourself to be a man/woman trapped in a woman's/man's body entitles you to federal protection without any identifiable action on your part to proceed with the transition and would like to see the entire concept of 'gender identity' revisited legislatively to establish its boundariesI read the order, and it's clear that the enforcement of the EO should be "consistent with applicable law." That's a direct quote from the EO. That does not appear to circumvent the legislative branch, because obviously "applicable law," has been passed by the legislative branch, and "consistent," means to follow said laws. You got another one you want throw my way?
It will be a long wait. If I could prove who and how the election was stolen, I would cheerfully watch the perpetraitors dance on the end of a ropeSo you are not of the crowd they did it to Trump so it's payback time?
I will await your rebuke of Printcraft.
I try not to take pleasure in the death of anyone, but if your god allows it.It will be a long wait. If I could prove who and how the election was stolen, I would cheerfully watch the perpetraitors dance on the end of a rope
I try not to take pleasure in the death of anyone, but if your god allows it.
But the death of liberty is OK, because it is a concept and not a person? My God is not culpable for my shortcomings as a follower; nor, likewise, the sanctimony of his other followersI try not to take pleasure in the death of anyone, but if your god allows it.
Wow! A Trifecta!But the death of liberty is OK, because it is a concept and not a person? My God is not culpable for my shortcomings as a follower; nor, likewise, the sanctimony of his other followers
You do realize 1....those idiots were invited in.....2 many were left wing instigators ......3 the weak minded storm troopers are not indicative of our people.Whose rules are, "If you don't like the election results, just storm the capitol?"