GOP Congresswoman Blamed Wildfires on Jewish Space Laser
Category: News & Politics
Via: john-russell • 3 years ago • 202 commentsBy: Jonathan Chait (Intelligencer)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Imag
The top example of a conservative mischief-maker, presented in perfect symmetry, is Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Greene's views are controversial. They include, but are by no means limited to, the following:
• The QAnon conspiracy theory, which holds that Donald Trump is secretly fighting a worldwide child-sex-slavery ring that was supposed to culminate in the mass arrest of his political opposition, is "worth listening to."
• Muslims don't belong in government.
• 9/11 was an inside job.
• Shootings at Parkland, Sandy Hook, and Las Vegas were staged.
• "Zionist supremacists" are secretly masterminding Muslim immigration to Europe in a scheme to outbreed white people.
• Leading Democratic officials should be executed.
The most recent Greene view to be unearthed comes via Eric Hananoki. Just over two years ago, Greene suggested in a Facebook post that wildfires in California were not natural. Forests don't just catch fire, you know. Rather, the blazes had been started by PG&E, in conjunction with the Rothschilds, using a space laser, in order to clear room for a high-speed rail project. Here is Greene's entire post, via Media Matters:
The Rothschild family has featured heavily in anti-Semitic conspiracy theories since at least the 19th century. Anti-Semites have generally updated the theory by replacing the Rothschilds with George Soros, a more contemporary and plausible-seeming mastermind for a global conspiracy to spread left-wing ideology. Greene's version has instead updated the theory by giving the Rothschilds possession of a secret, powerful space laser.
Now, you might wonder why, if an international cabal of Jewish bankers wanted to finance a rail project, they would go about it by using their space lasers to set a catastrophic blaze. Aren't there easier ways to get your rail stations approved by the state legislature? If you can pull off a massive conspiracy like that and keep it quiet, and you have a space laser you can use to immolate basically any target on Earth, there have to be more direct profit-making opportunities than burning down trees in order to arbitrage the land value for a public-transit contract.
You're probably not going to get Greene's answer, though, because the last news crew that showed up at one of her events was threatened with arrest by the local sheriff.
The thing is, you can be much more moderate than MTG, and still be extremely crazy.
Tags
Who is online
446 visitors
Pelosi should talk about this nutcase every day until she resigns.
This psychiatric hospital escapee is what Georgia has saddled us with? Come on, Georgia, do better.
Major whackadoodle alert, am I right?
Maybe coo coo for coco puffs?
My thoughts exactly regarding being cuckoo for cocoa puffs but I think that is far too mild and innocent. This freak is deadly dangerous.
Considering that GA came through in regards to decimating Trump, maybe they will show this waste of space the door next election.
This one really needs the boot.
oy...
LMAO!!! Good one!
Vey.
They should censor and then expel this bat shit crazy bitch.
I wish some of the conservatives here would kindly tell us why this woman deserves to remain in the United States Congress.
It's up to her constituents as to whether she should stay or go. Her haters have the obvious option of ignoring her unique candor. She sorta balances out the crazy rantings of Pelosi or AOC.
Antisemitism is now candor, eh?
Here's her threatening and harrassing David Hogg and calling him a coward
Video surfaces of Marjorie Taylor Greene confronting Parkland shooting survivor with baseless claims
Updated 10:32 AM ET, Thu January 28, 2021
False. There is this thingy called the Constitution. You should read it, starting with Article I, Section 5.
When has she disseminated ANY form of candor Greg? Please point out ANY of her above positions that are 'honest'. Perhaps you can provide quotes from her that refute the seed.
Wait WHAT? Either Green's statements are 'unique candor' or 'crazy rantings'. PICK ONE.
Greg needs the dictionary back. Who has it?
Such as? Could you cite something that's anywhere near as crazy as harassing a mass-shooting survivor?
Or are you just makin' shit up, as usual?
Are you implying that she is telling the truth? That is what candor usually means.
CANDOR | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary
candor definition: 1. the quality of being honest and telling the truth, especially about a difficult or embarrassing…. Learn more.
===========
"To be perfectly candid, Jews do secretly rule the world" . That sort of candor?
We shouldn't be so naïve as to think NT is free of these same crazy conspiracy theorists believing Democrats eat babies or are all lizard people mind controlling the masses with airplane contrails and Jewish space lasers. We've got at least a handful of "Pew! Pew! Pew!" nut balls who pop their heads up in random defense of blatant lunacy and then act as if they're the victims who are having their 1st amendment rights stripped simply because sane persons attack their hilariously insane conjecture and opinions.
