Reply With Quote
AT GUNPOINT TOO, REMEMBER. Actually I think he's banging on my door right now with what sounds like the end of an M40 Rifle.
I dunno, must be because of all of the artillery he's going to need to steal our money for his election campaigns...
AT GUNPOINT TOO, REMEMBER. Actually I think he's banging on my door right now with what sounds like the end of an M40 Rifle.
Bernie why did you bring a bolt action?
It could happen! He is LITERALLY GOING TO FORCE US AT GUNPOINT to fund his campaign.
We'll be like, "But Mr. Sanders, I don't plan to vote for you!" And he'll be like, "Tough , Nancy, either fork over some cash for my yard signs or suck on the end of my Kalashnikov."
I knew you wouldn't be able to ignore me for long, I'm just so damn irresistible.
Berniesuckers deflecting from some more uncomfortable truths, I see. You guys are the Enrique stans of the Political Forum.
You flip flop more than DeAndre Jordan over abortion, Paulsucker.
Your boy's a warmonger. No different than Bush, tbh.
I love me some Counterpunch, but really? Now I've seen it all. This is why no libercuck arian has ever received more than 1% of the vote, much less come close to holding national office without disguising themselves as a racist Republican. At least Old Man Bernie got elected like 8 times as a self-acclaimed "socialist" (although he's nothing close to an actual socialist). Voters hate the CNs of this world, because they stand for nothing and everything at the same time. They have absolutely no morals. Whatever fits your agenda at that given moment, seize on it and pretend it is truth. One moment they are citing Counterpunch, the next they're pretending the Daily Caller and National Review are dropping truth bombs. It's the most idiotic, incoherent, and inconsistent "political movement" on the planet. Libercuck s are the stupidest people, and they cry in their pillow each night wondering why they've never gotten more that 1% of a vote. Ever.
gold standard
The CN's of the world are the least-potent, most meaningless voting block in the country yet think they are somehow influential or important
ing losers. All 10s of them.
Last edited by Splits; 08-05-2015 at 02:39 AM.
I love me some Counterpunch, but really? Now I've seen it all. This is why no libercuck arian has ever received more than 1% of the vote, much less come close to holding national office without disguising themselves as a racist Republican. At least Old Man Bernie got elected like 8 times as a self-acclaimed "socialist" (although he's nothing close to an actual socialist). Voters hate the CNs of this world, because they stand for nothing and everything at the same time. They have absolutely no morals. Whatever fits your agenda at that given moment, seize on it and pretend it is truth. One moment they are citing Counterpunch, the next they're pretending the Daily Caller and National Review are dropping truth bombs. It's the most idiotic, incoherent, and inconsistent "political movement" on the planet. Libercuck s are the stupidest people, and they cry in their pillow each night wondering why they've never gotten more that 1% of a vote. Ever.
The CN's of the world are the least-potent, most meaningless voting block in the country yet think they are somehow influential or important
ing losers. All 10s of them.
But to be fair, Sanders is socialist in many ways, certainly not revolutionary but in terms of sweeping social policies to create wealth equality and the reformation of capitalism he comes pretty close to what most would consider a modern day socialist.
Translation: you have no explanation for why Bernie Sanders is a chickenhawk, but you are butthurt that I linked to a site you normally agree with.
I love me some Counterpunch, but really? Now I've seen it all. This is why no libercuck arian has ever received more than 1% of the vote, much less come close to holding national office without disguising themselves as a racist Republican. At least Old Man Bernie got elected like 8 times as a self-acclaimed "socialist" (although he's nothing close to an actual socialist). Voters hate the CNs of this world, because they stand for nothing and everything at the same time. They have absolutely no morals. Whatever fits your agenda at that given moment, seize on it and pretend it is truth. One moment they are citing Counterpunch, the next they're pretending the Daily Caller and National Review are dropping truth bombs. It's the most idiotic, incoherent, and inconsistent "political movement" on the planet. Libercuck s are the stupidest people, and they cry in their pillow each night wondering why they've never gotten more that 1% of a vote. Ever.
The CN's of the world are the least-potent, most meaningless voting block in the country yet think they are somehow influential or important
ing losers. All 10s of them.
Splitcuck
Bernie and his history aren't perfect, but he's 1000% better than Hillary and the ridiculous Repug Billionaire's Klown Kar.
This is exactly why non-lawyers need to shut the up when it comes to like this. Reading posts on a web forum and skimming an article from an idiot **** law student (who doesn't even practice in this area, btw) really sheds no light on the topic.
The only way to answer this question is to do a 50 state survey of each state's rape shield laws, rules of evidence, and cases construing both the laws and the rules. That is incredibly time consuming. Like weeks worth of research to be done properly.
Moreover, the fact that there is precedent to challenge a judge's exclusion of evidence only means that there's grounds for a challenge -- it doesn't mean it'll be successful.
But really, the key reason why this is so ing re ed is that once the evidence is excluded and/or a guilty verdict reached, the damage is already done. Appellate rules create strong presumptions towards upholding jury verdicts. Meaning that even if there is a legitimate challenge, it is both possible and plausible that the challenge will be rejected regardless.
But hey slurper, you read some on the internet once from some **** who went to a law school that used to be a YMCA, so I guess that makes you an expert on things.
Since slurper is so obsessed with this point, that little get needs to do this work or shut his pussy ass mouth the up.
thanks for admitting it would take weeks of research to back up your bs.
lol blaming other posters for not doing your own homework.
not at all. Here's some VERY mixed support:
Bernie and the Sandernistas: Into the Void
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...+the+Headlines
we're at a weird political inflection point: the importance of national party committees has been eclipsed by SuperPACS, which are taking over campaigning and messaging for the candidates.
for two national cycles in a row, billionaire backers have propelled unviable candidates and prolonged the GOP circular firing squad in the primaries.
how is it not? we'll give you x millions of dollars if you do a, b, and c
some posters back hard spending caps and public funding for national elections to prevent arrogant billionaires and special interests from suborning the political process; other posters seem to think that's just as it should be...whoever has the most gold picks our candidates.
Well...
You post something from Common Dreams, and expect any intelligent person to click on it?
He's reading from Common Dreams.
He has no intelligent answer.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions