katt_goddess Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 The quiet part out loud. Big surprise. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stilgar Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 That is what jingo believes and always has. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vamped Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 1 hour ago, PenguinBoss said: Good lord Oh was she supposed to say the "white" outloud ??? MAGA patriots must be what they're calling the white supremacists now. Might as well top it off with a "white power" at the end 2 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naraku360 Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 9 hours ago, Top Gun said: Yes we fucking should. We already do in certain situations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_retirement#United_States 8 hours ago, discolé monade said: yes, we absofuckingly should. Elaborate. 4 hours ago, Poof said: We coulda had Tim Ryan when he challenged her for speaker. Whenever you guys are ready to accept the future he will be there waiting to lead you to victory ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poof Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 5 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said: im all for revolution. we all know the duopoly party politics is a dead end. In the meantime can we also try voting and getting our friends to vote. Like actually pressuring them. Friends, family, and significant others. Carry on with formulating your revolution but can we still just vote. Just in the meantime. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poof Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, naraku360 said: ??? Tim Ryan challenged Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the house in 2016. He didn’t win, but jussayin, he agrees with you. https://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/who-is-tim-ryan/ Quote "If you're a quarterback and you keep throwing interceptions, you change quarterbacks," the 43-year-old Ryan, a former high school football player, said in a recent interview criticizing the record of Pelosi, 76, and arguing it's time for a younger generation to take the reins. Quote Tim Ryan vows 'Youngstown street fight' vs. Trump Hahahaha Edited June 26, 2022 by Poof 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpgamer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 8 hours ago, Sawdamizer said: I guess… I’m a bit disappointed that shit isn’t burning… Oh thank fuck, I'm not the only one feeling it. Not even sure what it would take to reach that point if this isn't it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberbully Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 1 hour ago, rpgamer said: Oh thank fuck, I'm not the only one feeling it. Not even sure what it would take to reach that point if this isn't it. This isnt it because it happened to another group that just takes it on the chin. Just like natives Just like Latinos Just like the entire rainbow of alternative life styles. Just like black people.....none of us are going to do shit.....or at least nothing that matters. At least not until we all band together. There is only one group that cries and gets results and until we take power from them, they will continue to take it from us. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seight Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 7 hours ago, katt_goddess said: The quiet part out loud. Big surprise. I have a hard time believing its the quiet part anymore tbh. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 This could literally be posted in three separate thread here… https://fallriverreporter.com/providence-police-officer-running-for-office-arrested-after-allegedly-assaulting-opponent-at-abortion-rally-two-others-also-arrested/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1pooh4u Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 4 hours ago, Sawdamizer said: This could literally be posted in three separate thread here… https://fallriverreporter.com/providence-police-officer-running-for-office-arrested-after-allegedly-assaulting-opponent-at-abortion-rally-two-others-also-arrested/ They gave him a fuckin paid vacation?!? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discolé monade Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 they gave him paid leave. WITH video evidence. they gave the white officer paid leave. *read this story last night* 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stilgar Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 1 hour ago, discolé monade said: they gave him paid leave. WITH video evidence. they gave the white officer paid leave. *read this story last night* And the investigation will find he did nothing wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 1 minute ago, stilgar said: And the investigation will find he did nothing wrong. Or his political opponent suicides themselves with two bullets to the back of their own head Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 https://www.npr.org/2022/05/10/1097482967/roe-v-wade-supreme-court-abortion-period-apps?fbclid=IwAR2nZRNGfsqzswM2jTYWUOB_1hvN710tTlc4z58gAjStINLITh8eQbj1Mj8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poof Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 someone show me how to be an abortion doctor. I'll have my clinic in the middle of texas idgaf. everything my whole life and i have no felonies. I'm immune to law enforcement. Theyll never catch me. I'm ready to be the hero. I can do this 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discolé monade Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 I don’t really understand all of this I’m seeing here… I get they are trying to get him to wake the fuck up and show the hypocrisy… but it’s almost like they are saying they shouldn’t be able to marry if womens rights are taken away… and, I guess it’s all Christianity bullshit… but, this isn’t the time for whataboutism…. Fucking take what you want now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Top Gun Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 13 hours ago, naraku360 said: Elaborate. What is there to elaborate about? If you are at the age where you will not have to live with the consequences of your own decisions for decades, then you have no right to be making said decisions. You should step aside for those that will have to live with those consequences for decades. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discolé monade Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 after certain age, numerous cognitive skills begin to decline. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katt_goddess Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 12 hours ago, rpgamer said: Oh thank fuck, I'm not the only one feeling it. Not even sure what it would take to reach that point if this isn't it. I think part of the problem [ other than it being officially official on a Friday allowing for all the guilty parties to go into hiding] is the various different things that are now all happening at once depending on which state you are in and all the various people who have to get things together in their state because of this. Some states are setting laws to keep things either 100% legal or at least as legal as it was before this while other states everything stopped immediately which means everyone effected has to scramble now for their own needs. You have clinics that need all hands on deck to move to an allowed location before even owning the equipment is considered a felony even if it's just passing through. You have other states that are doing the slow roll to fascist bullshit which may or may not be slowed or stopped at the state level but it's on those that have the energy to focus on that one thing instead of all the things in all the other states. And you've now got places like South Dakota that are looking into pre-emptively making birth control illegal because 'babies!' so anyone in that state now has to figure out how to get what they need when what they need tends to require visiting a doctor first for the damn prescription depending on just how stupid the ban is. And in North Dakota, the clock on the trigger law doesn't start until the AG officially certifies the SCOTUS decision. Slim pickings to slow it down but right now that's a thing. In short, everyone has been intentionally scattered because all the shit-head states are enacting their shit-head gender-biased laws in different ways. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 13 minutes ago, katt_goddess said: I think part of the problem [ other than it being officially official on a Friday allowing for all the guilty parties to go into hiding] is the various different things that are now all happening at once depending on which state you are in and all the various people who have to get things together in their state because of this. Some states are setting laws to keep things either 100% legal or at least as legal as it was before this while other states everything stopped immediately which means everyone effected has to scramble now for their own needs. You have clinics that need all hands on deck to move to an allowed location before even owning the equipment is considered a felony even if it's just passing through. You have other states that are doing the slow roll to fascist bullshit which may or may not be slowed or stopped at the state level but it's on those that have the energy to focus on that one thing instead of all the things in all the other states. And you've now got places like South Dakota that are looking into pre-emptively making birth control illegal because 'babies!' so anyone in that state now has to figure out how to get what they need when what they need tends to require visiting a doctor first for the damn prescription depending on just how stupid the ban is. And in North Dakota, the clock on the trigger law doesn't start until the AG officially certifies the SCOTUS decision. Slim pickings to slow it down but right now that's a thing. In short, everyone has been intentionally scattered because all the shit-head states are enacting their shit-head gender-biased laws in different ways. Saw what that dumb cunt of a governor said today regarding banning certain drugs… not sure if it was north or South Dakota… doesn’t matter 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naraku360 Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 1 hour ago, Top Gun said: What is there to elaborate about? If you are at the age where you will not have to live with the consequences of your own decisions for decades, then you have no right to be making said decisions. You should step aside for those that will have to live with those consequences for decades. I understand the point, but I'm not entirely comfortable using uncontrollable circumstances (age) to reject people from a job. 24 minutes ago, discolé monade said: after certain age, numerous cognitive skills begin to decline. But the assumption of conginitive decline based on age rather than behavioral symptoms is explicitly discriminatory and illegal in most industries. If someone is capable of performing a job, I'm not big on rejecting their right to do so on principle. It may solve a lot of issues with our current situation, however at what cost? If, theoretically, all 65+ y/os are treated as cognitively insufficient, who is to say we can't keep expanding competency on equally discriminatory bases? I'd prefer a system that's actively holding people accountable than assume medical conditions without direct proof. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpgamer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 3 minutes ago, naraku360 said: I understand the point, but I'm not entirely comfortable using uncontrollable circumstances (age) to reject people from a job. The presidency has a minimum age requirement. Why shouldn't there also be a maximum? 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpgamer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 11 hours ago, cyberbully said: This isnt it because it happened to another group that just takes it on the chin. Just like natives Just like Latinos Just like the entire rainbow of alternative life styles. Just like black people.....none of us are going to do shit.....or at least nothing that matters. At least not until we all band together. There is only one group that cries and gets results and until we take power from them, they will continue to take it from us. In fairness, looking back, we did kinda make it to that point after Floyd. Shit started burning, that whole Autonomous Zone thing in Seattle (and maybe a few others? idk), cops generally fearing for their lives. Shame we didn't really see strong tangible results from that. Seen a few calls for a general strike across the country. But, like. We're still reeling from labor shortages and supply chain problems and covid not actually being gone, etc. These rich fucks won't be impacted in the slightest by that. Idk. Something needs to bring these folks back down to reality. They're all just too detached from everything they preside over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naraku360 Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 11 minutes ago, rpgamer said: The presidency has a minimum age requirement. Why shouldn't there also be a maximum? Most laws with minimum ages don't have maximum ages. We gain rights with ages, typically for the better, but it's not like it becomes illegal to drink when you turn to the arbitrarily selected 70 or whatever. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discolé monade Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 1 hour ago, naraku360 said: I understand the point, but I'm not entirely comfortable using uncontrollable circumstances (age) to reject people from a job. But the assumption of conginitive decline based on age rather than behavioral symptoms is explicitly discriminatory and illegal in most industries. If someone is capable of performing a job, I'm not big on rejecting their right to do so on principle. It may solve a lot of issues with our current situation, however at what cost? If, theoretically, all 65+ y/os are treated as cognitively insufficient, who is to say we can't keep expanding competency on equally discriminatory bases? I'd prefer a system that's actively holding people accountable than assume medical conditions without direct proof. i'm usually in agreement with much of what your post. but not this, and rather than each of us trying to convince the other, i'll just agree to disagree. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 https://www.aap.org/en/news-room/news-releases/aap/2022/aap-statement-on-supreme-court-decision-in-dobbs-v.