BigRedBuster Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 5 minutes ago, Archy1221 said: She might have a perjury charge in her future. JK…that’s not even a thing anymore it seems Republicans are proving they're nothing but political hack idiots with the questioning. 2 1 2 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said: Republicans are proving they're nothing but political hack idiots with the questioning. I think this was the reasoning behind the question. This appointee is a political hack idiot. 2 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 12 minutes ago, Archy1221 said: I think this was the reasoning behind the question. This appointee is a political hack idiot. I know. But, the fact they don't even really want her to answer questions proves they are just there to make a political statement and not actually find something out. It's political show and that's it. Case in point. He really doesn't want her to answer or speak because she might ruin his agenda. Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said: I know. But, the fact they don't even really want her to answer questions proves they are just there to make a political statement and not actually find something out. It's political show and that's it. Case in point. He really doesn't want her to answer or speak because she might ruin his agenda. Unfortunately almost every appointee hearing is a partisan s#!t show. Look no further than the recent SCOTUS appointee hearings. They have been disgraceful the past 10-12 years. 1 1 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 15, 2023 Share Posted February 15, 2023 20 hours ago, JJ Husker said: I understand that but if a person doesn’t have a wang, they have no business using a urinal. I really don’t understand how halting the use of urinals solves anything unless the wrong sex is attempting to use one and the only way I see that coming about is a gender identity issue. I mean my initial comment was an attempt at humor but really, what is fixed by halting the use of urinals? Tired of this stupid s#!t. It’s like idiocracy and our society seems to have forgotten how easy it is to use a restroom correctly. I agree. I'm pointing out that the people getting rid of urinals because of "gender identity" don't really know what they are talking about. 2 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 15, 2023 Share Posted February 15, 2023 5 hours ago, Archy1221 said: She might have a perjury charge in her future. JK…that’s not even a thing anymore it seems This is one of the silliest attempts at a gotcha. Note the present tense of the verb "watch". Her watching MSNBC 12 years ago is not at all the same as she watches MSNBC today. 2 1 Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted February 15, 2023 Share Posted February 15, 2023 8 minutes ago, RedDenver said: I agree. I'm pointing out that the people getting rid of urinals because of "gender identity" don't really know what they are talking about. Oh yeah, I agree with that. Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted February 15, 2023 Share Posted February 15, 2023 Mary Trump…..how it started How it’s going (not sure how to edit the f word so if it needs moved I apologize) 2 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted February 16, 2023 Share Posted February 16, 2023 Not going along with the “everything is racist” crowd equals being called Uncle Tom by the clown world. Well done Jonesy 1 1 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted February 16, 2023 Share Posted February 16, 2023 Not sure where to put this but since Feinstein is a Dem, I thought this would be the best place to post this. However, this applies to Dem and Republican. How old does one have to be before they are required to take a competency test (1) President (looking at both Trump and Biden and even Ronald Reagan's later years) (2) Serving in Congress in either the House or the Senate (3) Supreme Court My former Okla Senator Inhofe was 88 years old before he retired last year. He seemed to be in decent cognitive shape for his age and was still flying small aircraft. But Feinstein seems to be well beyond usefulness in the Senate. We have roles in all 3 branches of govt in which those who serve must be at the top of their game to perform and make decisions on behalf of the citizens. There have been others in similar situations in years past. I know it is/was a hot topic regarding both the 2020 & 2024 presidential elections. Ronald Reagan used it for his advantage in 1984 against Mondale in his famous debate joke, but by 1986/7 he was showing decline. So, it isn't a joking matter. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/baffled-dianne-feinstein-walks-out-of-senate-chamber-wondering-what-just-happened-did-i-vote-for-that/ar-AA17wMmL?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=54e4905ece6040d28cf81659a7c831a7 Quote Dianne Feinstein didn't seem to know what took place on the Senate floor Wednesday morning. The retiring California Democrat asked staff for confirmation about a vote she had just attended. The latest flash of apparent confusion comes as Feinstein plans to serve out her term through 2024. Sen. Dianne Feinstein emerged from the Senate chamber on Wednesday seemingly confused about what she had done during a two-vote series. "Did I vote for that?" Insider overheard the California Democrat ask her long-time chief of staff, David Grannis, about approving a judicial nominee to the federal bench. Grannis, who had just finished explaining to his 89-year-old boss that the six Senate votes scheduled throughout the day would be on Biden appointees, shook his head and said, "No." The most jarring part about the public episode was that Grannis was trying to map out what Feinstein — whose cognitive ability has increasingly come into question — needed to know about what was happening later, but she couldn't recall what had transpired minutes before. 