They talk the talk of social stagnation, but they don't to walk the walk, any more than the rest of us do. Even their constant, consequence-free bitching is a privilege of their freedom from the kinds of repressive social systems they idolize, and a triumph of the democratic process that they half-heartedly attempt to undermine.
Yep. Where on 101 are you regularly driving? I drive it daily in the Santa Clara up to Palo Alto area, and its frequently backed up. Other local highways are bad too. I got sideswiped going 65 mph just before Thanksgiving on 85 in Mountain View (it was the other guy's fault). The other driver spoke only Spanish, was driving on a suspended license (for a previous DUI), and could not produce vehicle registration or proof of insurance at the scene (though it was later found to be insured under someone else's name). The other truck's insurance company is trying to stiff me on compensation. I still have some whiplash and my truck was declared a total loss. So now I have to buy a new truck to replace my old beloved Tacoma that I loved like a pet. It will cost me many thousands out of my own pocket.So, yeah..its a bit like Mad Max out on the roads, already. It won't be long until 90% of CA drivers are total rogues like that guy was...with a machine guy turret on top!!
… which is why The People of California elected him.
)
Three times. Once, because the idiot Republicans in the state thought he was an unpopular enough to warrant a recall, and were willing to waste 200 million dollars of taxpayer money testing that brainless assumption. More likely voters skipped the dumbass recall election altogether than voted for his supposed challenger...… which is why The People of California elected him.
More people than vote for their opponents?
Maybe #BLM could contribute to the fund? I think they have raised in excess of $100 million over the last few years. That would help 20 black residents in SF. If they sell the LA mansion they bought, that would make it 21.
What do you think the Post got wrong here, or are you just committing genetic fallacy here?Not the faithful idiot readers of the
NY FUCKING POST!!!
That is an answer to the question of how many people voted for these clowns. Not about who is voting for these clowns, which was a rhetorical question anyway.
Nothing in TSwizzle's reply suggests he has any trouble with that concept. But you would not be you without your trademark condescension.
What do leftist news sources have to say about this reparations nonsense?
Do you have some examples of that? The NY Post article certainly isn't. It explicitly says:
And as you can see, it also links to other articles that give more information about eligibility. What exactly is wrong with what the Post wrote here in your opinion?NY Post said:
Sadly, there is a limit on how moderate any mayor of SF is allowed to be. And when it comes to insanity, the "Board of Supervisors" is hard to top. I wish Lurie had the cajones to stand up to the crazies, even if his veto is ultimately overridden.
My guess is that the NEW YORK post likely has most of its faithful readers located on the other side of the country from CALIFORNIA, and as such ineligible to vote there.
Would have been nice if they linked to the text of the actual bill so that we may read for ourselves instead of relying on their Interpretaion. You don’t have to be wrong to be biased. The first word other article is “woke” so I didn’t expect an unbiased article.
NY Post does national reporting. And unlike LA Times or San Francisco Chronicle, it still does not have a paywall. There is nothing wrong with citing a paper based in NY about a story that happens elsewhere.
It would not be a bilby post if it wasn't dripping with condescension.
"Woke" is a good descriptor of this nonsense. And I do not think the article is biased just because it uses an adjective you dislike.
Well you give me so much to be condescending about. TM