KaskadskyjKozak

Welcome DC. Stick around a while. :-)

The reason for the large sq footage specified this time is that last time a similar initiative was proposed the opposition said that allowing for sales of hard liquor at hundreds, even thousands, of small stores would promote teen drinking and abuse and make it impossible to control such businesses. So arguing now that 10,000 square feet excludes too many businesses, well, it's retarded.

Just squeeking that ballot in under the wire, eh Sobo?

I see "Garmin". Apparently, personalization software is choosing the banner to display...

Still reading my posts despite claims to be "done"... you are so full of shit, but no surprises there. Why don't you go back to impressing us with all your "work" for the ACLU, how "smart" you are and all you "do" for us. We are sooo impressed.

And how much time have you been spending in downtown LA, Prole? A fair bit, as a matter of fact. Which In-N-Out are you working at?

To me, the issue here is that demagoguery is filling the vacuum left by the New Democrats' devastatingly failed consensus with neoliberal policy. Those "low-information voters" got that way because they've been left to twist in the wind of disinvestment, unplanned globalization and the like. The draw isn't demagoguery per se, it's a cohesive narrative that seems to hold together for people trying to make sense of their circumstances. The enduring failure of Obama's presidency (if you read him as an earnest but stymied reformer) is the inability to craft a strong narrative that not only draws on the real and enduring successes of labor, civil rights, New Deal movements and call into question the failed policies of his predecessors in his own party (hello Glass-Stegall, hello Greenspan, hello NAFTA). People are still looking for an "outsider", and apparently can't stoop low enough to find one, because the one who said he was going to make a real systemic break with the past has done no such thing in terms of policy or rhetoric. What, two occurrences of "narrative" and no "meme"? For shame! Gawd your libtard-babblespeak is a joke.

Personhood at concepton? Ha! You've lived more than 50 years and still haven't attained personhood.

Funny, I never thought of whining incessantly on a climbing forum as "working on shit"...

And how much time have you been spending in downtown LA, Prole?

"Proof" by assertion.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67808.html#ixzz1d4skzx4o Bennet sure has a lot more class than the typical cc.com conservatard conservatory. Allegations against a republican? DEFEND FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER!!!! He also points out libtard hypocrisy on this matter - which is fucking enormous.

Guess you libtards "won" that argument! You convinced us all! Good job! Nope, you "lost" that one all by yourselves: Try to follow along, moron.

Guess you libtards "won" that argument! You convinced us all! Good job! More love from the left.

it's so cute when j_bot tries to be funny

On the contrary! Keep it up - there nothing more entertaining than your incoherent babbling!

Now you sound like j_bot. I don't know whether you ever expressed support for the war on drugs but I do know that you are a warmonger who pushed to attack Iraq, a free market fundamentalist who didn't oppose Bush's budget busting policies, and a far right wing extremist who likes to paint those who propose social policies to offset the effects of invasive commercialism as totalitarians or commies. In short, pretty much anything I ever said about you and that you somehow keep denying despite your hundreds of post that confirm everything I just said. You have the intellectual integrity of a sewer. Thanks for exemplifying the tactics and style I was referring to.

speaking of gropers...

so, does this mean you are no longer on the Cain Train?

...and repetition is the other. Doesn't work on smart people, though. Yeah, you were so smart, you thought Edwards was a "good man"

and you realize that often people pay out settlements or plea guilty just to make the process end... of course you do...

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."

And I know that the difference between allegations and actual conviction don't matter much to today's ACLU fuck Then you probably also know that 'convictions' only apply to criminal proceedings, not lawsuits (as in the case of sexual harassment), and that 'allegations' are accusations, not reporting of past events. You mentioned "legality". So, there were "accusations" and these were settled. Now, 20 years later, those who took the cash out are suddenly changing their mind. Yeah, nothing muddy at all about that.

Which is not realistic, as we've seen played out with Barry. At least he was a senator for a couple of years - he would have been better served to complete a term or two before running, however.