We call them out and call them what they are and all we get for our "candor" are flags and tickets.
NT is kinda odd.
It's OK for a member to be both a fascist and an asshole. That's not a problem for the Mods.
OTOH, the Mods will ticket you if you say another member is a fascist or an asshole, even if you accompany the epithet with incontrovertible proof.
Your words are ''Moderated''. Your behavior is not.
I'm not sure any of the currently contributing "conservatives" here are off the deep end, I dont really see signs of that, but being sure would probably require further investigation.
Imagine if the mods were to make judgment calls about individuals and deem them fascist, asshole, troll, commie, liar, etc. Even something as seemingly obvious as 'troll' is problematic because one person's troll is another person's hero.
Moderation is subjective enough focusing just on the words. Beware of what you ask for.
Nope. People whose main contributions to discussions is to ask endless questions the answer to which never satisfies them but leads to more inane questions are trolls. It is not difficult to see which people have something pertinent to say about a topic , even if just a few words, and those who are trying to derail.
You don't know an asshole when you see one?
You don't know a fascist when you see one?
I have to agree with John's response to your comment. You know who the trolls are because you are particularly tasty to them
That's a good one TG!
I bet that anyone who I might deem a troll would be deemed a good member by others. Even the most extreme case.
You know as well as I that on social media sites the label 'troll' is typically affixed to those with whom one disagrees. One person's troll is another person's hero.
If there is a person whose comment history is nothing but attempting to disrupt the site by hindering normal discussion, etc. then that can be measured. Typically that is handled by members flagging and mods ticketing and ultimately suspending. There is thus a largely objective system for dealing with trolls (disruptors) and here this system has caused several of these individuals to no longer be here.
But what do you do about someone who is not disrupting the site per the CoC but is making comments that are absurdly stupid, bigoted, obnoxious, etc.? Is it trolling to claim that evolution is pseudo-science or that Harris, Melania, etc. are whores? Is it trolling to constantly rail on people like Fauci, or to argue that science is a religion? Is it trolling to stupidly act the role of the Trump sycophant while exaggerating and inventing false allegations about Biden? Is it trolling to chant: 'stop the steal'? Is it trolling to constantly label anything one dislikes as 'socialism'?
Unless we have objective, measurable factors for determining a troll (e.g. I noted disruption) moderators should not be taking action.
So, what are those factors? If those complaining about moderation can articulate objective measurable factors then let's see them.
Now, on JR's comment:
That matches my example. And, sure, if we have a person who is predominantly here to disrupt then that person should be flagged as off-topic, etc. But if that person is disagreeing and that disagreement is deemed as 'disruption' then we are back to the subjective calls.
key word would be your definition of "contributing".
Sure do. Have you noticed that a person can be an asshole on one comment and a contributor on the next?
Mods need measurable criteria. If you have a way to measure 'asshole' then flag it. If legit, the asshole will eventually get suspended. If this individual is truly an asshole by objective means, s/he would be perpetually suspended by a system working in this manner.
I am sure there are other criteria for determining a troll. Maybe you should identify the objective, measurable criteria that members can use when flagging a person for trolling. If the criteria are indeed objective and measurable then the mods could operate on this. If so, the troll will be ticketed and suspended until s/he reforms or leaves.
There are a few people here over the last couple years that many of us have agreed were "trolls". The question then is what if anything should be done about it. What should be done about it is a different subject than saying that the people I think are trolls might say I am one, and then we would have a "both sides" standoff.
It's not that subjective.
You're right of course. As always
Sure, if you focus on the extremes it is not subjective. One individual comes to mind whose comments were always attacks and most of the time were irrational. That individual wound up being banned from the site.
But we are not talking about just the extremes. And as we move from the extremes towards the norm the call of 'troll', etc. does indeed grow more subjective.
And, as I have suggested, those extreme cases will be naturally handled by a system of flags, tickets, suspensions and (if need be) bans. Clearly the extreme cases are easy.
The reason we are talking about this is because there are cases here right now that are not in the extreme. These individuals are not being constantly flagged for cause. They are irritating for some but unless they behave in a manner contrary to the CoC they are free to engage. And if there is something that can be done to provide objective, measurable criteria to the CoC that our mods could indeed act upon then let's focus on that.
Complaining that trolls, etc. are on the site accomplishes nothing.
