orderlyrandomness

I understand that the lack of comments on the original post wasn’t for lack of interest. I dont know why you all need to come to consensus before you comment. Did you know you can comment anonymously (make up a name) and that’s your right here? But whatevs…

Which brings me to the next item: since you seem to want to talk about older posts/topics that have closed comments assigned, I have a solution to that. On the latest post, just make a comment along the lines,

PrP r/o (and name of post you want reopened)

PrP r/o The Social Dilemma

I would then reopen the comment section on the post The Social Dilemma.

If anyone writes the above, I’ll reopen whatever post.

Hooray! She did it!

Pelosi pushes new bill to determine whether a President is capable of serving | CNN Politics

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to say Friday whether extraordinary constitutional measures should be invoked to remove President Donald Trump from office, saying, “that’s not for us to decide,” even as she throws her weight behind a new bill to give Congress a role in determining whether the President of the United States must be forced out of office because he’s incapable of doing his job.

Anyone want to comment on THAT FLY? Was it to show “they” could? And who is “they” exactly?

And, don’t forgot on Monday, in two days:

Amy Coney Barrett tells Senate panel she signed ad decrying Roe v. Wade as ‘infamous’

Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, submitted a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday showing she had previously signed on to an ad that referred to the Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion as “infamous” and called “for the unborn to be protected in law.”