250 Years - Amazing

CHAN has degree in "Botany".
Botany business numba 10 failure.
Could not make profit selling legal reefer.
Brames government "regulation" (taxes).
CHAN crueless about profit margins.
BotanyChad has essentially become a ward of the state. Thus, he has lots of time on his hands to promote right-wing autocracy.
 
Imperfect from the get go.
Hopefully there are some educational programs on this. So many stupid fucking MAGAtards think we have never done anything wrong. And make it a crime to teach otherwise.
 
Last edited:
BotanyChad has essentially become a ward of the state. Thus, he has lots of time on his hands to promote right-wing autocracy.

LOL

I'm not for autocracy, you're just a histrionic Karen....probably projecting, you wouldn't have any problem with a single party Democrat state with a god like autocrat.....especially if they're brown, gay, trans and satanic.
 
LOL

I'm not for autocracy, you're just a histrionic Karen....probably projecting, you wouldn't have any problem with a single party Democrat state with a god like autocrat.....especially if they're brown, gay, trans and satanic.
I remember Pubs chanting "Four more years!" for Reagan in 1987. But if Obama had talked of a third term, no Dem in the country would have backed him.
 
That show in DC looked amazing.

I'm bro a huge fan of the Washington neon lights, but it's effective.

 
Well, less constitutional -- despite endless rhetoric on that point.
Well they aren't into subverting their own primary and installing candidates based on skin color and genitals like Democrats....or term limits.

All super democratic....far more so than Democrats have been for the last 15 years.
 
Well they aren't into subverting their own primary and installing candidates based on skin color and genitals like Democrats....or term limits.

All super democratic....far more so than Democrats have been for the last 15 years.
There was nothing in any way improper about Harris' nomination. Biden dropped out AFTER winning the primaries -- there is no precedent, or need, for holding a whole new round of primaries in such a situation -- there was nothing left to do but for the delegates pledged to Biden to choose someone else -- and that is what they did.

Remember, primary elections are not in the Constitution; strictly a matter of party rules.
 
There was nothing in any way improper about Harris' nomination.

I said undemocratic not improper.

Remember, primary elections are not in the Constitution; strictly a matter of party rules.

Sure.....still undemocratic.

Just like term limits....perfectly legal yes but still undemocratic.

Proper pro-democracy stance is anti-term limits and some sort of democratic process even if inside the party, convention style election to choose a candidate so it at least LOOKED legitimate. But no, the DEI candidate was just too hard to resist.
 
I said undemocratic not improper.



Sure.....still undemocratic. Just like term limits....perfectly legal yes but still undemocratic.
I suppose you could apply that word to any structural element that comes between the people's will and policy formation -- but above the level of an ancient Greek city-state, it is impossible to construct a republic without such elements.
 
I suppose you could apply that word to any structural element that comes between the people's will and policy formation

No I'm not a direct democracy absolutist.

Representative democracy is valid democracy.

Denying the will of the people outright and installing a DEI puppet is anti-democratic.

Telling people they can't have the candidate they want (tem limits) is irrifutably anti-democratic.

-- but above the level of an ancient Greek city-state, it is impossible to construct a republic without such elements.

Funny you can't grasp that concept when it comes to citizenship or ID requirements. :D
 
I remember Pubs chanting "Four more years!" for Reagan in 1987. But if Obama had talked of a third term, no Dem in the country would have backed him.

So you're saying pubs are more democratic than democrats??

Well, less constitutional -- despite endless rhetoric on that point.

No, you didn't. He meant that Dems are not unconstitutional titty babies and wouldn't try to even think of a 3rd term, you extra chromosome having muppet.
 
Back
Top