Jabari Bird Arrested for Assault in Brighton

15,974 Views | 180 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by GMP
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dear Concord: I have to restrain myself. Every time I start talking about Bonny & Clyde I get into trouble
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JB shows just how intelligent he is by being guarded about the situation (unlike those proclaiming Kavanaugh's innocence).

https://www.google.com/amp/s/celticswire.usatoday.com/2018/09/25/jaylen-brown-comments-on-jabari-bird-allegations/amp/
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dear Barrister: Just a reminder. This is America. People are presumed innocent until PROVEN GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. i hope you were sitting down when you received this news bulletin.
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

Dear Barrister: Just a reminder. This is America. People are presumed innocent until PROVEN GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. i hope you were sitting down when you received this news bulletin.
This is not a criminal proceeding
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dear Yogi: When they taught Civics in the fourth grade, you obviously skipped the entire year. Please put down your comic books and read 1984. Then read the Constitution. Then--read it again. Then read the Federalist papers. You've heard of jury nullification????This is an attempt at voter nullification. If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The common thread is both matters involve abuse of women. In one case, one of the alleged assailant's best friends, Jaylen Brown, refuses to proclaim the innocence of his friend until all the facts are on the table. In the other matter, the entire Republican Party is proclaiming Kavanaugh innocent before all the facts are on the table. Thus Jaylen Brown is an intelligent and fair minded person while Republicans are partisan hacks willing to put their agenda above the rule of law as well as the country.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

Dear Yogi: When they taught Civics in the fourth grade, you obviously skipped the entire year. Please put down your comic books and read 1984. Then read the Constitution. Then--read it again. Then read the Federalist papers. You've heard of jury nullification????This is an attempt at voter nullification. If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.
I'm dying to know how you feel 1984 and the Federalist Papers are relevant to what's happening to Judge Kavanaugh. Please feel to elaborate.

As for the Constitution, everything that's going on is following the Constitution so I don't know what point you're trying to make here, but feel free to elaborate on that as well.

Since voters don't vote in Supreme Court justices, there is no voter nullification going on here.
mikecohen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

Dear Yogi: When they taught Civics in the fourth grade, you obviously skipped the entire year. Please put down your comic books and read 1984. Then read the Constitution. Then--read it again. Then read the Federalist papers. You've heard of jury nullification????This is an attempt at voter nullification. If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.
Speaking of voter nullification, read "Cyberwar: How Russian Hackers and Trolls Helped Elect a PresidentWhat We Don't, Can't, and Do Know," by Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a professor of communications at the University of Pennsylvania, dares to askand even attempts to answerwhether Russian meddling had a decisive impact in 2016. Jamieson offers a forensic analysis of the available evidence and concludes that Russia very likely delivered Trump's victory.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mikecohen said:

helltopay1 said:

Dear Yogi: When they taught Civics in the fourth grade, you obviously skipped the entire year. Please put down your comic books and read 1984. Then read the Constitution. Then--read it again. Then read the Federalist papers. You've heard of jury nullification????This is an attempt at voter nullification. If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.
Speaking of voter nullification, read "Cyberwar: How Russian Hackers and Trolls Helped Elect a PresidentWhat We Don't, Can't, and Do Know," by Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a professor of communications at the University of Pennsylvania, dares to askand even attempts to answerwhether Russian meddling had a decisive impact in 2016. Jamieson offers a forensic analysis of the available evidence and concludes that Russia very likely delivered Trump's victory.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/01/how-russia-helped-to-swing-the-election-for-trump/amp
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

Yeah just like every Democrat came out in support of Al Franken when he sexually harassed women decades ago and totally didn't pressure him into resigning or anything.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

You've heard of jury nullification????This is an attempt at voter nullification.
Two words for you: Merrick Garland.
Civil Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concernedparent said:

helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

Yeah just like every Democrat came out in support of Al Franken when he sexually harassed women decades ago and totally didn't pressure him into resigning or anything.

Except that the Franken accusers actually had corroborating evidence. Maybe Bubba v. Jones, Broaddrick and Willey is a better example?
mikecohen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civil Bear said:

concernedparent said:

helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

Yeah just like every Democrat came out in support of Al Franken when he sexually harassed women decades ago and totally didn't pressure him into resigning or anything.

