If I was the governor, I’d order the state police to arrest them immediately and, if there’s any resistance, shoot the fuckers.

If only Mitch McConnell would do the same, we can but pray that his demise will be long, painful, and very permanent. 

If only I could...

it’s the status quo. a few really rich people have a really nice setup going on and they’d appreciate it if you didn’t fuck it up for them.

I don’t see any reason to be skittish about locking them up. If there is a law on the books allowing for this, it seems to me they would simply be applying basic law and order principles in expecting that these principled conservatives to accept some personal responsibility.

A little different though - as the bills you mention were basically Republican attacks on fair elections. This is just the GOP sticking it’s head in the sand about climate change again. 

So, the TLDR is that essentially in Oregon, you need a supermajority of >= 66% (20 out 30 total senators) to pass new legislation if the minority are strongly enough opposed to it.

I guarantee you that the petition writers are gonna point to the fact that there’s no second season as proof it worked.

bitch-ass shitgrinning motherfuckers.

When Texas Democrats left the state to avoid allowing a ramrod vote approving even more gerrymandering just one year after Texas districts were already gerrymandered, I supported it. Legislators running from an actual vote is just slimy.

It’s spetacularly dumb that they got the wrong company, but to me what’s even dumber is asking Amazon (or, you know, whoever) to “cancel” it. As if it were an ongoing show that we might see more of, rather than a limited 6-episode series that was released all at once, has already been viewed by millions of people…

If I refuse to show up to do my job, I get fired. It doesn’t matter if I agree with or like the work I’m being given. I either do what I’m there to do or I quit. Why should elected or appointed positions be any different? Once again we have yet ANOTHER example of rules being applicable to one group and not another.

Seriously. Warren has the specifics on her policy/proposals/platforms in a way that Bernie didn’t even when he was still refusing to accept defeat in 2016. It has impressed a LOT of people.

This is not a new tactic, but one I am more used to Democrats using. In addition to the 2001 incident mentioned in the article, Democratic legislators fled Texas in 2003 to deny a quorum to vote on a redistricting bill. In 2011, Democratic lawmakers left Wisconsin to block an anti-union bill.

It’s like they should leave for their refusal to do their fucking jobs.

I have always been of the opinion that conservatism and modern republicanism are little more than institutionalized cowardice.  They behave like spoiled children, running away rather than face situations that make them uncomfortable.

So why did he devolve to these old tropes? Why could he not speak on policy differences, or style, or their records on voting in the senate?

He is correct that people are only preferring her because of her femaleness and her fresh youthful 69 years (the oldest woman running?) Not because of any intrinsic virtue of hers as a candidate? For real?

If there’s one absolute truth you can count on, it’s that an internet profile with an anime avatar who also uses the term “cultural Marxism” is going to have some pretty important and insightful things to say about feminism.  That’s just borne out by experience.  

we found the incel!