I am Jack's utter lack of surprise
For which company?
Shitpost
Literally
If only there was something distinctive about him that would make it easier to track him in a crowd...
$18M, including the GoFundMe money, as i understand it
Oldie, but a goodie (and somewhat relevant here):
This makes me happy. Let him keep talking, getting the lime light.
The more he speaks, the dumber he looks and the more he's exposed as the moron he is.
He can't do that to our pledges.
Yeah! Only WE can do that to our pledges!!
Looks like we're gonna have to create a new word, boys...
...because I don't believe the English language currently includes a phrase that adequately expresses the combination of rage, exasperation, frustration plus urge to act that reading this news induces in me!
I never cease to be amazed at headlines that scream "never before seen" or "breaking news" or "shocking revelations" that grab my attention...
...only to realize my response is "meh - saw that days/weeks ago" on TDW
The attention span of the seemingly average person today is much too short to be swayed by something so trivial as, oh I don't know, just 200 years of tradition and precedent. /s
claims
Claimed. FTFY
Saint Kyle of Antioch shot three. No more. No less. Three shalt be the number he doth shot, and the number of the shooting was three. Four he did not shoot, nor either shot him two, excepting that he doth then proceed to three. Five was right out.
That's where you're wrong, kiddo
(finger guns)
Thanks Harry.
I feel bad for him, not gonna lie.
The hurt in that voice, the realization of what's coming, the recognition of his future... Not to mention the scooter (ouch). I see/hear someone that knows he's up against it, wants better for himself, but just doesn't see it happening. Ever.
Reading too much into a ten second clip? Probably.
Add 'em to the Pinochet Passenger List (PPL)!
Thank you!
That's exactly what I was looking for, right there:
History supports Republicans filling the seat. Doing so would not be in any way inconsistent with Senate Republicans’ holding open the seat vacated by Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016. The reason is simple, and was explained by Mitch McConnell at the time. Historically, throughout American history, when their party controls the Senate, presidents get to fill Supreme Court vacancies at any time — even in a presidential election year, even in a lame-duck session after the election, even after defeat. Historically, when the opposite party controls the Senate, the Senate gets to block Supreme Court nominees sent up in a presidential election year, and hold the seat open for the winner. Both of those precedents are settled by experience as old as the republic. Republicans should not create a brand-new precedent to deviate from them.
Serious (non-sarcastic) question for TDW: what was the justification for not moving forward with a hearing/vote on Garland, other than whoever's in control of the Senate controls the process?
I'm kind of okay with the "thems da rules, cupcake" argument (aka elections have consequences), but want to be careful. I don't want to be hypocritical when arguing with those reeeeeeeeing now. Especially because I don't want it thrown back at me years later if/when the Ds control the Senate.
President Obama was in his second term, and was on his way out of office, regardless (lame duck). Is that the basis for holding "advice and consent" for eleven months? Why not just have the vote (and deny the nomination) - was it as simple as "don't even risk it, since they didn't have to" ?
I'm not from Baltimore, I'm not black, I'm not a woman...
...but I feel inspiration flowing off the screen from Kim!
It will be interesting to watch this congressional race. There's no D incumbent now, so I really wonder if the people there will leave the plantation and put in a fresh face, new blood, or not.
Rule #1: Obey the Law
I know it's just a movie, but I think of this clip a lot and believe it to be pretty-much spot on
MIB There's always a threat