Except that the Franken accusers actually had corroborating evidence. Maybe Bubba v. Jones, Broaddrick and Willey is a better example?
Unfortunately, the evidence against Franken turned out to be a lot weaker and more compromised than the testimony by Dr. Ford
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Chapman_is_Gone said:


Actually, what you see is a result of this message board having really poor tools in terms of quoting/editing/etc. The first pass at my post got messed up and the result made it appear that what I wrote was part of your quote...my attempt to fix the issue resulted in what is shown, with the original quote and my typing all appearing in the same greyed-out box. Life is too short to try to fix it a second time.


Is this supposed to be an apology? You are going to blame what you did to me issuing a false statement, false because I never made it, and publishing it under my name, as though I had written and published it on the tools available to us on the Bear Insider to reply to another poster on a blog, is lame. Oh, I understand and agree that the tools are not easy to use for the uninitiated (they take time to learn), but what prevented you from removing or editing your post? I see where you did edit it once. You insult someone, and you want us to believe that your "life is too short to try and fix it a second time"? Well, I'm sorry that you have time to unintentionally insult me but don't have time to fix your mistake. In that case, I guess you also did not have time to apologize. If it had been me, I would have tried like hell to fix my error, no matter how long it took. If I still failed, then you can bet your season ticket I would have apologized to you.

Quote:

All your other conspiracy BS is comical, though, like I have time or interest in my life to try to frame you.


My "conspiracy BS." What the hell does that mean? For your information, according to Mr. Webster, a conspiracy requires at least two people "to make a secret agreement to conspire to commit a crime or unlawful act." Where did I accuse you of having a partner or co-conspirator in your attack on me? Words mean things. I guess you skipped English 1A at Cal.

Quote:

I'd ask for an apology if I actually cared what you think of me.


You are thinking of asking me for an apology? Boy, is that rich. You have some serious cojones, my friend. So you didn't like my reaction to your post? How did you expect I would react to your post? I took your post the only way any reasonable person would take it as a personal attack, and a mean and devious one. I won't apologize anything I said in response, unless you apologize for your original post and mistake first.

Quote:

Everyone can see you were the one who brought up the topic of lynching...let me give you a tip, old man: not a good idea when discussing a black man.


I did not bring up "lynching" in general, nor did I bring it up as a "topic". I mentioned only "vigilante lynching" and that was in reference to many in the old West who were rushed to judgment by vigilance committees, and hung before any verdict or sentence was imposed by a court of law. You missed that word, "vigilante" I guess, when you read my post. Or maybe you don't know the word. Again, Webster's Dictionary is a valuable resource. There is a big difference between a vigilante lynching and the lynching of blacks in the post-Civil War era and beyond by Democrat paramilitary groups like the KKK, the White League in Louisiana, and the Red Shirts of the Carolinas. These bad boys usually lynched blacks not for breaking laws like stealing a horse, but for simply being black, to strike fear into the population. And one of the most prevalent questions they asked these blacks was, "Will you be voting Republican?" Or "Are you a Republican?" And they lynched them usually for being or voting Republican, not for any crime. It did not stop there. The Tuskegee Institute did a study on lynching and found records of a few thousand lynchings of blacks, and they also found that these groups lynched 1,297 white Republicans, so this sordid practice was not confined to black victims. Lynchings, both political, racial, and vigilante, were carried out against Indians, and against Mexican, Chinese, and Italian immigrants, as well as blacks and whites. So lynching does not apply just to blacks. In any case, my use of the term "vigilante lynching" referred to victims accused or convicted of crimes against the law. I don't appreciate your tip as to when I should or should not discuss lynching. My tip to you would be to read posts more carefully, and use a dictionary. I do. Or I try to.

Quote:

And I did no embellishing or dramatizing... everything I wrote came from press accounts.


You did embellish and dramatize further what you took from the press accounts. Here is one of your efforts, with those parts in bold:

"I do agree, though, that it does take a certain mental fortitude to be able to choke a woman to the point of her nearly blacking out, to let her recover, and then to return to the well by doing it again, and again, and again..."

I would also point out we are getting the victim's story by 3rd generation or 3rd hand hearsay. We are reading a story written by a reporter, who in turn listened to a story told by a police spokesperson, who in turn had heard or read a story given to him or her by police detectives, who in turn who listened to a story told by the alleged victim. When a story is told from one person to another several times, what are the odds that the story has not been changed or embellished unintentionally? We also have been given a written statement by Jabari Bird and his plea of "Not Guilty" in court. That is all we have as direct evidence. We need to hear the complaint in full in court, and the court needs to hear the story directly from the participants, if they testify, and from witnesses who are called.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civil Bear said:

concernedparent said:

helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

Yeah just like every Democrat came out in support of Al Franken when he sexually harassed women decades ago and totally didn't pressure him into resigning or anything.

