MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: #UnleashSean on September 02, 2021, 10:20:54 PM
-
While I believe this will be locked within the next 24 hours (cause 75% of you are nuts and need Arby's) but......
Can we talk about Texas? Like wtf?
-
While I believe this will be locked within the next 24 hours (cause 75% of you are nuts and need Arby's) but......
Can we talk about Texas? Like wtf?
Honestly, there's so much going on there, so you'll have to be more specific
-
Honestly, there's so much going on there, so you'll have to be more specific
I guess you'll just have to guess 8-)
-
I believe most (all?) law enforcement entities begged the governor not to do it. He did it anyway. Huzzah for law and order
-
"I know this will be locked, so let me lob a blatantly political thread into the Superbar, but be super vague about it, but also realized that everyone is speaking about one big ruling in Texas today, so it will be implied...but it could also be about another hotly contested political topic too! ;)"
I don't think this makes it to mid morning
-
(https://kirk.is/m/1239066583__2009.04.06.pewpewpew.gif)
-
Unable to maintain their private power grid in hot or cold weather?
-
Well if we're going to talk about Texas, how about Afghanistan as well. Biden just secured their border with Uzbekistan, but the border in Texas is wide open.
-
Fooked up, aina?
-
Well if we're going to talk about Texas, how about Afghanistan as well. Biden just secured their border with Uzbekistan, but the border in Texas is wide open.
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
It’s fascinating from a legal standpoint, beliefs aside. There is no state entity accountable or responsible? How can it be enforced then? Citizens can be sued for assisting? Is this merely another lawyer money grab? It’s clearly at odds with federal law and precedent, and lawyers in opposition will be able to challenge it, effectively I believe. It’s disheartening to see such a blatant government effort to pit citizen against citizen, usually it’s a bit more covert. IBTL
-
Well if we're going to talk about Texas, how about Afghanistan as well. Biden just secured their border with Uzbekistan, but the border in Texas is wide open.
Didn’t Mexico pay for a wall?
-
7am and so far were civil. My God.
-
Abortions suck!
Go guns!
There, now I’ve done it! 8-)
Btw, I don’t necessarily believe that^^^^^^
Things I do believe…
ND sucks!
Go smoked meats!
-
It’s fascinating from a legal standpoint, beliefs aside. There is no state entity accountable or responsible? How can it be enforced then? Citizens can be sued for assisting? Is this merely another lawyer money grab? It’s clearly at odds with federal law and precedent, and lawyers in opposition will be able to challenge it, effectively I believe. It’s disheartening to see such a blatant government effort to pit citizen against citizen, usually it’s a bit more covert. IBTL
You referring to the women's dress code they're trying to pass?
-
Abortions suck!
Go guns!
There, now I’ve done it! 8-)
Btw, I don’t necessarily believe that^^^^^^
Things I do believe…
ND sucks!
Go smoked meats!
I think the founding fathers said it best "We hold these truths to be self evident."
-
Well if we're going to talk about Texas, how about Afghanistan as well. Biden just secured their border with Uzbekistan, but the border in Texas is wide open.
That's what happens when you lose a war that was always unwinnable.
-
You referring to the women's dress code they're trying to pass?
Cow tipping ban
-
Cow tipping ban
They have bigger concerns when it comes to bovine-human interaction in Texas than cow tipping
-
They have bigger concerns when it comes to bovine-human interaction in Texas than cow tipping
My bovine, my choice?
-
My bovine, my choice?
Pretty soon they’ll even be marrying bovine
-
They have bigger concerns when it comes to bovine-human interaction in Texas than cow tipping
Some people tenderizing the meat while it's still alive?
-
Pretty soon they’ll even be marrying bovine
But can’t buy a cake?
-
Some people tenderizing the meat while it's still alive?
Sad!
-
But can’t buy a cake?
I don’t know about you, but If a bakery won’t make a cake for cow-human weddings, I won’t bother shopping there
-
I like the direction this thread has gone.
But then, I would, given my hippy-dippy, flower-power, free-love-for-bovines worldview.
-
What would the rights of a bovine human baby be? These are the hard questions
-
What would the rights of a bovine human baby be? These are the hard questions
Well, it better get a job because my tax dollars aren’t going to pay for its health care, I know that
-
I don’t know about you, but If a bakery won’t make a cake for cow-human weddings, I won’t bother shopping there
Open a bakery that refuses to serve any union other than a Holstein-Human one?
-
That's what happens when you lose a war that was always unwinnable.
I find it amazing how much concern some people have had about Afghanistan in the last 2 weeks, but the last 20 years......................not so much.
-
Some people tenderizing the meat while it's still alive?
I feel judged?
-
Open a bakery that refuses to serve any union other than a Holstein-Human one?
Brand new markets are opening everyday
-
Well, it better get a job because my tax dollars aren’t going to pay for its health care, I know that
Universal Cowdicare?
-
"I know this will be locked, so let me lob a blatantly political thread into the Superbar, but be super vague about it, but also realized that everyone is speaking about one big ruling in Texas today, so it will be implied...but it could also be about another hotly contested political topic too! ;)"
I don't think this makes it to mid morning
The Shadow Docket aspect of the decision is almost as infuriating as the Texas part itself.
-
Brand new markets are opening everyday
Laissez county faire?
-
Universal Cowdicare?
Going to be hard to top that. Have to imagine it would put Ted Cruz in a tight spot railing against it while his constituents demand it, however
-
The Shadow Docket aspect of the decision is almost as infuriating as the Texas part itself.
Truth
-
Going to be hard to top that. Have to imagine it would put Ted Cruz in a tight spot railing against it while his constituents demand it, however
Ted Cruz railing against a cows tight spot. Constitutional? Freedom of choice?
-
The Shadow Docket aspect of the decision is almost as infuriating as the Texas part itself.
Texas is going to Texas. A complete dereliction of duty by the Supreme Court. Legislatures were always going to push the envelope into areas that were clearly unconstitutional (dare I say, virtue signaling). It is the court's responsibility to stop laws that are unconstitutional on their face from taking effect.
-
Texas is going to Texas. A complete dereliction of duty by the Supreme Court. Legislatures were always going to push the envelope into areas that were clearly unconstitutional (dare I say, virtue signaling). It is the court's responsibility to stop laws that are unconstitutional on their face from taking effect.
It seems that part is unconstitutional based on current law and part is novel and unknown. It is frustrating to me that even in the majority opinions it is written that the opinions do not address the constitutionality of the law, isn’t that their only job? So why not at the very least grant the stay and hear full arguments in a proper session? I’m sure I’m missing something.
-
Pretty soon they’ll even be marrying bovine
Cornyn is focused more on box turtles
-
I like the direction this thread has gone.
But then, I would, given my hippy-dippy, flower-power, free-love-for-bovines worldview.
All Longhorns Matter?
-
All Longhorns Matter?
Only if they sing The Yellow Rose of Texas
-
Texas is going to Texas. A complete dereliction of duty by the Supreme Court.
Nah, this was their purpose from the get-go.
-
Guys, this has been amazing. Cheers.
Now, let's talk about the outrageousness in Texas -
How has no one in the Astros organization been severely punished for their cheating scandal that won them a WS?
-
Guys, this has been amazing. Cheers.
Now, let's talk about the outrageousness in Texas -
How has no one in the Astros organization been severely punished for their cheating scandal that won them a WS?
Yadier Molina has been allowed to cheat for years. MLB is being consistent
-
Only if they sing The Yellow Rose of Texas
Cause they are given free food, housing, and education at their barn solely for the enjoyment of the meat eaters?
Thank you so much for making my morning, I have been laughing quite a bit even with the topic being uncomfortably frightening and dangerous.
-
What would the rights of a bovine human baby be? These are the hard questions
You can get 10 grand for turning in your neighbor for having a BBQ.
-
You can get 10 grand for turning in your neighbor for having a BBQ.
And sue Weber Grill Co?
-
It seems that part is unconstitutional based on current law and part is novel and unknown. It is frustrating to me that even in the majority opinions it is written that the opinions do not address the constitutionality of the law, isn’t that their only job? So why not at the very least grant the stay and hear full arguments in a proper session? I’m sure I’m missing something.
What you wrote is exactly what John Roberts wrote in his dissent.
-
I applaud the brave decision the Texas government has made. I've been saying for years that we should legally restrict the choices that women are allowed to make, and hunt down those that enabled their decision-making.
In all honesty, though, we're watching some Texan death throes before they flip purple/blue in a few years. This type of thing is a gift to anyone in their great state trying to energize young people to get out to vote.
-
I applaud the brave decision the Texas government has made. I've been saying for years that we should legally restrict the choices that women are allowed to make, and hunt down those that enabled their decision-making.
In all honesty, though, we're watching some Texan death throes before they flip purple/blue in a few years. This type of thing is a gift to anyone in their great state trying to energize young people to get out to vote.
Wait til you hear what they're doing on voting rights
-
I applaud the brave decision the Texas government has made. I've been saying for years that we should legally restrict the choices that women are allowed to make, and hunt down those that enabled their decision-making.
In all honesty, though, we're watching some Texan death throes before they flip purple/blue in a few years. This type of thing is a gift to anyone in their great state trying to energize young people to get out to vote.
I get the excellent sarcasm, but isn’t this an avenue to sue gun manufacturers? Typical government shortsightedness and the law of unintended consequences?
-
What you wrote is exactly what John Roberts wrote in his dissent.
Seems like a logical take, but I’m no legal scholar. Although, according to some present day logic, I am now basically the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
-
I get the excellent sarcasm, but isn’t this an avenue to sue gun manufacturers? Typical government shortsightedness and the law of unintended consequences?
The Sandy Hook families are suing Remington and while not Thee Supreme Court, the Connecticut State Supreme Court allowed it to proceed despite the gun manufacturers arguing that Federal law did not allow the case to proceed.
-
The Sandy Hook families are suing Remington and while not Thee Supreme Court, the Connecticut State Supreme Court allowed it to proceed despite the gun manufacturers arguing that Federal law did not allow the case to proceed.
I did read that the case is allowed to proceed, and the recent information requests by the gun manufacturers. Could the Texas law and specifically the private enforcement rights be applied to guns? Did Texas inadvertently shoot itself in the foot, so to speak?
-
I for one am looking forward to being able to sue people in other states for being unvaccinated despite having absolutely no standing. Looking at you Kirk Cousins.
-
Knock Texas all you want, but there would have been no Jerry Springer Show or Sally Jesse Raphael Show without it. Florida can't do everything, you know.
-
I get the excellent sarcasm, but isn’t this an avenue to sue gun manufacturers? Typical government shortsightedness and the law of unintended consequences?
IANAL, but...
If a Texas doctor is akin to a gunshop, then the pharma companies are the gun manufacturers. Someone in Texas needs to sue a pharmaceutical company.
-
Going to be hard to top that. Have to imagine it would put Ted Cruz in a tight spot railing against it while his constituents demand it, however
If we can get Ted to support it, Cancun Cowdicare literally rolls off of the tongue.
-
The Sandy Hook families are suing Remington and while not Thee Supreme Court, the Connecticut State Supreme Court allowed it to proceed despite the gun manufacturers arguing that Federal law did not allow the case to proceed.
Remington is going all in. Now they are demanding the scholastic records of the 5 and 6 year olds that were murdered.
For real.
-
If we can get Ted to support it, Cancun Cowdicare literally rolls off of the tongue.
Given what 45 said about Ted’s wife, maybe he’s more into Bovine relations than we know of, not judging, of course
-
Crean sucks
-
If we can get Ted to support it, Cancun Cowdicare literally rolls off of the tongue.
I think I blew it, should have been Moodicare
-
We're edging slightly closer. Where is rocket?
-
We're edging slightly closer. Where is rocket?
Bounty hunting
-
Texas should not have left the Big 12
-
“It does not affect your daily life very much if your neighbor marries a box turtle. But that does not mean it is right. Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), advocating a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage
-
“It does not affect your daily life very much if your neighbor marries a box turtle. But that does not mean it is right. Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), advocating a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage
Doesn't address the fact that Heidi Cruz would rather be married to a box turtle
-
Didn't they already secede?
-
“It does not affect your daily life very much if your neighbor marries a box turtle. But that does not mean it is right. Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), advocating a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage
You know there's not a single part of that I can argue with.
-
You all know Texas can divide into 5 states. Would not surprise me if DC became a state.
-
Well sure, 2 more donkey senators, hey?
-
I find it amazing how much concern some people have had about Afghanistan in the last 2 weeks, but the last 20 years......................not so much.
Well they care now thanks to Biden and the asinine way he left the country. People actually care about 13 serviceman getting killed when a total of zero were killed there in a year in a half. And they also care about the stranded Americans there, as well as Afghan SIV's. They additionally care about the weapons we left and the fact that our "over the horizon" capabilities are limited at best with no intelligence forces in the region. And lastly, believe it or not, people care that women and girls, who have spent 20 years living with basic freedoms, will now have all of their rights taken away from them or be murdered by a terrorist regime.
-
Well they care now thanks to Biden and the asinine way he left the country. People actually care about 13 serviceman getting killed when a total of zero were killed there in a year in a half. And they also care about the stranded Americans there, as well as Afghan SIV's. They additionally care about the weapons we left and the fact that our "over the horizon" capabilities are limited at best with no intelligence forces in the region. And lastly, believe it or not, people care that women and girls, who have spent 20 years living with basic freedoms, will now have all of their rights taken away from them or be murdered by a terrorist regime.
Some things yes, some things no. However we gave the taliban almost nothing in terms of military gear. They will not be able to maintain the vehicles or air support. The guns are a dime a dozen.
-
Well they care now thanks to Biden and the asinine way he left the country. People actually care about 13 serviceman getting killed when a total of zero were killed there in a year in a half. And they also care about the stranded Americans there, as well as Afghan SIV's. They additionally care about the weapons we left and the fact that our "over the horizon" capabilities are limited at best with no intelligence forces in the region. And lastly, believe it or not, people care that women and girls, who have spent 20 years living with basic freedoms, will now have all of their rights taken away from them or be murdered by a terrorist regime.
I see how you brought it back to Texas but I think it's just fined/jail not murdered.
-
I how you brought it back to Texas but I think it's just fined/jail not murdered.
Nice 8-)
But I wouldn't put it past Texas to start trying them as murderers and then executing them.
-
I how you brought it back to Texas but I think it's just fined/jail not murdered.
What if they rebel in any way, shape, or form? They will be killed.
-
Nice 8-)
But I wouldn't put it past Texas to start trying them as murderers and then executing them.
Got it.
What if they rebel in any way, shape, or form? They will be killed.
Did not get it.
-
Well they care now thanks to Biden and the asinine way he left the country. People actually care about 13 serviceman getting killed when a total of zero were killed there in a year in a half. And they also care about the stranded Americans there, as well as Afghan SIV's. They additionally care about the weapons we left and the fact that our "over the horizon" capabilities are limited at best with no intelligence forces in the region. And lastly, believe it or not, people care that women and girls, who have spent 20 years living with basic freedoms, will now have all of their rights taken away from them or be murdered by a terrorist regime.
So much context missing here.
But, alas, nothing about Texas.
Change my mind: FC Dallas has the best youth program/academy in the US
-
(https://scontent-atl3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/240114694_5495271680565841_5483106698028562018_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=U7sJV6iNOfYAX-vJxtN&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-2.xx&oh=396b42e341a70d798af74e7164ec740e&oe=61581199)
-
Well they care now thanks to Biden and the asinine way he left the country. People actually care about 13 serviceman getting killed when a total of zero were killed there in a year in a half. And they also care about the stranded Americans there, as well as Afghan SIV's. They additionally care about the weapons we left and the fact that our "over the horizon" capabilities are limited at best with no intelligence forces in the region. And lastly, believe it or not, people care that women and girls, who have spent 20 years living with basic freedoms, will now have all of their rights taken away from them or be murdered by a terrorist regime.
Yeah twenty years wasn’t enough. We should have spent even more time there!
It was a mistake to do any type of “nation building” there in the first place. Money and lives wasted.
-
So much context missing here.
But, alas, nothing about Texas.
Change my mind: FC Dallas has the best youth program/academy in the US
I was responding to his comments on Afganistan. The Texas decision is stupid but not the least bit surprising.
-
Well they care now thanks to Biden and the asinine way he left the country. People actually care about 13 serviceman getting killed when a total of zero were killed there in a year in a half. And they also care about the stranded Americans there, as well as Afghan SIV's. They additionally care about the weapons we left and the fact that our "over the horizon" capabilities are limited at best with no intelligence forces in the region. And lastly, believe it or not, people care that women and girls, who have spent 20 years living with basic freedoms, will now have all of their rights taken away from them or be murdered by a terrorist regime.
See, I don’t think 90% of the country even knows about any of that, let alone cares one bit about it. Sure, Fox News viewers will be whipped into the appropriate level of outrage…until the next thing comes along that they can milk to create more outrage.
-
Oh, and Texas sucks. In every imaginable way. Austin isn’t half bad though.
-
See, I don’t think 90% of the country even knows about any of that, let alone cares one bit about it. Sure, Fox News viewers will be whipped into the appropriate level of outrage…until the next thing comes along that they can milk to create more outrage.
I think you're wrong based on recent polling.
-
Yeah twenty years wasn’t enough. We should have spent even more time there!
It was a mistake to do any type of “nation building” there in the first place. Money and lives wasted.
You're conflating leaving Afghanistan (which most people agree with) to how we left the country which was a complete and unmitigated disaster.
-
And lastly, believe it or not, people care that women and girls, who have spent 20 years living with basic freedoms, will now have all of their rights taken away from them or be murdered by a terrorist regime.
"U.S. officials are looking into reports that in the frantic evacuation of desperate Afghans from Kabul, older men were admitted together with young girls they claimed as “brides” or otherwise sexually abused." (In Wisconsin)
https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-child-trafficking-27d93a340c4834d497eb36e22bb72f42
Just a complete disaster all around.
-
Change my mind: FC Dallas has the best youth program/academy in the US
I don't think thats even up for debate at this point.
-
You're conflating leaving Afghanistan (which most people agree with) to how we left the country which was a complete and unmitigated disaster.
Yes. It’s usually really easy and smooth leaving a war zone where we lost and the puppet government we put in place runs off to Uzbekistan.
-
"U.S. officials are looking into reports that in the frantic evacuation of desperate Afghans from Kabul, older men were admitted together with young girls they claimed as “brides” or otherwise sexually abused." (In Wisconsin)
https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-child-trafficking-27d93a340c4834d497eb36e22bb72f42
Just a complete disaster all around.
Not really. We got almost all Americans out. (Only ones left are those who stayed after repeated contacts.). Ten of thousands of Afghan refugees airlifted out as well.
Could have been better. Hardly a disaster.
-
Oh, and Texas sucks. In every imaginable way. Austin isn’t half bad though.
Houston is way cooler than Austin.
-
"U.S. officials are looking into reports that in the frantic evacuation of desperate Afghans from Kabul, older men were admitted together with young girls they claimed as “brides” or otherwise sexually abused." (In Wisconsin)
https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-child-trafficking-27d93a340c4834d497eb36e22bb72f42
Just a complete disaster all around.
We also won't and in many ways can't properly vet all of these people coming into the country. It's a process that should take 2 yrs as well. And this narrative that it was a "20 year war" is also imbecilic whether it came from Trump or Biden.
It's not my fault that Biden doesn't know we have troops in Syria, South Korea, or Germany. Nor is it my fault that unlike other areas, the Middle East for example, we can't maintain a balance of power because we have zero allies in the region or counter intelligence on the ground. And it certainly isn't my fault that Biden is a total assclown, who has never made a good foreign policy decision, lied about the likelihood the Taliban would take over the country, didn't know Al Qaeda still exists, created ISIS with Obama, and has made the world far less safe.
The utter incompetence of Blinken, Austin, Milley, and that smug piece of garbage NSA is even more upsetting than Biden's cluelessness. There are also countless pets of servicemen and women that could have been boarded on empty planes. This was a total abomination and beyond reprehensible. Ransom payments to the Taliban to get those stranded out will not make anyone forget this unconscionable disaster and dereliction of duty.
-
We also won't and in many ways can't properly vet all of these people coming into the country. It's a process that should take 2 yrs as well. And this narrative that it was a "20 year war" is also imbecilic whether it came from Trump or Biden.
It's not my fault that Biden doesn't know we have troops in Syria, South Korea, or Germany. Nor is it my fault that unlike other areas, the Middle East for example, we can't maintain a balance of power because we have zero allies in the region or counter intelligence on the ground. And it certainly isn't my fault that Biden is a total assclown, who has never made a good foreign policy decision, lied about the likelihood the Taliban would take over the country, didn't know Al Qaeda still exists, created ISIS with Obama, and has made the world far less safe.
The utter incompetence of Blinken, Austin, Milley, and that smug piece of garbage NSA is even more upsetting than Biden's cluelessness. There are also countless pets of servicemen and women that could have been boarded on empty planes. This was a total abomination and beyond reprehensible. Ransom payments to the Taliban to get those stranded out will not make anyone forget this unconscionable disaster and dereliction of duty.
Uhhh. OK it was a 19.5 year war.
The rest of your post is hilarious. I mean..the pets?? 😂😂😂
-
Houston is way cooler than Austin.
This is just plain false
-
This is just plain false
Then you don’t know the right places in Houston. Not the suburbs. They’re awful.
And I like Austin. But after being there a few times…eh….reminds me of Madison with more glass towers.
-
We also won't and in many ways can't properly vet all of these people coming into the country. It's a process that should take 2 yrs as well. And this narrative that it was a "20 year war" is also imbecilic whether it came from Trump or Biden.
It's not my fault that Biden doesn't know we have troops in Syria, South Korea, or Germany. Nor is it my fault that unlike other areas, the Middle East for example, we can't maintain a balance of power because we have zero allies in the region or counter intelligence on the ground. And it certainly isn't my fault that Biden is a total assclown, who has never made a good foreign policy decision, lied about the likelihood the Taliban would take over the country, didn't know Al Qaeda still exists, created ISIS with Obama, and has made the world far less safe.
The utter incompetence of Blinken, Austin, Milley, and that smug piece of garbage NSA is even more upsetting than Biden's cluelessness. There are also countless pets of servicemen and women that could have been boarded on empty planes. This was a total abomination and beyond reprehensible. Ransom payments to the Taliban to get those stranded out will not make anyone forget this unconscionable disaster and dereliction of duty.
We should have had Mexico pay for a wall we could have built around the Taliban, like in Texas. Speaking of Texas, I don’t like their big government invasion into freedom but that’s the price we have to pay prevent box turtle-human marriage
-
Then you don’t know the right places in Houston. Not the suburbs. They’re awful.
And I like Austin. But after being there a few times…eh….reminds me of Madison with more glass towers.
I've been everywhere in Houston. They got nothing going on
-
Uhhh. OK it was a 19.5 year war.
The rest of your post is hilarious. I mean..the pets?? 😂😂😂
Right. This was a 20 year war similar to WW2 with battles analogous to Stalingrad. We will agree to disagree FBM. Is Korea a 70 yr war?
-
Right. This was a 20 year war similar to WW2 with battles analogous to Stalingrad. We will agree to disagree FBM. Is Korea a 70 yr war?
There were ~2,000,000 casualties during the battle of Stalingrad in less than 8 months... not even in the same stratosphere.
Also, "......will now have all of their rights taken away from them or be murdered by a terrorist regime." Religious Fundamentalist Regime. Terrorism is a feature of their religious fundamentalism but not the basis of its existence.
-
I think we should get back into Vietnam and continue the American War of Aggression just to prove to the world we can leave a war the right way. Otherwise, we'll be a laughingstock.
-
And I like Austin. But after being there a few times…eh….reminds me of Madison with more glass towers.
I really like Austin and I think it has more culture/better food/stuff to do than Madison, but it has one of the ugliest skylines in history. Brutal bland 80s oil money skyscrapers that clash violently with all the new glassy buildings and condos.
There were ~2,000,000 casualties during the battle of Stalingrad in less than 8 months... not even in the same stratosphere.
I think he was being facetious
-
Go Daddy will no longer host Texas' snitch site
(p.s. Yo, Texas... snitches get stitches)
https://gizmodo.com/godaddy-is-giving-texas-abortion-snitching-site-the-boo-1847616447
Uber and Lyft will pay the legal fees of any driver sued under the new Texas law.
https://www.npr.org/2021/09/03/1034140480/lyft-and-uber-will-pay-drivers-legal-fees-if-theyre-sued-under-texas-abortion-la
-
I think he was being facetious
dammit! I just finished listening to Ghosts of the Ostfront (Hardcore History podcast) and was excited to flex my Eastern Front knowledge.
-
We also won't and in many ways can't properly vet all of these people coming into the country. It's a process that should take 2 yrs as well. And this narrative that it was a "20 year war" is also imbecilic whether it came from Trump or Biden.
It's not my fault that Biden doesn't know we have troops in Syria, South Korea, or Germany. Nor is it my fault that unlike other areas, the Middle East for example, we can't maintain a balance of power because we have zero allies in the region or counter intelligence on the ground. And it certainly isn't my fault that Biden is a total assclown, who has never made a good foreign policy decision, lied about the likelihood the Taliban would take over the country, didn't know Al Qaeda still exists, created ISIS with Obama, and has made the world far less safe.
The utter incompetence of Blinken, Austin, Milley, and that smug piece of garbage NSA is even more upsetting than Biden's cluelessness. There are also countless pets of servicemen and women that could have been boarded on empty planes. This was a total abomination and beyond reprehensible. Ransom payments to the Taliban to get those stranded out will not make anyone forget this unconscionable disaster and dereliction of duty.
Can I honestly ask where you're getting some of your sources?
Because, this is what I found on a quick google search: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/09/01/fact-check-image-falsely-claims-show-military-dogs-left-kabul/5667668001/
-
I think we should get back into Vietnam and continue the American War of Aggression just to prove to the world we can leave a war the right way. Otherwise, we'll be a laughingstock.
The "wars" aren't analogous at all. We weren't worried about Vietnamese attacking the Western World or our homeland. And again, it's not getting out, it's HOW we got out and the ignominious decision making during that process. I'm a bit hawkish and anachronistic so I realize most people don't agree with my views.
I will keep them to myself. However, there is no way to sugarcoat the utter s-show that happened regardless of you and others that continue to redirect the conversation. Nor is it conceivable that Biden isn't a pathological liar.
-
Houston is way cooler than Austin.
Dude, you’ll have to go on ignore if you persist with that sort disinformation.
-
Go Daddy will no longer host Texas' snitch site
(p.s. Yo, Texas... snitches get stitches)
https://gizmodo.com/godaddy-is-giving-texas-abortion-snitching-site-the-boo-1847616447
Uber and Lyft will pay the legal fees of any driver sued under the new Texas law.
https://www.npr.org/2021/09/03/1034140480/lyft-and-uber-will-pay-drivers-legal-fees-if-theyre-sued-under-texas-abortion-la
I will settle for bad people doing good things given the state of things, but this is a pretty good PR campaign for two companies that need one. Now pay your gig workers a living wage.
-
dammit! I just finished listening to Ghosts of the Ostfront (Hardcore History podcast) and was excited to flex my Eastern Front knowledge.
Speaking of 20 years ago and Stalingrad, I enjoyed the film Enemy at the Gates.
-
Not really. We got almost all Americans out. (Only ones left are those who stayed after repeated contacts.). Ten of thousands of Afghan refugees airlifted out as well.
Could have been better. Hardly a disaster.
This exactly.
Interestingly it was the largest airlift in history.
-
This exactly.
Interestingly it was the largest airlift in history.
“Days after the Biden administration finished evacuating about 124,000 people from Afghanistan, it’s coming to grips with the reality that it doesn’t know who many of those people are.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-03/u-s-struggles-to-learn-who-s-who-in-afghan-airlift-of-124-000
-
My wife at dinner tonight. "$10,000,000 would not get me to move to Texas or Florida right now."
-
Here's a thought...split da $10 mil with her and ewe kan just goe while she stays in MI, hey?
-
Right. This was a 20 year war similar to WW2 with battles analogous to Stalingrad. We will agree to disagree FBM. Is Korea a 70 yr war?
LOOOOLLLL Seriously?
You are comparing a situation where we have been asked to stay in Korea by a legit government versus a situation where we were essentially an occupying force?
It was a 20 year war. We have been running military operations and drone strikes until the end. All your spinning doesn't change that.
-
“Days after the Biden administration finished evacuating about 124,000 people from Afghanistan, it’s coming to grips with the reality that it doesn’t know who many of those people are.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-03/u-s-struggles-to-learn-who-s-who-in-afghan-airlift-of-124-000
Ah yes. Bitch that they’re not getting people out. Then, when they get people out, bitch that they got people out. What’s the next complaint?
-
Here's a thought...split da $10 mil with her and ewe kan just goe while she stays in MI, hey?
Texas is so f'd up right now that i almost want them to secede.
-
Texas is so f'd up right now that i almost want them to secede.
I am not so crazy to think there's a civil war coming.
But I'm not so against the idea of a few different countries emerging. It's pretty clear there are significant cultural divides by region that are making things worse and aren't going to be solved anytime soon (if ever).
NE, MW, South, West, great plains/mountain.
-
I am not so crazy to think there's a civil war coming.
Civil War? They aren't worth fighting for. Bye.
-
Ah yes. Bitch that they’re not getting people out. Then, when they get people out, bitch that they got people out. What’s the next complaint?
Bitch that too many of them 'don't practice American values' (read: are brown)
-
Bitch that too many of them 'don't practice American values' (read: are brown)
We have to get them out but they are not welcome here
-
I am not so crazy to think there's a civil war coming.
But I'm not so against the idea of a few different countries emerging. It's pretty clear there are significant cultural divides by region that are making things worse and aren't going to be solved anytime soon (if ever).
NE, MW, South, West, great plains/mountain.
But thats been the case for most of this country's existence. Think of the scene in the bar in Good Will Hunting talking about Gordon Wood and the agrarian economies of the south vs the entrepreneurial capitalistic economies of Pennsylvania and the NE. There have always been wildly different pockets.
As long as states have rights and autonomy, that can happen just fine. Things change, things are cyclical, it happens. I think California would secede before Texas ever would.
The rest of this thread is getting a bit circle jerky.
-
It seems that in government there's a competition to see what state or nation can come up with the stupidest thing. I was going to say stupidest solution to the problem, but in so many cases there actually isn't even a problem. Just stupidity. We need better qualifications for people before they can enter state or national politics - like Singapore has - in order to weed out the incompetent and stupid.
Yes, Singapore's criteria would eliminate probably 60% of congress and the last 3 presidents.
https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/singapore-president-qualifications/
-
I am not so crazy to think there's a civil war coming.
But I'm not so against the idea of a few different countries emerging. It's pretty clear there are significant cultural divides by region that are making things worse and aren't going to be solved anytime soon (if ever).
NE, MW, South, West, great plains/mountain.
Sort of there’s a cultural divide? More people in Texas don’t agree with what Texas is doing than probably live in New England. They just get jettisoned into a dominionist authoritarian fate in this scenario?
People love to rag on Alabama, but there’s a lot of people who aren’t civil war enthusiasts who live there, more than say live in Delaware. Does the fact that they’re the minority faction within that state make them worth splitting off into a separate country from those enlightened states where the ratio is reversed?
-
Jesmu said he doesn't think there's a civil war coming. He said he wouldn't mind multiple countries. I wouldn't either provided that any referendum had >75% voter turnout so we could get a real read on the thoughts of the voters
-
I guess I should have boldfaced "there are significant cultural divides" but was on my phone. The cultural divides, such as they are, are urban-rural. I used Texas and Alabama as examples, but could just as easily used California. There were 6M R-voters in California, and a Calexit scenario doesn't really resolve their cultural divide that exists within California, no?
-
Just saw the term "Abortion Vigilante."
That's what the Texas politicians have created -- legislation that pits neighbor against neighbor.
It sounds like the plot of a hard-to-believe, dystopian-society movie.
-
Just saw the term "Abortion Vigilante."
That's what the Texas politicians have created -- legislation that pits neighbor against neighbor.
It sounds like the plot of a hard-to-believe, dystopian-society movie.
Wonder if there's a German term for this sort of... wait a minute...
Ministerium für Staatssicherheit
That went swimmingly I'm told.
-
Not really. We got almost all Americans out. (Only ones left are those who stayed after repeated contacts.). Ten of thousands of Afghan refugees airlifted out as well.
Could have been better. Hardly a disaster.
”Could have been better” is a bit of an understatement, hey? If you think otherwise, you’re hiding your head in the sand. I’m not questioning for a second that we needed to leave, but we could have gotten people out first, then equipment and then the military. We could have gotten out earlier before the Taliban took over most of the country. We could have done it at a different time than the busiest fighting season for the Taliban. We didn’t have to lose 13. Hell, even CNN and MSNBC people have said this was a disaster.
And Texas? For cafeteria Catholics, like Biden and many others, it’s horrible. But abortion on demand and as a means of birth control has become the norm, instead of safe, legal and rare.
Lock this thing up.
-
”Could have been better” is a bit of an understatement, hey? If you think otherwise, you’re hiding your head in the sand. I’m not questioning for a second that we needed to leave, but we could have gotten people out first, then equipment and then the military. We could have gotten out earlier before the Taliban took over most of the country. We could have done it at a different time than the busiest fighting season for the Taliban. We didn’t have to lose 13. Hell, even CNN and MSNBC people have said this was a disaster.
You make it sound like leaving a war zone, especially when the provisional government high tails it out of the country and their army just disappears, is like moving next door. It was no where near the disaster it has been portrayed.
And Texas? For cafeteria Catholics, like Biden and many others, it’s horrible. But abortion on demand and as a means of birth control has become the norm, instead of safe, legal and rare.
False. Abortion rates have been falling for years. And it is not due to restrictions.
https://www.statista.com/chart/19490/us-abortion-rate-guttmacher-institute/
Lock this thing up.
Ah, someone doesn't want to get their falsehoods challenged I see.
-
”Could have been better” is a bit of an understatement, hey? If you think otherwise, you’re hiding your head in the sand. I’m not questioning for a second that we needed to leave, but we could have gotten people out first, then equipment and then the military. We could have gotten out earlier before the Taliban took over most of the country. We could have done it at a different time than the busiest fighting season for the Taliban. We didn’t have to lose 13. Hell, even CNN and MSNBC people have said this was a disaster.
And Texas? For cafeteria Catholics, like Biden and many others, it’s horrible. But abortion on demand and as a means of birth control has become the norm, instead of safe, legal and rare.
Lock this thing up.
I always find this term interesting. It's used to insinuate that left leaning people can't be Catholic or Christian but really it's a different way of saying "I don't respect the establishment clause and you do"
-
Ah, someone doesn't want to get their falsehoods challenged I see.
It's the muguru technique of spiking the ball and insisting no one can argue with you.
-
Wrong.
Many of us, who follow the Catholic faith, have a lot more to say about the topic. But this topic is the perfect reason that politics should be and are banned from this site.
-
Wrong.
Many of us, who follow the Catholic faith, have a lot more to say about the topic. But this topic is the perfect reason that politics should be and are banned from this site.
You do realize there are pro-choice Catholics right? And that your participation in this topic isn't mandatory?
-
Wrong.
Many of us, who follow the Catholic faith, have a lot more to say about the topic. But this topic is the perfect reason that politics should be and are banned from this site.
The problem with the term 'Cafeteria Catholics' is that we all are to some extent or other.
The official Catholic stances on preferential treatment for the poor, immigration, the environment, capitalism, COVID vaccines, universal health care as a right (as long as abortion isn't covered), the death penalty are all pretty liberal.
It is the extemely rare person who is lockstep with all of them. Even in the clergy.
-
Wrong.
Many of us, who follow the Catholic faith, have a lot more to say about the topic. But this topic is the perfect reason that politics should be and are banned from this site.
Maybe I'm reading your line of thought incorrectly but it appears your support of a law is base on a religious belief. You're not proposing the validity of that law based on those religious beliefs are you?
-
You do realize there are pro-choice Catholics right?
Most, actually.
(https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/ft_2020.10.20_abortion_01.png)
Not even a contest on overturning.
(https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/ft_2020.10.20_abortion_03.png)
-
So much context missing here.
But, alas, nothing about Texas.
Change my mind: FC Dallas has the best youth program/academy in the US
Context??? What "context" would you offer to better help me accept the rape of 13 year old girls by grown men/terrorists.
-
Context??? What "context" would you offer to better help me accept the rape of 13 year old girls by grown men/terrorists.
You shouldn't accept it. No one suggested you should. But I am not understanding the point you are making here - that we should have occupied Afghanistan indefinitely to protect 13 year old girls?
-
And Texas? For cafeteria Catholics, like Biden and many others, it’s horrible. But abortion on demand and as a means of birth control has become the norm, instead of safe, legal and rare.
Lock this thing up.
Uhhhh no. Absolutely incorrect. You do not pass go, you do not collect 200.
Abortions have been falling for years. And as for the so called "real catholics" they have been the ones denying the safe sex practices for YEARS.
-
You shouldn't accept it. No one suggested you should. But I am not understanding the point you are making here - that we should have occupied Afghanistan indefinitely to protect 13 year old girls?
Muggsy listed a number of consequences from our correct, but ham-handed withdrawal from Afghan, including the inevitable rape and murder of young girls by the Taliban. Another poster followed up with the suggestion that some of Muggsy's points needed "context".
When it comes to the rape and murder of 13 year old girls, I don't need "context".
-
Just saw the term "Abortion Vigilante."
That's what the Texas politicians have created -- legislation that pits neighbor against neighbor.
It sounds like the plot of a hard-to-believe, dystopian-society movie.
You mean such as the Face Mask Nazis in blue states who call the cops to report that their neighbor has 2 unrelated children staying at her house for the weekend on her daughter's "sleepover"??
The "Karen" in the grocery store who summons the store manager to report that someone in aisle 5 isn't wearing a mask??
Those "dystopian movies"??
-
Muggsy listed a number of consequences from our correct, but ham-handed withdrawal from Afghan, including the inevitable rape and murder of young girls by the Taliban. Another poster followed up with the suggestion that some of Muggsy's points needed "context".
When it comes to the rape and murder of 13 year old girls, I don't need "context".
Well the withdrawl wasn’t “ham handed” given the context so perhaps context is an issue for you.
-
Context??? What "context" would you offer to better help me accept the rape of 13 year old girls by grown men/terrorists.
A better withdrawal would have led to better post-withdrawal behavior by the Taliban?
Now who's burying their head in the sand?
-
This vague thread is a now a political quagmire covering abortion, COVID, Afghanistan, and religion. Can’t wait to see how much farther we go before a justified lock
-
This vague thread is a now a political quagmire covering abortion, COVID, Afghanistan, and religion. Can’t wait to see how much farther we go before a justified lock
Nazis.
-
This vague thread is a now a political quagmire covering abortion, COVID, Afghanistan, and religion. Can’t wait to see how much farther we go before a justified lock
It's the cops, everybody run!
-
I am not so crazy to think there's a civil war coming.
But I'm not so against the idea of a few different countries emerging. It's pretty clear there are significant cultural divides by region that are making things worse and aren't going to be solved anytime soon (if ever).
NE, MW, South, West, great plains/mountain.
The Atlantic had an article about this sometime in the last 12 months.
They said a"Cold Civil War" is possible.
-
Wrong.
Many of us, who follow the Catholic faith, have a lot more to say about the topic. But this topic is the perfect reason that politics should be and are banned from this site.
It's actually pretty simple. It's called separation of church and state.
-
I am not so crazy to think there's a civil war coming.
It's pretty crazy.
How do you envision this all shaking out? Like, will California go to war with Utah? Are the people of Missouri and Iowa teaming up to take on Illinois and Minnesota?
And what about the non "red" voters in red states? Will the 10.5 million combined Biden voters in Texas and Florida be kindly asked to leave? Rounded up into camps and re-educated? Slaughtered in their homes? Will soldiers from rural Michigan start killing their fellow soldiers from Detroit?
Who's going to organize this thing?
And, most importantly, wny? Are millions of Americans going to try to kill millions of other Americans over Donald Trump? Immigration laws? Tax rates? Gun control?
Unlike the actual Civil War, there isn't one overriding issue (slavery) that clearly divides the nation along economic, cultural, moral and geographical lines.
People like to say "I can see another civil war coming," but never seem to think through the logistics of it.
So, how's this all going down?
-
Muggsy listed a number of consequences from our correct, but ham-handed withdrawal from Afghan, including the inevitable rape and murder of young girls by the Taliban. Another poster followed up with the suggestion that some of Muggsy's points needed "context".
When it comes to the rape and murder of 13 year old girls, I don't need "context".
In all seriousness, do you have a suggestion on how to prevent this? Once the U.S. withdrew, as it should have 18 years ago IMO, how do we prevent such a thing? What about the the way the U.S> withdrew has anything to do with what the Taliban was going to do?
-
A post on Texas abortion has turned into the war in Afghanistan. Strange scoop, strange.
-
This vague thread is a now a political quagmire covering abortion, COVID, Afghanistan, and religion. Can’t wait to see how much farther we go before a justified lock
This is true. But is started out with a lot of promise.
-
You make it sound like leaving a war zone, especially when the provisional government high tails it out of the country and their army just disappears, is like moving next door. It was no where near the disaster it has been portrayed.
False. Abortion rates have been falling for years. And it is not due to restrictions.
https://www.statista.com/chart/19490/us-abortion-rate-guttmacher-institute/
Ah, someone doesn't want to get their falsehoods challenged I see.
They would fall even more if every woman could view the sonogram guided procedures of their own abortions as the fetus hopelessly struggles for its life.
-
They would fall even more if every woman could view the sonogram guided procedures of their own abortions as the fetus hopelessly struggles for its life.
At least there are old, mediocre white men demanding the right to tell women what to do with their bodies.
There would actually be fewer abortions if you demanded the right to tell men what to do with their bodies and support a ban on Viagra.
-
They would fall even more if every woman could view the sonogram guided procedures of their own abortions as the fetus hopelessly struggles for its life.
Yeah they are too dumb and emotional to make decisions otherwise.
-
I believe there is a zero percent chance the 50 US states will be one country in 100 years. Frankly, zero chance in 50 years too. 50/50 chance in 25 years .. and I'd put it at 25% chance in 5 years.
How in 5 years? In 2016, Trump won and there was a movement called Calexit that spelled out a path to California seceding, with a "Proposition" on the ballot to change their constitution, if passed then a vote to secede. It lost energy.
Say in 2024, Trump runs and wins, the GOP wins the house and Senate -- very plausible. Liberals across the country are enraged and Calexit starts with complete intensity -- again, very plausible. In 2017, polling had Calexit at 32% .. I could easily see it passing in ~2025 if the GOP was in control again.
Next is federal ratification. Surely that wouldn't happen, right? But Trump is in office and he's no Abe Lincoln. The GOP sees this as a golden opportunity to wipe away CA's 55 electoral votes and win permanent control of the Presidency. Trump says: California, you're fired, I'm rid of Nancy Pelosi forever.
No one fires a shot. Lawyers work out the details. Oregon and Washington are on the clock.
We thought people using horse dewormer to fight a pandemic was far fetched 5 years ago. The above scenario .. is more likely.
-
Yeah they are too dumb and emotional to make decisions otherwise.
Isn't that the gist of what men have said throughout the history of mankind?
-
I believe there is a zero percent chance the 50 US states will be one country in 100 years. Frankly, zero chance in 50 years too. 50/50 chance in 25 years .. and I'd put it at 25% chance in 5 years.
How in 5 years? In 2016, Trump won and there was a movement called Calexit that spelled out a path to California seceding, with a "Proposition" on the ballot to change their constitution, if passed then a vote to secede. It lost energy.
Say in 2024, Trump runs and wins, the GOP wins the house and Senate -- very plausible. Liberals across the country are enraged and Calexit starts with complete intensity -- again, very plausible. In 2017, polling had Calexit at 32% .. I could easily see it passing in ~2025 if the GOP was in control again.
Next is federal ratification. Surely that wouldn't happen, right? But Trump is in office and he's no Abe Lincoln. The GOP sees this as a golden opportunity to wipe away CA's 55 electoral votes and win permanent control of the Presidency. Trump says: California, you're fired, I'm rid of Nancy Pelosi forever.
No one fires a shot. Lawyers work out the details. Oregon and Washington are on the clock.
We thought people using horse dewormer to fight a pandemic was far fetched 5 years ago. The above scenario .. is more likely.
5 years wth? wats gonna happen. seems so unrealistic to me. 50 plus years sure idk. texas is gonna become a country so it can have a thoecracy. other bible.belt states? go ahead. how do u even do it
-
It really comes down to who pulls the trigger first. Let's say Topper's scenario did happen, Oregon and Washington (at least the eastern portions) are going to jump to try to leave with California. The red states will gladly get rid of that swaying the elections. However, if Texas leaves first, I could see some of the red states trying to jump on board with that ship. Question is would Texas try to get rid of the purple or blue areas or not.
-
Ain't happenin' guys.
I expect to see Rs make one more final attempt at a coup. It will fail and the middle and soft right will reject them completely. Even their attempts to rig elections won't be enough to save them.
-
I believe there is a zero percent chance the 50 US states will be one country in 100 years. Frankly, zero chance in 50 years too. 50/50 chance in 25 years .. and I'd put it at 25% chance in 5 years.
How in 5 years? In 2016, Trump won and there was a movement called Calexit that spelled out a path to California seceding, with a "Proposition" on the ballot to change their constitution, if passed then a vote to secede. It lost energy.
Say in 2024, Trump runs and wins, the GOP wins the house and Senate -- very plausible. Liberals across the country are enraged and Calexit starts with complete intensity -- again, very plausible. In 2017, polling had Calexit at 32% .. I could easily see it passing in ~2025 if the GOP was in control again.
Next is federal ratification. Surely that wouldn't happen, right? But Trump is in office and he's no Abe Lincoln. The GOP sees this as a golden opportunity to wipe away CA's 55 electoral votes and win permanent control of the Presidency. Trump says: California, you're fired, I'm rid of Nancy Pelosi forever.
No one fires a shot. Lawyers work out the details. Oregon and Washington are on the clock.
We thought people using horse dewormer to fight a pandemic was far fetched 5 years ago. The above scenario .. is more likely.
I'm going to save this post for the 2026, 2046 and 2071 versions of Old Takes Exposed.
The odds of Donald Trump presiding over the exit of California in five years is about 1,000 times smaller than the odds of Donald Trump being dead in five years.
We can argue about whether think a Calexit vote magically would flip from 2-to-1 against to 2-to-1 in favor, or why Republicans would want to bid adieu to the country's largest producer of food, its technology hub and a tax donor state.
A key fact all of this speculation forgets is that there is no legal or Constitutional mechanism for what you propose here. So, fun conjecture, but it's not possible under U.S. law.
-
I'm going to save this post for the 2026, 2046 and 2071 versions of Old Takes Exposed.
The odds of Donald Trump presiding over the exit of California in five years is about 1,000 times smaller than the odds of Donald Trump being dead in five years.
We can argue about whether think a Calexit vote magically would flip from 2-to-1 against to 2-to-1 in favor, or why Republicans would want to bid adieu to the country's largest producer of food, its technology hub and a tax donor state.
A key fact all of this speculation forgets is that there is no legal or Constitutional mechanism for what you propose here. So, fun conjecture, but it's not possible under U.S. law.
Crops: California doesn't do crops efficiently especially with the water issues and then R's could proclaim they brought back farming infrastructure to middle America.
Tech hub, maybe to get it out of an area where they feel youre indoctrinated?
Always remember a few years ago the Scottish referendum was at 34% now if Boris Johnson allows another Scotland's likely leaving the UK. If that can happen I wouldn't be surprised of any state leaving here.
-
Crops: California doesn't do crops efficiently especially with the water issues and then R's could proclaim they brought back farming infrastructure to middle America.
OK. Good luck growing mass quantities of grapes, almonds, strawberries and lettuce in the Midwest.
Always remember a few years ago the Scottish referendum was at 34% now if Boris Johnson allows another Scotland's likely leaving the UK. If that can happen I wouldn't be surprised of any state leaving here.
Latest polls show otherwise. FWIW.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/elections-2021/scottish-independence
But again, the UK has a legal mechanism for that to happen. The U.S. does not.
-
Ain't happenin' guys.
I expect to see Rs make one more final attempt at a coup. It will fail and the middle and soft right will reject them completely. Even their attempts to rig elections won't be enough to save them.
