The Chief's star player, the refs, hasn't gotten any game time yet.

Maybe they'll get in the game in the second half?

Early buyers likely were entirely Trump and his inside circle.

It was never anything more than a quick money grab from the idiots.

She backed the wrong faction of the oligarchy.

#3 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

No, idiot, she held Trump accountable for criminal actions.

A big no no with the current s%^* show you morons have foisted on the rest of us.

According to this source the cuts are aimed at indirect costs - overhead.

Which covers facilities and admin costs.

Most large research institutions have core facilities funded by this money that allows researchers to access equipment and methods that are waaaaaaaay too expensive to get by themselves.

Not to mention all the behind the scenes folks that manage budgets, projects, facilities maintenance ect.

I don't work for a fed funded entity, dips^*%.

Was bluewaffleidiot born this stupid? Or did they work at it?

Wait until RFK has a few years and Trump has fully destroyed or cowed the media.

There will be major outbreaks everywhere that you'll never hear about.

What a moron you are. Just breathtakingly stupid.

#10 | Posted by Alexandrite

He heard it somewhere and his mouh breathing, lowbrow dumb a&^ thought it was funny.

So he repeats it thinking it makes him sound funny.

I wonder, if Musk started with auditing the Pentagon for fraud, waste and abuse, whether the dems would be demanding he stop.

I would. Not because I don't think it should happen, but because an unvetted, unelected, unqualified idiot like Musk who clearly has zero legal authority to do it shouldn't be doing it.

That's what IGs were for. That's what the budget office should be for. Not a turd like Musk.

DOGE is only a threat to democrat crooks / money laundering

Shut up you stupid f*&^. You couldn't name a single instance of fraud/money laundering if you had to.

You're just mouthing words you've been told to mouth because you're a moron.

that's the kind of idiocy.....MONEY LAUNDERING....that will kill the country.

Why do you use phrases you don't understand?

Go find a frat party reatard. And blow a trucker on your way out.

#13 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Its usually best to not be what you're accused of when responding to an accusation you stupid pile of worthless s%^*.

#1 another "small government" piece of s%^* cheering the radical takeover of government and abuse of its power.

#4 is openly proud of being a childish piece of s%^*.

You seem to want to talk about the existence of God

No, that's just your canned rebuttal.

My first post stating what I want-less religious zealotry in our politics.

Its quite simple.

LOL this will probably be the biggest blow to Musk's standing than anything so far.

JPW, I never said you called for Trump's assassination.

Then why is that in any way a response to my pointing out the highly situational nature of MAGA morals, values ect?

See #18.... or not. No one is trying to change your opinions.

I have seen it. No mention of the Oval Office.

you are just using your favorite logical fallacy of attacking the source.

Calling something lunacy isn't attacking the source. It's disregarding it as a useful analysis because it's, well, lunacy.

Giving you a short tract or vid on a point is just something you like to whine about when you have no argument.

Yawn. No. It's me calling you out on your tactic of using other people's words and insisting people waste their time reading your links or watching a video because you can't synthesize an argument based on it and communicate that argument in your own words. You point to other people's words and say "debunk that or you have no argument."

Terrible debate tactic.

Wow. I agree with Rand Paul on something...

What crazy fracking times we live in.

It means your opinions aren't the facts you tell others that they are.

I know what I say is my opinion, you know yours are facts.

See the difference?

#23 | Posted by Corky

Your words, not mine.

I guess you have no good argument for why it's not religious nuttery?

There are people with approximately twice your IQ that disagree with you.

#19 | Posted by Corky

Other than argument from authority being your favorite logical fallacy, who cares? This means nothing.

We've never had as dangerous an evil person Trump before in the Oval Office. Ever.

#17 | Posted by Corky

I don't disagree with that.

But where does it say the Antichrist will inhabit the Oval Office?

These people are already coming after us.

#48 | Posted by Zed

My wife asked me if I was going to stop posting on social media/the internet because critical comments might become a reason to ruin people.

I told her there's an 8-year history of me making comments critical of Trump and MAGA. Stopping now isn't going to change a damn thing if it really comes down to that.

She was appointed in 2002. Her term expired years ago. It's a six year term.

#42 | Posted by visitor_

Her term expires when her replacement is named.

Trump can simply name a replacement and the term she was just elected to a month ago ends.

Interacting with them has a certain fascination, like driving through the outer suburbs of Hell.

#38 | Posted by Zed

Yup. But I find myself slowly decreasing that interaction and tempering what I say because I'm increasingly concerned what backlash will look like for those who actually stand by their morals, values and convictions.

They're proving to be every bit as awful, garbage people as we thought they were with zero qualms about any harm they cause someone else. In fact, they seem to relish in it.