Except that the Franken accusers actually had corroborating evidence. Maybe Bubba v. Jones, Broaddrick and Willey is a better example?

The use of the word "corroboration" is very misleading to lay people. There is a jury instruction that says a fact may be proven by the testimony of one credible witness. No "corroboration" required. There is another jury instruction that states If a witness is shown knowingly to have testified falsely about any material matter, you have a right to distrust such witness' other testimony and you may reject all the testimony of that witness or give it such credibility as you may think it deserves. Thus, since Dr. Ford is a credible witness, her testimony alone is enough to establish the sexual assault. The finder of fact could reasonably conclude that Kavanaugh's testimony was untruthful with regard to numerous material facts and thus all his testimony can and should be rejected. Oh, and the fact Kavanaugh is lying in itself corroborates Dr. Ford's testimony.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/2018/09/28/heres-where-kavanaughs-sworn-testimony-was-misleading-or-wrong/
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
blungld
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

Dear Yogi: When they taught Civics in the fourth grade, you obviously skipped the entire year. Please put down your comic books and read 1984. Then read the Constitution. Then--read it again. Then read the Federalist papers. You've heard of jury nullification????This is an attempt at voter nullification. If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.
Ingest this answer and then wipe the talking point from your mind. You are completely wrong that every Democrat would vote for him if it were switched. You are projecting your belief that this is a game and all politics and that there are no real values here. We actually care about the accusation and on that basis we do not believe him or that he is a good choice for the Court. Okay. Did you hear that?. Did it sink in? You are wrong.

This is so frustrating. Republicans think that everyone else is capable of doing the same dirty tricks and thinks so unabashedly about power as they do. So they never trust the sincerity or good intention of anyone else. Democrats aren't saints, but on many many issues they come from the right place.

Yes, you are right that most Democrats did not want him on the Court before the accusations for his partisan nature and the damage they think he will do by not checking the abuse of power by the WH. They ALSO don't want him on the Court for his personal attributes like temperament and past behavior.

There is no well-reasoned reason after all that has happened that this man should be appointed. That is just stubborn and ignoring what has been displayed. Republicans can find a suitable replacement in a non-confrontational way, and God forbid maybe even take into consideration what over 50% of the country wants.
Civil Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blungld said:

helltopay1 said:

Dear Yogi: When they taught Civics in the fourth grade, you obviously skipped the entire year. Please put down your comic books and read 1984. Then read the Constitution. Then--read it again. Then read the Federalist papers. You've heard of jury nullification????This is an attempt at voter nullification. If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

This is so frustrating. Republicans think that everyone else is capable of doing the same dirty tricks and thinks so unabashedly about power as they do. So they never trust the sincerity or good intention of anyone else. Democrats aren't saints, but on many many issues they come from the right place.

I hate to break it to you, but the exact same frustration is felt by righties, but with "republicans" and "democrats" reversed.
Civil Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mikecohen said:

Civil Bear said:

concernedparent said:

helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

Yeah just like every Democrat came out in support of Al Franken when he sexually harassed women decades ago and totally didn't pressure him into resigning or anything.

Except that the Franken accusers actually had corroborating evidence. Maybe Bubba v. Jones, Broaddrick and Willey is a better example?
Unfortunately, the evidence against Franken turned out to be a lot weaker and more compromised than the testimony by Dr. Ford
Wrong. With Franken there were photographs and an admission of guilt. With Dr. Ford there is zero verifiable evidence. In fact, every witness she named could not recall being at the party. She can't even recall when it was, where it was, or even how she got there.

So with Bubba and his accusers, er excuse me, survivors, which Dems petitioned for him to step down?
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mr. cohen. Please. and, while you are at, please look up the word Integrity at home. Please see and read Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz. They are life-long distinguished liberals who have more backbone and integrity in their little finger than 99.99 % of liberals in this great country. Mr. cohen---I just know you raped my Mother at a party 36 years ago. i can't tell you where the house was--I don't know who owned the house--I don't know how I got to the party--I don't remember how I got home----I never told anyone for 36 years. Now------PROVE YOU DIDN":T DO IT. how do you like it??????Recognize your country?????I just passed a lie detector test---so, get yourself a good lawyer baby!!!!!!
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civil Bear said:

mikecohen said:

Civil Bear said:

concernedparent said:

helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

Yeah just like every Democrat came out in support of Al Franken when he sexually harassed women decades ago and totally didn't pressure him into resigning or anything.