This is the most likely scenario.
1/6/21 combined with the ongoing Q/extreme entrenchment of ~50% of the GOP (or ~20% of voters) and complacency of any potential leadership, guarantees that if voting restrictions don't do the trick another coup attempt is absolutely on their docket. And, as you said, there are enough R's that are rational about social issues and intelligent enough to know what democracy actually is (as well as other forms of government) to reject the movement.
-
We can argue about whether think a Calexit vote magically would flip from 2-to-1 against to 2-to-1 in favor,
Not sure why you picked 2 to 1. It'd only need 50% to pass a referendum in CA, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
.. or why Republicans would want to bid adieu to the country's largest producer of food, its technology hub and a tax donor state.
A key fact all of this speculation forgets is that there is no legal or Constitutional mechanism for what you propose here. So, fun conjecture, but it's not possible under U.S. law.
You are so cute thinking the GOP rationally thinks about things like tech and food production. Or that laws matter to them when they get in the way of their desires.
They are primarily interested in having and holding power. This would do that. The end. It would get done.
-
Not sure why you picked 2 to 1. It'd only need 50% to pass a referendum in CA, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
You are so cute thinking the GOP rationally thinks about things like tech and food production. Or that laws matter to them when they get in the way of their desires.
They are primarily interested in having and holding power. This would do that. The end. It would get done.
They've taken the big step to threaten businesses that will not do their bidding for them. If they loose the Chamber of Commerce, they are toast.
-
Not sure why you picked 2 to 1. It'd only need 50% to pass a referendum in CA, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
The campaign for Cali to secede was stated by 2 Trumpers. It will go nowhere.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1869 that no state can secede from the Union. To do so would require a Constitutional amendment which means it would have to be approved by 2/3 in the House and Senate, then be ratified by 38 states.
-
.....thinking the GOP rationally thinks about things like tech and food production. Or that laws matter to them when they get in the way of their desires.
They are primarily interested in having and holding power. ......
Regardless of where one falls on the hypothetical civil war argument nobody can argue that this isn't accurate.
-
They are primarily interested in having and holding power. This would do that. The end. It would get done.
As opposed to the Democrats, who are primarily interested in having and holding power.
-
As opposed to the Democrats, who are primarily interested in having and holding power.
I think the distinction is GOP = having, holding, *and wielding* power. Dems = having and holding power.
The GOP for many decades has viewed and organized their political operation with cold, Machiavellian, game theory. The same cannot be said of the Democrats. Twice in the last 3 presidents, they have controlled both houses of Congress and the White House and with that they've gotten basically nothing done. The opposite is true of the GOP.
-
I think the distinction is GOP = having, holding, *and wielding* power. Dems = having and holding power.
The GOP for many decades has viewed and organized their political operation with cold, Machiavellian, game theory. The same cannot be said of the Democrats. Twice in the last 3 presidents, they have controlled both houses of Congress and the White House and with that they've gotten basically nothing done. The opposite is true of the GOP.
In a two party system both parties seek to have, hold and wield power. The Dems used to be great at all 3. The Rs never had an LBJ, Tip O’Neill, Dan Rostenkowski, etc. They kept the fringe in line. Not so much today.
-
As opposed to the Democrats, who are primarily interested in having and holding power.
But don’t kill their followers to do so.
Saying “they do it too” is the height of ignorance. Which is of course why you would make that argument.
-
In a two party system both parties seek to have, hold and wield power. The Dems used to be great at all 3. The Rs never had an LBJ, Tip O’Neill, Dan Rostenkowski, etc. They kept the fringe in line. Not so much today.
Okay, iterating toward the most precise end point:
Dems seek to have, hold, and wield power but are comically inept at accomplishing any wielding of power when they stumble into having it.
GOP seeks to have, hold, and wield power, but since they have embraced the platonic form of machiavellian power expression, they manage to wield power even when they neither have nor hold it.
-
Okay, iterating toward the most precise end point:
Dems seek to have, hold, and wield power but are comically inept at accomplishing any wielding of power when they stumble into having it.
GOP seeks to have, hold, and wield power, but since they have embraced the platonic form of machiavellian power expression, they manage to wield power even when they neither have nor hold it.
Yep. Republicans seek to undermine the very Constitution they pretend to care about, and brain dead followers like Lenny’s lap it up.
-
But don’t kill their followers to do so.
What are you talking about? The Clintons have killed plenty of their followers, who crossed them, to stay in power.
-
Yep. Republicans seek to undermine the very Constitution they pretend to care about, and brain dead followers like Lenny’s lap it up.
How do political comments and personal attacks like this not merit a ban?
Probably because when one moderator chooses to participate in what is obviously a political thread, this thread is allowed to continue and not be locked.
-
How do political comments and personal attacks like this not merit a ban?
Probably because when one moderator chooses to participate in what is obviously a political thread, this thread is allowed to continue and not be locked.
Keep crying.
-
Okay, iterating toward the most precise end point:
Dems seek to have, hold, and wield power but are comically inept at accomplishing any wielding of power when they stumble into having it.
GOP seeks to have, hold, and wield power, but since they have embraced the platonic form of machiavellian power expression, they manage to wield power even when they neither have nor hold it.
j
I agree with much of what you say.
-
How do political comments and personal attacks like this not merit a ban?
Probably because when one moderator chooses to participate in what is obviously a political thread, this thread is allowed to continue and not be locked.
Lighthouse
Ignore him. I asked (nicely) that he stop the stalking but he can’t quit me. Addiction is a horrible thing.
-
How do political comments and personal attacks like this not merit a ban?
Probably because when one moderator chooses to participate in what is obviously a political thread, this thread is allowed to continue and not be locked.
Pretty much. We're tyrannical like that. -- That being said, no mod will look at a thread and say "oh, another mod is posting here, I won't lock it."
Keeping in mind .. I supported the political board's existence ~7 years ago. I like a good political conversation. It didn't last a year before we realized it was impossible to keep a civil discourse going.
Now? The pandemic and the Covid board .. plus an election .. yeah, things are out of hand now. We've gotten used to the coarseness. We shouldn't, and yeah, this thread will get locked when one of the mod's head explodes.
tick tick tick
-
Nm
-
Nm
-
Keep in mind that Litehouse was the guy to post his opinion, call for the thread to be locked, and now whines about it. 🙄🙄🙄
I held off for six pages, marveling at how this thread went on different political rants, until I commented, and agreed with a couple of others it should be locked, purely because it’s politics, which are supposed to be banned. I don’t give a rats as$ if it’s not locked up because of politics. But either ban politics or open it up again.
Lenny, you’re right. I’ll ignore. Thanks
-
I held off for six pages, marveling at how this thread went on different political rants, until I commented, and agreed with a couple of others it should be locked, purely because it’s politics, which are supposed to be banned. I don’t give a rats as$ if it’s not locked up because of politics. But either ban politics or open it up again.
Lenny, you’re right. I’ll ignore. Thanks
Weak on many levels. Not surprising.
-
Nm
Starting to finally smell your own farts
-
Pretty much. We're tyrannical like that. -- That being said, no mod will look at a thread and say "oh, another mod is posting here, I won't lock it."
Keeping in mind .. I supported the political board's existence ~7 years ago. I like a good political conversation. It didn't last a year before we realized it was impossible to keep a civil discourse going.
Now? The pandemic and the Covid board .. plus an election .. yeah, things are out of hand now. We've gotten used to the coarseness. We shouldn't, and yeah, this thread will get locked when one of the mod's head explodes.
tick tick tick
Sounds like jockitch hacked your account, bro.
-
I'm starting to come around to the thinking of some of you guys. A woman should have unfettered control of her own body. I am now pro choice.
If a woman decides she doesn't want a vaccination by sticking a needle in her arm, she should have every right to decline.
And if a woman doesn't want to put a mask over here mouth and nose, then that is her constitutional right.
No man should force a woman to get a shot or wear a mask.
Can I get a witness?
-
I'm starting to come around to the thinking of some of you guys. A woman should have unfettered control of her own body. I am now pro choice.
If a woman decides she doesn't want a vaccination by sticking a needle in her arm, she should have every right to decline.
And if a woman doesn't want to put a mask over here mouth and nose, then that is her constitutional right.
No man should force a woman to get a shot or wear a mask.
Can I get a witness?
100% agree.
There are consequences to any choice a person makes though. If she refuses to get a shot there are certain aspects of society she won't be able to participate in (entering specific venues, etc.) same if she doesn't wear a mask (entering retail establishments, etc.). If she gets an abortion you can view her through whatever religious lens you wish to view her through with whatever religious consequences you believe will befall her and the man who impregnated her..........................All while being civil and acting within the law.
#accidentallyliberal
-
I'm starting to come around to the thinking of some of you guys. A woman should have unfettered control of her own body. I am now pro choice.
If a woman decides she doesn't want a vaccination by sticking a needle in her arm, she should have every right to decline.
And if a woman doesn't want to put a mask over here mouth and nose, then that is her constitutional right.
No man should force a woman to get a shot or wear a mask.
Can I get a witness?
You actually have hit on a problem that bothers me when it comes to the abortion debate. Absolutes don't really work. I for one don't believe that women should have complete unfettered control over their own body the entire time while pregnant. IOW, at some point during pregnancy, society DOES have a compelling reason to protect the right of the fetus. I mean, I think most people believe that women shouldn't be able to have an elective abortion the day before their due date right?
But I also really don't believe that life begins at conception. It doesn't make sense to me on legal grounds, and that a woman DOES have the right to undertake an elective medical procedure at that point.
So IMO, the issue is where those two rights "cross paths." And this is why at some point it comes down to a personal, moral choice rather than a societal, legal one.
-
You actually have hit on a problem that bothers me when it comes to the abortion debate. Absolutes don't really work. I for one don't believe that women should have complete unfettered control over their own body the entire time while pregnant. IOW, at some point during pregnancy, society DOES have a compelling reason to protect the right of the fetus. I mean, I think most people believe that women shouldn't be able to have an elective abortion the day before their due date right?
But I also really don't believe that life begins at conception. It doesn't make sense to me on legal grounds, and that a woman DOES have the right to undertake an elective medical procedure at that point.
So IMO, the issue is where those two rights "cross paths." And this is why at some point it comes down to a personal, moral choice rather than a societal, legal one.
Absolutes "don't work" is correct but we absolutely are never going to find agreement from either side of the abortion debate on when life begins. There are other components to this discussion, as well as individual circumstances, but essentially, for the vast majority of people, this is the crux of the issue. It's not really solvable frankly because very few people will deviate from their thinking on this critical question.
If abortion becomes illegal in certain states, whether it be Texas after 6 weeks or somewhere else, people will find a way to get their abortions. This isn't a desirable outcome obviously and opens up a whole other set of problems.
-
Agree Muggs.
-
I'm starting to come around to the thinking of some of you guys. A woman should have unfettered control of her own body. I am now pro choice.
If a woman decides she doesn't want a vaccination by sticking a needle in her arm, she should have every right to decline.
And if a woman doesn't want to put a mask over here mouth and nose, then that is her constitutional right.
No man should force a woman to get a shot or wear a mask.
Can I get a witness?
I'm starting to come around to the thinking of some of you guys. A woman should have unfettered control of her own body. I am now pro-vaccine-choice.
If a woman decides she wants an abortion, she should have every right to one.
And if a woman wants that abortion later than some church or political party approves of, then that is her constitutional right.
No man should force a woman to keep a fetus against her will for at least the first 24 weeks of pregnancy, which is the Roe v Wade standard.
Can I get a witness?
-
Not sure why you picked 2 to 1. It'd only need 50% to pass a referendum in CA, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
Whether it's a simple majority or 2 to 1 doesn't really matter because, again, there's no way under current law for any state to leave.
Calexit could get 95 percent of the vote and it would be as legally binding as me declaring my home its own country.
-
Absolutes "don't work" is correct but we absolutely are never going to find agreement from either side of the abortion debate on when life begins. There are other components to this discussion, as well as individual circumstances, but essentially, for the vast majority of people, this is the crux of the issue. It's not really solvable frankly because very few people will deviate from their thinking on this critical question.
If abortion becomes illegal in certain states, whether it be Texas after 6 weeks or somewhere else, people will find a way to get their abortions. This isn't a desirable outcome obviously and opens up a whole other set of problems.
The Clintonian phrase, "safe, legal but rare." applies perfectly.
It is magical thinking that "if we make it illegal again, there will be no abortions ever!" They will still happen, in the same numbers but dangerous.
-
Whether it's a simple majority or 2 to 1 doesn't really matter because, again, there's no way under current law for any state to leave.
Calexit could get 95 percent of the vote and it would be as legally binding as me declaring my home its own country.
The only way legally for it to happen is via a Constitutional amendment or convention.
-
I'm starting to come around to the thinking of some of you guys. A woman should have unfettered control of her own body. I am now pro-vaccine-choice.
If a woman decides she wants an abortion, she should have every right to one.
And if a woman wants that abortion later than some church or political party approves of, then that is her constitutional right.
No man should force a woman to keep a fetus against her will for at least the first 24 weeks of pregnancy, which is the Roe v Wade standard.
Can I get a witness?
I don't agree with your point that only women should have an opinion on the subject regardless of the particulars from every situation. Because "it's their body" they should be able to do whatever they want? What if a female (or male) teacher decides to tape bombs to their body and take out a kindergarten classroom?
Half the country believes you are killing a life whether it be 6 weeks or 24 weeks. Completely disregarding that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. But again, you can't legislate this issue or calibrate laws that will satisfy virulent pro-lifers or force people to take personal responsibility.
-
Ain't happenin' guys.
I expect to see Rs make one more final attempt at a coup. It will fail and the middle and soft right will reject them completely. Even their attempts to rig elections won't be enough to save them.
I agree.
I think we're in a transition phase. Transitions of anything are always messy and confusing. (See Afghanistan withdrawal as an example.)
The Republicans are trying everything and the kitchen sink to fight off the transition away from their decades of policy. We're just witnessing the food fight prolonging the changes that will happen.
-
Me Gato esta enfermo en el bano
-
Ain't happenin' guys.
I expect to see Rs make one more final attempt at a coup. It will fail and the middle and soft right will reject them completely. Even their attempts to rig elections won't be enough to save them.
I'm not sure what we've seen to make us think any of the centrists would risk their own comfort to take a virtuous stand.
-
I’m not questioning for a second that we needed to leave, but we could have gotten people out first, then equipment and then the military. We could have gotten out earlier before the Taliban took over most of the country. We could have done it at a different time than the busiest fighting season for the Taliban. We didn’t have to lose 13. Hell, even CNN and MSNBC people have said this was a disaster.
People were advised to leave starting months ago, but had we started clear evacuations, the Afghan government that lasted 11 days would've crumbled far sooner. Had we pulled out equipment or military, it would've crumbled.
All the Monday morning generals seem to think there was some secret recipe for success, but our last president was calling for this before he was even elected and yet in 4 years he never tried to get out until it was clear he would leave the disaster on someone else's watch. At least we're out now.
-
People were advised to leave starting months ago, but had we started clear evacuations, the Afghan government that lasted 11 days would've crumbled far sooner. Had we pulled out equipment or military, it would've crumbled.
All the Monday morning generals seem to think there was some secret recipe for success, but our last president was calling for this before he was even elected and yet in 4 years he never tried to get out until it was clear he would leave the disaster on someone else's watch. At least we're out now.
This is what I can never understand. Trump directly negotiated the withdrawal of American troops with the Taliban. He deliberately left the Afghan government out of the negotiations. He bragged even a month ago, that the withdrawal was going to happen, because he made sure there was no way for Biden to stop it.
We now find out his administration deliberately slowed the process of our Afghan allies leaving the country, because they didn't want a bunch of Muslims entering the country.
Yet, we have a situation where many are now blaming universally the current president. Blame for the current situation is an amalgam of issues throughout our 20-year history there.
Here is the simple truth (well at least my opinion). Every president since this war started has boasted about how they would end this war. None did it, because it was going to be a mess no matter what. Like Vietnam, we put constraints on the military's terms of engagement that ensured this would never be a win, rather a money making operation for lobbyists. Neither party really cared about what was going on in Afghanistan, nor did they really care about the military, they just use them to pull on the heartstrings of America to get more votes. What they did care about was money.
To some extent, despite the mess, I give both Trump and Biden some credit for finally ending this thing. I wish we could get a joint statement from the two acknowledging that this needed to be done, it was going to be a mess, but now jointly we have ended this 20-year war.
-
People were advised to leave starting months ago, but had we started clear evacuations, the Afghan government that lasted 11 days would've crumbled far sooner. Had we pulled out equipment or military, it would've crumbled.
All the Monday morning generals seem to think there was some secret recipe for success, but our last president was calling for this before he was even elected and yet in 4 years he never tried to get out until it was clear he would leave the disaster on someone else's watch. At least we're out now.
Again, i don’t forget a second think we shouldn’t have left, but I’m not the only one who thinks the way it was done was horrible:
Yeah, and there’s no way to reconcile those statements and then say there’s nothing we could have done. Obviously, one thing you could have done was get the intelligence right. There were clearly screwups here.- David Axelrod
There’s no way to hide it. The situation in Afghanistan is another shame on this admin. Withdrawal was never going to be easy but it didn’t need to come to this. The US must do everything in its power to help our partners & allies to safety & protect our national security.-Vicente Gonzalez
I am disappointed that the Biden administration clearly did not accurately assess the implications of a rapid U.S. withdrawal. -Bob Mendez
The consequences of our decision to abandon Afghanistan are now on full display for the world to see. It didn’t have to be this way. -Jim Langevin
Not everyone in the administration shared the commander in chief’s confidence. “I am absolutely appalled and literally horrified we left Americans there,” one administration official told POLITICO. “It was a hostage rescue of thousands of Americans in the guise of a NEO [noncombatant evacuation operations], and we have failed that no-fail mission.” Another White House official said that the mission isn’t accomplished if they left Americans behind.
Again, the point isn’t that Biden shouldn’t have gotten us out of Afghanistan.
-
The intelligence community as well as the military let down and/or misled all 4 presidents who oversaw our efforts in Afghanistan, some of them likely to keep the money spigot flowing. Too bad Biden appears to be taking the fall for all of them. Plenty of blame to share among each administration.
Keeping track of the various tangents this thread has taken:
(https://media.giphy.com/media/cLtvKDcQYkSRO/giphy.gif)
One last thing:
(http://i.imgur.com/s0zIgPW.gif)
-
I don't agree with your point that only women should have an opinion on the subject regardless of the particulars from every situation. Because "it's their body" they should be able to do whatever they want? What if a female (or male) teacher decides to tape bombs to their body and take out a kindergarten classroom?
Half the country believes you are killing a life whether it be 6 weeks or 24 weeks. Completely disregarding that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. But again, you can't legislate this issue or calibrate laws that will satisfy virulent pro-lifers or force people to take personal responsibility.
Read Dickthedribbler's post again, and then read mine again, and then you'll get it.
-
I'm not sure what we've seen to make us think any of the centrists would risk their own comfort to take a virtuous stand.
I almost agree with you GB. I have said many, many times that there is no bottom for how low Rs will sink. But I really think they are traveling down a road that will alienate all but the craziest. I realize that number might still be 20 million, but that is a to much of a minority to overcome. At least that is my hope.
-
I'm starting to come around to the thinking of some of you guys. A woman should have unfettered control of her own body. I am now pro choice.
If a woman decides she doesn't want a vaccination by sticking a needle in her arm, she should have every right to decline.
And if a woman doesn't want to put a mask over here mouth and nose, then that is her constitutional right.
No man should force a woman to get a shot or wear a mask.
Can I get a witness?
For all of the handwringing here, the answer is so simple
All men get reversible vasectomies when they turn 18. Once they are able to prove they are responsible financially to have children, it is then reversed. If they fail to provide for the child, every citizen will have the right to turn them over to the police for prosecution with a minimum mandatory jail sentence.
-
OK. Good luck growing mass quantities of grapes, almonds, strawberries and lettuce in the Midwest.
Latest polls show otherwise. FWIW.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/elections-2021/scottish-independence
But again, the UK has a legal mechanism for that to happen. The U.S. does not.
Almonds are horrible for the environment the way we grow them. They require an insane amount of water and contribute to the drought. Good riddance.
Interesting numbers there, seems like people get cold feet when it's presented as a viable option
-
California is the world's 6th biggest economy. Who is Mississippi going to vilify while simultaneously leaning on to subsidize the most federally dependant states in the country?
-
Almonds are horrible for the environment the way we grow them. They require an insane amount of water and contribute to the drought. Good riddance.
Wait until you hear about what cows do for the environment.
-
Wait until you hear about what cows do for the environment.
Comedic break to keep this thread going
https://youtu.be/INmvdJNKdO8 (https://youtu.be/INmvdJNKdO8)
-
Wait until you hear about what cows do for the environment.
pasture raised grass fed meat is not bad for the environment, it helps replace the vital nutrients in the soil.
-
pasture raised grass fed meat is not bad for the environment, it helps replace the vital nutrients in the soil.
The agriculture sector is one of the world’s biggest sources of climate-altering gases, the vast majority of which come from meat and dairy production. If cows were their own country, they would be the third-biggest greenhouse gas emitter in the world.
A 2018 study found that about 12.4 million acres of forest — the equivalent of more than five Yellowstone National Parks — are cut down each year to clear room for industrial agriculture. A whopping 30 percent of Earth’s ice-free land mass is used as pasture for livestock.
Here, again, cows are a major culprit. Because ruminants have slower growth and reproduction rates than other animals, they require more resources to produce something a person can eat. Beef requires about twice as much land per gram of protein as chicken and pork, and 20 times as much land as the equivalent amount of protein from beans.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2019/11/18/are-my-hamburgers-hurting-planet/
To be clear, I love me a good burger and steak and in no way want to be rid of the beef industry. But if environmental impact is going to be your standard for which agricultural products should go or stay, beef and dairy are by far at the top of the "go" list.
-
I eat cows so they stop producing methane.
-
We should probably ban Real Chili too, eh?
-
The agriculture sector is one of the world’s biggest sources of climate-altering gases, the vast majority of which come from meat and dairy production. If cows were their own country, they would be the third-biggest greenhouse gas emitter in the world.
A 2018 study found that about 12.4 million acres of forest — the equivalent of more than five Yellowstone National Parks — are cut down each year to clear room for industrial agriculture. A whopping 30 percent of Earth’s ice-free land mass is used as pasture for livestock.
Here, again, cows are a major culprit. Because ruminants have slower growth and reproduction rates than other animals, they require more resources to produce something a person can eat. Beef requires about twice as much land per gram of protein as chicken and pork, and 20 times as much land as the equivalent amount of protein from beans.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2019/11/18/are-my-hamburgers-hurting-planet/
To be clear, I love me a good burger and steak and in no way want to be rid of the beef industry. But if environmental impact is going to be your standard for which agricultural products should go or stay, beef and dairy are by far at the top of the "go" list.
I'm confused here.
Me: almonds are awful for the environment
You: COWS!
Me: actually there's a method of raising them where they aren't bad
You: Here's an article that groups together all methods of raising cows ignoring that I'm specifically talking about one method.
It's basically like if you responded by saying "well I get naturally growing almonds from their native habitat" and I responded with an article about how almonds in California are terrible. See how that wouldn't be relevant?
-
Any commentary/opinion on the afghan withdrawal from anyone who worked in previous administrations, has ties to military-industrial profits or lobbying efforts or worked in intelligence under previous administrations should be immediately ignored.
-
I'm confused here.
Me: almonds are awful for the environment
You: COWS!
Me: actually there's a method of raising them where they aren't bad
Ah, I didn't realize you were trying to argue that shifting to grass-fed beef would be good for the environment. You'd be wrong.
"A Harvard report published July 2018 in the journal Environmental Research Letters found that shifting U.S. beef production to exclusively grass-fed, pastured systems would require 30% more cattle just to keep up with current demand and production levels, and that the average methane footprint per unit of beef produced would increase by 43% due to the slower growth rates and higher methane conversion rates of grass-fed cattle. This would increase the U.S.’s total methane emissions by approximately 8%, according to the researchers."
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aad401
-
Ah, I didn't realize you were trying to argue that shifting to grass-fed beef would be good for the environment. You'd be wrong.
