All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[JCAll]

It's unfortunate that you feel this way about national politics (I am sorry about the other stuff.)

For the most part, Republican voters want what they think is best. It's a different thing than what you want, and we have a political process to hash it out.

When it comes to parties respecting constitutional rights, it does seem to me that Republicans are better able to articulate constitutional arguments and to understand that sometimes it means they won't immediately get the policy objective they prefer.

Other people make the mistake of blaming Trump or Trump voters for the likely Supreme Court decision, implying that he's the only one who could have pulled this off. If President Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio or Mitt Romney had been elected in 2016, we would likely have the same outcome right now. In blaming Trump, they're encouraging others to give him credit. That type of rhetoric makes him stronger in the 2024 primary and increases the chances that he'll be back in the White House.

What they "think is best" is genocide. Every time.

[JackDaw]

Susan Collin's bs today about if this is true then they lied to me right in my office. Bitch of course they lied. And you damn well knew it.

Is a proven lie during inauguration proceedings one of the few reasons a Supreme Court judge can be removed? (It ought to be. But I guess in this case it would be impossible to prove, they would just argue their views had changed.)

[thwhtGuardian]

Is a proven lie during inauguration proceedings one of the few reasons a Supreme Court judge can be removed? (It ought to be. But I guess in this case it would be impossible to prove, they would just argue their views had changed.)

As much as I think its a lie in this case, barring the argument that their views changed would have a really chilling effect that I'm not comfortable with.

[Ozymandias]

It's apologizing for Russia's actions any way you slice it...the west isn't to blame here in any way ,shape or form. It's pure Russian antagonism from start to finish.
You don't want people on your borders possibly pointing weapons at you?

Then don't act like a tin pot dictator and other countries won't feel the need to possibly defend themselves from you.

It's not hard.

There's a difference between what you said he said and what he actually said, it's not the same to say that the cause for a given event is either "A" or "B". Now, you say it doesn't matter, because only "C" is the cause. OK, that's your take, but don't misquote the Pope, he has many "followers" and they may take it the wrong way if they think his position is other than the one he states.

[numberthirty]

Remember that the turnout of women, mostly black women, was enough to win a senate seat in deep red Alabama when the Republican was Roy Moore.

Roe going away makes every Republican candidate a Roy Moore.

Politely?

That is a seriously incomplete assessment of what actually took place in that race.

The actual results?

- Jones: 49.97%
- Moore: 48.91%
- Write In: 1.06%

Without those likely Republican voters casting votes for "Write In..."?

That win may very well not have happened.

God knows that Tuberville put the boots to Jones in 2020.

Some of those Republican voters that would probably be needed to take the races you are talking about?

Quite a few of them probably support what is going on.

It's anything but "Apples..."/"Apples..." with the "Moore..."/"Jones..." race.

[thwhtGuardian]

There's a difference between what you said he said and what he actually said, it's not the same to say that the cause for a given event is either "A" or "B". Now, you say it doesn't matter, because only "C" is the cause. OK, that's your take, but don't misquote the Pope, he has many "followers" and they may take it the wrong way if they think his position is other than the one he states.

He's excusing Russia's actions...I don't get the disconnect you're having.

There is zero excuse for Russia's actions and trying to rationalize them in any way is just flat out wrong.

Again, if the intention is to try and present a softer take on Russia's actions in order to try and appear neutral so as to try and broker peace I can sort of understand the statement...but it's not a tacit I agree with at all. Appeasement in any form just doesn't work.

[Mister Mets]

Is a proven lie during inauguration proceedings one of the few reasons a Supreme Court judge can be removed? (It ought to be. But I guess in this case it would be impossible to prove, they would just argue their views had changed.)

They would need to lie under oath, which could include depositions but won't include interviews or meetings with legislators.

[kidfresh512]

Is a proven lie during inauguration proceedings one of the few reasons a Supreme Court judge can be removed? (It ought to be. But I guess in this case it would be impossible to prove, they would just argue their views had changed.)

Its also another one of those things where Democrats would have to do it alone anyway. GOP knew what they wanted these Justices to do.

[Ozymandias]

He's excusing Russia's actions...I don't get the disconnect you're having.

There is zero excuse for Russia's actions and trying to rationalize them in any way is just flat out wrong.

Again, if the intention is to try and present a softer take on Russia's actions in order to try and appear neutral so as to try and broker peace I can sort of understand the statement...but it's not a tacit I agree with at all. Appeasement in any form just doesn't work.