Except that the Franken accusers actually had corroborating evidence. Maybe Bubba v. Jones, Broaddrick and Willey is a better example?
Unfortunately, the evidence against Franken turned out to be a lot weaker and more compromised than the testimony by Dr. Ford
Wrong. With Franken there were photographs and an admission of guilt. With Dr. Ford there is zero verifiable evidence. In fact, every witness she named could not recall being at the party. She can't even recall when it was, where it was, or even how she got there.

So with Bubba and his accusers, er excuse me, survivors, which Dems petitioned for him to step down?


Then why did Kavanaugh lie under oath about underage drinking (claiming the drinking age was 18 when he was a senior), lying about the meaning of a "Devil's Triangle" he mentioned in his yearbook, claiming "ralphing" refered to his "weak stomach" "boofing" is "farting" and claiming "I don't remember" somehow exonerates him?

Lying under oath (committing perjury) is not something someone who is innocent and wants to be a Supreme Court justices should be doing.
blungld
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

mr. cohen. Please. and, while you are at, please look up the word Integrity at home. Please see and read Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz. They are life-long distinguished liberals who have more backbone and integrity in their little finger than 99.99 % of liberals in this great country. Mr. cohen---I just know you raped my Mother at a party 36 years ago. i can't tell you where the house was--I don't know who owned the house--I don't know how I got to the party--I don't remember how I got home----I never told anyone for 36 years. Now------PROVE YOU DIDN":T DO IT. how do you like it??????Recognize your country?????I just passed a lie detector test---so, get yourself a good lawyer baby!!!!!!
The fact that you think that what you wrote is appropriate and logical and a good way to make your point is frightening.
concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blungld said:

helltopay1 said:

mr. cohen. Please. and, while you are at, please look up the word Integrity at home. Please see and read Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz. They are life-long distinguished liberals who have more backbone and integrity in their little finger than 99.99 % of liberals in this great country. Mr. cohen---I just know you raped my Mother at a party 36 years ago. i can't tell you where the house was--I don't know who owned the house--I don't know how I got to the party--I don't remember how I got home----I never told anyone for 36 years. Now------PROVE YOU DIDN":T DO IT. how do you like it??????Recognize your country?????I just passed a lie detector test---so, get yourself a good lawyer baby!!!!!!
The fact that you think that what you wrote is appropriate and logical and a good way to make your point is frightening.
He's sick in the head.
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dear bungled-----what I typed is accurate. I was trying to show the absurdity of the accusation. NOT ONE OF MRS FORDS" girl friends or party-goers has come forth to substantiate her story. NOT ONE. 40 years later she cannot point out the house--she cannot tell us who owned the house. She cannot tell us how she got to the party. She cannot tell us how she got home. She told no one for 36 years. The notes of her Therapist DO NOT MENTION MR> KAVANAUGH. Some of her supposed party-goers have denied her story. No lawyers would ever consider bringing this "case" to trial. No Judge would ever preside over it. Did something happen to this woman 40 years ago??Perhaps something did , but, based on her testimony, with all the obvious gaps, the presumption of innocence MUST ALWAYS HOLD SWAY IN THIUS COUNTRY> We are not Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, China, Iran or many Middle Eastern countries. Let me repeat what I typed earlier----if Kavanaugh were a Democrat, he would get ALL 49 democrats in the Senate to vote for him. If you don't understand that , I have no idea what you have been doing all these years. BTW< the ABA, which has an obvious liberal tilt, just gave Kavanaugh the highest possible rating of "well qualified." "Well qualified" is the highest possible rating of the ABA. And, everyone knows that the ABA has gotten more and more liberal over thge years. You were saying????
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dear concerned: You are not concerned enough. Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg, liberal lion of the SC, just stated a couple days ago, that she was appalled by the judicial hearings. Is she sick in the head????
Civil Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

Civil Bear said:

mikecohen said:

Civil Bear said:

concernedparent said:

helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.






Then why did Kavanaugh lie under oath about underage drinking (claiming the drinking age was 18 when he was a senior), lying about the meaning of a "Devil's Triangle" he mentioned in his yearbook, claiming "ralphing" refered to his "weak stomach" "boofing" is "farting" and claiming "I don't remember" somehow exonerates him?