"A Harvard report published July 2018 in the journal Environmental Research Letters found that shifting U.S. beef production to exclusively grass-fed, pastured systems would require 30% more cattle just to keep up with current demand and production levels, and that the average methane footprint per unit of beef produced would increase by 43% due to the slower growth rates and higher methane conversion rates of grass-fed cattle. This would increase the U.S.’s total methane emissions by approximately 8%, according to the researchers."
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aad401
Not definitive.
https://www.ewg.org/meateatersguide/a-meat-eaters-guide-to-climate-change-health-what-you-eat-matters/why-go-organic-grass-fed-and-pasture-raised/
Environmental Benefits
Well-managed grazing and grass-fed operations are better for the environment. They use fewer energy-intensive inputs and, by regularly moving animals to fresh pasture and keeping them away from streambeds, they spread the manure more evenly and improve the quality and quantity of forage growth. This helps to conserve soil, reduce erosion and water pollution, increase carbon sequestration and preserve biodiversity and wildlife (Johnson 2002, FAO 2009, Pelletier 2010). Organic feed production and grazing practices are also better for the environment. They reduce fertilizer and pesticide runoff into waterways, and the use of compost, cover-cropping and rotational grazing helps build healthy, productive and water-conserving soils. Organic methods also enhance pest and weed resistance without the use of chemicals and ultimately foster greater resiliency in the face of extreme weather and climate change.
Climate Impact
There are few definitive studies of the net amount of greenhouse gas emissions from grass-fed versus confined-feedlot, grain-fed meat. Since pasture-raised cattle gain weight more slowly than grain-fed animals (an average of 25 percent slower in one recent study (Gurian-Sherman 2011), those animals take longer to reach slaughter weight and consequently emit more methane and nitrous oxide. Confined cattle gain weight much more quickly on their high-starch corn feed.
These higher emissions may be offset, however, by the carbon sequestration benefits that well-managed pasture systems can provide (Pelletier 2010). Rotational grazing and the application of organic soil treatments can have a significant impact on building up soil carbon in pastureland (Follet 2001, Conant 2001). Far fewer energy-intensive inputs are used in grass-fed beef production.
The climate impact of grass-fed animals depends on factors that vary greatly from one production system to another. They include: average weight gain and quality of forage (the slower the animals gain weight, the more methane they emit); the rate of soil carbon sequestration; and crowding (greater density of animals means more concentrated manure deposits and higher methane and nitrous oxide emissions).
Much more research is needed to determine the comparative climate impact of pasture-based versus confined feedlot systems.
-
Not definitive.
https://www.ewg.org/meateatersguide/a-meat-eaters-guide-to-climate-change-health-what-you-eat-matters/why-go-organic-grass-fed-and-pasture-raised/
So as not to beat this dead cow any longer, I'll just point out that it appears the information in your link - saying there are no definitive studies and more research is needed - seems to pre-date the study I linked.
-
Half the country believes you are killing a life whether it be 6 weeks or 24 weeks.
Half the country does not believe this. Hell, at this point I'm not certain that 50% of American Christians believe this.
I see this language thrown around a lot with social issues. Half this country doesn't support gay marriage. Half this country doesn't support gun control. Half this country doesn't support the BLM movement (not the organization). Half this country doesn't believe in mask mandates or vaccines. None of these are true. The social liberals make up well over half of this country. There is just a very vocal and very well resourced minority that has ensured that progress is slowed on these topic areas and the will of the people is not realized.
-
Half the country does not believe this. Hell, at this point I'm not certain that 50% of American Christians believe this.
It's probably closer to 30% of the country, and even then, most of those still prefer exceptions for rape & incest. It's truly amazing how far this issue has gotten considering the vast majority support for the other side.
-
Half the country does not believe this. Hell, at this point I'm not certain that 50% of American Christians believe this.
I see this language thrown around a lot with social issues. Half this country doesn't support gay marriage. Half this country doesn't support gun control. Half this country doesn't support the BLM movement (not the organization). Half this country doesn't believe in mask mandates or vaccines. None of these are true. The social liberals make up well over half of this country. There is just a very vocal and very well resourced minority that has ensured that progress is slowed on these topic areas and the will of the people is not realized.
To boot, more than half of the people who DO believe this do not have uteruses and thus I give even less credence to their thoughts
-
All the men opining about abortion are causing me me to make my first donation to Planned Parenthood. I should have done it in the name of MU Scoop.
-
It's probably closer to 30% of the country, and even then, most of those still prefer exceptions for rape & incest. It's truly amazing how far this issue has gotten considering the vast majority support for the other side.
Those on the wrong side of this issue have political clout, scream the loudest and are the most cunning about getting their way. I mean, the Texas law was a pretty smart work-around -- even if unconstitutional -- and several similarly fascist-run states are planning to craft similar legislation.
I already have read a few articles about work-arounds that those opposed to this law could have at their disposal. This isn't finished yet ... although it will wreak havoc on Texas women who want abortions now.
-
Those on the wrong side of this issue have political clout, scream the loudest and are the most cunning about getting their way. I mean, the Texas law was a pretty smart work-around -- even if unconstitutional -- and several similarly fascist-run states are planning to craft similar legislation.
I already have read a few articles about work-arounds that those opposed to this law could have at their disposal. This isn't finished yet ... although it will wreak havoc on Texas women who want abortions now.
The minority make the rules now. Only in American democracy.
-
I believe there is a zero percent chance the 50 US states will be one country in 100 years. Frankly, zero chance in 50 years too. 50/50 chance in 25 years .. and I'd put it at 25% chance in 5 years.
How in 5 years? In 2016, Trump won and there was a movement called Calexit that spelled out a path to California seceding, with a "Proposition" on the ballot to change their constitution, if passed then a vote to secede. It lost energy.
Say in 2024, Trump runs and wins, the GOP wins the house and Senate -- very plausible. Liberals across the country are enraged and Calexit starts with complete intensity -- again, very plausible. In 2017, polling had Calexit at 32% .. I could easily see it passing in ~2025 if the GOP was in control again.
Next is federal ratification. Surely that wouldn't happen, right? But Trump is in office and he's no Abe Lincoln. The GOP sees this as a golden opportunity to wipe away CA's 55 electoral votes and win permanent control of the Presidency. Trump says: California, you're fired, I'm rid of Nancy Pelosi forever.
No one fires a shot. Lawyers work out the details. Oregon and Washington are on the clock.
We thought people using horse dewormer to fight a pandemic was far fetched 5 years ago. The above scenario .. is more likely.
Civil war, aina?
-
Wait until you hear about what cows do for the environment.
To get this back on to the original topic. The environment should not be a factor in the legality of man-cow relationships.
-
Great article in this week's economist trying to define what's happening.
Don't get confused by the title... equal responsibility is hung on the illiberal left and the irresponsible right.
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/09/04/the-threat-from-the-illiberal-left
I should also caution that the word "liberal" is used not in the american political context but in the original definition as an adjective from the Oxford dictionary.
If one believes as I do that history repeats itself, we're somewhere in the early 1900's again with the Bolsheviks and the Fascists stretching their wings. Yes, as someone said in an earlier post, there's a whole huge space opening in the middle for some sensibility, but imho a massive shortage of sensibility to exploit that opening.
-
Hats off for Tayhaas. Some pretty brave folks. Where you stand on this topic probably defines what you believe and who you are more than any other.
-
To get this back on to the original topic. The environment should not be a factor in the legality of man-cow relationships.
That term is degrading to both parties involved. Please use the more acceptable term "re-worming" in these troubled times of scarce ivermectin availability.
-
To get this back on to the original topic. The environment should not be a factor in the legality of man-cow relationships.
Suppose people can marry Badger fans if they want.
-
Half the country does not believe this. Hell, at this point I'm not certain that 50% of American Christians believe this.
I see this language thrown around a lot with social issues. Half this country doesn't support gay marriage. Half this country doesn't support gun control. Half this country doesn't support the BLM movement (not the organization). Half this country doesn't believe in mask mandates or vaccines. None of these are true. The social liberals make up well over half of this country. There is just a very vocal and very well resourced minority that has ensured that progress is slowed on these topic areas and the will of the people is not realized.
So half the people don't follow the science? So why do the prochoice folks say it is a difficult choice for the woman?
-
Suppose people can marry Badger fans if they want.
Let's not get crazy now
-
To get this back on to the original topic. The environment should not be a factor in the legality of man-cow relationships.
He agrees
(https://radioink.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/12/Mancow-e1545659627191.jpg)
-
Texas is back!
-
So half the people don't follow the science? So why do the prochoice folks say it is a difficult choice for the woman?
What?
-
All of Those ‘Hysterical’ Women Were Right
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/trump-supreme-court-abortion-ban/619963/?fbclid=IwAR2KhRDJXLMIIrpqFXdhxpMM2Bh176udlIiPVULpUA1y-hwPCSdQEOaQQvY
For half a decade, Republicans—especially self-described moderate members of the party—have been gaslighting America on the issue of abortion rights, pretending they didn’t know that Donald Trump’s Supreme Court picks were always planning to overturn Roe. A central goal of the conservative judicial movement that these justices came out of is overturning Roe. The Federalist Society handpicked them for that reason. It’s a transparently phony act, one that’s now been exposed as such.
-
George Carlin's epic rant on abortion:
"Why, why, why, why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you wouldn’t want to f*ck in the first place, huh? Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren’t they? They’re all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you’re born, you’re on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don’t want to know about you. They don’t want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re preborn, you’re fine; if you’re preschool, you’re f*cked."
https://scrapsfromtheloft.com/comedy/george-carlin-back-town-1996-full-transcript/
-
George Carlin's epic rant on abortion:
"Why, why, why, why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you wouldn’t want to f*ck in the first place, huh? Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren’t they? They’re all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you’re born, you’re on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don’t want to know about you. They don’t want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re preborn, you’re fine; if you’re preschool, you’re f*cked."
https://scrapsfromtheloft.com/comedy/george-carlin-back-town-1996-full-transcript/
I remember that rant. It's funny ... but it's not ... because it's true. He'd have some real interesting things to say today.
(https://scontent-atl3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/p526x296/241134152_3111653135778300_3069059596240187088_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_rgb565=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=fG-KftFIaZ4AX_DQi1f&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-2.xx&oh=6be1c1329023ba53eea9e2c26eec6fbc&oe=615C3694)
-
George Carlin's epic rant on abortion:
Good share. Here's another gem my wife found. Exposes the pure hypocrisy of those that claim to care about "the unborn."
"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.
Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.
--Pastor Dave Barnhart
-
Good share. Here's another gem my wife found. Exposes the pure hypocrisy of those that claim to care about "the unborn."
"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.
Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.
--Pastor Dave Barnhart
Very powerful, brew. Thanks for sharing that.
I like to think that most of our anti-abortion-rights Scoopers are very much into helping children who are less fortunate than their own kids.
But sadly there are many people out there who would force even a woman who was raped and risking death to have a child she won't be able to care for ... and then those same people would spend years whining about that child being a burden on society -- a "taker."
In 2020, there were almost 50,000 Texas children in foster care. Where are the "all life is precious" Texans after the fetuses they fought for become human beings? Hell, I would think Texas lawmakers would have adopted them all!
Oh, and Texas offers no earned-income tax credit for low-income parents, no child tax credit, and no child and dependent care tax credit -- https://www.taxcreditsforworkersandfamilies.org/state/texas/
The fetuses ain't fetuses any more, so eff 'em!
But hey, when you're busy trying to rig future elections with your new Elimination of Voting Rights Law and busy pitting citizens against each other with your new Abortion Vigilante Law, who has time to worry about actual, living, breathing kids?
-
Oh, and Texas offers no earned-income tax credit for low-income parents, no child tax credit, and no child and dependent care tax credit -- https://www.taxcreditsforworkersandfamilies.org/state/texas/
While I don't disagree with your point...I believe this is because Texas has no state income tax.
-
While I don't disagree with your point...I believe this is because Texas has no state income tax.
Thanks for pointing that out, and that's my bad.
Has Texas enacted any kind of child-care programs and the like? Maybe it has.
-
Thanks for pointing that out, and that's my bad.
Has Texas enacted any kind of child-care programs and the like? Maybe it has.
Yes, there is a state-sponsored child care program for low income families available through the Texas Workforce Commission. You can debate whether or not it is substantial enough.
-
The sad thing about the Texas debate is it rekindled a battle that’s never ending. It’s always going to be here in one form or another.
Before Roe vs. Wade was announced, I was in high school in Nashville. There was a huge billboard at Eighth Avenue and Church Street advertising for abortion services. At the time, abortions in the State of Tennessee were hugely illegal. What it meant was that Tennessee women who sought an elective abortion called this agency and arranged for travel to and service in New York, where abortion was legal.
If Roe vs. Wade suddenly was overruled, our nation would have a patchwork of abortion laws, as it did in 1971. I doubt the number of abortions performed in the nation would decrease substantially. What we’re arguing is symbolism and low income abortion access. The only thing that changes this would be a human rights amendment defining life as beginning at conception. That definitely IS NOT happening in my lifetime.
All that said, I’m about as pro-life as they come. The difference is I don’t believe the government can do what the priests and bishops, preachers and ministers, Imans, Rabbis and other holy people can’t do — limit abortions. What we need to do in this country is to limit the demand for abortion, rather than the supply — and that ain’t easy. We need alternatives to abortion, including everything from effective birth control to embracing women with unwanted pregnancies and fostering the love that ensures their child gets the home it deserves.
-
I doubt the number of abortions performed in the nation would decrease substantially. What we’re arguing is symbolism and low income abortion access.
Thanks for getting it, sir.
Rich folks -- including the politicians who impregnate their mistresses and prostitutes -- will still be able to get abortions, no problem.
-
The new version of the war on drugs now that marijuana is becoming increasingly legal?
-
The new version of the war on drugs now that marijuana is becoming increasingly legal?
We've seen how the war on drugs has gone...
-
What would Jesus do?
-
What would Jesus do?
Shoot cows and eat them
-
What would Jesus do?
Build a megachurch and get stinking rich?
Insist on building a wall to keep "those people" out?
Advocate for tax cuts for the rich and reducing benefits to the poor?
-
What would Jesus do?
He tells us in Matthew 7:1-3.
-
What would Jesus do?
That hippy who lived with a bunch of poor guys and a prostitute, drank wine constantly, and always talked up his blood dad while ignoring the guy that stepped up to parent him?
Psht, who cares what he'd do it's about what my multi millionaire televangelist pastor says I should do.
-
Shoot cows and eat them
He'd throw them on the smoker first.
-
He'd throw them on the smoker first.
The Bible’s silence on smoking meats is defeaning
-
What would Jesus do?
Cure the lepers with horse de-wormer?
-
Ahhhh…..
Now we’re back on track.
-
Cure the lepers with horse de-wormer?
Happy New Year MU82.
-
The sad thing about the Texas debate is it rekindled a battle that’s never ending. It’s always going to be here in one form or another.
Before Roe vs. Wade was announced, I was in high school in Nashville. There was a huge billboard at Eighth Avenue and Church Street advertising for abortion services. At the time, abortions in the State of Tennessee were hugely illegal. What it meant was that Tennessee women who sought an elective abortion called this agency and arranged for travel to and service in New York, where abortion was legal.
If Roe vs. Wade suddenly was overruled, our nation would have a patchwork of abortion laws, as it did in 1971. I doubt the number of abortions performed in the nation would decrease substantially. What we’re arguing is symbolism and low income abortion access. The only thing that changes this would be a human rights amendment defining life as beginning at conception. That definitely IS NOT happening in my lifetime.
All that said, I’m about as pro-life as they come. The difference is I don’t believe the government can do what the priests and bishops, preachers and ministers, Imans, Rabbis and other holy people can’t do — limit abortions. What we need to do in this country is to limit the demand for abortion, rather than the supply — and that ain’t easy. We need alternatives to abortion, including everything from effective birth control to embracing women with unwanted pregnancies and fostering the love that ensures their child gets the home it deserves.
Best comment in this whole thread.
-
Best comment in this whole thread.
No way it has nothing to do with cows
-
Udder fraud the new voter fraud?
-
Happy New Year MU82.
Thanks, Muggs. I gave up religion for permanent lent many years ago, but I appreciate the thought.
-
Check and mate, Pro Choicers.
@KXAN_News
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said the state will "eliminate rape" so victims won't have to have their rapist's baby under the state's new abortion restrictions.
-
I guess we'll see how effective that wall is going southbound now that Mexico upheld pro choice rights.
-
Check and mate, Pro Choicers.
@KXAN_News
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said the state will "eliminate rape" so victims won't have to have their rapist's baby under the state's new abortion restrictions.
Incest? Life of mother? Requirement to carry a dead fetus?
Maybe if pro-choicers wanted an in-utero vaccine mandate, Abbott would get rid of the entire law!
-
Incest? Life of mother? Requirement to carry a dead fetus?
Maybe if pro-choicers wanted an in-utero vaccine mandate, Abbott would get rid of the entire law!
Give him a break, Mike. I believe he has already eliminated all murderers and thieves. How hard can it be to eliminate rapists?
How can Rs even pretend to be intelligent when they vote for people like this? These are just really dumb people.
-
Check and mate, Pro Choicers.
@KXAN_News
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said the state will "eliminate rape" so victims won't have to have their rapist's baby under the state's new abortion restrictions.
Can't believe Jeb Bush was pro rape all these years
-
Incest? Life of mother? Requirement to carry a dead fetus?
Maybe if pro-choicers wanted an in-utero vaccine mandate, Abbott would get rid of the entire law!
If the fetus is dead, it won't have a heartbeat and therefore would be abortable under Texas new law, I think.
-
Can't believe Jeb Bush was pro rape all these years
Jeb was governor of Florida, not Texas.
One other point I'd raise. For those of you who think California will go its own way -- ditto for other states -- I got news. There was a little eminent domain action that began in 1861 and ended in 1865 that solved the secession question for all time. Period.
Unless California wants to raise an Army and defend itself against the combined might of 49 other states, secession is not an issue.
It is possible under the current laws for parts of states to secede from their existing legal domicile. Rural parts of Northern California and the Central Valley have sought for some time to secede from California and create the State of Jefferson. Likewise, Eastern Oregon wants to become Idaho West. This is technically allowable but the process is complicated and cumbersome. It's not likely to happen in my lifetime, if ever.
So, California, you're stuck with us in Florida!
-
Thanks, Muggs. I gave up religion for permanent lent many years ago, but I appreciate the thought.
I read that "Ultra" Orthodox Jews are not getting vaccinated. Any idea why this is the case? Although Israel as a country is like 80% vaccinated so maybe it's not a potential issue. What is "Ultra" Orthodox anyway? Seems like regular Orthodox is pretty out there and strict?
-
I read that "Ultra" Orthodox Jews are not getting vaccinated. Any idea why this is the case? Although Israel as a country is like 80% vaccinated so maybe it's not a potential issue. What is "Ultra" Orthodox anyway? Seems like regular Orthodox is pretty out there and strict?
Big difference actually. There are plenty of Orthodox Jews who live relatively normal lives. Some don’t even wear kippahs. Outside of eating kosher or how they observe the Sabbath on Saturdays, you wouldn’t even know. My BIL is modern orthodox and he runs a bunch of pizzarias and taco joints, wears super trendy clothes, is a major sneaker head, goes to great restaurants and just watches what he orders, and texts me on Saturday all the time. He just seems like another guy from Brooklyn.
Ultra orthodox are the big fur hats or the prayer tassels with a black vest. Won’t even eat outside of a kosher restaurant or kitchen. Women usually aren’t educated past middle school and they live in a bubble.
Israel is far more secular than you think. The ultra orthodox make up a small percentage of Jews there just like they do here
-
Big difference actually. There are plenty of Orthodox Jews who live relatively normal lives. Some don’t even wear kippahs. Outside of eating kosher or how they observe the Sabbath on Thursdays, you wouldn’t even know. My BIL is modern orthodox and he runs a bunch of pizzarias and taco joints, wears super trendy clothes, is a major sneaker head, goes to great restaurants and just watches what he orders, and texts me on Saturday all the time. He just seems like another guy from Brooklyn.
Ultra orthodox are the big fur hats or the prayer tassels with a black vest. Won’t even eat outside of a kosher restaurant or kitchen. Women usually aren’t educated past middle school and they live in a bubble.
Israel is far more secular than you think. The ultra orthodox make up a small percentage of Jews there just like they do here
Ty. Who are the guys with the beards? I thought in an Orthodox temple the men and women are separated? I guess I need learn more about the sects. I just thought it was Reforned, Conservative, Orthodox.
-
Ty. Who are the guys with the beards? I thought in an Orthodox temple the men and women are separated? I guess I need learn more about the sects. I just thought it was Reforned, Conservative, Orthodox.
Usually Hasidic, which are one of the 3 branches of "ultra Orthodox" (aka Haredi) Judaism. Other less strict Orthodox is usually referred to as "religious" Orthodoxy. Usually even in modern Orthodox, men and women will sit on separate sides at temple, but Ultra Orthodox goes even farther. My wife's SIL is modern orthodox and got married in 2019. I sat with all the men at the wedding on one side, but after the ceremony it was like a normal reception. But at an UO wedding, men and women stay together and dance in separate rooms and don't intermingle.
Its not unlike many of my customers who are a sect of Hinduism called Jain. Traditional Jain is strict vegan (eat nothing that was ever alive or that grew underground) so no potatoes, carrots, etc... as well as no alcohol. But many of them, especially younger, are "modern Jain". They will drink, they eat vegan but are a bit more liberal with the vegetables, and so on...
But to the original point, Ultra Orthodox Jews were also the ones having huge gatherings in Brooklyn and Queens during lockdown last Spring and generally do what they please. Vaccine hesitancy from that group is far from surprising.
-
Usually Hasidic, which are one of the 3 branches of "ultra Orthodox" (aka Haredi) Judaism. Other less strict Orthodox is usually referred to as "religious" Orthodoxy. Usually even in modern Orthodox, men and women will sit on separate sides at temple, but Ultra Orthodox goes even farther. My wife's SIL is modern orthodox and got married in 2019. I sat with all the men at the wedding on one side, but after the ceremony it was like a normal reception. But at an UO wedding, men and women stay together and dance in separate rooms and don't intermingle.
Watch "Unorthodox" on Netflix. It's pretty eye-opening.
Not to be confused with "My Unorthodox Life", which is a reality show that can be summarized best as "Jewish Kardashians".
-
Check and mate, Pro Choicers.
@KXAN_News
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said the state will "eliminate rape" so victims won't have to have their rapist's baby under the state's new abortion restrictions.
Clarifying question... they're going to allow abortions in instances of rape? Or the state is going to eliminate rape as an act?
-
Usually Hasidic, which are one of the 3 branches of "ultra Orthodox" (aka Haredi) Judaism. Other less strict Orthodox is usually referred to as "religious" Orthodoxy. Usually even in modern Orthodox, men and women will sit on separate sides at temple, but Ultra Orthodox goes even farther. My wife's SIL is modern orthodox and got married in 2019. I sat with all the men at the wedding on one side, but after the ceremony it was like a normal reception. But at an UO wedding, men and women stay together and dance in separate rooms and don't intermingle.
Its not unlike many of my customers who are a sect of Hinduism called Jain. Traditional Jain is strict vegan (eat nothing that was ever alive or that grew underground) so no potatoes, carrots, etc... as well as no alcohol. But many of them, especially younger, are "modern Jain". They will drink, they eat vegan but are a bit more liberal with the vegetables, and so on...
But to the original point, Ultra Orthodox Jews were also the ones having huge gatherings in Brooklyn and Queens during lockdown last Spring and generally do what they please. Vaccine hesitancy from that group is far from surprising.
That's right. I had forgotten about Brooklyn last Spring. But there are also other sects that I find confusing. About 5 yrs ago I was in South Beach/Miami and a large group of Lubbuvich?? Jews were handing out something on the street. I didn't look at their literature but I thought it was pretty odd because I don't recall proselytizing at all in the Jewish faith.
-
Oh...I guess Lubavich are Hasiddic Jews?
It has to be less confusing than some religious groups? I grew up near the Baihai temple in Wilmette, IL and still have no earthly idea what they believe. Gorgeous building I must say.
-
O, sew ewe grew up privileged, aina?
-
Watch "Unorthodox" on Netflix. It's pretty eye-opening.
Not to be confused with "My Unorthodox Life", which is a reality show that can be summarized best as "Jewish Kardashians".