By the way, I have my own list of individuals who are, in my opinion, net bad for the site. (As TG points out, this should be obvious.) So I am not arguing that there are no bad players. My point is on an objective, measurable means to act.
When people make 5 or 6 comments in a row that are repetitive questions, and they do it regularly, they are trolling. I dont even consider that fact to be up for discussion.
OR...pretend that they don't know what you are talking about or twist words and meanings and INSIST ON ALWAYS HAVING THE LAST WORD!!!
My favorite, Don't put words in my mouth...I didn't say that.
Of course.
Delete the asshole comment.
Not that complicated...
This should be a no-brainer. Reformulations should be automatic tickets. No wiggle room.
It's easy to copy/paste. It's easy to link. There is absolutely no reason for reformulation
I would consider that trolling (more specifically, sealioning) too. So the obvious action is for members to flag this as trolling. If a member were to literally ask the same question 5 or 6 times in a thread —especially if the question is answered— are you saying this would be ignored by the mods if flagged?
Sure there is. Paraphrasing is a common mechanism to cross-verify understanding. I could paraphrase ⇣ to verify my understanding:
Are you saying that any restatement of one's words is necessarily a ticket-able offense, even if the person is just trying to verify understanding?
Note that I do recognize the dishonest tactic which would be something like:
Are you saying that your words are always so clear that nobody would ever need to verify they understood you properly?
This is putting words in your mouth. ⇡ It is basically a strawman tactic.
And another form, which I suspect you had in mind, is to not quote your actual words but substitute a bullshit variant and then argue against that. That, I would agree, is intellectual dishonesty and you know my bias there.
That's a question, not a reformulation. I can either take it seriously, and answer seriously; or take it for trolling and just answer "No"... and leave the other hanging...
A reformulation takes a form like "So you're saying that...". It's an affirmation, that engages you (using words that you never pronounced).
There's no problem with a request for clarification: "Do you mean...".
The problem is in imposition: "You're saying that..."
OK?
I would consider this to be a dishonest tactic:
Are you saying that your words are always so clear that nobody would ever need to verify they understood you properly?
That is so damn true of certain, which are I'm sure known, but shall remain nameless, as far as their contributions to seeds/trolls. It's annoying and tiresome and they know it.
No.
-------------------
The interrogatory formulation, "Are you saying..." gives the other person the occasion to kill the episode instantly.
OTOH, an affirmative formulation "You're saying..." engages the other person without their accord.
Yes, but I am not saying otherwise. My point was about dishonesty. Look at my comments and see how often I used the word dishonest to describe my point. The quote I provided dishonestly distorted your words into something that you clearly did not mean and is negative against you. I would find that to be bad.
Do we agree that an affirmative reformulation should be a ticket?
No. While I personally would like to see dishonesty addressed, unless we can offer an objective, consistent way for the mods (read: for anyone) to determine dishonesty it would make their tasks even more subjective.
What would be the measurable criteria by which a moderator could review a flag and determine that indeed the flagged comment was dishonest? Outside of the most blatant cases I think we have problems.
In the case of your affirmative reformulation, the mod could compare what you wrote with the reformulation. For a brain-dead simple case like this ...
Art: A lot of people, seems to me, voted for Trump because they liked his stated policies
Ben: So you are saying Trump is fit to be PotUS.
... it is obvious that Art simply opined why Trump got votes and nowhere did Art even hint that Trump was fit (or unfit) for office.
But this is simple and contrived. When we hit the real world we have context and subtleties that likely would involve the context of a series of comments. If I were a mod I would reject the obligation to adjudicate dishonesty. Even If they agreed to only handle the obvious cases, they would immediately be hit with the gray areas that are 'so obvious' to the flagger but maybe not so obvious when the words are read objectively. It is a losing proposition for mods.
Stated again, I would like mods to address dishonesty but I fully understand why they do not.
Reality check, folks!
Her precinct loves her. She is a shoo-in to win re-election.
she has to be expelled
C'mon, John! Get real...
The Arizona GOP censured Cindy McCain and Doug Doucey.
Somehow, I don't think that's in the right direction.
Liz Cheney?
McCarthy is supposed to 'have a talk with her'. I imagine he'll tell her to keep up the good work
Trump is
working on itintent on ittelling other people to do it...That says a lot about her precinct.
Evening Gordy..That is exactly what I was going to say. Great minds think alike..
Actually she missed one!!!..
Everyone knows the world is flat and with a bit of luck she will sail right off the edge..
Glad she is on your side of the Pacific...
Sounds like we need to build a wall...... around her precinct!