Lying under oath (committing perjury) is not something someone who is innocent and wants to be a Supreme Court justices should be doing.
That you believe your examples amount to Kavanaugh unequivocally committing purgery only bolsters the original point in the thread.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civil Bear said:

mikecohen said:

Civil Bear said:

concernedparent said:

helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

Yeah just like every Democrat came out in support of Al Franken when he sexually harassed women decades ago and totally didn't pressure him into resigning or anything.

Except that the Franken accusers actually had corroborating evidence. Maybe Bubba v. Jones, Broaddrick and Willey is a better example?
Unfortunately, the evidence against Franken turned out to be a lot weaker and more compromised than the testimony by Dr. Ford
Wrong. With Franken there were photographs and an admission of guilt. With Dr. Ford there is zero verifiable evidence. In fact, every witness she named could not recall being at the party. She can't even recall when it was, where it was, or even how she got there.

So with Bubba and his accusers, er excuse me, survivors, which Dems petitioned for him to step down?
What Franken did, he did. What Kavanaugh "did", he allegedly did. True. However, it is quite a stretch to conflate the two transgressions.
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civil Bear said:

blungld said:

helltopay1 said:

Dear Yogi: When they taught Civics in the fourth grade, you obviously skipped the entire year. Please put down your comic books and read 1984. Then read the Constitution. Then--read it again. Then read the Federalist papers. You've heard of jury nullification????This is an attempt at voter nullification. If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

This is so frustrating. Republicans think that everyone else is capable of doing the same dirty tricks and thinks so unabashedly about power as they do. So they never trust the sincerity or good intention of anyone else. Democrats aren't saints, but on many many issues they come from the right place.

I hate to break it to you, but the exact same frustration is felt by righties, but with "republicans" and "democrats" reversed.
I find myself in complete agreement with you again. On two posts on separate topics in the same day. It warms my heart. Really.
oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In reading this thread Ibwas hoping to get some new information on Jabari. The politics hijackingbthreads is getting tired.
Last year is over,” Fox said. “Today we start to fight forward. We build for greater days.”
Civil Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

Civil Bear said:

mikecohen said:

Civil Bear said:

concernedparent said:

helltopay1 said:

If Kavanaugh were a Democrat, every single Democrat would vote for him. Surely you know that. But you don't care. And that's a shame.

Yeah just like every Democrat came out in support of Al Franken when he sexually harassed women decades ago and totally didn't pressure him into resigning or anything.

Except that the Franken accusers actually had corroborating evidence. Maybe Bubba v. Jones, Broaddrick and Willey is a better example?
Unfortunately, the evidence against Franken turned out to be a lot weaker and more compromised than the testimony by Dr. Ford
Wrong. With Franken there were photographs and an admission of guilt. With Dr. Ford there is zero verifiable evidence. In fact, every witness she named could not recall being at the party. She can't even recall when it was, where it was, or even how she got there.

So with Bubba and his accusers, er excuse me, survivors, which Dems petitioned for him to step down?
What Franken did, he did. What Kavanaugh "did", he allegedly did. True. However, it is quite a stretch to conflate the two transgressions.
Indeed.
BeachedBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker said:

In reading this thread Ibwas hoping to get some new information on Jabari. The politics hijackingbthreads is getting tired.
Based on the thread, I just assumed that Jabari's case was going to the Supreme Court!
StillNoStanfurdium
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BeachedBear said:

oskidunker said:

In reading this thread Ibwas hoping to get some new information on Jabari. The politics hijackingbthreads is getting tired.
Based on the thread, I just assumed that Jabari's case was going to the Supreme Court!
Having started the thread, I'm amazed at the tangents it's managed to spin off into. Was hoping the discussion could be isolated to this particular incident relevant to a former Cal basketball player.
Northside91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Political tantrum-ing is the new TM. A warm endorphin bath for the brain. At least for your average 21st century citizen-lunatic....Be a good American and embrace it. It now defines us - like hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet.
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anyone remember the Salem witch Trials circa 1629???women were accused of being witches. To the surprise of no one, the women could not prove that they were not witches. So, naturally, the women were burned alive for the crime of proving that they were not witches. Seems fair to me. Any resemblance to the current judicial trial in which Mr. kavanaugh has to prove that he is not a rapist, gang rapist, alcoholic, or serial abuser of teenage girls is purely co-incidental . Anyone inferring such resemblance should either be arrested or shot on sight. Due process??Please. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. D'accord?????
KenBurnski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Why are TM classes so damn expensive?
Northside91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I know. It's crazy, right?
Page 5 of 6
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.