You should read some of his other statements about the conflict, he certainly doesn't sound like one making excuses for Putin. Trying to explain why somebody does something, which he doesn't do very well, and excusing that person, are different things too.

And since you mention the things that don't work, how about some positive thinking and telling me what does work in this particular situation?

[babyblob]

It's unfortunate that you feel this way about national politics (I am sorry about the other stuff.)

For the most part, Republican voters want what they think is best. It's a different thing than what you want, and we have a political process to hash it out.

When it comes to parties respecting constitutional rights, it does seem to me that Republicans are better able to articulate constitutional arguments and to understand that sometimes it means they won't immediately get the policy objective they prefer..

Since Republican voters seem to think that Racism, trans/homophobia, forgiving terrorism, and taking away the rights of woman and minorities is what they want and what they think is best I could care very little about their thoughts on why they are doing it.

One thing that is sickening. Is when talking about the Ohio bill to ban abolitions Rep Jean Schmidt called rape an opportunity. They should be no exception in the case of rape or incest because no matter how old or young the woman who is raped it is an opportunity and said that it is a great opportunity for the woman to get over what happened and guide the new life growing in her to be a great, productive member of society. When asked about it a day later from a reporter she said that if a life was conceived out of rape it was gods plan to bring that life into the world and it is wrong to dismiss that.


So yea. I could give two shits about these people and their views.

[kidfresh512]

After Roe v. Wade Leak, LGBTQ+ People Are in Big Trouble

Think about what else isn’t listed in the constitution. Voting rights, civil rights, desegregation, trains, cars, planes, telephones, cellphones, computers, the abacus, toys, games, passports, bars, restaurants, watches, jewelry, donkeys, horses, and dogs. Are these all illegal?

So what are these sanctimonious, narrow-minded, merciless firebrand, Bible-thumping, so-called justices preparing themselves to do next? They are gleefully ready to put Roe v. Wade in the trash bin of history. And because this decision is enormously consequential, my guess is that one of the justices (I guess Clarence Thomas) leaked the opinion in order to give states time to create their own anti-abortion laws before the SCOTUS decision is officially released, probably sometime late next month.

Thomas is just that sadistic. He would do something like this because he, and his wife, have zero respect for the court and for the LGBTQ+ community.

The leak was also a sign that if you are gay; if you are in a same-sex marriage; if you have sex; if you are transgender; if you’re leaving an inheritance to your partner, husband, or wife; and on and on, you will be the next “no mentions” in the constitution, and as such, your rights will be stripped away.

[seismic-2]

So here's how the Supreme Court's deliberations must have gone:
Justices Allito and Kavenaugh: "In our confirmation hearings we said that Roe v. Wade is decided law. We may not agree with the decision, but it's decided law."
Justices Thomas and Barrett: "But obviously it's not decided law, or else we wouldn't be here now, being asked to rule in a case that would basically have the effect of nullifying it."
Justices Allito and Kavenaugh: "Oh, well since it's not decided law, then..."

And so it goes.

[thwhtGuardian]

You should read some of his other statements about the conflict, he certainly doesn't sound like one making excuses for Putin. Trying to explain why somebody does something, which he doesn't do very well, and excusing that person, are different things too.

And since you mention the things that don't work, how about some positive thinking and telling me what does work in this particular situation?

I have read his prior statements, which is why this new stance surprised me. And if he's just trying to explain why Russia might have acted the way it was then he probably should have have said as much, with out that context it's just giving an excuse to Russia and its sympathizers. Like, " Hey, this in no way excuses the horrible actions perpetrated by Russia but their rationalization of defense against NATO is one that could have been avoided if we all spent less on arms." It could be seen as being somewhat neutral to Russia for peace talks while still being honest that IS just a rationalization and not an acceptable reason.

Appeasement never works so it's not really raining on the parade to point that out, so spare me the positive thinking bit.

As for what can work? I'm for further financially ostracizing Russia. More sanctions and the heavier the better. Money is about the only thing other than military might that these kinds of idiots like Putin understand so short of putting boots on the ground I think monetary shots are all that we can deliver.

[WAKANDA FOREVER!]

Of course.

https://mobile.twitter.com/akapczyns...7Ctwgr%5Etweet

[Kevinroc]

After Roe v. Wade Leak, LGBTQ+ People Are in Big Trouble

LGBTQ+ people are terrified. They are completely right to be.