Her voters will pay for it.
She's not just a gigantic bitch on wheels, she's nuts!
She is one nasty hateful ugly bitch with freakshow whackjob thrown in in for good measure.
In Texas, we call that 'New Money'. She might have it, but she hasn't had it for long.
I saw last night that the Oregon State Republican Party issued some kind of statement saying it's looking more and more like the attack on the Capitol was a false flag operation.
That was from the official state party.
How can there be so many crazy people in this country?
Since many of the attackers have been captured now (they didn't mask), It's quite obvious.
Nah..They are everywhere Dig...
We have them to...but way in the minority and they are ridiculed and ostracised and sort of just "disappear" when it all back fires on them...
Just the way we like it...
That must be nice.
She is bat shit fucking crazy and becoming the new standard bearer for the GOP considering GOP leadership won't just straight up tell her to shut the fuck up and say she is a nut case.
I have been saying the whole time, this is the kinda shit you are dealing with Democrats, there is no middle ground or bipartisanship to be found so stop wasting time by looking.
She rose up through the QANon republican/gop ranks with the help of the former 'president'. He loves her!
I don't agree with the general consensus here. I think that she should be allowed to continue to make her ignorant comments and that they should be quoted by the media, and she should be allowed to make those ridiculous statements without censure on TV news interviews as often as possible. Everyone knows she is a Republican, and she could conceivably do more to damage the reputation of the Republican party than even Trump was able to accomplish. So let her keep blabbering. She could displace Alfred E. Neuman as America's number one idiot poster person.
You know, in normal times, I'd agree with you. But just like it seemed that Trump's constant lying about election fraud and Republican support for him should have hurt them in the court of public opinion, but didn't, I think this malarkey should tarnish her reputation and that of her party, but won't.
We are full up on crazy here in the States, and crazy votes.
It will be interesting to see if her Party is capable of shutting her up.
I don't think they have any intention of trying.
In the US we have Constitutionally protected freedom of speech
No, they won't. They like her out there saying the things they want to. People listened to trmp 5 years ago and looked what happened. With all the shit that came out of his mouth, he shouldn't have been elected. And then he double downed on the lies and bullshit and his cult followers double downed on their worship of their god.
We live in strange and interesting times. What I would give for something more boring
Yes, there is. But that same constitution says I can call her batshit crazy and try to counteract her by exposing her insanity
It is more likely that a bunch of people will be killed because of all this garbage than that she will be shut up. But the problem is not what she will say in the future, the problem is who she is.
As far as insane goes, she's up there with Covid hoaxers and election deniers. I will admit, a Jewish space laser is a creative conspiracy theory.
“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.”
Soren Kierkegaard ... Either/Or
"Everyone knows she is a Republican"
Trumpists pretend to be what they are not.
Up to the point that protected speech gets someone killed...... then what the hell are you going to do?
Oh wait.... That already happened on 6JAN21....
And you have.
Be careful what you wish for.
I really think people like you should be careful what you wish for. You trmp supporters aren't going to be happy until this whole country is surrounded by razor wire, all passports rescinded, and we are under a fascist, theocratic dictatorship.
I think I got a little hysterical there.
I fixed it for you.
I accused someone of hysteria yesterday, recognized it in myself, and decided to be honest about it
That's called candor...... remember?
lol
Well, to be fair, you weren't talking about rounding up people in cattle cars and sending them off to concentration camps for being meanies and picking on the 'conservatives'
Enoch wouldn't agree with me, but maybe they would be okay if you cooked them on paper plates in a microwave oven.
I decided not to say what I was thinking because I didn't want to get banned from NT. So as you can see, "Freedom of Speech" does have its limitations in the USA.
I agree 100%. She's eager to make her bones, but she is misinterpreting the attention she is getting from people like Matt Gaetz and Kevin McCarthy. They are goading her into doing their dirty work to escape culpability when the time comes. They have no idea that's what Trump has been doing to them. Yet. But some day they will. One can hope.
What me worry?
She is the face of the new Republican party.
You wish.
No Greg... she is the face of the GOP. If she was going to be shunned, she would not have been assigned to the education committee, and would already be called out by fellow republicans.
The GOP now clearly is embracing racists, and conspiracy theorists by the bushel. The house and senate GOP leaders had their opportunity to save the party from the Trumpists. But since they refuse to honestly look into accountability, the Trump whackadoodles now run the party. Enjoy your bed as you and others with your like mind have made it.
She represents you Greg. She is your party, Jewish space lasers and all.