Yea Unorthodox is wild. My wife was excited to watch My Unorthodox Life but it’s painfully scripted, plays fast and loose with details, and is clearly just a big branding vehicle.
Oh...I guess Lubavich are Hasiddic Jews?
It has to be less confusing than some religious groups? I grew up near the Baihai temple in Wilmette, IL and still have no earthly idea what they believe. Gorgeous building I must say.
Yep, Lubavitch/Chabad are arguably the most mainstream of Hasidics. But still pretty out there.
Baha’i is interesting. It’s basically sort of an evolved Mormonism with Christian tenants. It definitely doesn’t have a super clear message or differentiator
-
Yea Unorthodox is wild. My wife was excited to watch My Unorthodox Life but it’s painfully scripted, plays fast and loose with details, and is clearly just a big branding vehicle.
Yep, Lubavitch/Chabad are arguably the most mainstream of Hasidics. But still pretty out there.
Baha’i is interesting. It’s basically sort of an evolved Mormonism with Christian tenants. It definitely doesn’t have a super clear message or differentiator
Maybe I'll start my own religion.....none of the other options appeal to me. :)
-
Maybe I'll start my own religion.....none of the other options appeal to me. :)
Worked out for L. Ron.
-
Clarifying question... they're going to allow abortions in instances of rape? Or the state is going to eliminate rape as an act?
They are simply going to eliminate rape as a thing, by eliminating all the rapists. Damn, why didn't any other states think of simply getting rid of the rapists.
Now, if they can only protect the cows, from all these wild Texas men.
-
They are simply going to eliminate rape as a thing, by eliminating all the rapists. Damn, why didn't any other states think of simply getting rid of the rapists.
Now, if they can only protect the cows, from all these wild Texas men.
If Greg Abbott has a plan to eradicate rape from Texas, I’m confident he can end man-cow love. A great day for cows in Texas except the ones we eat
-
Worked out for L. Ron.
Those people are clearly insane. And asshead criminals.
-
Abbott Considering Other Measures to Prevent People from Ever Setting Foot in Texas
AUSTIN (The Borowitz Report)—Texas Governor Greg Abbott said that he was “actively considering” additional measures to prevent people from wanting to ever set foot in the state.
Although he acknowledged that new laws banning most abortions, restricting voting, and allowing citizens to carry a gun without a permit or training would dissuade many from visiting Texas, Abbott said that “there’s more we can do.”
“Maybe we pass a law that says when you have to go to bed every night, or when you’re allowed to use a hair dryer,” he said. “We need to put our thinking caps on.”
“Just spitballing here, but what if we mandated that every visitor to Texas got bitten by a dog or poked with a stick of some kind?” he said. “I’ll be damned if that wouldn’t do the trick.”
Even as he works overtime thinking up with new ideas to alienate potential visitors to Texas, he admitted he was surprised that anyone still wanted to come. “Honestly, I thought me being Governor would be enough to keep people out,” he said.
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/abbott-considering-other-measures-to-prevent-people-from-ever-setting-foot-in-texas
-
He can keep working to make sure the power grid can't handle hot or cold.
-
Worked out for L. Ron.
*cough*
that's how all religions started
*cough*
-
Can I get an amen?
-
Big difference actually. There are plenty of Orthodox Jews who live relatively normal lives. Some don’t even wear kippahs. Outside of eating kosher or how they observe the Sabbath on Saturdays, you wouldn’t even know. My BIL is modern orthodox and he runs a bunch of pizzarias and taco joints, wears super trendy clothes, is a major sneaker head, goes to great restaurants and just watches what he orders, and texts me on Saturday all the time. He just seems like another guy from Brooklyn.
Ultra orthodox are the big fur hats or the prayer tassels with a black vest. Won’t even eat outside of a kosher restaurant or kitchen. Women usually aren’t educated past middle school and they live in a bubble.
Israel is far more secular than you think. The ultra orthodox make up a small percentage of Jews there just like they do here
Very impressed with your knowledge of all this, Wags.
My brother and his wife live in Israel. They are "modern Orthodox," they keep kosher and my brother wears a kippah most of the time. As you said, the men and women are separated at religious services, and women are not allowed to read from the Torah or be part of the 10-man "minyan" that is necessary for a proper service. My SIL is big on women's rights, very vocal on FB and in conversations ... except when it comes to her willingly giving up the right to be an active participant in Jewish services, which my wife considers pretty absurd. "I can't believe your sister-in-law sits in the back there like a second-class citizen."
-
What?
So stopping an otherwise healthy beating heart of an unborn child is not taking a human life?
Having said that there is a lot I don't like about the Texas law and I doubt SCOTUS will uphold it.
-
So stopping an otherwise healthy beating heart of an unborn child is not taking a human life?
What does that have to do with half of the people not following the science? Are you saying that science says that abortion is the taking a human life?
-
Very impressed with your knowledge of all this, Wags.
My brother and his wife live in Israel. They are "modern Orthodox," they keep kosher and my brother wears a kippah most of the time. As you said, the men and women are separated at religious services, and women are not allowed to read from the Torah or be part of the 10-man "minyan" that is necessary for a proper service. My SIL is big on women's rights, very vocal on FB and in conversations ... except when it comes to her willingly giving up the right to be an active participant in Jewish services, which my wife considers pretty absurd. "I can't believe your sister-in-law sits in the back there like a second-class citizen."
Just wondering - does your SIL wear a wig or other head covering?
-
So stopping an otherwise healthy beating heart of an unborn child is not taking a human life?
Having said that there is a lot I don't like about the Texas law and I doubt SCOTUS will uphold it.
If we're calling a fetus an "unborn child," should we call the elderly "undead humans?"
You may be surprised to learn that pro choice people are well aware that abortion means stopping a beating heart, and they're pro choice anyways.
-
Just wondering - does your SIL wear a wig or other head covering?
I've only been to a few services with them, and the most recent was many years ago, back when they lived in London and not Israel. I can't remember if she wore a head-covering then, and I don't know if she wears one now.
-
Very powerful, brew. Thanks for sharing that.
I like to think that most of our anti-abortion-rights Scoopers are very much into helping children who are less fortunate than their own kids.
But sadly there are many people out there who would force even a woman who was raped and risking death to have a child she won't be able to care for ... and then those same people would spend years whining about that child being a burden on society -- a "taker."
In 2020, there were almost 50,000 Texas children in foster care. Where are the "all life is precious" Texans after the fetuses they fought for become human beings? Hell, I would think Texas lawmakers would have adopted them all!
Oh, and Texas offers no earned-income tax credit for low-income parents, no child tax credit, and no child and dependent care tax credit -- https://www.taxcreditsforworkersandfamilies.org/state/texas/
The fetuses ain't fetuses any more, so eff 'em!
But hey, when you're busy trying to rig future elections with your new Elimination of Voting Rights Law and busy pitting citizens against each other with your new Abortion Vigilante Law, who has time to worry about actual, living, breathing kids?
Brother MU:
Didn't Doctor Beach (or whoever you had for Phil 104) caution you about Glittering Generalities?
Let me walk you through what it truly means to be pro-life.
To begin with, my wife's and my Pro-Life credentials ae well-established with people who know us well. We subscribe to the notion that the Death Penalty is just as wrong as most abortions. I personally find euthanasia repugnant for the same reason. Life is a gift and you nurture it from conception to natural death.
One of us is a Republican and yet we BOTH believe that in a nation as great and as wealthy as the United States, no one should have to spend the night in the streets for lack of shelter. No one should have to suffer in pain due to lack of basic medical care and no one should starve or lack for an education. We try to eliminate bias in our life and though not always successful, we keep trying. Ask 10 Republicans the same thing and probably nine of us would agree to all of this. We might disagree with you as to how to achieve these goals but believe it or not, we have a heart. We do care.
Our faith, the Roman Catholic Church, puts many of these beliefs into action. We Catholics, collectively, are the largest NGO provider of social services in the world. We're the largest NGO provider of educational services in the United States and one has to look no further than our alma mater to realize its impact. Marquette has the largest ever percentage of first time college students in its student body and its minority population is the largest ever. Those of us who support Marquette and other educational institutions -- including, believe it or not, Republicans -- have a big hand in making this happen.
Many of us are no great fans of abortion. It's about our view of life.
If this sounds familiar, it should. We subscribe to the late Cardinal Joseph Bernadin's seamless garment of life teaching. We believe in the sanctity of life and we live it day in and day out.
P.S. -- before you get too hung up on voter suppression, read past the headlines and try to understand what's being legislated. In my new home state of Florida, the ugliness about our voting rules has rained down about as hard as a late afternoon tropical thunderstorm. Our voting rules in Florida under the new law are some of the most liberal in the United States. Far more so than, say, Pennsylvania, Delaware or a number of other eastern states. Keep in mind though that in our last election, both our governor and U.S. Senator won by less than 1 percent of the vote. The 2000 Presidential election hung on Florida and, given the hell our state has gone through over the years, we want to be sure we get it right.
Yes, we require IDs and no, we do not permit ballot harvesting. But if you want to vote early or, as in my case, vote by mail, it's easy. Even for people with physical ailments. Short of hiring election officials to walk a ballot to a person's door and filling it out for them (which should be as illegal as hell), we do a good job. And it will be better next time because we have a new election commissioner in Palm Beach County. If Broward County can get it's act together, we'll be a model for election administration nationally.
-
Brother MU:
Didn't Doctor Beach (or whoever you had for Phil 104) caution you about Glittering Generalities?
Let me walk you through what it truly means to be pro-life.
To begin with, my wife's and my Pro-Life credentials ae well-established with people who know us well. We subscribe to the notion that the Death Penalty is just as wrong as most abortions. I personally find euthanasia repugnant for the same reason. Life is a gift and you nurture it from conception to natural death.
One of us is a Republican and yet we BOTH believe that in a nation as great and as wealthy as the United States, no one should have to spend the night in the streets for lack of shelter. No one should have to suffer in pain due to lack of basic medical care and no one should starve or lack for an education. We try to eliminate bias in our life and though not always successful, we keep trying. Ask 10 Republicans the same thing and probably nine of us would agree to all of this. We might disagree with you as to how to achieve these goals but believe it or not, we have a heart. We do care.
Our faith, the Roman Catholic Church, puts many of these beliefs into action. We Catholics, collectively, are the largest NGO provider of social services in the world. We're the largest NGO provider of educational services in the United States and one has to look no further than our alma mater to realize its impact. Marquette has the largest ever percentage of first time college students in its student body and its minority population is the largest ever. Those of us who support Marquette and other educational institutions -- including, believe it or not, Republicans -- have a big hand in making this happen.
Many of us are no great fans of abortion. It's about our view of life.
If this sounds familiar, it should. We subscribe to the late Cardinal Joseph Bernadin's seamless garment of life teaching. We believe in the sanctity of life and we live it day in and day out.
P.S. -- before you get too hung up on voter suppression, read past the headlines and try to understand what's being legislated. In my new home state of Florida, the ugliness about our voting rules has rained down about as hard as a late afternoon tropical thunderstorm. Our voting rules in Florida under the new law are some of the most liberal in the United States. Far more so than, say, Pennsylvania, Delaware or a number of other eastern states. Keep in mind though that in our last election, both our governor and U.S. Senator won by less than 1 percent of the vote. The 2000 Presidential election hung on Florida and, given the hell our state has gone through over the years, we want to be sure we get it right.
Yes, we require IDs and no, we do not permit ballot harvesting. But if you want to vote early or, as in my case, vote by mail, it's easy. Even for people with physical ailments. Short of hiring election officials to walk a ballot to a person's door and filling it out for them (which should be as illegal as hell), we do a good job. And it will be better next time because we have a new election commissioner in Palm Beach County. If Broward County can get it's act together, we'll be a model for election administration nationally.
Bravo, DG. One of the most intelligent things written on here in years.
-
What does that have to do with half of the people not following the science? Are you saying that science says that abortion is the taking a human life?
Yes!
Life: the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.
Abortion stops life.
-
Yes!
Life: the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.
Abortion stops life.
Three different reactions to this:
1) So a fetus with a terminal condition should be aborted yes?
2) If something can't survive without its host then it doesn't have the full capacity yet to grow, reproduce, or be fully functional.
3) in the strictest sense a cell is alive and you're right but the argument isn't whether a fetus is "alive" in that strictest sense. It is about at what point is it human life.
-
Brother MU:
Didn't Doctor Beach (or whoever you had for Phil 104) caution you about Glittering Generalities?
Let me walk you through what it truly means to be pro-life.
To begin with, my wife's and my Pro-Life credentials ae well-established with people who know us well. We subscribe to the notion that the Death Penalty is just as wrong as most abortions. I personally find euthanasia repugnant for the same reason. Life is a gift and you nurture it from conception to natural death.
One of us is a Republican and yet we BOTH believe that in a nation as great and as wealthy as the United States, no one should have to spend the night in the streets for lack of shelter. No one should have to suffer in pain due to lack of basic medical care and no one should starve or lack for an education. We try to eliminate bias in our life and though not always successful, we keep trying. Ask 10 Republicans the same thing and probably nine of us would agree to all of this. We might disagree with you as to how to achieve these goals but believe it or not, we have a heart. We do care.
Our faith, the Roman Catholic Church, puts many of these beliefs into action. We Catholics, collectively, are the largest NGO provider of social services in the world. We're the largest NGO provider of educational services in the United States and one has to look no further than our alma mater to realize its impact. Marquette has the largest ever percentage of first time college students in its student body and its minority population is the largest ever. Those of us who support Marquette and other educational institutions -- including, believe it or not, Republicans -- have a big hand in making this happen.
Many of us are no great fans of abortion. It's about our view of life.
If this sounds familiar, it should. We subscribe to the late Cardinal Joseph Bernadin's seamless garment of life teaching. We believe in the sanctity of life and we live it day in and day out.
P.S. -- before you get too hung up on voter suppression, read past the headlines and try to understand what's being legislated. In my new home state of Florida, the ugliness about our voting rules has rained down about as hard as a late afternoon tropical thunderstorm. Our voting rules in Florida under the new law are some of the most liberal in the United States. Far more so than, say, Pennsylvania, Delaware or a number of other eastern states. Keep in mind though that in our last election, both our governor and U.S. Senator won by less than 1 percent of the vote. The 2000 Presidential election hung on Florida and, given the hell our state has gone through over the years, we want to be sure we get it right.
Yes, we require IDs and no, we do not permit ballot harvesting. But if you want to vote early or, as in my case, vote by mail, it's easy. Even for people with physical ailments. Short of hiring election officials to walk a ballot to a person's door and filling it out for them (which should be as illegal as hell), we do a good job. And it will be better next time because we have a new election commissioner in Palm Beach County. If Broward County can get it's act together, we'll be a model for election administration nationally.
Thanks for taking the time to put your thoughts into words. We disagree politically on some of this, but it's obvious that you care about people. It would serve no purpose to debate the areas of disagreement. I wish you and yours good fortune and great health.
-
Two different reactions to this:
1) So a fetus with a terminal condition should be aborted yes?
2) If something can't survive without its host then it doesn't have the full capacity yet to grow, reproduce, or be fully functional.
3) in the strictest sense a cell is alive and you're right but the argument isn't whether a fetus is "alive" in that strictest sense. It is about at what point is it human life.
I never said a fetus with terminal condition should not be aborted. I never said a pregnant woman diagnosed with a life threatening condition should be denied an abortion, but those are very few.
So what if the law said the state/ hospital is not required to provide a COVID patient with a respirator because his /her ability to breathe on their own is not fully functional would that sit well with any of us?
According to the definition an embryo any embryo is alive and if the embryo is human it is a human life.
-
Yes!
Life: the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.
Abortion stops life.
Where did you get that is "science's" accepted definition of life? Some define life as starting at conception. Some at birth. Most, somewhere in between. When did "science" decide which of those definitions is correct?
-
According to the definition an embryo any embryo is alive and if the embryo is human it is a human life.
I doubt many scientists would claim an embryo is "alive." And the dictionary definition of embryo doesn't include the word "alive."
The problem is that "life" really isn't a switch that is turned on at a given point. It's a process.
-
I never said a fetus with terminal condition should not be aborted. I never said a pregnant woman diagnosed with a life threatening condition should be denied an abortion, but those are very few.
So what if the law said the state/ hospital is not required to provide a COVID patient with a respirator because his /her ability to breathe on their own is not fully functional would that sit well with any of us?
According to the definition an embryo any embryo is alive and if the embryo is human it is a human life.
I didn't say you did. I wanted confirmation on where you stand in the "having to carry it to term" argument. Glad we're on the same page.
That's different as that person is objectively human prior to that. They have the full capacity to do all those things, the medical intervention is to keep that objectively human person alive.
Again I'm not arguing that an embryo is alive. In the same sense I'm not arguing that any single cell organism or simple multi-cell organism isnt alive. But you make a big jump with the "if the embryo is human it is a human life" statement. Plenty of things in a human can meet that life definition so it seems like you're working from a logic statement of "if something alive comes from humans then it is a human life" which is obviously false. Or "if a human embryo has human potential then it is a full human life" which in itself acknowledges that a human embryo isn't a full human life at that time. Nothing wrong with the belief, its just that it acknowledges it's not a human life at that moment which then voids your science argument about human life beginning at conception.
-
So what if the law said the state/ hospital is not required to provide a COVID patient with a respirator because his /her ability to breathe on their own is not fully functional would that sit well with any of us?
That's a pretty bad analogy.
A woman is not a ventilator for a fetus. She's not a medical device. She does not exist solely to further the existence of another.
That's where this turns for me. If you outlaw abortion, you're telling every woman that her bodily autonomy is subservient to the health of another, and that subservience will be enforced through the power of the state.
I suspect we'd all be outraged if the government forced us to surrender our bodily autonomy to provide kidney, liver or bone marrow transplants to preserve the lives of others. Yet some don't blink at - and in fact wholly embrace - the idea of the government forcing women to surrender their autonomy for another.
Brother dgies ... what you wrote was thoughtful and eloquent. But we don't live in a theocracy, Your faith guides your moral compass and the way you live your life, and that's worthy of respect. Also worthy of respect is that not everyone shares your faith nor should they be required to live under its tenets.
-
Brother dgies ... what you wrote was thoughtful and eloquent. But we don't live in a theocracy, Your faith guides your moral compass and the way you live your life, and that's worthy of respect. Also worthy of respect is that not everyone shares your faith nor should they be required to live under its tenets.
This was my logic for being pro choice when I was still somewhat religious. The separation of church and state outweighs any discomfort I have with the procedure
-
If Greg Abbott has a plan to eradicate rape from Texas, I’m confident he can end man-cow love. A great day for cows in Texas except the ones we eat
If he has a plan to eliminate rape in texas, it brings up a couple of points:
1. He has been governor for several years. If he knows how to eliminate rape, but hasn't done it, doesn't that make him a rape enabler?
2. He is not talking about putting rapists in jail. That does not eliminate rape - only punishes rapists. To eliminate rape, as he said he would, you have to stop it before it happens. How does he plan to do this? Go full Minority Report? Put cameras covering literally every square foot of the state? Tell rapists "just say no"?
-
If he has a plan to eliminate rape in texas, it brings up a couple of points:
1. He has been governor for several years. If he knows how to eliminate rape, but hasn't done it, doesn't that make him a rape enabler?
2. He is not talking about putting rapists in jail. That does not eliminate rape - only punishes rapists. To eliminate rape, as he said he would, you have to stop it before it happens. How does he plan to do this? Go full Minority Report? Put cameras covering literally every square foot of the state? Tell rapists "just say no"?
He’s going to have Mexico do it
-
2. He is not talking about putting rapists in jail. That does not eliminate rape - only punishes rapists. To eliminate rape, as he said he would, you have to stop it before it happens. How does he plan to do this? Go full Minority Report? Put cameras covering literally every square foot of the state? Tell rapists "just say no"?
As Charles says,
Conservative Politicians Have Realized They Don't Even Really Need to Try Anymore
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a37511800/greg-abbott-texas-abortion-law-rape-exception/
"For a while now, it's been obvious that America’s conservative politicians have decided that they don’t have to try very hard, and that their audience of voters will swallow just about anything as long as it has the desired effect of owning the libs and conforming to whatever the fantasy conflict du jour is. ’Twas not ever thus. For example, supply-side economics is as fundamentally kooky as anything Alex Jones ever has exhaled into the ether, but there was at least a semblance of thought behind it. OK, so its founding document is a cocktail napkin. But there was at least a semblance of a kind of thought that grew out of that napkin. There was an attempt to defend the crackpottery on its merits. Now, all that is necessary is to spout off in public, full in the confidence that most of your audience is safely in the bag before you ever say a word."
-
I doubt many scientists would claim an embryo is "alive." And the dictionary definition of embryo doesn't include the word "alive."
The problem is that "life" really isn't a switch that is turned on at a given point. It's a process.
I know you're Sultan and all, so there's that, but actually, many scientists do claim that an embryo is a human life.
https://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8/scientists-attest-life-beginning-conception/
https://www.liveaction.org/news/life-begins-at-conception-science-teaches/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/pro-life-pro-science/549308/
It's true that one can find some scientists who claim otherwise, but there's oodles of scientists who claim an embryo is a human life from inception.
-
I know you're Sultan and all, so there's that, but actually, many scientists do claim that an embryo is a human life.
https://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8/scientists-attest-life-beginning-conception/
https://www.liveaction.org/news/life-begins-at-conception-science-teaches/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/pro-life-pro-science/549308/
It's true that one can find some scientists who claim otherwise, but there's oodles of scientists who claim an embryo is a human life from inception.
I agree, you wouldn't be hard-pressed to find scientists to find plenty of scientists agree that an embryo is alive.
But most would also agree that we really don't have a firm definition of what life is, nor do we understand the concept of life. Instead, there decisions on a embryo being a human life largely stems from personal beliefs, often rooted in religion.
The fact of the matter is the concept of life and consciousness is beyond the scope of current science.
-
That's a pretty bad analogy.
A woman is not a ventilator for a fetus. She's not a medical device. She does not exist solely to further the existence of another.
That's where this turns for me. If you outlaw abortion, you're telling every woman that her bodily autonomy is subservient to the health of another, and that subservience will be enforced through the power of the state.
I suspect we'd all be outraged if the government forced us to surrender our bodily autonomy to provide kidney, liver or bone marrow transplants to preserve the lives of others. Yet some don't blink at - and in fact wholly embrace - the idea of the government forcing women to surrender their autonomy for another.
Brother dgies ... what you wrote was thoughtful and eloquent. But we don't live in a theocracy, Your faith guides your moral compass and the way you live your life, and that's worthy of respect. Also worthy of respect is that not everyone shares your faith nor should they be required to live under its tenets.
OK, but ask anyone suffering from a parasitic infection if the parasite is not a living organism.
-
OK, but ask anyone suffering from a parasitic infection if the parasite is not a living organism.
Actually, parasites are considered living organisms. Viruses, on the other hand, usually are not.
But again, the definitions are fluid.
-
Brother dgies ... what you wrote was thoughtful and eloquent. But we don't live in a theocracy, Your faith guides your moral compass and the way you live your life, and that's worthy of respect. Also worthy of respect is that not everyone shares your faith nor should they be required to live under its tenets.
Brother Pakuni:
First of all, my posts and my personal beliefs generally support your view of a theocracy. I actually lived in one, in Nashville from the 1960s through the time I left for Marquette. Before it became the hot growth spot of America, Nashville was the "Buckle on the Bible Belt." We Catholics were truly outsiders and we were treated that way by the local Baptists and Church of Christ, who sought to impose their will on the broader city. The Bible Belt culture of Nashville was one of the big reasons I never really wanted to go back for the rest of my life.
That said, all societies have as a core certain "Positive Moral Values" that govern how we live. Those values are not just ingrained in our religion, but in our American Society as well. Nondiscrimination is one example. Our theology teaches to "love your neighbor as yourself." Our Constitution says all of us are created equal. There's linkage between the two. If you question me, take a good hard look at the photos and videos of the Selma to Montgomery march. The people in the front of that march were religious leaders emphasizing the need for understanding of what is a positive moral value. Likewise, when Dr. King was supporting striking garbage workers in 1968, our Bishop, Joseph A. Durick, was out there with him. He was there afterward as well with Mrs. King and Rev. Abernathy.
Why was he there -- because our Bishop believed in the notion that all men are created equal before God and Government.
