u/rant_casey

I banish you to the land of wind and ghosts

Aaaand they’re saying everyone who disagrees is a “Jew”.

Gil was based on Jack Lemon’s character from Glengarry Glen Ross

The reason a lot of career government folks are hesitant to break away from KSA has less to do with economic considerations than it does with having a strategic military intelligence ally in the region. They’ve got something we need, and have been an invaluable intelligence ally against AQ and ISIS.

I still agree that we should disassociate, but the motivations for the continued relationship are far less cynical than typically portrayed.

Gotta love that logic. Forestry “mismanaged”, which caused the fires and deaths. Therefore, I will take away funding from forestry, ensuring I cause far more deaths.

Arctic circle?

Jim has asked literally every one of those questions including “point to a story that is fake news”

He has multiple times directly called CNN by name “fake news”. There is no ambiguity in what he’s saying.

Goes to the Treasury actually. That said, plenty of money from the treasury now goes to Trump properties, but that a different discussion.

That’s the best part about this whole shitshow of a comment thread: every single defender of American political supremacy readily contrasts the US with whatever caricature of European politics that they pretend to understand.

It’s pretty tough leaving this article and clicking around through other stuff and seeing, for example, John Kerry talking about how the real problem with the country is political polarization in Washington. Vapid, cowardly rhetoric like that will ensure that Democrats are losers for generations to come if they don’t wake up to the real war that’s going on.

DC/PR statehood and political corruption (and naming names) should be a typical conversation starter for candidates. Talk of “reaching across the aisle” indicates that a candidate is living in a fantasy land of political consulting from the 80’s, and for me is basically disqualifying.

The new ‘swing voter’ is the non-voter, not some imaginary moderate. It would be nice to see a leading Democratic candidate with a tenth of the passion of the Democratic base, and the courage to do what needs to be done in the Trump/McConnell age.

But I feel like we’re gonna get another John Kerry.

It has a long history before this, but Newt Gingrich launched a coordinated campaign to use the term when he became speaker.

You’re the Senate, you’re to be the ones making conclusions! You weren’t supposed to have access to information about me that could let you make any informed conclusions!!! Republicans promised me! I PLAY SPORTS DAMMIT!

I know other people have already corrected you but since you keep saying you didn't watch the video and that's why you didn't see it, here we go:

When you say "They gave Beto a multi sentence quote", they actually have him one sentence:

Asked the same question, U.S. Rep. Beto O'Rourke was unambiguous.

"I will commit to serving every single day of my full six-year term for the people of Texas," O'Rourke said.

What comes before that, in the article, is actually a three-sentence quote from Cruz:

Asked in a Sept. 11 interview with the Tribune whether he might run for president in 2020, Cruz said "I am focused on the United States Senate."

"Can you commit to serving out your term?" the Tribune's Alana Rocha asked.

In response, Cruz began: "You know, as we stand here today, the Texas Board of Education is getting ready to vote on a proposal, a recommendation they received, to delete the word 'heroic' from the description of the defenders of the Alamo."

His reply, which went on for two minutes but did not answer the question, concluded with, "We should be standing up for who we are as Texans and Americans."

It's literally the exact opposite of what you said. You clearly didn't read the article carefully before criticizing it, and then doubled down multiple times rather than re-reading to check if you were wrong.

You saw what you wanted to see. That's bias, plain and simple.

Yeah, it’s so biased when reporters print the words Cruz says. It’s just plain unfair.

Please, elaborate...

"Remember, Wharton school of business, I'm like, really smart."

In this press conference he literally referred to his "very, very large brain".

Not only does he not know anything, he no longer knows what a fact is. He joked about lying to Trudeau about the non-existent trade deficit with Canada. The substance simply doesn't matter. To him, everything is image. He does not give a single fuck about the people he's supposed to help. He wants to win, that's the only thing that is real to him.

“Everybody else is lying about what they believe”

I 100% guarantee that’s how he feels about racism too

Lots of people are saying it.

Well, Roy Moore only lost by a few thousand votes, so they’re not trailing behind or anything.

You're correct, and initially when writing my comment I almost hedged, however it was a 1990's Time magazine feature that propelled the concept into the zeitgeist. The concept was prevalent in activist circles, but had not permeated the public sphere in the way that it now exists in common vernacular.

And so, the idea of reporting a sexual assault to the police, as a minor, perpetrated by another minor, while drinking underage, in the early 1980's, is the standard now required by the 11 conservative men who will be questioning her on the judiciary committee. Given that the median age of the senate is 61, I guarantee republican senators weren't reading Brownmiller in their formative years.

Take all that money we spend on weapons and defense each year and instead spend it feeding, clothing, and educating the poor of the world which it would many times over, not one human being excluded, and we can explore space together - both inner and outer - forever, in peace.

- Bill Hicks

Exactly. At the time of the alleged assaults by Kavanaugh, the term “date rape” wasn’t yet in use. Rape was largely considered something perpetrated by strangers. And yet, Ford was supposed to go to the police at the time? As a minor, and all the stigma that would come with that, and the extreme likelihood that she’d simply be ignored? The people who take that line of reasoning make me sick.

If I were a Yale law student, I would be beyond furious at the implication that Kavanaugh represents the pinnacle of what the school can produce. It gives me hope to see the faculty, in large part at least, appear to agree.