I don't have to wish, Greg.
She has been named to the ed committee, she has not been reprimanded for her statements.
That says she is accepted as she is which is a damn shame. If the Republicans had any balls she would be out the door.
Deal with it, she is the face of your party.
Just as much as you seem to think AOC is and has been the face of the Democratic party, right?
It seems to me that on this site the comments made by Greg Jones represent the face of the Republican Party as well, and maybe out of embarrassment his fellow Trumpers don't appear to be coming to defend them either.
Oh...this is good! I thought she was the one but I wasn't sure. Here is a video of Greene trying to force Ilhan Omar and Rashida Talib to take their oaths of office on the Bible, saying that it was illegal to swear in on a Quaran:
“It wasn’t a law yet … at the time they swore in. I think at the time they swore in it wasn’t passed, because it wouldn’t pass in a Republican-controlled ... “ Ms Greene said. “So they’re not really official, I don’t think.”
That's the problem.
<snort>
And she has no concept of the Bill of Rights. I wonder if she was one of those dumb bunnies that had to have information spoon fed to her in school so she could pass
As with most Trumpists, the BOR is whatever she wants it to be. They/she invoke the BOR on whatever subject, from whatever angle, to come to whatever conclusion they/she want.
The actual content and meaning of the BOR is of no interest. It is simply a talisman.
that would be a fun exercise in Heated Debate...drawing up the Batshit Crazy Bill of Rights
Terrifying
I accidentally called you Bill in my article. I fixed it.
Green swore to uphold the Constitution yet obviously has no fucking idea what it says.
How seriously do you suppose she takes her oath?
My guess is that it was an empty gesture... part of a meaningless ceremony required to be seated.
Sadly Bob, judging from the ignorance some members here show of the text and meaning or the Constitution, her oath utterly lacks foundation.
So she may take her oath very seriously while being utterly delusional about what that oath is based on.
She knows what the Second Amendment is and by God! She will defend that one to her dying breath!
She is one ugly woman.
On the inside for sure
Sad thing is she reproduced. Those poor kids are going to be fucked up.
All I could think was, who in the hell could actually put up with her long enough then even want to touch her, after all the crazy that comes out of her mouth.
I hear the QAnon Shaman is single....... and horny too!
The unholy union.
what a dumbass
I dunno...that seems to be an insult to dumbasses world wide
She's just a peach, isn't she? Does she ever actually confront the two ladies? The video either cut off before it happened, or the whole thing was for some kind of fake shit show to prove how tough she is. What it really shows is how full of shit she is. Fab find, Ms. Giggs!
Facebook took down a far-right congressional candidate's photo showing her holding a gun next to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the 'Squad'
You're both wrong. The vast majority of we on the right don't support the views of this crazy deranged bitch .
But your partisan attempts to paint the entire Republican party with the same soiled brush is doomed to fail
The vast majority of the gop have not denounced this batshit crazy bitch so they support this batshitcrazy bitch
If they don't support her, why aren't they doing something about her? She's fucking dangerous, Greg
we on the right don't support the views of this crazy deranged bitch .
Really Greg? Then why did she get elected to congress? Why is she still there? Where is the outrage by congressional republicans calling her out and calling for her removal?
So the bottom line is Greg... This is who the GOP is.
The GOP supports Trump notwithstanding his incitement to Insurrection, notwithstnading his ten thousand plus lies, notwithstanding his incompetent and negligent mismanagement of the Covid virus leading to the USA having the world's record infection and death numbers. So why is her being the face of the Republican Party any different than the majority of Republican lawmakers?
Same as your partisan BS to paint AOC as the face of the Democrats.
So exactly how much power does a Jewish space laser pack?
About 7 million joules?
Marjorie Taylor Greene, the ideological leader of the Republican Party, is a clear and present danger to the American people and the American way of life.
The way of the modern day Republicans is to minimize everything negative about their group and wait for time to smooth things over. They have already minimized Jan 6th by courting favor with Donald Trump, sending the Republican leader in the House to Trump's "presidency in exile" to beg for his help in the midterms in 2022.
Not even a month has passed and all is forgiven towards Trump. The rest of the country must speak up. These craven fools never will.
The Oregon Republican Party is now taking the position that the Capitol attack was a "false flag" operation. Insanity.
That's what this whackjob has been saying about Parkland, just like Alex Jones.
Oh, FFS.
Please tell me that you aren't gullible enough to actually believe that shit!
Please?
