If you put food in front of Ainsley and ask her to argue with you to earn it, she will eat you alive (in iambic pentameter) and then take the food. Because she earned it. 🧁🤭😁
@@MrBraddles3128 It was a dessert buffet table. Just a short "I met him" type conversation. But cool nonetheless. Met each one seperately And of course John Spencer is no longer with us. He has a heart attack in the show and dies of one in real life.😞
And that rule only exists in public schools, specifically because the government is meant to be secular. Like most conservative talking points (back then and to this day), it's completely incoherent.
The West Wing is considered the best fictional movie that this country has ever had the pleasure of watching. With a Democrat in office just imagine, new jobs, a balanced budget, a strong military, a godly and monogamous president, a content and loyal staff, and an approval rating above thirty percent. This is a blockbuster among the right wing of this country.
Also, every American oven filled with a turkey and a... hotline to provide clarity to those who've never roasted their own turkey in such prosperous times. Long live Jed 'Butterball' Bartlett.
The US military hasn't been weak by any measure since before the Spanish American War. It's been "strong" under every democratic president, and every Republican president, since the parties were founded.
The 14th amendment was mute, when women were first allowed to attend college in 1833... so the amendment came long afterwards.. and there are still were justices who do not believe the 14th or 15th protect women's rights, specifically.. According to Scalia: "does not disallow the passage of legislation outlawing such discrimination, it doesn’t itself outlaw that behavior:"... and in 1868, no one in particular was thinking about protecting women's rights when writing said amendments.. There was a time Ainsley, you weren't allowed to go to lawschool....So there goes your purists literal interpretation...
Your argument is not really applicable. The justices regularly find "new" rights they could not find before, such as the right to abortion or the right to gay marriage.
MY THEORY: The ERA was passed because the same old white men in various positions of power in both public and private sector still allowed bias and discrimination against anyone who WASN’T a white man. This theory is based in the fact that the ERA was passed into law. And laws happen because of two reasons: money and/or politics. The ERA doesn’t, directly, financially make anyone rich. So, if there was no obvious financial motivation, the motivation must’ve been political. If so, it must’ve meant that the public was in favor of it. If the public was in favor of a major step forward in social equality, could it be that there was a great deal of social inequality that was going on to such an extent that a federal law was required in the form of a constitutional amendment demanding and requiring equal rights for all citizens? Looking through history textbooks I certainly think so. Unless I have totally missed something.
Yes, it hasn't been officially adopted yet. If it had been there would have been huge headlines in the Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, Wall Street Journal, and the Boston Globe. So far nothing.
Sam Seaborn was literally the speechwriter for the Bartlet Administration, it was literally his job to sit around and make up appropriate presidential jokes
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.3 (2/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLS9roCy_xY/mqdefault.jpg)
One of the only shows were every character was so well rounded,strong,smart,and just funny without trying to be. Still watch this in entire seasons.
Ed and Larry, the west wing proffesionalls. Want something done? Get Ed and Larry in the room.
Why is every episode filmed to look like the entire world is lit by candles.
If you put food in front of Ainsley and ask her to argue with you to earn it, she will eat you alive (in iambic pentameter) and then take the food. Because she earned it. 🧁🤭😁
I worked for a caterer at the Bloomberg party. I met John Spencer (Leo) and Jay Leno at the dessert table where I was serving.
Does that mean that you served them their dessert while they had a conversation with each other?
@@MrBraddles3128
It was a dessert buffet table. Just a short "I met him" type conversation. But cool nonetheless. Met each one seperately And of course John Spencer is no longer with us. He has a heart attack in the show and dies of one in real life.😞
KhAoz Why was this necessary?
Cool
@@MrBraddles3128 "You served them their 'just' desserts."- LMAO.
Ainsley and Sam took a long time to get coffee, and look at her face as he explains...........🤔
You can pray in school, individually, or led by another student. it just can’t be organized prayer led by a teacher or other school district employee.
Yes. Any time someone makes that claim, I know they don't know what they are talking about.
And that rule only exists in public schools, specifically because the government is meant to be secular. Like most conservative talking points (back then and to this day), it's completely incoherent.
Donna and Josh romance was enviable.
Enviable or inevitable?
@@stevefranks9873 , Enviable. I envy someone who gets a Donna who looks at him and cares about him like she does. Yes, its fiction, but one can dream.
Ed, Larry and Ainsley - how good is that?
The West Wing is considered the best fictional movie that this country has ever had the pleasure of watching.
With a Democrat in office just imagine, new jobs, a balanced budget, a strong military, a godly and monogamous president, a content and loyal staff, and an approval rating above thirty percent.
This is a blockbuster among the right wing of this country.
Also, every American oven filled with a turkey and a... hotline to provide clarity to those who've never roasted their own turkey in such prosperous times. Long live Jed 'Butterball' Bartlett.
The US military hasn't been weak by any measure since before the Spanish American War. It's been "strong" under every democratic president, and every Republican president, since the parties were founded.
The 14th amendment was mute, when women were first allowed to attend college in 1833... so the amendment came long afterwards.. and there are still were justices who do not believe the 14th or 15th protect women's rights, specifically.. According to Scalia: "does not disallow the passage of legislation outlawing such discrimination, it doesn’t itself outlaw that behavior:"... and in 1868, no one in particular was thinking about protecting women's rights when writing said amendments.. There was a time Ainsley, you weren't allowed to go to lawschool....So there goes your purists literal interpretation...
moot.
Your argument is not really applicable. The justices regularly find "new" rights they could not find before, such as the right to abortion or the right to gay marriage.
University
@@MrJamberee the government making law based on religious beliefs is against the constitution
@@MrJamberee aw man, that comment aged poorly
I went to law school just to make sure. Killer..
Ok, where's your draft card Ainsley?
MY THEORY: The ERA was passed because the same old white men in various positions of power in both public and private sector still allowed bias and discrimination against anyone who WASN’T a white man. This theory is based in the fact that the ERA was passed into law. And laws happen because of two reasons: money and/or politics. The ERA doesn’t, directly, financially make anyone rich. So, if there was no obvious financial motivation, the motivation must’ve been political. If so, it must’ve meant that the public was in favor of it. If the public was in favor of a major step forward in social equality, could it be that there was a great deal of social inequality that was going on to such an extent that a federal law was required in the form of a constitutional amendment demanding and requiring equal rights for all citizens? Looking through history textbooks I certainly think so. Unless I have totally missed something.
Yes, it hasn't been officially adopted yet. If it had been there would have been huge headlines in the Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, Wall Street Journal, and the Boston Globe. So far nothing.
Was that an Agent Smecker reference at the end, or a happy coincidence?
@@hindenburg2006 Both a reference and an invitation for others to correct me if Im wrong.
This is a ridiculous scene. The staff would not be writing jokes. They're not professional comedy writers, which is who this would be contracted to.
Sam Seaborn was literally the speechwriter for the Bartlet Administration, it was literally his job to sit around and make up appropriate presidential jokes