GhostofCain
Ancient Mariner
I was born during the rabbit-attack guy’s time in office. For the “land of the free” we sure gotta lotta racists in that office.
I think when they came up with the phrase, they thought it only applied to the white.
I was born during the rabbit-attack guy’s time in office. For the “land of the free” we sure gotta lotta racists in that office.
I mean I knew deep down that most of the early presidents were slaveholders but I didn't think it was 10 of the first 17, and William Henry Harrison didn't own slaves only because he wanted to be a soldier so he sold his plantation inheritance to his brother immediately. So I guess he owned slaves for as long as it took the paperwork to clear. Then there were the three doughheads who didn't own slaves but like, they were totally cool with slavery, saying things like "The institution of slavery should not be considered a political issue" like what?!I was born during the rabbit-attack guy’s time in office. For the “land of the free” we sure gotta lotta racists in that office.
I think when they came up with the phrase, they thought it only applied to the white.
I can see this entire unhappy saga ending with Trump living out the remainder of his life in a maximum security mental hospital, where he spends his days ranting into a specially-written computer interface which looks exactly like Twitter but actually posts nowhere.
The good news is that anyone who says she can't be professional or respect the office because of "sneakers" is someone whose opinion never has to be listened to again.The issue is that Kamala had done a photoshoot in a suit with professional shoes, and they had agreed with Vogue to use that one, then Vogue switched it. It's unfortunate, because there are absolutely people out there who will say that Kamala is wearing sneakers, she doesn't respect being VP, etc.
It's funny. Every damn time Democrats are in charge, physical appearance somehow gets on the top of the news agenda. Obama wore a grey suit - Fox screamed it was unpresidential, while the entirety of the last 4 years have been unpresidential. Harris wore sneakers = Disrespecting the office. Fox also questioned the manufacturing origins of Hillary Clinton's pantsuit.
People, yes. That's the mob mentality of the internet for you. Can't say I have seen any actual American news outlets, i.e. Washington Post, NY Times or AP, in their news reporting questioning Trump's choice of clothing or mocked his tan. Didn't know about Conway though, that is pretty much the same thing.People made fun of Trump's appearance all the time, just not the media from the Trump camp. There was also a mini-scandal about how Kellyanne Conway disrespected the office by putting her shoes on the couch once. Don't pretend the Democrat camp isn't this petty.
He must be stopped, there's nothing else for it. But the thing is, I was only half joking. The senario I outlined is the logical conclusion of what I think is becoming increasingly apparent to most people: that there is something going on in Trump's head which cannot be entirely attributed to the toxic combination of arrogance, narcissism and vanityIt could be a solution. The guy is clearly demented. The sooner he is stopped, the better.
He must be stopped, there's nothing else for it. But the thing is, I was only half joking. The senario I outlined is the logical conclusion of what I think is becoming increasingly apparent to most people: that there is something going on in Trump's head which cannot be entirely attributed to the toxic combination of arrogance, narcissism and vanity![]()
Shameless hacks who are trying to sell the idea of a party.Who gives a shit about the clothes politicians are wearing?
You have, and you're not alone. But whatever is Trump's issue I think it's been fed by years brain-laziness caused by indulgence and generally getting his own way with little or no resistance. I have no sympathy for him, only pity.I think I have mentioned before that some of his behaviours correlate well with those one often sees in patients with early dementia.
But the Senate will not vote today. They do, in fact, not assemble again until the 19th if I have understood things correctly.House:
221 yay
203 nay
Now the Senate. I just read:
To convict an accused, "the concurrence of two thirds of the [Senators] present" for at least one article is required. If there is no single charge commanding a "guilty" vote from two-thirds of the senators present, the defendant is acquitted and no punishment is imposed.
And I guess they're rounding up. Curious how many Senators turn up (if I understood well the House was not complete), then we know how many votes are needed.