Please tell me that you aren't gullible enough to believe that AOC is the ideological leader of the Democratic Party.
Okay. She isn't the ideological leader of the DEmcoratic Party.
DIfference is, I didn't claim it, you did. And I actually quoted your fucking exact words to you.
Can YOU quote ME stating she is--like you just did???????
I will take your non-response as an admission that you are, indeed, gullible enough to believe what you claimed!
"I will take your non-response as an admission ..."
What a cop out ... it's only been 7 minutes. Posters do have other things to do. I myself plucked my eyebrows and polished off a quart of Whiskey ... gotta run, the post-mistress has already rung twice.
Well, gee, he found the time to respond with something unrelated, so there is ample proof he HAD the time and chose to use it to deflect.
You make a very poor and weak argument, but thanks for trying anyways.
Well, you're the response police. I was enjoying the Creative Arts page for a while. Much more interesting.
I believe that her ideology is now prevalent within a wide swath the Republican Party. I haven't seen anything to dissuade me from that opinion. Of course, there are saner heads in the Republican Party, but they seem to be becoming fewer and fewer.
[deleted]
That certainly is a far cry from claiming she is the ideological leader of the GOP.
Got that quote from me claiming AOC is the ideological leader of the Democratic Party?
You know how much we all love it when you swear. It's so YOU.
Well, so long as you're happy.......
It's raining. I'm very happy.
Well, YAY!!
Party time!
Perhaps Jon Ossoff the new Senator from GA who happens to be Jewish could use the Jewish Space Lazer on Green.
Poof!!!
I hope he has access. Somebody else said they had to pay their temple dues before they were allowed access (seriously...it was a meme on Face Book)
It would be a waste of good Jewish electricity if you ask me..... Can't we just find a basement under a D.C. pizza shop to lock her up in?
What pisses me off is people like this bitch have no repercussions for their hateful actions.
She will continue as long as she has no pushback.
What a hateful, nasty, ugly thing.
She is a total horror show.
Your know, if you look at her picture, try to imagine her with Joker makeup applied. It would suit her grin and apparent insanity. Then imagine her with Mark Hamill's Joker laugh. Once you visualize that, you might be unable to unsee it, lol
I wish I was good with photo shop and Paint
A little photo touch up would be hilarious.
Especially with that Adam's apple she doesn't bother hiding.
If she dyes her hair green, that will just complete the look.
very good.
It's already a touch green, so I thought I'd leave it as is... One should never draw world-wide attention to themselves after using an off-the-rack hair color.
I know you were going for The Joker, but she looks more like Bozo minus the red, frizzy hair.
But it's a nice piece of work, Sis
can i crop her clown face out and use it as my new avatar ?
This is what I used as the Joker layer. I did a vertical invert and a slight rotate to better match the facial position of MTG, erased all but the face, tweaked the opacity to allow her bone structure to show, and blended the edges.
If you want to. I'll send it in a PN.
ok thanks
My apologies. I haven't seen the new Joker movie. You did a good job!
The joke is on America.
Unfortunately, she's no joke.
Sure she is. Just a bad one.
Is it just me or does she actually look better now as the Joker?
she looks happier. the role must suit her.
I noticed that too. Must be the lighting. It works.
She might be a sick joke, but I think she is deadly serious.
I wouldn't be surprised if she were serious.
Not necessary. Critiques are a photographer's best friend. True story.
I don't see any reason to think she's not totally serious.
I tend to agree.
....have no repercussions for their hateful actions.
At least not from within the GOP......
The following is not suitable for all audiences...
The sound of frustration.
You gotta label stuff like that video NSFW. Please...
Sorry. I didn't even think about that. I will add it.
Perhaps not suitable for all audiences, but completely understandable considering the circumstances.
He gets my vote!
He's a great guy. I would vote him up 1,000 times.
From the heart!
His yelling reminds me of Sam Kinison. lol
Me too!
For those wondering... I did check Ebay and Amazon, totally sold out of space lasers.
I checked with Bibi and he has a few that can be transferred to the US for use by Jon Ossloff. And ''poof'' Green is gone.
For those of you that are unfamiliar with ''Jewish Space Lasers'' here are a few versions.
And the most famous and deadly the Grandfather Bernie Jewish Space Laser.
Where's California ?
It's along the Pacific Coast, but in reality, it's a state of mind.
That's the answer.
Too funny!
LOL
Well goddamn, she was right!! That is some serious Jewish space laser action!
I would send the Israeli Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman after her...
She is fantastic...and beautiful.