Our abortion debate centers on one thing -- a conflicting view of when legal personhood should be conveyed on a living being. It's a legitimate debate that encompasses positive moral values related to rights and responsibilities. To your point about a theocracy and as I said earlier, people who support government action against abortion clinics are asking government to do what the moral authority of this country has been unable to do -- use the scientific, cultural and theological values to which this country largely subscribes to teach in a way that reduces demand for abortion.
Gosh, am I sounding like Dr. Beach. I doubt he ever knew who I was, sitting in the back of the classroom and all, but he sure had an impact! I still hear him saying, "I'm dictating... it would behoove you to take notes..."
-
Actually, parasites are considered living organisms. Viruses, on the other hand, usually are not.
But again, the definitions are fluid.
...and a fetus is not a virus.
-
Gosh, am I sounding like Dr. Beach. I doubt he ever knew who I was, sitting in the back of the classroom and all, but he sure had an impact! I still hear him saying, "I'm dictating... it would behoove you to take notes..."
I still hear him saying, "It says in the Wall Street Journal.....", as he peered out over the paper, seated in the front of the room....
-
P.S. -- before you get too hung up on voter suppression, read past the headlines and try to understand what's being legislated. In my new home state of Florida, the ugliness about our voting rules has rained down about as hard as a late afternoon tropical thunderstorm. Our voting rules in Florida under the new law are some of the most liberal in the United States. Far more so than, say, Pennsylvania, Delaware or a number of other eastern states. Keep in mind though that in our last election, both our governor and U.S. Senator won by less than 1 percent of the vote. The 2000 Presidential election hung on Florida and, given the hell our state has gone through over the years, we want to be sure we get it right.
Yes, we require IDs and no, we do not permit ballot harvesting. But if you want to vote early or, as in my case, vote by mail, it's easy. Even for people with physical ailments. Short of hiring election officials to walk a ballot to a person's door and filling it out for them (which should be as illegal as hell), we do a good job. And it will be better next time because we have a new election commissioner in Palm Beach County. If Broward County can get it's act together, we'll be a model for election administration nationally.
To your point, True Blue Connecticut has some of the strictest voting laws in the USA.
We also interestingly have some of the highest voting percentages in the USA.
The main reason is that the laws are in the state constitution and there's a long process to open them up.
There is no early voting.
You need to show an ID (although I think a credit card or utility bill is sufficient).
You need a "legit excuse" to vote absentee. Last year, per Governor emergency powers COVID was deemed a valid excuse so everyone got mailed a "Do you need an absentee ballot to remote vote because of COVID?" card that you had to return.
To change some of these laws, it needs to be voted by a majority for two separate state congresses and then it only goes to a referendum where it has to pass. The state is trying to open up, but nothing will change until 2024 for some and 2026 for others.
-
I know you're Sultan and all, so there's that, but actually, many scientists do claim that an embryo is a human life.
https://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8/scientists-attest-life-beginning-conception/
https://www.liveaction.org/news/life-begins-at-conception-science-teaches/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/pro-life-pro-science/549308/
It's true that one can find some scientists who claim otherwise, but there's oodles of scientists who claim an embryo is a human life from inception.
A lot of the quote you provided here don't say what you think they say.
-
A lot of the quote you provided here don't say what you think they say.
Judging from just one of the quotes provided,
"It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception...."
It's safe to say you have no clue what I think they say.
-
Brother Pakuni:
First of all, my posts and my personal beliefs generally support your view of a theocracy. I actually lived in one, in Nashville from the 1960s through the time I left for Marquette. Before it became the hot growth spot of America, Nashville was the "Buckle on the Bible Belt." We Catholics were truly outsiders and we were treated that way by the local Baptists and Church of Christ, who sought to impose their will on the broader city. The Bible Belt culture of Nashville was one of the big reasons I never really wanted to go back for the rest of my life.
That said, all societies have as a core certain "Positive Moral Values" that govern how we live. Those values are not just ingrained in our religion, but in our American Society as well. Nondiscrimination is one example. Our theology teaches to "love your neighbor as yourself." Our Constitution says all of us are created equal. There's linkage between the two. If you question me, take a good hard look at the photos and videos of the Selma to Montgomery march. The people in the front of that march were religious leaders emphasizing the need for understanding of what is a positive moral value. Likewise, when Dr. King was supporting striking garbage workers in 1968, our Bishop, Joseph A. Durick, was out there with him. He was there afterward as well with Mrs. King and Rev. Abernathy.
Why was he there -- because our Bishop believed in the notion that all men are created equal before God and Government.
Our abortion debate centers on one thing -- a conflicting view of when legal personhood should be conveyed on a living being. It's a legitimate debate that encompasses positive moral values related to rights and responsibilities. To your point about a theocracy and as I said earlier, people who support government action against abortion clinics are asking government to do what the moral authority of this country has been unable to do -- use the scientific, cultural and theological values to which this country largely subscribes to teach in a way that reduces demand for abortion.
Gosh, am I sounding like Dr. Beach. I doubt he ever knew who I was, sitting in the back of the classroom and all, but he sure had an impact! I still hear him saying, "I'm dictating... it would behoove you to take notes..."
Leaving the abortion argument out of it, I think it is extremely dangerous to tie morality with religious beliefs, specifically as it relates to US Government for two reasons: A) It does not give credit to the individuals - writers of the constitution, those who fight for amendments/civil liberties/equal rights may or may not be religious but they certainly are people of high moral character. and B) the people who oppose civil liberties and equal rights almost always do so because of their religious beliefs - the people on the other side of the bridge in Selma, or those that fight desegregation, or oppose LGBTQ+ rights (even here on Scoop) primarily do so because of their interpretation of their beliefs.
Equating faith and moral authority gives a tremendous amount of cover for people who use faith to support positions of hate and oppression.
We've said it before, there is very little difference in intent or action between a religious person who truly has faith and an atheist who is truly thoughtful. I don't care why a person is of strong moral character, there are many paths to being so and faith can certainly be one of those paths but faith can also be a path to standing on the other side of the bridge (or enacting laws limiting LGBTQ+ rights).
-
...and a fetus is not a virus.
But living, really isn't the moral question. A human cell is living, we do all kinds of tests on human cells that result in death of the cell. No one is screaming pro-life when someone gets a blood test, or a Pap smear, or a biopsy, or even an amputation of a limb that was previously living and now dies when excised from the human body.
The real question is , when is something a "human life"? As I mentioned above, that is a question beyond the scope of current science. What makes something "life" and "conscious" right now is a philosophical and moral question.
-
Leaving the abortion argument out of it, I think it is extremely dangerous to tie morality with religious beliefs, specifically as it relates to US Government for two reasons: A) It does not give credit to the individuals - writers of the constitution, those who fight for amendments/civil liberties/equal rights may or may not be religious but they certainly are people of high moral character. and B) the people who oppose civil liberties and equal rights almost always do so because of their religious beliefs - the people on the other side of the bridge in Selma, or those that fight desegregation, or oppose LGBTQ+ rights (even here on Scoop) primarily do so because of their interpretation of their beliefs.
Equating faith and moral authority gives a tremendous amount of cover for people who use faith to support positions of hate and oppression.
We've said it before, there is very little difference in intent or action between a religious person who truly has faith and an atheist who is truly thoughtful. I don't care why a person is of strong moral character, there are many paths to being so and faith can certainly be one of those paths but faith can also be a path to standing on the other side of the bridge (or enacting laws limiting LGBTQ+ rights).
Brother NaginiF:
Interesting comments. You are right, the guys on the "other side" of the Edmund Pettus Bridge back in 1965 often used religious beliefs to justify their very sinful actions. People have invoked the name of God for eternity to justify everything from war to slavery to limiting the role of women and hatred of gays and lesbians. The first time I was in Europe, I was appalled by the amount of torture that was used to advance the cause of the Roman Catholic faith back in the middle ages.
My gosh, we're still feeling the fallout from the Crusades, which were a morally suspect series of wars fought over the right to control modern-day Israel and Palestine.
I'd also agree that the religious do not hold a monopoly on goodness. We see that every day. I used to argue this day in and day out with a good friend of mine who is a very devout Muslim.
Nonetheless, the values and beliefs that underlie our culture, laws and social expectations come from somewhere and in America, those core beliefs represent a very forward thinking view of the religious values our founders held, coupled with a really nasty dislike of the King of England. I'd also argue that as our views about such things as who our brothers and sisters are, how we should treat them and how we view ourselves in the context of a greater society, change, that change is in part driven by a better understanding of what our Judeo-Christian beliefs really teach.
For example, when I was in early grade school, we were taught the "thunder and lightening" version of God found in the Baltimore Catechism. It was such a rote process that even now, 59 years later, I can STILL recite the questions and answers in that catechism. God was, in effect, the big KPMG in the sky! Around the time I was in middle school, the catechism we learned was more "God the hippie love child" where our love for one another arising from adherence to the Great Commandment drove a better appreciation for civil rights, equality and appreciating our neighbor.
The point is that things evolve. Our religious views in this country mostly abhor slavery, segregation and abuse of women. We're evolving -- probably too slowly -- on gays and lesbians. Maybe in a generation if we don't evolve to the true teachings of Jesus, our churches will be nonexistent and our religious practices will be more like Europe. But even Europe, where participation in religious congregations is at all-time lows, there is no denying the link between society at large and the influence of Christian religions.
-
Leaving the abortion argument out of it, I think it is extremely dangerous to tie morality with religious beliefs, specifically as it relates to US Government for two reasons: A) It does not give credit to the individuals - writers of the constitution, those who fight for amendments/civil liberties/equal rights may or may not be religious but they certainly are people of high moral character. and B) the people who oppose civil liberties and equal rights almost always do so because of their religious beliefs - the people on the other side of the bridge in Selma, or those that fight desegregation, or oppose LGBTQ+ rights (even here on Scoop) primarily do so because of their interpretation of their beliefs.
Equating faith and moral authority gives a tremendous amount of cover for people who use faith to support positions of hate and oppression.
We've said it before, there is very little difference in intent or action between a religious person who truly has faith and an atheist who is truly thoughtful. I don't care why a person is of strong moral character, there are many paths to being so and faith can certainly be one of those paths but faith can also be a path to standing on the other side of the bridge (or enacting laws limiting LGBTQ+ rights).
Well said.
Faith drives people to do many wonderful things. But not all people who do wonderful things are people of faith.
Faith also drives people to do many terrible things. And, of course, not all people who do terrible things are people of faith.
Brother dgies,
I didn't mean to imply you are in favor of a theocracy. I was pointing out that the religious beliefs that inform your stance on abortion should not be the basis of our laws on abortion or anything else.
-
Brother NaginiF:
.......
For years I used to debate the nature vs nurture element of human morality with a good friend of mine and it eventually devolved into him telling me "you're doing gods work" work every time I cleared the hurdle of being a decent person and me telling him "you're a good man" every time he did. In the end it doesn't matter whether the country was founded by people who used their faith as their guiding principle or if it was founded by people who were innately moral (for their era) and happened to be Christian......what matters is where we go from here and, as you stated, we continue to evolve in a positive manner.
Thank you for your perspective - the more people with your approach to faith the less problem I'd have with the role of religion in our society
-
You know guys, this is one of the more interesting discussions I've had on politics and morality. It's clear we all have strong, well-developed beliefs that, in many cases, conflict with each other.
We're able to air those beliefs intelligently and rationally.
I may not always agree with you folks, but I admire the thought that went into many of the discussions here and the respect shown toward each other.
Brothers NaginiF, MU82, MUFan, Lighthouse and Pakuni, I've truly enjoyed this back and forth.
-
The Justice Dept. sues Texas over its new restrictive abortion law
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/09/us/politics/texas-abortion-law-justice-department-lawsuit.html?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20210909&instance_id=0&nl=breaking-news&ref=headline®i_id=108420427&segment_id=68510&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
The Justice Department sued Texas on Thursday over its recently enacted law that prohibits nearly all abortions in the state, the first significant step by the Biden administration to fight the nation’s most restrictive ban on abortion and a move that could once again put the statute before the Supreme Court.
The department argued that the law was unconstitutional because it allowed Texas to essentially prohibit abortion while technically complying with Supreme Court rulings that forbid such a ban by deputizing private parties to enforce the new restrictions.
Attorney General Merrick B. Garland called Texas’ enforcement mechanism “an unprecedented” effort whose “obvious and expressly acknowledged intention” was to prevent women from exercising their constitutionally protected right to have abortions.
“This kind of scheme to nullify the Constitution of the United States is one that all Americans — whatever their politics or party — should fear,” Mr. Garland said in a news conference at the Justice Department. “If it prevails, it may become a model for action in other areas, by other states, and with respect to other constitutional rights and judicial precedents.”
Yep. Those cheering this law might not be so happy with other laws that might be crafted to deputize vigilante citizens.
-
Will be interesting to see it all play out.
-
Will be interesting to see it all play out.
-
Hmm, if the point is to reduce cars on the road, should any passengers under the age of 16 qualify (or anyone without a drivers license) as they would have to be passengers regardless?
-
Texas wanted to be the tech haven of the U.S. Its new abortion bill and other measures are causing workers to rethink their move.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/12/texas-abortion-law-tech-workers-reconsidering-relocation/?utm_campaign=wp_the7&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_the7&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F34a9394%2F613f2fdd9d2fda262757afa2%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F7%2F38%2F613f2fdd9d2fda262757afa2
On Sept. 3, just two days after Texas banned abortions, Vivek Bhaskaran, the chief executive of an Austin-based online survey software company, quickly assembled the handful of female employees that are based in the city.
In a virtual town hall that lasted about 15 minutes, he told the women that regardless of insurance, the company would cover out-of-state abortion services.
“I’m not a politician; I can’t change anything. But I’m still responsible for my employees in Texas, and I have a moral responsibility to them,” said Bhaskaran, CEO of QuestionPro.
For the past several years, Texas has been selling itself as a tech haven attracting start-ups and tech companies such as Oracle, Hewlett-Packard Enterprises, and even Elon Musk, Tesla’s billionaire co-founder and CEO, who has moved to the state. Big Tech companies such as Facebook, Amazon, and Apple all have grown their presence in the state, opening new warehouses, data centers, and production facilities.
But Texas’s recent swerve to the right on abortion, voting restrictions as well as a ban on coronavirus vaccine mandates has many workers and industry leaders like Bhaskaran worried about retaining workers and recruiting top tech talent to the state. In August, Texas had 33,843 tech job openings — the second highest in the U.S. after California — according to a report from the Computing Technology Industry Association. That’s up 56% from a year earlier.
EDIT: And another
Salesforce offers to help employees leave in wake of Texas' restrictive abortion law
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/salesforce-offers-help-employees-leave-wake-texas-restrictive-abortion-law-n1278988?campaign_id=4&emc=edit_dk_20210913&instance_id=40273&nl=dealbook®i_id=108420427&segment_id=68788&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
-
To be honest, Texas Republicans likely don't care much that the relocations from California slow down.
-
Meanwhile, in California, polls are now showing that the recall election probably won't result in Newsom getting ousted. So, of course, Republicans in the state are pre-emptively screaming: "Voter fraud!"
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/12/us/politics/gop-voter-fraud-california-recall.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210913&instance_id=40271&nl=the-morning®i_id=108420427&segment_id=68786&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
So Trump accomplished one thing in his 4 years, anyway. He has made lies about voter fraud the new normal.
-
Meanwhile, in California, polls are now showing that the recall election probably won't result in Newsom getting ousted. So, of course, Republicans in the state are pre-emptively screaming: "Voter fraud!"
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/12/us/politics/gop-voter-fraud-california-recall.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210913&instance_id=40271&nl=the-morning®i_id=108420427&segment_id=68786&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
So Trump accomplished one thing in his 4 years, anyway. He has made lies about voter fraud the new normal.
Really? My wife and I live with our grown children so we can mind our grand daughter while they are at work. Here in New Jersey in 2016 we received our mail-in ballots in early October. There was the ballot which you placed in an envelope. That envelope was placed into an envelope that you signed and that envelope was placed into an envelope that was sent to the county clerk. Sounds pretty straight forward. Even though we each signed our own evelopes my grand daughter could have filled out all 4 ballots and the county clerk would not have been the wiser. There would be absolutely no way to prove fraud even though a fraud could have been committed. These votes would be counted just like any other ballots.
The problem with man-in ballots is there is no direct way to prove that the ballot cast was actually cast by the voter. If all 4 of us showed up in person at the polls would they let all 4 of us go into the voting booth at the same time? Absolutely not, because they could not be certain who is casting the vote, but with mail-in ballots every voter at that residence is essentially in the same voting booth.
-
Really? My wife and I live with our grown children so we can mind our grand daughter while they are at work. Here in New Jersey in 2016 we received our mail-in ballots in early October. There was the ballot which you placed in an envelope. That envelope was placed into an envelope that you signed and that envelope was placed into an envelope that was sent to the county clerk. Sounds pretty straight forward. Even though we each signed our own evelopes my grand daughter could have filled out all 4 ballots and the county clerk would not have been the wiser. There would be absolutely no way to prove fraud even though a fraud could have been committed. These votes would be counted just like any other ballots.
The problem with man-in ballots is there is no direct way to prove that the ballot cast was actually cast by the voter. If all 4 of us showed up in person at the polls would they let all 4 of us go into the voting booth at the same time? Absolutely not, because they could not be certain who is casting the vote, but with mail-in ballots every voter at that residence is essentially in the same voting booth.
So the logic here is that because something could have happened that didn't happen shows that it happened on a large enough scale to overturn a presidential election and now prevent a recall election? (in an established blue state mind you).
If you make wild accusations it's on you to prove them. You haven't offered proof here only a conspiracy how it could work at a small scale.
-
Really? My wife and I live with our grown children so we can mind our grand daughter while they are at work. Here in New Jersey in 2016 we received our mail-in ballots in early October. There was the ballot which you placed in an envelope. That envelope was placed into an envelope that you signed and that envelope was placed into an envelope that was sent to the county clerk. Sounds pretty straight forward. Even though we each signed our own evelopes my grand daughter could have filled out all 4 ballots and the county clerk would not have been the wiser. There would be absolutely no way to prove fraud even though a fraud could have been committed. These votes would be counted just like any other ballots.
The problem with man-in ballots is there is no direct way to prove that the ballot cast was actually cast by the voter. If all 4 of us showed up in person at the polls would they let all 4 of us go into the voting booth at the same time? Absolutely not, because they could not be certain who is casting the vote, but with mail-in ballots every voter at that residence is essentially in the same voting booth.
Ah yes, the mythical voter fraud scare.
Which has been found to happen exceedingly rarely.
And for both parties about equally, resulting in no net change.
https://www.stlmag.com/news/debunking-mail-in-voting-fraud/
"Yet the Brennan Center found only six substantiated cases of voter fraud in Missouri, a rate of 0.0003 percent. All told, the Brennan Center noted, it’s more likely that an American will be struck by lightning than impersonate someone at the polls.
What about mail-in voting? For years, multiple states, including Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, have used the mail as their primary voting mechanism, and there, too, the Brennan Center found low levels of fraud. Since 2000, Oregon has issued about 100 million mail-in ballots. It has only documented a dozen cases of proven fraud. “It is still more likely for an American to be struck by lightning than to commit mail voting fraud,” the Brennan Center concluded."
But of course you know why Republicans don't want to allow mail in voting and it has nothing to do with voter fraud.
-
To be honest, Texas Republicans likely don't care much that the relocations from California slow down.
Ever since this recent wave of legislation was proposed, I've speculated that one of the ulterior motives was to slow the influx of transplants from blue states and encourage them from red states. Texas gets more and more purple every year.
-
So the logic here is that because something could have happened that didn't happen shows that it happened on a large enough scale to overturn a presidential election and now prevent a recall election? (in an established blue state mind you).
If you make wild accusations it's on your to prove them. You haven't offered proof here only a conspiracy how it could work at a small scale.
Just admit it. Trump won by a landslide. Dems were too stoopid to figure out how to cheat on races for Congress, but had a genius plan to cheat on the presidential vote.
People like 69 are the ones who gave the "wink" to the terrorists on Jan 6 and urged them on by repeating the Big Lie..
-
Ah yes, the mythical voter fraud scare.
Which has been found to happen exceedingly rarely.
And for both parties about equally, resulting in no net change.
https://www.stlmag.com/news/debunking-mail-in-voting-fraud/
"Yet the Brennan Center found only six substantiated cases of voter fraud in Missouri, a rate of 0.0003 percent. All told, the Brennan Center noted, it’s more likely that an American will be struck by lightning than impersonate someone at the polls.
What about mail-in voting? For years, multiple states, including Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, have used the mail as their primary voting mechanism, and there, too, the Brennan Center found low levels of fraud. Since 2000, Oregon has issued about 100 million mail-in ballots. It has only documented a dozen cases of proven fraud. “It is still more likely for an American to be struck by lightning than to commit mail voting fraud,” the Brennan Center concluded."
But of course you know why Republicans don't want to allow mail in voting and it has nothing to do with voter fraud.
There is nothing mythical about it. As I said my grand daughter could have filled out the ballots and the Brennan Center would have never discovered the fraud much less prove it. No wonder there are so few "proven" cases of fraud. I agree it cuts both ways, but I just don't trust a system of voting that could be so easily manipulated and fraud impossible to discover or prove.
-
There is nothing mythical about it. As I said my grand daughter could have filled out the ballots and the Brennan Center would have never discovered the fraud much less prove it. No wonder there are so few "proven" cases of fraud. I agree it cuts both ways, but I just don't trust a system of voting that could be so easily manipulated and fraud impossible to discover or prove.
Nothing mythical, of course, save for the actual evidence of it happening. That bit remains mythical.
-
Nothing mythical, of course, save for the actual evidence of it happening. That bit remains mythical.
Do you realize how nonsensical that reply is?
-
So the logic here is that because something could have happened that didn't happen shows that it happened on a large enough scale to overturn a presidential election and now prevent a recall election? (in an established blue state mind you).
If you make wild accusations it's on you to prove them. You haven't offered proof here only a conspiracy how it could work at a small scale.
That is my point. I could neither prove it did happen anymore than you can prove it didn't happen. The perfect system for voter manipulation.
-
Nothing mythical, of course, save for the actual evidence of it happening. That bit remains mythical.
That is my point. There is no evidence of fraud even though a fraud was committed.
-
That is my point. There is no evidence of fraud even though a fraud was committed.
Your honor, I bring this lawsuit against muwarrior69 for stealing $1M from my home. Sure, there is no evidence that he entered my home while I was sleeping and removed the $1M in nonsequential bills that I keep in a briefcase under my bed. And, sure, there is no evidence that I actually possessed that $1M in cash. But, you see, this theft occurred. Just look, he has lots and lots of money and is a very successful man (no doubt due to the money he stole from me). Therefore, despite the fact that I have no evidence whatsoever that the thing I allege occurred actually occurred, please direct Mr. muwarrior69 to give me $1M.
-
That is my point. There is no evidence of fraud even though a fraud was committed.
You've got to be joking.
On the off chance you are not, by this logic anyone can believe anything and you are going to hold it as valid. Santa? you bet. JFK was killed because he was going to expose the lizard people? no evidence he wasn't. The FBI reached an agreement with Al McGuire in 1976 that if he retired after the '77 season they would destroy all evidence of him starting the Vietnam war? Has to be true.
Each of these are as true as your position on voter fraud.
-
Your honor, I bring this lawsuit against muwarrior69 for stealing $1M from my home. Sure, there is no evidence that he entered my home while I was sleeping and removed the $1M in nonsequential bills that I keep in a briefcase under my bed. And, sure, there is no evidence that I actually possessed that $1M in cash. But, you see, this theft occurred. Just look, he has lots and lots of money and is a very successful man (no doubt due to the money he stole from me). Therefore, despite the fact that I have no evidence whatsoever that the thing I allege occurred actually occurred, please direct Mr. muwarrior69 to give me $1M.
Whoa. Did you steal the Trump playbook?
-
Holy moses I didn't know educated people actually bought the voter fraud narrative that has no basis in fact. MU really was a different place in 1969.
-
Holy moses I didn't know educated people actually bought the voter fraud narrative that has no basis in fact. MU really was a different place in 1969.
This is one of Keefe's alts right? My bad if I'm wrong. It's hard to keep track.
-
Holy moses I didn't know educated people actually bought the voter fraud narrative that has no basis in fact. MU really was a different place in 1969.
It's worse.
