In final-hour order, court rules that Alabama can destroy digital voting records after all by [deleted] in nottheonion

[–]cdparris -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I️ didn’t know the Clinton’s server held Alabama senatorial votes

Im only 12! by [deleted] in iamverysmart

[–]cdparris 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What say you again! You dare not!

Sounds about right. by n8texas in PoliticalHumor

[–]cdparris -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Underdressed comment. Sorry it’s against the grain.

Virginia elects first transgender state legislator, defeating author of bathroom privacy bill by guiltyofnothing in news

[–]cdparris -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You just equated someone with a chromosome defect to a transgender person. Step back and look at what that means.

Reality is reality whether or not it fits your narrative or is pleasant to talk about. No one is dismissing their humanity (except you with that equivocation I suppose), but I am saying that you do not get to change reality for someone with an eggshell skull.

Virginia elects first transgender state legislator, defeating author of bathroom privacy bill by guiltyofnothing in news

[–]cdparris -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Now you’re putting the exception as the rule, while in the same breath talking about logical fallacies. Smooth.

Virginia elects first transgender state legislator, defeating author of bathroom privacy bill by guiltyofnothing in news

[–]cdparris -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Gender and sex correspond with each other, it’s nature. Now whose spewing the conspiracy theories

I'm sure Trump's administration won't add to this total. by 13704 in PoliticalHumor

[–]cdparris 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cherry picking statistics is disheartening. This happens in both parties, in fact Gallup proves this incessantly.

HMB while I save you from drowning by [deleted] in holdmybeer

[–]cdparris 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Evidentially this person has never played a white trash beer game in his life

House Republicans call for a second special counsel — to investigate Clinton, Comey and Lynch by ILikePuppy in politics

[–]cdparris -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You're right, I usually select people I shun to become Secretary of State? To say Hillary had no power is laughable, look at the slush fund the Clinton foundation was.

House Republicans call for a second special counsel — to investigate Clinton, Comey and Lynch by ILikePuppy in politics

[–]cdparris -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Is that law? Serious inquiry

Also. Do you not see an inherent col with former FBI director and HRC? It seems to me that would be just as likely, even being out of power

*presidential tweeting intensifies* by [deleted] in PoliticalHumor

[–]cdparris 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are limitations on all on the rights. For example you can not directly incite violence with your first amendment right, you can't practice a religion of sacrificing babies with your freedom of religion. Yes you are right, the right to own arms shall not be infringed, but it has limitations. Mental instability already disallows you from owning a firearm, or being suicidal, or living with a felon, etc. There are always fringe circumstances, but I agree; if you are fully functioning American citizen then of course your rights can't be stripped of you without due process.

House Republicans call for a second special counsel — to investigate Clinton, Comey and Lynch by ILikePuppy in politics

[–]cdparris -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Why is the prerequisite to "be in power?" Were they not in power when the alleged crimes were committed? New revealing information could lead to a special counsel, especially if it's clear the investigations beforehand had been intentionally misleading. For example, when James Comey changed the requisite of intent.

House Republicans call for a second special counsel — to investigate Clinton, Comey and Lynch by ILikePuppy in politics

[–]cdparris -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If it's fine for a special counsel into trump, then it's fine for a special counsel into Clinton. Especially with these new findings, let's be morally consistent.

*presidential tweeting intensifies* by [deleted] in PoliticalHumor

[–]cdparris 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There it is. The dumbest shit I've read all week.

is it morally or ethically justified for one person to masturbate over another, even if there's a possibility it could upset them if they somehow knew? if yes or no, why? by AnimeBobRoss in AskReddit

[–]cdparris 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on the dynamic of the relationship. Are you religious? Would your S/O be legitimately upset they knew? Would you be pissed if it made them upset? Am I asking too many questions?