I had an old school French professor in college who once said something like:
"You Americans are so bizarre. You will spend hundreds and thousands of dollars to pay for the privilege to lay on a couch and talk to a therapist. We know better in France. In France we go to Mass, we go into the confessional, we say what we feel bad about, the priest forgives us, and we're all better. For free!"
edit: was supposed to be under the therapy comment
I was an annual pass holder as late as February 2020 right when COVID hit. Hell, I went like 3 times in Feb 2020 and I think I caught COVID from a chinese tourist. [I only went to make my girlfriend happy because she has huge titties]
From one whose wife is a big titty haver (who also loves Disney), that is perhaps THE best reason to go to Disney. Going for kids is acceptable too.
Doležal. Holy crap she wrote a book called "In Full Color" and it gets rave reviews on Amazon.
And...her cross-listed categories are wikipedia are 🤡
Just a few:
"American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent" "Bisexual Feminists" "Impostors" "Transracial Activists"
And....drumroll...
"OnlyFans creators"
Oh I know! ObrienMustSuffer posted it as "NIMPH". I assumed it was a joke.
Unfortunately, I did a Rule 34 search. I will just say.. god damn furries ruin everything.
(And nothing wrong with being pedantic when right!)
Great cartoon!
Secrets of NIMPH, lol.
I don't get what your point is. Isn't it generally agreed that a higher % of men cheat? Are you going to say, yes, that'st true, but it's because of their evil feminist wives who forced them to it, and the men are not HAPPY to do it, therefore they are actually even more loyal to their families?
God, I think I just got a glimpse of the inner workings of Imp's mind.
My ideal would be Biden announcing he's running again, we get up right next to the primaries and Trump makes a big announcement about how he is going to go all out to support MAGA candidates, but that America deserves a presidential election that is NOT between two octogenarians, and he bows out.
Why not support Trump? Because for all the positives, he can't keep his fucking mouth shut. Most of the time that's good, but he causes a lot of his own problems. He comes across like a sore loser when he attacks Desantis.
Keffals seems like he should be hanging out ON kiwifarms. Autism. Check. Shitposting. Check. Terminally online. Check.
International Relations
If I had to bet, I would bet every single one of those majors is completely dominated by female students, with the exception of political science. Maybe journalism is more male too, I'm not sure.
So maybe this is mostly female regret about. higher ed, rather than specific major regret?
I've never actually gone on Rumble before... thx for the heads up.
Haha, I hear you about the blood pressure. I didn't watch ANYTHING in 2016. I was logged into World of Warcraft when chat started going wild, lol.
Maybe trying to get rid of suspected bot or inactive accounts?
I deleted my account years ago.
EDIT: I basically never used my account, but it got hacked at some point and followed like 1,000 people. Crazy.
It came back for me after a couple days of being down.
The other thing you can do is download a Tor Browser (e.g. Brave), connect to Tor, and just go to to main address (NOT an onion address). That seems to work.
Is there some unwritten rule that every internet forum gets taken over either by troons or stormfags?
We on the Right are plagued with traitors who switch sides. I wish we had a pack of idiots who just did whatever Thomas told them to do.
Yup. Another poster in this thread same the same thing. It is very disappointing. How many Stevens and Souters and Romneys and Liz Cheneys are we going to have to bear.
https://twitter.com/AdamSFeldman/status/1580303052430450688
Hilarious. The three left-wing women are the chattiest. Then Alito. Then Barrett. Finally, Thomas.
What I said in a second post. There are only a few "reliable" conservative justices. Thomas is rock solid in his jurisprudence. Alito is solid. Gorusch has some idiosyncracies, but he's pretty solid. Scalia was just about as perfect a justice as I could ask for.
Roberts? Kavanaugh? Barrett? Well..
Kenndy and O'Connor used to be known as a swing justices, who could, and often were, swayed by counter arguments.
A really solid, intellectual, and persuasive leftwing justice could easily make a habit of picking off Roberts, convincing Kavanaugh to go along with something, etc. We've seen this happen. Kagan DOES try this with Roberts.
Kagan's probably is that she's got to represent the intellectual left, while tempering two justices who are not intellectual and who are not interested in meeting with the other side of the bench.
Sotomayor and Ketanji are shitty justices. They're also not going to convince anyone who is balancing on the edge of an issue. This is one case where, imho, it's better to have firebrand idiots.
Sorry, but this is just cope. It doesn’t matter that they look stupid doing it, it matters that they have two dumbasses ruling on the law of the land and thereby curtailing people’s rights and increasing federal powers.
It's not a question of looking stupid while doing it, it's that if they were smarter, they could make more compelling arguments, maybe even peel off some of the weaker-willed conservatives (see Roberts, Kavanaugh, etc).
As it is, they are hardcore leftists and they don't make compelling legal arguments. Kagan is the one to watch out for.
I know some professors who love Sotomayor due to her politics but basically admit she's a complete fucking idiot.
Ketanji seems like a loudmouthed idiot too. The three most chatty justices are Ketanji, then Sotomayor, then Kagan. Ketanji speaks more than Sotomayor and Kagan combined.
Elena Kagan is a smart cookie and the core of the left wing bloc. I disagree with her almost always, but I actually find her likeable, funny, and intellectually honest in her positions.
Affirmative action is actually helping conservatives here. 2/3 of the left bloc, and the two clear affirmative action hires, are just not up to par with the intellectual requirements of the court.
Kia1 mods on the other site were getting ready for the ban hammer to come down after the first whispers of goobergaber started coming out.
Certainly much rarer, and the majority of the population of the south was absolutely poor whites who couldn't afford slaves.
A big chunk of my family comes from Appalachia since late 1700s/early 1800s. I did some genealogy work, read some old family diaries, etc. They lived rough, hard lives. One young man's diary talked about how when he woke up in some winter mornings in their house, the windows and walls were so poorly sealed that his sheets would be covered in a layer of snow. Another young girl was playing with her sister and they both got trampled by a (horse drawn) wagon. Her sister died. One man lost six brothers in three days of fighting at Gettysburg. Alcoholics. Starvation. Disease. Rough shit.
I found one reference to a slave in all the reading and genealogy I did (spanning ~100 years).
I've never understood those Kazar nutters. I mean, what's the point of their argument?
Almost all? I don't believe you, nor your footnote-less source. Name ten.
I'm not the OP, but Jewish merchants and plantation owners were disproportionate in terms of how many slaves they owned and how many ships they ran. "Almost all" is horse shit, but there were many.
As an example, the vice president of the Confederacy was Judah Benjamin.
Hah, there is a Wikipedia category "Jewish-American Slave Owners" though I imagine it needs fleshed out a bit.
Only a single digit percentage of people did
I don't know about that either. It was relatively common in the south to have a single house slave. The plantations we think of with 100s of slaves were very rare.
Not a bad joke, but since I was curious, also doesn't seem to be true.