He admits there is no basis in fact, but insists it happened anyhow.
-
There is nothing mythical about it. As I said my grand daughter could have filled out the ballots and the Brennan Center would have never discovered the fraud much less prove it. No wonder there are so few "proven" cases of fraud. I agree it cuts both ways, but I just don't trust a system of voting that could be so easily manipulated and fraud impossible to discover or prove.
Even your hypothetical is silly. So your granddaughter fills out the ballots and you don't notice that those ballots you were going to complete are no where to be found? And then you go vote in person...and discover you already voted by mail--and the fraud is discovered.
The reason Republicans don't want mail-in voting has nothing to do with fraud.
-
This is one of Keefe's alts right? My bad if I'm wrong. It's hard to keep track.
No, thats theBabyDavid or something of that nature I believe
-
No, thats theBabyDavid or something of that nature I believe
Roger. We should circulate a memo or something. These 31 names are Chicos' alts. These are Keefes. This one's on me. Carry on everyone.
-
Holy moses I didn't know educated people actually bought the voter fraud narrative that has no basis in fact. MU really was a different place in 1969.
I think that is a pretty wild assumption. If we ever needed proof of how batsh!t crazy these people are, we have exhibit #1.
-
That is my point. I could neither prove it did happen anymore than you can prove it didn't happen. The perfect system for voter manipulation.
::) :o :'( :-X
All these emotions at once.
-
Even your hypothetical is silly. So your granddaughter fills out the ballots and you don't notice that those ballots you were going to complete are no where to be found? And then you go vote in person...and discover you already voted by mail--and the fraud is discovered.
The reason Republicans don't want mail-in voting has nothing to do with fraud.
You misunderstood. We all sign our envelopes. We explain to our grand daughter that only one bubble for president, senate, congress etc can be filled out in each row. She is very good at coloring bubbles as she does it all the time when taking tests at school. We then take the ballots the she competed and complete the process by placing all items in its proper envelopes and mail it to the county clerk. A fraud was committed because we did not cast those ballots, a second fraud was committed because our grand daughter is not even eligible to vote. There is no way the county clerk could discover a fraud was committed. We signed the envelope, the ballots were filled out correctly (by someone else) and counted. There is no reason to vote in person. Our ballots were mailed and counted. Absolutely no evidence of fraud. There is no direct link between the voter and the ballot. There is no way to know with absolute certainty that the ballot was actually cast by the person who signed envelope.
-
You misunderstood. We all sign our envelopes. We explain to our grand daughter that only one bubble for president, senate, congress etc can be filled out in each row. She is very good at coloring bubbles as she does it all the time when taking tests at school. We then take the ballots the she competed and complete the process by placing all items in its proper envelopes and mail it to the county clerk. A fraud was committed because we did not cast those ballots, a second fraud was committed because our grand daughter is not even eligible to vote. There is no way the county clerk could discover a fraud was committed. We signed the envelope, the ballots were filled out correctly (by someone else) and counted. There is no reason to vote in person. Our ballots were mailed and counted. Absolutely no evidence of fraud. There is no direct link between the voter and the ballot. There is no way to know with absolute certainty that the ballot was actually cast by the person who signed envelope.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/7a/b9/3b/7ab93ba902d6b15f569f1256a0732367--super-hero-stuff-why-so-serious.jpg)
-
You misunderstood. We all sign our envelopes. We explain to our grand daughter that only one bubble for president, senate, congress etc can be filled out in each row. She is very good at coloring bubbles as she does it all the time when taking tests at school. We then take the ballots the she competed and complete the process by placing all items in its proper envelopes and mail it to the county clerk. A fraud was committed because we did not cast those ballots, a second fraud was committed because our grand daughter is not even eligible to vote. There is no way the county clerk could discover a fraud was committed. We signed the envelope, the ballots were filled out correctly (by someone else) and counted. There is no reason to vote in person. Our ballots were mailed and counted. Absolutely no evidence of fraud. There is no direct link between the voter and the ballot. There is no way to know with absolute certainty that the ballot was actually cast by the person who signed envelope.
What we have here is a person who has entwined their beliefs with their identity. The beliefs of "us vs them," "democracy is under threat," "people who don't agree with these principals are acting in bad faith therefore we must be vigilant against any and all perceived slights," and "my hypothetical is not merely possible, but certain to have occurred because if there is nothing they will not do, and they can do fraud, therefore they have done fraud." It all weaves together into a situation where any criticism of these beliefs is cannot be based on evidence, logic, statistics, or good faith, those criticism are an attack on the *self.*
That is to say nothing of the fact that the path that people with this worldview has walked has led them to a place where the perceived threat is existential to democracy, the country, and way of life, and if that is true, then there is no action they are unwilling to take to defeat that threat.
There is nothing I or anyone on this board can say that might deradicalize this worldview. The only hope is that there is some breadcrumb that leads to another breadcrumb that leads closer to the disentangling of identity from misinformation.
Pretty cool stuff.
-
You misunderstood. We all sign our envelopes. We explain to our grand daughter that only one bubble for president, senate, congress etc can be filled out in each row. She is very good at coloring bubbles as she does it all the time when taking tests at school. We then take the ballots the she competed and complete the process by placing all items in its proper envelopes and mail it to the county clerk. A fraud was committed because we did not cast those ballots, a second fraud was committed because our grand daughter is not even eligible to vote. There is no way the county clerk could discover a fraud was committed. We signed the envelope, the ballots were filled out correctly (by someone else) and counted. There is no reason to vote in person. Our ballots were mailed and counted. Absolutely no evidence of fraud. There is no direct link between the voter and the ballot. There is no way to know with absolute certainty that the ballot was actually cast by the person who signed envelope.
Getting back to California where you started this. Are you arguing that enough people live in California, with their granddaughter, then explain how to vote to their granddaughter, then don't examine the ballot before signing and sealing it, that turn those ballots in. And this is the only reason that the Republic recall failed? (Or for that matter Trump got voted out?)
-
Getting back to California were you started this. Are you arguing that enough people live in California, with their granddaughter, then explain how to vote to their granddaughter, then don't examine the ballot before signing and sealing it, that turn those ballots in. And this is the only reason that the Republic recall failed? (Or for that matter Trump got voted out?)
There's an epidemic of grandchildren voting in California.
And for some weird reason, they all vote Democrat.
-
That is my point. There is no evidence of fraud even though a fraud was committed.
The best take anybody will have on Scoop this month. Thanks for making my day!
Don't listen to all the haters, bud. And don't worry about the fact that the only proven election fraud in the U.S. happened in 2018 right in my district in NC, when a GOP operative tried to steal the election for his candidate but was caught, forcing a new vote.
Stick to your guns (and maybe buy a few more guns) because know there was fraud, even though nobody has come close to proving it! Your lord and master says so, as do Tucker and Hannity and MyPillow, so it must be true!
-
You misunderstood. We all sign our envelopes. We explain to our grand daughter that only one bubble for president, senate, congress etc can be filled out in each row. She is very good at coloring bubbles as she does it all the time when taking tests at school. We then take the ballots the she competed and complete the process by placing all items in its proper envelopes and mail it to the county clerk. A fraud was committed because we did not cast those ballots, a second fraud was committed because our grand daughter is not even eligible to vote. There is no way the county clerk could discover a fraud was committed. We signed the envelope, the ballots were filled out correctly (by someone else) and counted. There is no reason to vote in person. Our ballots were mailed and counted. Absolutely no evidence of fraud. There is no direct link between the voter and the ballot. There is no way to know with absolute certainty that the ballot was actually cast by the person who signed envelope.
Exactly. Just like I could steal your diver's license, have plastic surgery to look like you, and then go vote in your place. Bingo...voter fraud.
This happens all the time.
-
Is 69's example even voter fraud? I feel like there needs to be some level of intent and harm for it to be considered fraud. In his example, he is deciding to let his grandchild make his voting decisions for him and signing off that these are his votes. He is not casting an extra vote, it's not being done without his knowledge, he just decided to base his vote on what his grandchild chose. It's a dumb way to vote, but people vote for dumb reasons all the time. I guess if he wasn't going to vote and the grandchild requested a ballot in his name and forged his signature, I could see it. But I'm not certain his example, as presented, would be prosecuted.
-
We signed the envelope
So, not fraud.
Assuming Jersey’s like most states, your signature is an acknowledgment that the ballot was filled out in a manner consistent with the will of you, the registered voter. The mail-in voter affidavit, while making requirements of your citizenship and residency, deliberately leaves out a requirement that you fill out your own ballot, so those who need assistance can get it without additional legal hurdles.
If your granddaughter registers while underage and gets her own ballot, that’s fraud.
If your granddaughter fills out your ballot without your consent and forges your signature, that’s fraud.
Voter/election fraud is about an outcome that doesn’t align with the will of the voter. If your granddaughter is filling out your ballot under your supervision and you provide your election board with your genuine signature, what is the crime?
-
So, not fraud.
Assuming Jersey’s like most states, your signature is an acknowledgment that the ballot was filled out in a manner consistent with the will of you, the registered voter. The mail-in voter affidavit, while making requirements of your citizenship and residency, deliberately leaves out a requirement that you fill out your own ballot, so those who need assistance can get it without additional legal hurdles.
If your granddaughter registers while underage and gets her own ballot, that’s fraud.
If your granddaughter fills out your ballot without your consent and forges your signature, that’s fraud.
Voter/election fraud is about an outcome that doesn’t align with the will of the voter. If your granddaughter is filling out your ballot under your supervision and you provide your election board with your genuine signature, what is the crime?
I stand corrected, the state assumes that the signed envelope expresses the will of the voter, but does not know for certain.
-
I stand corrected, the state assumes that the signed envelope expresses the will of the voter, but does not know for certain.
The state also assumes that a ballot cast in person expresses the will of the voter, but does not know for certain.
-
When I paid my property taxes last December, the city assumed that since I signed my check that I authorized that payment...but do they really know for certain? I'm calling the city clerk tomorrow.
-
I stand corrected, the state assumes that the signed envelope expresses the will of the voter, but does not know for certain.
I mean, I think there’s a fair debate to be had about whether or not signature verification is acceptable as a sole means of voter identification. But as naginiF and Fluffy are suggesting, your level of skepticism underpins just about every transaction in modern society. (Is that my signature on the check? Did I really give that website my credit card number? How long until Scoop finds out I’m the world’s most dexterous Doberman?)
-
Ok gang, full disclosure -- I'm a moderately conservative person, so keep that in mind as I say what I am about to say.
1) Was there voter fraud? Of course there was. Voter fraud is as old as elections themselves. There's always someone who is looking for an edge and will cheat. Case in point, every Cook County, IL election since the 1840s.
2) Was there enough fraud to affect the outcome of the 2020 Presidential Election? Hell no!
3) Why do I believe that? Because for such a fraud to occur, there would have to be an organized conspiracy in five different states. Democrats have never been organized, much less organized enough to know in which states to commit fraud and to conspire on a grand enough scale to throw a Presidential election. The closest they came was in 1960 and that still would have involved two states -- Illinois and Texas.
4) If I'm wrong, God help our republic. If the Trumpers are right and can prove it, the results will bring down the country.
-
If the Trumpers are right and can prove it, the results will bring down the country.
They’re not right. They can’t prove it. And yet the Trumpers are still trying to bring down our country.
-
They’re not right. They can’t prove it. And yet the Trumpers are still trying to bring down our country.
Well said, 82.
-
Texas? Check.
Shouldn't have had a gun but b/c Texas had one? Check.
Abortion leading this guy to believe murder was right? Check.
https://www.insider.com/texas-man-murdered-woman-because-she-supported-joe-biden-police-2021-9
But at least with hindsight being 20/20 people can always say "well that guy shouldn't have had a gun"
-
Women in Texas will not stop getting abortions. They will just do what's necessary to circumvent the law -- just as politicians, lobbyist, CEOs, coaches, athletes, etc, do what they feel is necessary to circumvent laws or rules they don't like.
In the case of women seeking abortion, a process that has been legal in the U.S. for a half-century, many will turn to abortion pills -- some pills that are already recognized and are easily available by mail from India, Mexico or elsewhere; and others that will be less safe and perhaps will put the women's lives in danger.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/09/14/abortion-pills-texas/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F34aba5e%2F6140d00d9d2fdaecb9d7cda4%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F22%2F74%2F6140d00d9d2fdaecb9d7cda4
-
Ok gang, full disclosure -- I'm a moderately conservative person, so keep that in mind as I say what I am about to say.
1) Was there voter fraud? Of course there was. Voter fraud is as old as elections themselves. There's always someone who is looking for an edge and will cheat. Case in point, every Cook County, IL election since the 1840s.
2) Was there enough fraud to affect the outcome of the 2020 Presidential Election? Hell no!
3) Why do I believe that? Because for such a fraud to occur, there would have to be an organized conspiracy in five different states. Democrats have never been organized, much less organized enough to know in which states to commit fraud and to conspire on a grand enough scale to throw a Presidential election. The closest they came was in 1960 and that still would have involved two states -- Illinois and Texas.
4) If I'm wrong, God help our republic. If the Trumpers are right and can prove it, the results will bring down the country.
I've worked a lot of elections in various parts of Cook County (and out of state also). I have yet to see evidence of this fraud you claim exists, at least at the polling place level. I do see underpaid election judges diligently doing their job to ensure a fair election. Every time. Every location. Even out of state. Your broad brush assertion is somewhat insulting to all these good people. I always think of how they have been vilified by Trump's false assertions which are not going to make their job any easier going forward. Wouldn't surprise me to see a shortage in coming elections.
I'll concede that there are people who commit election fraud every election but I do not believe it is to the extent your post implies.
-
Let's not kid ourselves: There definitely was very real and significant fraud involving the 2020 election ... and it's still going on, with fraudulent "audits" being conducted by ardent supporters of the allegedly aggrieved parties.
Before that, there were fraudulent claims by the likes of Giuliani (who was disbarred because of his attempts at fraud) and Sidney Powell (who is getting sued for $1B+ for her fraudulent actions).
-
I've worked a lot of elections in various parts of Cook County (and out of state also). I have yet to see evidence of this fraud you claim exists, at least at the polling place level. I do see underpaid election judges diligently doing their job to ensure a fair election. Every time. Every location. Even out of state. Your broad brush assertion is somewhat insulting to all these good people. I always think of how they have been vilified by Trump's false assertions which are not going to make their job any easier going forward. Wouldn't surprise me to see a shortage in coming elections.
I'll concede that there are people who commit election fraud every election but I do not believe it is to the extent your post implies.
As far as I'm aware, there's been only one federal election in n recent memory (if ever) overturned because of fraud. It didn't happen in Illinois and the Democrats weren't the ones behind the fraudulence.
-
Having also worked elections in Illinois, I also have seen only hard-working people. I did observe on a couple occasions some attempts to intimidate voters or make them believe they couldn’t vote. I helped man a voter protection hotline last fall both pre-and post-election day, and on the day itself, and most of the calls I dealt with had to do with people trying to figure out where, whether and how they could vote. Sometimes we couldn’t help them, sometimes we could.
-
Ok gang, full disclosure -- I'm a moderately conservative person, so keep that in mind as I say what I am about to say.
1) Was there voter fraud? Of course there was. Voter fraud is as old as elections themselves. There's always someone who is looking for an edge and will cheat. Case in point, every Cook County, IL election since the 1840s.
2) Was there enough fraud to affect the outcome of the 2020 Presidential Election? Hell no!
3) Why do I believe that? Because for such a fraud to occur, there would have to be an organized conspiracy in five different states. Democrats have never been organized, much less organized enough to know in which states to commit fraud and to conspire on a grand enough scale to throw a Presidential election. The closest they came was in 1960 and that still would have involved two states -- Illinois and Texas.
4) If I'm wrong, God help our republic. If the Trumpers are right and can prove it, the results will bring down the country.
1.1) Yeah probably, I highly doubt there's ever been enough to sway an election outside of maybe 2000 which if you'd like to argue swayed an election by all means please do.
1.2) hahaha still stuck on one conspiracy theory from the 60s meaning it's been happening in every election. This example screams of guy from Red suburb angry at his (admittedly corrupt) metropolitan area for following the trends of every metropolitan area.
2) we can agree. You earned rational points back.
3) why is it that you guys only ever see fraud on the left? Has it ever dawned on you that if your argument is that we aren't organized to do it, but you guys are that that actually incriminates you guys more? And to quote your fellow believer 69, because you can't prove that it happened or that it didn't happen is exactly why it did.
4) Agreed.
-
As far as I'm aware, there's been only one federal election in n recent memory (if ever) overturned because of fraud. It didn't happen in Illinois and the Democrats weren't the ones behind the fraudulence.
It was for the seat in NC's 9th House District in 2018.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/02/north-carolina-9th-fraud-board-orders-new-election/583369/
A long-time GOP operative illegally harvested votes on behalf of the party's candidate, Mark Harris, in an extremely close election decided by only hundreds of votes. After the fraud was discovered, both Harris and Trump pushed back hard, demanding Harris be certified. But the House correctly refused until the matter was settled.
Harris adamantly insisted that he had won until the decisive hearing -- when his own son took the stand and told the court that he had repeatedly warned his father to steer clear of the operative, "a shady character." Harris broke down in court, weeping, and finally agreed the election should get a re-do.
Ultimately, Harris' health took a bad turn and he ended up pulling out of the election. He was replaced by state Rep. Dan Bishop, a far-right, hard-line Trump supporter. With Trump putting all his energy into Bishop's candidacy -- Trump wasn't distracted by other candidates because it was the only election going on -- Bishop won a close vote in a district that has been heavily Republican for years.
Bishop has been a loyal Trump toady, voting against certifying the 2020 election, pushing conspiracy theories, downplaying the 1/6/21 coup attempt, pushing "miracle" COVID-19 cures, etc.
That's the only proven federal election fraud that has taken place in eons ... except, of course, from the fraud being perpetrated by Trump and his minions to this day.
-
Is the stunt in Florida where the R recruited a shlub with a name just like the D candidate in order to siphon votes considered fraud?
-
Is the stunt in Florida where the R recruited a shlub with a name just like the D candidate in order to siphon votes considered fraud?
It's an Eddie Murphy movie, The Distinguished Gentleman.. His campaign slogan was "the name you know!"
-
Is the stunt in Florida where the R recruited a shlub with a name just like the D candidate in order to siphon votes considered fraud?
Which is the same thing Michael Madigan did to split up the vote in his legislative district on the SW Side of Chicago. It was important for Madigan because his district was turning Hispanic and there was some question whether the district wanted a corrupt pink guy representing them when there were qualified, intelligent Hispanic alternatives.
Three guesses who won!
-
Which is the same thing Michael Madigan did to split up the vote in his legislative district on the SW Side of Chicago. It was important for Madigan because his district was turning Hispanic and there was some question whether the district wanted a corrupt pink guy representing them when there were qualified, intelligent Hispanic alternatives.
Three guesses who won!
Brother dgies,
I think we'll both agree that Mike Madigan is a sleaze who, if there's any justice, will soon face indictment.
That said, the allegations you cite here were thrown out as unfounded by multiple state courts. On top of that, Madigan received 65% of the vote in that primary ... so even without multiple challengers, he'd have won in a landslide. Oh, and he received 65% of the vote after those allegations surfaced, so for better or worse, the electorate chose the corrupt pink guy.
-
AP is calling the Cali recall election already. It looks like Newsom easily won the right to remain governor, as "no recall" took 2 out of 3 votes with about 60% in.
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-california-climate-elections-a590782877be099d44f1766b2d138394
Newsom was smart to make the election a referendum on Trumpism. He also pointed at the Texas abortion law.
-
Brother dgies,
I think we'll both agree that Mike Madigan is a sleaze who, if there's any justice, will soon face indictment.
That said, the allegations you cite here were thrown out as unfounded by multiple state courts. On top of that, Madigan received 65% of the vote in that primary ... so even without multiple challengers, he'd have won in a landslide. Oh, and he received 65% of the vote after those allegations surfaced, so for better or worse, the electorate chose the corrupt pink guy.
Brother Pakuni:
For the record, what Madigan did was not illegal. Sleazy -- that's par for the course. But unless you have forged signatures on nominating petitions, anyone can run. All you have to do is follow campaign finance laws and boom, you have a chance.
-
Is 69's example even voter fraud? I feel like there needs to be some level of intent and harm for it to be considered fraud. In his example, he is deciding to let his grandchild make his voting decisions for him and signing off that these are his votes. He is not casting an extra vote, it's not being done without his knowledge, he just decided to base his vote on what his grandchild chose. It's a dumb way to vote, but people vote for dumb reasons all the time. I guess if he wasn't going to vote and the grandchild requested a ballot in his name and forged his signature, I could see it. But I'm not certain his example, as presented, would be prosecuted.
So if I went to the polls, signed the registration log and then let my grand daughter, neighbor or anyone I chose to cast the ballot that would be permitted?
-
So if I went to the polls, signed the registration log and then let my grand daughter, neighbor or anyone I chose to cast the ballot that would be permitted?
Instead of some dopey hypothetical situation, why don't you worry about the actual fraud that the previous president committed for months leading up to the election and then septupled-down on after the election?
-
AP is calling the Cali recall election already. It looks like Newsom easily won the right to remain governor, as "no recall" took 2 out of 3 votes with about 60% in.
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-california-climate-elections-a590782877be099d44f1766b2d138394
Newsom was smart to make the election a referendum on Trumpism. He also pointed at the Texas abortion law.
This futile exercise cost the taxpayers of California at least $276 million.
-
This futile exercise cost the taxpayers of California at least $276 million.
Impossible. The GOP is the fiscal-responsibility party.
Look at all the money Trump "saved" taxpayers by eliminating most pandemic-readiness stuff early in his presidency!
-
Instead of some dopey hypothetical situation, why don't you worry about the actual fraud that the previous president committed for months leading up to the election and then septupled-down on after the election?
This has nothing to do with hyper partisan politics, but everything to do with all citizens trusting the integrity of the ballot. Most here are fine with the mail-in ballot. I am not.
-
Which is the same thing Michael Madigan did to split up the vote in his legislative district on the SW Side of Chicago. It was important for Madigan because his district was turning Hispanic and there was some question whether the district wanted a corrupt pink guy representing them when there were qualified, intelligent Hispanic alternatives.
Three guesses who won!
Is Michael Madigan related to longtime Chicago journalist John Madigan?,:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2012-03-07-ct-met-john-madigan-obit-20120307-story.html
John Madigan also was father of actress/ MU alum Amy Madigan (Field of Dreams), longtime wife of actor Ed Harris
-
This has nothing to do with hyper partisan politics, but everything to do with all citizens trusting the integrity of the ballot. Most here are fine with the mail-in ballot. I am not.
So you are being irrational then.
-
This has nothing to do with hyper partisan politics, but everything to do with all citizens trusting the integrity of the ballot. Most here are fine with the mail-in ballot. I am not.
Except it is partisan politics. The GOP fights mail-in-ballots in areas it hurts them, and celebrates them in areas it helps them.
There laws are designed to make it easier for members of the GOP to vote, and harder for minority communities who vote DEM to vote.
It has nothing to do with election integrity. Your hypotheticals have nothing to do with election integrity. They are historic scare tactics the GOP uses to inspire their electorate to follow their voting restrictions that are strictly aimed at decreasing legitimate and legal DEM votes.
-
Except it is partisan politics. The GOP fights mail-in-ballots in areas it hurts them, and celebrates them in areas it helps them.
There laws are designed to make it easier for members of the GOP to vote, and harder for minority communities who vote DEM to vote.
It has nothing to do with election integrity. Your hypotheticals have nothing to do with election integrity. They are historic scare tactics the GOP uses to inspire their electorate to follow their voting restrictions that are strictly aimed at decreasing legitimate and legal DEM votes.
Exactly. Before the pandemic, the GOP was pushing for mail-in ballot use in many areas of the country. Deep-red Utah became an all-mail-in ballot state, for cryin' out loud.
But the Trumplicans need a scapegoat because their guy -- the only president since approval ratings began during the Truman era to never receive a 50% approval rating (and Trump never got close) -- couldn't possibly have lost a free and fair election. At least, that's what Trump says, and the cultists can't go against the cult leader.
