Still too scared to name the Marxists? What group is beyond criticism? Who owns the media, academia, and Hollywood?
To know who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize
Good night. God Bless
equal pay act of 1963
Equal pay on what? I don't think women should work in the first place
workplace discrimination
see above
workplace conduct legislature
see above
You also can’t possibly defend that not giving deserving women equal access to employment and income is not a form of oppression.
That's your opinion. If you believe working in a cubicle instead of taking care of children (what you've been doing since the start of human history) is freeing you from oppression, you do you.
Now knowing that you're a woman, I know that you'll start insulting me on my sex life. Save it and don't waste any more of my time
Basically, you're assuming that the founding fathers SHOULD have given women the right to vote but they didn't have the time to focus on that. No. I disagree. The founding fathers would be vehemently opposed to giving women the right to vote and I would agree with them.
No it's not chivalry. I've got a lot of stuff to do and I don't want to waste time
Should be male
Just stop your white knight charade. If you're looking for female attention, go on Tinder or wherever white knights go to
That's why the 19th ammendment should be repealed
Yeah I agree. The judge that Trump actually nominates should be male
ultimately the vision of the founding fathers is.
The founding fathers didn't want women to vote. What you're saying is a complete misrepresentation
I won't argue with you because you're a woman but if you are a feminist, I don't think many people here share your view
The Republicans have 51 senators (Romney and Murkowski are Democrats). So It's 51 vs 49. Susan Collins will probably vote no. So now its 50 vs 50. There is absolutely no room for error.
Fuck women's rights. Repeal the 19th ammendment
Do that after the election during the lame duck period
It's a fake nomination. The objective here is to fail.
Step 1) Nominate an illegal immigrant Latino
Step 2) Get Dems to attack him
Step 3) Pull his nomination
Step 4) You will get the Latino community's sympathy
Step 5) Then after, the election, nominate a young white male to be judge.
Female Latina Dreamer... 6d chess
We should nominate an illegal immigrant or a Dreamer. Remember: It's just a fake nomination. Get the Dems to attack him and then pull his nomination.
Not Latino enough. We need to get one who is an illegal immigrant.
Remember: This is just a fake nomination. The point is to get Democrats to attack him and then pull his nomination after. So that the Democrats will alienate Latinos.
It's to turn Latinos against blacks and the Democratic party. We can exploit the already existing tension between blacks and Latinos to suppress turnout and get them to vote for us.
Yes. This is Machiavellian. But if you want to win, we need to do this
The whole objective is to fail. After the Dems attack the Latino judge, Trump should pull his nomination and say he "failed". The Latino judge can make a speech about how the Dems viciously attacked him and he will gain the sympathy of the Latino community.
TO THE TRUMP TEAM:
NOMINATE A LATINO JUDGE.
IF THE DEMS ATTACK HIM, THEY WILL ALIENATE LATINOS.
4D CHESS
Edit: And the whole objective is to fail. After the Dems attack the Latino judge, Trump should pull his nomination and say he "failed". The Latino judge can make a speech about how the Dems viciously attacked him and he will gain the sympathy of the Latino community.
Read this part of my post
Edit: And the whole objective is to fail. After the Dems attack the Latino judge, Trump should pull his nomination and say he "failed". The Latino judge can make a speech about how the Dems viciously attacked him and he will gain the sympathy of the Latino community.
How good the judge is doesn't matter you fool. This is a ploy to get Trump re-elected.
I'm not Latino. This is the best strategy to get Trump re-elected