SkyBlue Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 And now I head for the mountains, waterfall hikes, elk and bear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganCardinal Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 I probably fall further right than most would guess. As long as it's a binary choice though, and one of those choices is a reality TV clown with a racist history and felony convictions (or those who support him), my choices are made for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 8 minutes ago, SkyBlue said: I typically read everything from NR to NYT and WaPost and host of others. Too many look at who the author is or the publication and just discount it, like you here. There are some that is justified on all sides but living in an echo chamber benefits no one. We get it, politics is beneath you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 10 minutes ago, SkyBlue said: I typically read everything from NR to NYT and WaPost and host of others. Too many look at who the author is or the publication and just discount it, like you here. There are some that is justified on all sides but living in an echo chamber benefits no one. Considering who authored the op-ed is the most important thing a reader can do to properly frame what's been written—even more important than where it's published. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyBlue Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 32 minutes ago, chasfh said: Considering who authored the op-ed is the most important thing a reader can do to properly frame what's been written—even more important than where it's published. I don't disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaceyLou Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 2 hours ago, chasfh said: Now that the Court has expanded presidential powers so dramatically, Trump can eventually jusy get to the point where he kneecaps the Court along with Congress and retains all legislative and judicial powers until himself. 😉 Just like Sinclair Lewis wrote.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smr-nj Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 16 minutes ago, LaceyLou said: Just like Sinclair Lewis wrote.... As we have seen “It sure CAN happen here”. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 Good piece from Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 7 hours ago, CMRivdogs said: Good piece from Tim Well, he put three of them on there, and he had fully co-opted Alito and Thomas going in, so he has his bulletproof majority. Robert’s is just a bonus throw-in most of the time. It’s clear that they work for him, and for nothing else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 13 Share Posted July 13 On 6/29/2024 at 3:49 PM, romad1 said: ... Chevron decision for one is going to seriously banana republic this country up. This has gotten scant attention here, but the effect of the overturning of the Chevron Deference is that the expertise of scientists will no longer be privileged in court cases, and judges and panels can simply set them aside as irrelevant to whatever legal doctrine is deemed more convenient and beneficial to whoever is in charge at every level of government. This is as bad as an under-the-radar ruling can get. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 USA! USA! USA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 28 minutes ago, chasfh said: USA! USA! USA! Complements the timing for the Biden court reform announcement pretty nicely. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 1 hour ago, chasfh said: USA! USA! USA! Though I agree with the premise of not allowing younger adults to purchase guns. We ask our young folks to join the military and kill our enemies with them at that age. We could always lobby for laws to put stricter standards getting a fire arm at that age. Amendment 26 put that to bed though I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: Though I agree with the premise of not allowing younger adults to purchase guns. We ask our young folks to join the military and kill our enemies with them at that age. We could always lobby for laws to put stricter standards getting a fire arm at that age. Amendment 26 put that to bed though I think. This was a much stronger argument when the military draft was still active and was pretty much exactly what motivated the reduction in the voting (and at the time even the drinking age) to 18. Still, given what we know about neurological development any rational governance system should be able to carve out reasonable distinctions like this, just in the same way most states that legalized 18 yr old alcohol consumption have reversed themselves while leaving reduced voting age in place. The founders wrote an *amendable* document. And amend we did for about 150 yrs. But this idea that some in American politics push today that each word written in 1792 must remain the received wisdom of the Universe for all time is pure poppycock. Edited July 17 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted July 17 Author Share Posted July 17 (edited) they also push that words not written in 1792 magically appear as if they were written in 1792 and we're bound by it. Where in the constitution say that an amendment isn't really implemented unless the congress passes a law implementing it?!? Isn't that, shall we say, completely bassackwards? A constitutional amendment can effectively be rendered useless by the fillibuster? LMAO WTF are we even doing here Presidential immunity appears nowhere in the constitution. They made it up. There are other immunities granted by the constitution, they didn't do presidential. Edited July 17 by pfife Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted July 17 Author Share Posted July 17 Judicial review doesn't exist in the constitution either but these jabronies flex that power no problem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: This was a much stronger argument when the military draft was still active and was pretty much exactly what motivated the reduction in the voting (and at the time even the drinking age) to 18. Still, given what we know about neurological development any rational governance system should be able to carve out reasonable distinctions like this, just in the same way most states that legalized 18 yr old alcohol consumption have reversed themselves while leaving reduced voting age in place. The founders wrote an *amendable* document. And amend we did for about 150 yrs. But this idea that some in American politics push today that each word written in 1792 must remain the received wisdom of the Universe for all time is pure poppycock. You know what they never will reverse it? Being 18 to kill for your country. Why? you answered it above. You can't create a brain to rationalize killing to a thirty year old who just joined the military. They need to be young with a brain that can be molded into being a killer. No one cares about the veteran living on the streets 20 years later when they could never turn it off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 11 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said: Though I agree with the premise of not allowing younger adults to purchase guns. We ask our young folks to join the military and kill our enemies with them at that age. We could always lobby for laws to put stricter standards getting a fire arm at that age. Amendment 26 put that to bed though I think. I'm old enough to remember "they're old enough to fight and die for their country, they should be old enough to take a drink." Ah, good times ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 10 hours ago, pfife said: Presidential immunity appears nowhere in the constitution. They made it up. There are other immunities granted by the constitution, they didn't do presidential. But any prosecutor named Jack Smith can't prosecute a president if he is named Trump is definitely in the Constitution. The bible tells me so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 29 minutes ago, chasfh said: I'm old enough to remember "they're old enough to fight and die for their country, they should be old enough to take a drink." Ah, good times ... You have already told us of your distain for the military, old stale story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 13 hours ago, chasfh said: USA! USA! USA! **** yeah!! MAGA!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 (edited) 12 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said: They need to be young with a brain that can be molded into being a killer. This is absolutely true. If you want fully formed adults fighting in an army effectively the battle better be for their own homes and freedom (a la Ukraine). Edited July 17 by gehringer_2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 (edited) 22 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said: You have already told us of your distain for the military, old stale story. Someone needs a hug. Edited July 18 by chasfh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 2 minutes ago, chasfh said: Someone needs a hug. OK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 58 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: OK Come here then ... thaaat's it ... shh shh shhhhh ... it's OK, buddy ... don't worry, it's gonna be all right ... you're safe now ... the black helicopters can't hurt you anymore ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.