-
Is 69's example even voter fraud? I feel like there needs to be some level of intent and harm for it to be considered fraud. In his example, he is deciding to let his grandchild make his voting decisions for him and signing off that these are his votes. He is not casting an extra vote, it's not being done without his knowledge, he just decided to base his vote on what his grandchild chose. It's a dumb way to vote, but people vote for dumb reasons all the time. I guess if he wasn't going to vote and the grandchild requested a ballot in his name and forged his signature, I could see it. But I'm not certain his example, as presented, would be prosecuted.
I don't think so. If a family of 4 receives 4 ballots, it's inconceivable to think every single person filled out and signed their own ballot. Although, 99.99% gave at least implicit consent (or at the very least were indifferent about it), which does not constitute fraud, in my opinion.
I think the main issue Republicans have with mail-in voting is that it makes it very convenient to get ballots in the hands of people who otherwise maybe would not have gone to the polls and voted. The risk of fraud is very low and there would be more evidence and first hand accounts if there were widespread issues. On one hand, every American deserves the right to cast a ballot, but I am personally more old school and I think people should show up on the day and vote in person (with certain exceptions of course).
-
I don't think so. If a family of 4 receives 4 ballots, it's inconceivable to think every single person filled out and signed their own ballot. Although, 99.99% gave at least implicit consent (or at the very least were indifferent about it), which does not constitute fraud, in my opinion.
I think the main issue Republicans have with mail-in voting is that it makes it very convenient to get ballots in the hands of people who otherwise maybe would not have gone to the polls and voted. The risk of fraud is very low and there would be more evidence and first hand accounts if there were widespread issues. On one hand, every American deserves the right to cast a ballot, but I am personally more old school and I think people should show up on the day and vote in person (with certain exceptions of course).
I'm assuming you don't live in one of those areas where there's one polling spot to thousands of people and the wait time is practically all day?
I agree with the sentimentality of showing up day of but when places like Texas are making it harder to vote in denser minority communities then it's time to throw that "old school" sentimentality out the window and choose instead for more voices to be heard.
-
So if I went to the polls, signed the registration log and then let my grand daughter, neighbor or anyone I chose to cast the ballot that would be permitted?
Mikekinsella already explained to you how your example wasn't fraud and you agreed. Are you reversing now?
-
This futile exercise cost the taxpayers of California at least $276 million.
And a base price of $680K for the new fraudit in Wisconsin
-
I don't think so. If a family of 4 receives 4 ballots, it's inconceivable to think every single person filled out and signed their own ballot. Although, 99.99% gave at least implicit consent (or at the very least were indifferent about it), which does not constitute fraud, in my opinion.
Huh? Why?
-
So if I went to the polls, signed the registration log and then let my grand daughter, neighbor or anyone I chose to cast the ballot that would be permitted?
It's clear that you haven't spent much time in a polling place (and that's not a shot at you). It is not that unusual for a senior citizen to come in with a younger relative to help them navigate the equipment. The senior citizen may say to the younger relative in a certain race, "I don't have a preference, who should I vote for?" That's okay. Even more egregious language (to some) would be okay if it reflects the ultimate will of the voter.
Assisting otherwise competent voters cast their ballots is not election fraud. Failing to assist them would be tantamount to voter disenfranchisement.
-
This futile exercise cost the taxpayers of California at least $276 million.
No doubt you objected to the cost of the Walker recall too, then?
-
No doubt you objected to the cost of the Walker recall too, then?
I definitely did. That was ridiculous waste.
-
No doubt you objected to the cost of the Walker recall too, then?
I'm not really objecting to anything, just pointing out that it never had a chance and was a big waste of money.
But yeah, I think the Walker recall was dumb as well.
Do you find these to be worthy uses of government resources and taxpayer money?
-
Instead of some dopey hypothetical situation, why don't you worry about the actual fraud that the previous president committed for months leading up to the election and then septupled-down on after the election?
69 absolutely cannot prove that trump won. Hence, you have your proof that he did win.
Can't you even grasp that simple concept? Duh!!!
-
I always find the debate over mail in ballots fascinating. I can understand why someone would not trust the process, when you put that ballot into the mailbox you are giving up some control. Not to say we don’t give up control on a lot of things, but I can understand someone being uncomfortable.
What I don’t understand is if someone is uncomfortable with mail-in ballots, why not shout for easier in-person processes? Why not shout for things like expanded polling locations, multiple days, federal holiday, whatever.
Can’t have it both ways?
-
I always find the debate over mail in ballots fascinating. I can understand why someone would not trust the process, when you put that ballot into the mailbox you are giving up some control. Not to say we don’t give up control on a lot of things, but I can understand someone being uncomfortable.
What I don’t understand is if someone is uncomfortable with mail-in ballots, why not shout for easier in-person processes? Why not shout for things like expanded polling locations, multiple days, federal holiday, whatever.
Can’t have it both ways?
Except it is not about fraud, or the process, or dishonesty. It is simply the rallying cry for those who want to keep certain types of people from voting.
They are not looking for fairness in elections. They just want to 'fix' the results - just as they are doing with the fraudulent audits in Arizona, Wisconsin and other places.
-
I'm not really objecting to anything, just pointing out that it never had a chance and was a big waste of money.
But yeah, I think the Walker recall was dumb as well.
Do you find these to be worthy uses of government resources and taxpayer money?
recalls are a joke. We're dealing with a recall attempt on our Mayor out here, coordinated by the campaign of the candidate who lost in November. It was announced two weeks after the election. There is a recall process, it's called the next election. Our mayor is a spineless idiot who has caved to the extreme leftist terrorist (even moving when his condo building was set on fire) but he still won so the Mao and Stalin loving and let the homeless live wherever they want losing candidate needs to just go away until 2024.
Unless there's a crime committed while in office and the politician does not resign then recalls should either not be allowed or the threshold needs to be significantly higher for it to happen.
-
Except it is not about fraud, or the process, or dishonesty. It is simply the rallying cry for those who want to keep certain types of people from voting.
They are not looking for fairness in elections. They just want to 'fix' the results - just as they are doing with the fraudulent audits in Arizona, Wisconsin and other places.
Precisely. I was looking to keep the triggers and tired rhetoric out of the comment.
-
I am against recalls except in cases of crime or fraud.
-
I am against recalls except in cases of crime or fraud.
Maybe ... except "fraud" is now routinely claimed, usually without proof.
I mean, tens of millions of Americans would say Biden should be recalled because of "fraud."
-
No doubt you objected to the cost of the Walker recall too, then?
I'm against recalls of any kind.
The recall is the next election whether you decide to re-elect the person or not.
It may suck you have to wait a full 4 years but that's the process & system we use.
-
I'm against recalls of any kind.
The recall is the next election whether you decide to re-elect the person or not.
It may suck you have to wait a full 4 years but that's the process & system we use.
Completely agree.
If a crime is committed in office, let the courts handle it.
-
I'm against recalls of any kind.
The recall is the next election whether you decide to re-elect the person or not.
It may suck you have to wait a full 4 years but that's the process & system we use.
Right.
And if the elected official commits a crime or is somehow deemed unfit for office, there are remedies for that that don't require a statewide election.
-
No doubt you objected to the cost of the Walker recall too, then?
I see these types questions a lot from people on the right. It's amusing to me because usually the answer is, "yes, I'm opposed to it even when it doesn't benefit the left." When it goes in the opposite direction, it seems like the question is usually ignored.
-
I see these types questions a lot from people on the right. It's amusing to me because usually the answer is, "yes, I'm opposed to it even when it doesn't benefit the left." When it goes in the opposite direction, it seems like the question is usually ignored.
See also: sexual harassment/misconduct
-
See also: sexual harassment/misconduct
Oh I was including that. All whataboutism. There are certainly exceptions, but my usual experience is that when someone on left responds to whataboutism, it's usually with "yes, that's bad too but we're talking about this now."
-
Is the stunt in Florida where the R recruited a shlub with a name just like the D candidate in order to siphon votes considered fraud?
I've been trying to get my buddy Sean Duffy to move up north and run for retired congressman Sean Duffey's seat for the past couple years.
-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Distinguished_Gentleman
-
Well, this could get interesting ...
Texas doctor says he violated nation’s most restrictive antiabortion law to challenge it
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texas-abortion-doctor-tests-restrictive-law/2021/09/18/f5b48862-18a0-11ec-9589-31ac3173c2e5_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F34b95c9%2F61475a989d2fda9d41d6ac89%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F10%2F74%2F61475a989d2fda9d41d6ac89
A Texas doctor stepped forward Saturday to say he had performed an abortion that is illegal under the state’s restrictive new law to force a test of its legality.
“I understand that by providing an abortion beyond the new legal limit, I am taking a personal risk, but it’s something I believe in strongly,” Alan Braid, a San Antonio OB/GYN, said in an op-ed in The Washington Post. “I have daughters, granddaughters and nieces. I believe abortion is an essential part of health care. . . . I can’t just sit back and watch us return to 1972.”
Braid said he performed a first-trimester abortion on Sept. 6, just a few days after the law known as Senate Bill 8 went into effect in Texas, making nearly all abortions illegal after a woman is about six weeks pregnant — with no exceptions for incest or rape. The doctor said he acted because he had “a duty of care to this patient, as I do for all patients.”
-
Well, this could get interesting ...
Texas doctor says he violated nation’s most restrictive antiabortion law to challenge it
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texas-abortion-doctor-tests-restrictive-law/2021/09/18/f5b48862-18a0-11ec-9589-31ac3173c2e5_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F34b95c9%2F61475a989d2fda9d41d6ac89%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F10%2F74%2F61475a989d2fda9d41d6ac89
A Texas doctor stepped forward Saturday to say he had performed an abortion that is illegal under the state’s restrictive new law to force a test of its legality.
“I understand that by providing an abortion beyond the new legal limit, I am taking a personal risk, but it’s something I believe in strongly,” Alan Braid, a San Antonio OB/GYN, said in an op-ed in The Washington Post. “I have daughters, granddaughters and nieces. I believe abortion is an essential part of health care. . . . I can’t just sit back and watch us return to 1972.”
Braid said he performed a first-trimester abortion on Sept. 6, just a few days after the law known as Senate Bill 8 went into effect in Texas, making nearly all abortions illegal after a woman is about six weeks pregnant — with no exceptions for incest or rape. The doctor said he acted because he had “a duty of care to this patient, as I do for all patients.”
A lot like the school teacher teaching evolution when it was banned eh?
-
Well, this could get interesting ...
Texas doctor says he violated nation’s most restrictive antiabortion law to challenge it
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texas-abortion-doctor-tests-restrictive-law/2021/09/18/f5b48862-18a0-11ec-9589-31ac3173c2e5_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F34b95c9%2F61475a989d2fda9d41d6ac89%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F10%2F74%2F61475a989d2fda9d41d6ac89
A Texas doctor stepped forward Saturday to say he had performed an abortion that is illegal under the state’s restrictive new law to force a test of its legality.
“I understand that by providing an abortion beyond the new legal limit, I am taking a personal risk, but it’s something I believe in strongly,” Alan Braid, a San Antonio OB/GYN, said in an op-ed in The Washington Post. “I have daughters, granddaughters and nieces. I believe abortion is an essential part of health care. . . . I can’t just sit back and watch us return to 1972.”
Braid said he performed a first-trimester abortion on Sept. 6, just a few days after the law known as Senate Bill 8 went into effect in Texas, making nearly all abortions illegal after a woman is about six weeks pregnant — with no exceptions for incest or rape. The doctor said he acted because he had “a duty of care to this patient, as I do for all patients.”
Does he get $10,000 for turning himself in?
-
Does he get $10,000 for turning himself in?
Hahaha I hope so
-
Doesnt he have to sue himself?
-
Broad majorities of Americans oppose key provisions of restrictive Texas abortion law, poll finds
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-texas-abortion-law/2021/09/20/fbbd3968-1a0b-11ec-8380-5fbadbc43ef8_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F34bb877%2F6148b2909d2fda9d41d91db4%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F29%2F74%2F6148b2909d2fda9d41d91db4
Broad majorities of Americans oppose key provisions of a restrictive Texas abortion law, and a majority disagrees with the recent Supreme Court decision that allowed the law, which effectively bans abortions after six weeks, to go into effect, a new poll finds.
The new law takes a novel approach, relying on private citizens to sue people who help women get forbidden abortions, effectively eliminating the guarantee in Roe v. Wade and subsequent Supreme Court decisions that women have a right to end their pregnancies before viability and that states may not impose undue burdens on that decision.
In the Monmouth University poll, 70 percent of Americans say they disapprove of “allowing private citizens to use lawsuits to enforce this law rather than having government prosecutors handle these cases.”
Meanwhile, 81 percent say they disapprove of giving $10,000 to “private citizens who successfully file suits against those who perform or assist a woman with getting an abortion.”
The poll also finds that 54 percent of Americans disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision to let the law stand while the legal battle over it continues.
-
There are definitely some slippery slopes with all this. How long until a blue state passes a firearm ban with a citizen enforcement mechanism?
Similarly, if there's no duty of the state to protect an individual's bodily autonomy, then there's no argument against a broad vaccine mandate.
Feels like a lot of legal conundrums being created.
-
There are definitely some slippery slopes with all this. How long until a blue state passes a firearm ban with a citizen enforcement mechanism?
Similarly, if there's no duty of the state to protect an individual's bodily autonomy, then there's no argument against a broad vaccine mandate.
Feels like a lot of legal conundrums being created.
How about a vaccine mandate, where if an unvaccinated person is COVID positive and leaves their domicile, they can be sued for a minimum of $10k by anyone.
-
There are definitely some slippery slopes with all this. How long until a blue state passes a firearm ban with a citizen enforcement mechanism?
Perhaps if the Supreme Court wasn't dominated by partisan hacks, but they will strike down guns bans in an instant.
-
Perhaps if the Supreme Court wasn't dominated by partisan hacks, but they will strike down guns bans in an instant.
A Justice who rules on the law, whether he or she agrees with the law or not, does not equal a "partisan hack". It's not the obligation of SCOTUS to rule on how he or she personally wants the decision to be. As Scalia said, “The judge who always likes the results he reaches is a bad judge.”
-
Tangential...https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/20/politics/supreme-court-mississippi-abortion-law/index.html
This is a big deal
-
A Justice who rules on the law, whether he or she agrees with the law or not, does not equal a "partisan hack". It's not the obligation of SCOTUS to rule on how he or she personally wants the decision to be. As Scalia said, “The judge who always likes the results he reaches is a bad judge.”
That's my point exactly. And Scalia was one of the worst at twisting his rationale to fit his desired outcome.
-
That's my point exactly. And Scalia was one of the worst at twisting his rationale to fit his desired outcome.
I think you misunderstand the concept. To use another Scalia quote:
"Persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea and pass a law. That's what democracy is all about. It's not about nine superannuated judges who have been there too long, imposing these demands on society."
It's not the Court's job to make the laws.
-
I think you misunderstand the concept. To use another Scalia quote:
"Persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea and pass a law. That's what democracy is all about. It's not about nine superannuated judges who have been there too long, imposing these demands on society."
It's not the Court's job to make the laws.
How serious does one take such admonitions from a justice who decided corporations are people?
-
I think you misunderstand the concept. To use another Scalia quote:
"Persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea and pass a law. That's what democracy is all about. It's not about nine superannuated judges who have been there too long, imposing these demands on society."
It's not the Court's job to make the laws.
Well first of all, that has nothing to do with your original point which was "It's not the obligation of SCOTUS to rule on how he or she personally wants the decision to be".
And my point was that was EXACTLY was Scalia did all too frequently--ruled the way he personally wanted the decision to come out and often used arguments directly contradicting arguments he had made in other cases in order to justify the decision he personally wanted.
-
Scalia was famous for aligning his opinions to the outcomes he wanted. Heller is a well known example (when he abandoned his "originalist" approach) but by all means not the only one.
-
How serious does one take such admonitions from a justice who decided corporations are people?
I remember reading that in the Constitution. And Scalia was a strict constitutionalist.
-
I remember reading that in the Constitution. And Scalia was a strict constitutionalist.
Original Intent. The Constitution clearly intended that Facebook should have all the rights of a citizen but none of the obligations.
-
Scalia was extremely political, and in a way that always favored his "side."
I'm actually looking forward to this thing getting decided by this court. It will tell us quite a bit about where we stand as a nation.
-
It's not the Court's job to make the laws.
Its administrative agencies' job, everyone knows that.
-
Since I have pretty much lost any faith over the past few years as to where this country stands as a nation, I am not looking forward to the Court deciding this case.
-
Since I have pretty much lost any faith over the past few years as to where this country stands as a nation, I am not looking forward to the Court deciding this case.
I'm afraid that I agree with you, Warrior.
-
Oh, I hear you guys.
But the observer in me is fascinated by this kind of stuff, and every once in awhile I actually get pleasantly surprised.
-
From a Washington Post op-ed:
Republicans are digging themselves into a deep hole on this one. In a Monmouth University poll released Monday, 70 percent of those surveyed said they disapprove of “allowing private citizens to use lawsuits to enforce this law rather than having government prosecutors handle these cases.” Nonetheless, other conservative states are signaling they plan to try to pass their own versions of the Texas law.
Whether the Texas statute survives in court, Republicans across the country are likely to rue the overreach. “All of this is going to impact governor’s races in 2022, to the detriment of Republicans,” predicts GOP pollster Christine Matthews. An early test will come this fall in Virginia, where Democrat Terry McAuliffe is making protecting abortion rights a centerpiece of his campaign; his Republican opponent, Glenn Youngkin, has been more equivocal, and he was caught on video telling a conservative audience that if he were elected with a majority in the House of Delegates, he would be able to go “on offense” against abortion.
Women, even those who are not entirely supportive of abortion rights, are paying attention. On Monday night, I observed a focus group of suburban women sponsored by a group of liberal organizations. “I don’t believe in abortion. I think you should have other options. But it’s my body,” said one participant, who lives near Atlanta. She added: “You look at the people who are voting for these things, and it’s a bunch of men.”
-
Its administrative agencies' job, everyone knows that.
Which is why our country increasingly is run by Executive Order, Emergency Powers and administrative fiat.
God forbid we cross an administrative agency. We get dragged into Kangaroo Court run by administrators for the financial well being of the administrative body.
Ever wonder why many municipalities issue "P-Tickets?" They don't share the revenue and try you in Kangaroo courts, where the deck is stacked.
Here's to the Kangaroos!
-
Which is why our country increasingly is run by Executive Order, Emergency Powers and administrative fiat.
God forbid we cross an administrative agency. We get dragged into Kangaroo Court run by administrators for the financial well being of the administrative body.
Ever wonder why many municipalities issue "P-Tickets?" They don't share the revenue and try you in Kangaroo courts, where the deck is stacked.
Here's to the Kangaroos!
It's ended up this way because Congress doesn't want to have to do anything. The less decisions they're forced to make, the easier it is to keep their jobs.
They will never end the AUMF because then they would be responsible for making the decision on when we go to war. And that's politically difficult.
-
Why do government entities create agencies to do the job of government?
Why do large companies have assistants, financial people, R & D departments?
It is a complicated world.
-
Alright, alright, alright.
McConaughey has said now several times that he's considering a run for Texas governor — and Texans appear to like his style. Poll data released this week, collected by Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas at Tyler, showed McConaughey was leading Governor Greg Abbott, 44 percent to 35 percent.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/matthew-mc-conaughey-wont-rule-out-political-run-in-texas-160049077.html
-
Alright, alright, alright.
McConaughey has said now several times that he's considering a run for Texas governor — and Texans appear to like his style. Poll data released this week, collected by Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas at Tyler, showed McConaughey was leading Governor Greg Abbott, 44 percent to 35 percent.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/matthew-mc-conaughey-wont-rule-out-political-run-in-texas-160049077.html
Not only would McConaughey be a better governor than Abbott, but so would Wooderson.
This current dope is one of America's most dazed and confused governors.
-
Alright, alright, alright.
McConaughey has said now several times that he's considering a run for Texas governor — and Texans appear to like his style. Poll data released this week, collected by Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas at Tyler, showed McConaughey was leading Governor Greg Abbott, 44 percent to 35 percent.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/matthew-mc-conaughey-wont-rule-out-political-run-in-texas-160049077.html
If he runs--although I don't know why he would--the Dems would be wise to throw their weight behind him rather than try to win a three way race.
That said, actors-turned-Governor don't exactly have a sterling track record in recent history.
-
If he runs--although I don't know why he would--the Dems would be wise to throw their weight behind him rather than try to win a three way race.
That said, actors-turned-Governor don't exactly have a sterling track record in recent history.
But again ... could he be any worse than the d-bag who's there now?
-
That said, actors-turned-Governor don't exactly have a sterling track record in recent history.
(https://c.tenor.com/GzbfM24YoQ0AAAAd/arnold-schwarzenegger-kindergarten-cop.gif)
-
Why do government entities create agencies to do the job of government?
Why do large companies have assistants, financial people, R & D departments?
It is a complicated world.
R & D departments or D & R departments? :D :D
-
But again ... could he be any worse than the d-bag who's there now?
That's my point. Rather than attempt to win a three way Abbott-Beto-Alright Alright Alright race, take the sure thing and at least remove Abbott.
-
Shouldn't this thread be locked as well moderators? I'm just curious.
-
Shouldn't this thread be locked as well moderators? I'm just curious.
report the direct political statements if you want it shut down
-
report the direct political statements if you want it shut down
No worries Galway. I would never report anything.
-
No worries Galway. I would never report anything.
Not worried, this AM I reported posts on both sides of the spectrum. if you don't we may as well have Chicos back here to turn every thread into a 20page political fight.
-
Shouldn't this thread be locked as well moderators? I'm just curious.
Probably. I assume the mods decided to take a containment approach rather than a salt the earth approach
-
Probably. I assume the mods decided to take a containment approach rather than a salt the earth approach
Fair enough. Ty for the information.
-
Not worried, this AM I reported posts on both sides of the spectrum. if you don't we may as well have Chicos back here to turn every thread into a 20page political fight.
I mean, we're bordering on that in more than a few threads :o
-
I mean, we're bordering on that in more than a few threads :o
It doesn't bother me. In fact I think everything should be permissible. But if the mods truly don't want political discussions perhaps there should be more consistency? Just sayin...
-
I don't think it's necessarily as simple as all politics = bad, it's more the fact that in this day an age political discussion either leads people to get nasty very quickly or leads to people trying to bait others to get nasty so they can point the finger. Stopping those discussions before they get out of hand is a good decision IMO.
-
It doesn't bother me. In fact I think everything should be permissible. But if the mods truly don't want political discussions perhaps there should be more consistency? Just sayin...
They're in a tough spot. A comment on racial inequality or inner city crime isn't inherently political. But the moment someone starts pointing fingers it usually becomes political so they're in a cycle of waiting for the inevitable political lock. I do agree about this thread, I'm surprised it stayed open. It was fairly cordial for awhile though maybe that's why?
-
They're in a tough spot. A comment on racial inequality or inner city crime isn't inherently political. But the moment someone starts pointing fingers it usually becomes political so they're in a cycle of waiting for the inevitable political lock. I do agree about this thread, I'm surprised it stayed open. It was fairly cordial for awhile though maybe that's why?
I'm cordial Galway unless I am attacked. :)
Anyway, it's all good.
-
I'm cordial Galway unless I am attacked. :)
Anyway, it's all good.
Unless it's a walrus doing the attacking, I'd imagine you're still cordial then.
-
Unless it's a walrus doing the attacking, I'd imagine you're still cordial then.
Touche! Wally made it to Iceland btw and I assume will head home soon to Greenland. Clearly he enjoyed Ireland!
He's a rather resourceful young Walrus. I'm guessing he put down a few clams in numerous locations.
-
It doesn't bother me. In fact I think everything should be permissible. But if the mods truly don't want political discussions perhaps there should be more consistency? Just sayin...
It's Animal Farm in these parts, muggs.
-
It's Animal Farm in these parts, muggs.
::) ::)
-
It's Animal Farm in these parts, muggs.
Truth brother. If a story about a group whose quest for liberty being derailed by a pig leader who cannot stop celebrating himself, distorting the truth, and placating his charges with empty promises that things are only great with him in charge doesn't capture 2017-2021, I don't know what does.
-
Probably. I assume the mods decided to take a containment approach rather than a salt the earth approach
Honestly, I think people shouldn't assume we're hanging on every word written here - especially the superbar. I don't read most threads in here - so if they get derailed the only way I notice is if they get reported (and this one never was reported, topper must have swung by and noticed).