uncool2pillow

So good!

No reason? Are you not familiar with one of the most sound and ancient of all legal principles?!? Finders keepers?!? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And it's the same crazies.

I like Kasich, but yeah, not cool. In my experience, the best way to spread so-called Judeo-Christian values is to quietly live them.

I honestly don't dispute that you honestly feel that way. I just doubt that this forum would be as replete with condemnations if the shoe was on the other foot. Imagine if RBG had died in February 2008 and Schumer and other Democrats said they didn't want Bush to tip the balance of the court with yet another conservative nominee. Maybe you can imagine outrage being expressed on by the same people on this board currently condemning the Republicans. But I will say it again. I find it implausible.

Because I am skeptical that the mostly left-leaning membership of this forum would be devoting so much time and energy to condemning a Democratic Senate for taking a similar course of action, which they most certainly would if the shoe was on the other foot. I find it simply implausible.

I will take you at your word. I tend to view myself as a political moderate. If I were very liberal or conservative I could see myself being very worried about an opposition president making a lifetime appointment so late in their term. I can understand, but not justify Schumer in 2007 or the Republicans today. Especially considering how big of a swing this makes in the court's alignment. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quick question: Was Schumer a petty bullshit artist in 2007? If so, would you be as angry about it? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And, as my above post confirms, exactly what Chuck Shumer wanted to do in July of 2007, seven months earlier in Bush's term. Not saying either side is right, but Schumer's comments this weekend are absolutely hypocritical. So fucking tired of this two-party system.

Bwahahaha!! http://www.politico.com/story/2007/07/schumer-to-fight-new-bush-high-court-picks-005146

Not defending the Senate, but they get a say in this. If they want to obstruct, that is their right. Then it becomes the right of the electorate to hold them accountable. I've never not voted for Charles Grassley, but he's losing it recently, sounding a lot more like a FoxNews drone than the independent voice he used to. If he goes along with this obstruction (and I fully expect him to) he will most likely lose my vote. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fair point there.

And yet those liberals who knew him the best valued his friendship.

Scalia was smart and had a biting wit. The fact that he was good friends with Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg should tell us something about him personally. Now if I were Obama, I would fulfill my constitutional obligation by nominating a moderate just to date the Republicans to obstruct. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Glad to see I was wrong about Space Oddity. I really figure that was going to be just for NYC since it didn't come out at the beginning of the tour.

I am a guitar god polytheist. My pantheon includes: Richard Thompson Bob Mould Eric Clapton Charlie Christian Django Reinhardt Nels Cline Buddy Guy Keith Richards Neil Young Jimi Hendrix and lots more Maybe more than in all of Hinduism.

I suspect they're doing it specifically for the NYC audience, but I hope you get to hear it.

Invited some friends over for the game. At first, they said they probably couldn't make it. Last night, they said they would. House is a mess, wife's a bit pissed. Oh well, there will be IPAs, chili, and football. All will be well by 5:30 PM CST. Oh, and go BRONCOS!! Though I'd be happy for Jared Allen if the Panthers win.

@Wilco retweeted Relix Magazine's article with one of the videos posted here embedded. Maybe it's time to reconsider the policy.

Random enforcement of the rules is what makes this place exciting.

Or Presidents Carter, Bush (43) and Obama. Are they predictive? No. Meaningless? Hell no. I am, of course, biased. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Trump did not fuck up his concession speech the way I hoped/believed he could. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think most anyone who doesn't currently support Clinton doesn't want to support Clinton. There will be exceptions. I suppose there's polling on this, but it just seems like Clinton is such a known quantity that her support isn't going to grow.

The thing about the Democratic Caucuses is that in each candidate, a candidate has to be "viable" to receive votes. That means if they don't have 15% of the room, then their supporters have to move to another candidate. I tend to think more O'Malley supporters will break for Sanders than for Clinton. O'Malley's numbers suggest that he won't be viable in most precincts. Could be good news for Sanders. The Republicans just vote on a ballot, no viability or anything. Trumps numbers seem to be back on the way up, but it will be interesting to see if people actually vote for him in the numbers h