Yzermandius19

A bump stock doesn't turn a weapon into a full-auto, it simply allows you to pull the trigger faster, by pulling the trigger into your finger, still entirely semi-auto. Why don't you try learning something about guns before demanding they be banned out of ignorance and fear?

Not great, Don.

Not great, Bob.

Innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. Good luck with that lizard stuff Nefarious Banana.

He is appointing conservatives who will actually defend the bill of rights, including the tenth amendment. Originalists for the win. Like I say, Romney and McCain were more against gay rights, and abortion than Trump. Every Republican POTUS before Trump was more against gay rights and abortion than Trump, Trump is the most pro-gay rights, pro-Abortion POTUS the GOP has ever had.

Trump is more pro-gay rights than Romney or McCain. Your post does not refute that.

When you spend like a drunken sailor, tax cuts don't make you a fiscal conservative. Trump is more pro-Gay rights than Romney and McCain. Trump's position on abortion is also to the left of Romney and McCain's position. Like I said, Trump moved the Republicans to the left, especially on social issues. Trying to pretend Trump is some big social conservative just because social conservatives support him strongly, that is just factually incorrect.

Indeed, Trump supports banning bump stocks, here's hoping SCOTUS strikes that nonsense down.

Going bald ain't that bad, to some people it is, I don't really give a shit. Perhaps when more of it is gone, I'll care, but I kind of doubt it.

Seems to me there is pretty large gap between not being attracted to any black women and having jungle fever. /shrugs

Cardi B would a lot hotter if it weren't for the giant distracting tattoo's.

What about that Slovakian DJ chick in her thirties? What about young Marissa Tomei? What about Cardi B? Something tells me there is an exception or two to the over 40 thing.

Ageless wonder to boot, that's some good genes right there.

Less social conservatism, more fiscally liberal, less economic globalism. Trump is a New York Liberal who hijacked the Republican Party, he is to the left of Romney and McCain, not to their right.

Bernie has gone gun grabber too, every single one of the 2020 Dem nominees is a gun grabber. So is Trump for that matter, but the judges he has appointed are not gun grabbers, and will strike down any gun grabbing that Trump supporters that gets signed into law. Trump does not muse about eliminating free speech, and the judges he appoints don't either. If he tried to eliminate free speech, the judges he appointed would team up with the other Republican appointed judges and strike that shit down. This is why I prefer Republican appointed SOCTUS judges who don't believe in "hate speech" laws and "common sense" gun control being allowable under the first and second amendment, over Democrat appointed judges who do think that is a good idea.

Indeed, such a qt.

I said they moved towards the left with Donald Trump, nearer to the center, still on the right, while the Democrats moved to left, further away from center.

Being in the public eye changes nothing, that's even more reason not get fired for such a thing. You shouldn't only get to be in the public eye if no one gets offended by what you say. This lynching of people in the public eye for saying things people don't like is really stupid, enough of it already.

It's the right of the people to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed, not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

It's about protecting free speech and the right to bear arms mostly, those issues are far more important than abortion. If reversing Roe v. Wade happens, so be it, fine by me, but that reason is far down the list of reasons for preferring Republican appointed SCOTUS judges to Democrat appointed SCOTUS judges. I want Democrat politicians getting their speech banning and gun grabbing legislation shot down by the judiciary for as long of a stretch as possible, and the more Republican SCOTUS judges that need to be replaced for that to happen, the longer that stretch will last. The worst impulses of Democrat politicians are more important to constrain than the worst impulses of Republican politicians. If that changes and the Republicans want to start banning speech and guns and Democrats want to start appointing judges that protect those rights, the Republicans own appointed SCOTUS nominees from before that happened will strike that nonsense down too, and then I will want Democrats to be nominating SCOTUS judges at that point.

1) It being their call doesn't make it the right call. It can be their call and be the wrong call, and in this case, it clearly is a bad call. 2) It doesn't matter which side is subjected to the cancel culture, it's still lame regardless. People need to stop calling for other people to be fired because they didn't like something they said, it's stupid and petty.

Well duh, that doesn't mean it was the right call for Rogers to fire Don Cherry though. Just because they can, doesn't mean they should. It was not Don Cherry's comments that got him fired, it was the reaction of perpetually offended people who already hated him that got him fired. They caved to a vocal minority, because they are spineless.

I think it's pretty safe to say that if you uploaded a video of you saying exactly what Don Cherry said, you would not be fired.

Trump is vastly superior to Romney, especially in hindsight.

If they keep driving blacks and hispanics away, they might even starting losing ground in their urban cantonments too. They really are out to hang themselves by pandering to woke white twitter echo chamber while projecting their views on the rest of America.