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted February 16, 2023 Share Posted February 16, 2023 2 minutes ago, TGHusker said: Not sure where to put this but since Feinstein is a Dem, I thought this would be the best place to post this. However, this applies to Dem and Republican. How old does one have to be before they are required to take a competency test (1) President (looking at both Trump and Biden and even Ronald Reagan's later years) (2) Serving in Congress in either the House or the Senate (3) Supreme Court My former Okla Senator Inhofe was 88 years old before he retired last year. He seemed to be in decent cognitive shape for his age and was still flying small aircraft. But Feinstein seems to be well beyond usefulness in the Senate. We have roles in all 3 branches of govt in which those who serve must be at the top of their game to perform and make decisions on behalf of the citizens. There have been others in similar situations in years past. I know it is/was a hot topic regarding both the 2020 & 2024 presidential elections. Ronald Reagan used it for his advantage in 1984 against Mondale in his famous debate joke, but by 1986/7 he was showing decline. So, it isn't a joking matter. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/baffled-dianne-feinstein-walks-out-of-senate-chamber-wondering-what-just-happened-did-i-vote-for-that/ar-AA17wMmL?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=54e4905ece6040d28cf81659a7c831a7 Charles Grassley. 89 years old and still in the Senate. He shouldn't be. Where are the voters in this? Why can't the local/state party's find someone younger to beat them? On a totally flip side of this. If the government could put in a law that to serve in certain capacities, you have to be under a certain age, why can't I do that with my company? Or....why can't I tell someone when they reach a certain age that..."It's time for you to retire"? The way it is, you have to tiptoe around the subject just hoping someone doesn't turn around and sue you for age discrimination. The fact is, the vast majority of Americans that are lucky enough to live to be old, reach a point they should not be doing their jobs anymore. Many, try their best to hang on as absolutely as long as possible putting everyone in an awkward position. Politicians are no different. Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted February 16, 2023 Share Posted February 16, 2023 The San Francisco Chronicle made Feinstein's plan to not run for reelection in 2024 the big front-page story, celebrating her long career and handicapping the chances of the big name Democrats who got a head start by announcing their candidacies over the last few weeks. I think someone still needs to step in and suggest that Dianne retire now and avoid nearly two more years of this awkwardness and uncertainty. It's not good for the Senate, for Feinstein, for the Party or for America. Obviously a Democrat would take her place, but I'm guessing there's a ton of CA Dem infighting about this and they might prefer to nurse her along as a feeble emeritus rather than have Newsom appoint his second replacement Senator. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted February 16, 2023 Share Posted February 16, 2023 6 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said: The San Francisco Chronicle made Feinstein's plan to not run for reelection in 2024 the big front-page story, celebrating her long career and handicapping the chances of the big name Democrats who got a head start by announcing their candidacies over the last few weeks. I think someone still needs to step in and suggest that Dianne retire now and avoid nearly two more years of this awkwardness and uncertainty. It's not good for the Senate, for Feinstein, for the Party or for America. Obviously a Democrat would take her place, but I'm guessing there's a ton of CA Dem infighting about this and they might prefer to nurse her along as a feeble emeritus rather than have Newsom appoint his second replacement Senator. As a party, I would think they would want this. Newsome could put a Dem in and the incumbent is probably going to win the next election. So, Dems would probably keep the seat. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted February 16, 2023 Share Posted February 16, 2023 1 hour ago, TGHusker said: Not sure where to put this but since Feinstein is a Dem, I thought this would be the best place to post this. However, this applies to Dem and Republican. How old does one have to be before they are required to take a competency test (1) President (looking at both Trump and Biden and even Ronald Reagan's later years) (2) Serving in Congress in either the House or the Senate (3) Supreme Court My former Okla Senator Inhofe was 88 years old before he retired last year. He seemed to be in decent cognitive shape for his age and was still flying small aircraft. But Feinstein seems to be well beyond usefulness in the Senate. We have roles in all 3 branches of govt in which those who serve must be at the top of their game to perform and make decisions on behalf of the citizens. There have been others in similar situations in years past. I know it is/was a hot topic regarding both the 2020 & 2024 presidential elections. Ronald Reagan used it for his advantage in 1984 against Mondale in his famous debate joke, but by 1986/7 he was showing decline. So, it isn't a joking matter. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/baffled-dianne-feinstein-walks-out-of-senate-chamber-wondering-what-just-happened-did-i-vote-for-that/ar-AA17wMmL?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=54e4905ece6040d28cf81659a7c831a7 I agree there should be some age limits and competency thresholds but sad fact is that the electorate is failing us. People voting should be able to remedy these situations and they continuously fail to do so. Unfortunately the people get exactly what they vote for. In an ideal situation people like Feinstein, Biden, Trump etc. would be precluded from running. We are so far from an ideal situation on so many fronts it isn’t funny. We need term limits and age limits. I won’t even get into competency and decency limits. Link to comment
Recommended Posts