-jackson-womens-health-organization/ absolutely gut wrenching 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distortedreasoning Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 6 hours ago, Sawdamizer said: the plan is to use this as leverage to try and rally support to vote blue for the midterms. but actually doing something? nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distortedreasoning Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 7 hours ago, naraku360 said: I understand the point, but I'm not entirely comfortable using uncontrollable circumstances (age) to reject people from a job. But the assumption of conginitive decline based on age rather than behavioral symptoms is explicitly discriminatory and illegal in most industries. If someone is capable of performing a job, I'm not big on rejecting their right to do so on principle. It may solve a lot of issues with our current situation, however at what cost? If, theoretically, all 65+ y/os are treated as cognitively insufficient, who is to say we can't keep expanding competency on equally discriminatory bases? I'd prefer a system that's actively holding people accountable than assume medical conditions without direct proof. giving you a like just for not age discriminating. old people aint the problem even though there are old people that are problems. they are just part of the system, they can and will get replaced by another servant of the rich donor class. it doesnt matter if they are old, young, black, white, or rainbows and everything in between. the power system is design to keep them in power and keep everybody else down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobdog Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 14 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said: giving you a like just for not age discriminating. old people aint the problem even though there are old people that are problems. they are just part of the system, they can and will get replaced by another servant of the rich donor class. it doesnt matter if they are old, young, black, white, or rainbows and everything in between. the power system is design to keep them in power and keep everybody else down. Every power structure maintains itself in the same way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 https://www.axios.com/2022/06/25/defense-department-abortion-access-roe-v-wade until 2024… 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poof Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 (edited) 17 hours ago, Sawdamizer said: If you already voted, keep voting, get more people to vote next time. Edited June 27, 2022 by Poof And of course resist the law all you can for yourself and others Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vamped Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 20 hours ago, Sawdamizer said: I don’t really understand all of this I’m seeing here… I get they are trying to get him to wake the fuck up and show the hypocrisy… but it’s almost like they are saying they shouldn’t be able to marry if womens rights are taken away… and, I guess it’s all Christianity bullshit… but, this isn’t the time for whataboutism…. Fucking take what you want now. I think what they're getting at with Clarence Thomas is that with striking Roe v Wade down and threatening to revisit and axe rights to same sex marriage and contraception on the grounds of some oppressive Christianity bullshit, you might as well go on and add interracial marriage in there because they argued that the mixing of the races was against God's natural order or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stilgar Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 51 minutes ago, Poof said: If you already voted, keep voting, get more people to vote next time. Voting doesn't mean shit if democrats are gonna give republicans everything they want. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawdamizer Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 So, do we fucking just not have separation of church and shit? 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PenguinBoss Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 They're already forcing states to pay for private, religious schools. This is no surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1pooh4u Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 1 hour ago, Sawdamizer said: So, do we fucking just not have separation of church and shit? Nope but we knew they were going to do this when they said tax money can got towards religious schools. This ruling is an outrage. The SCOTUS must be abolished and rebuilt. This country is a fuckin joke now. No better than any other country ruled by fundamentalists 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1pooh4u Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 You know what fuck it. I want all the Muslim Jewish and any Satan worshippers to lead prayer in the classroom. Let’s get this reversed quickly as those teachers are sure to get warned and fired if they do this 2 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vamped Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 I'm kinda surprised that nothing is on fire 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poof Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 2 hours ago, stilgar said: Voting doesn't mean shit if democrats are gonna give republicans everything they want. You literally believe in a narrative based on right wing propaganda to disillusion you to the party. Ending the filibuster or whatever weird demands you guys have won’t mean shit if you just become complacent until republicans win a 51 majority and undo everything you did. you guys haven’t “voted enough” if dems don’t even have 60 majority. You’re bitching that they haven’t done anything with the power you’ve given them but you don’t give them power you bitch at them for not having enough power. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discolé monade Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 June 26, 2022 (Sunday) Defenders of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade insist that Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health does not outlaw abortion but simply returns the decision about reproductive rights to the states. “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote. He quoted the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote: “The permissibility of abortion, and the limitations, upon it, are to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy: by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting.” This, Alito wrote, “is what the Constitution and the rule of law demand.” The idea that state voters are the centerpiece of American democracy has its roots in the 1820s, when southern leaders convinced poorer Americans that the nation was drifting toward an aristocracy that ignored the needs of ordinary people. The election of 1824, when established politicians overrode the popular vote to put John Quincy Adams into the presidency, seemed to illustrate that drift. Supporters of Adams’s chief rival, Andrew Jackson, complained that a wealthy elite was taking over the country and, once in charge, would use the power of the federal government to cement their control over the country’s capital, crushing ordinary Americans. The rough, uneducated Andrew Jackson, who promised to break the hold of northeastern elites on the government and return democracy to the people, began to articulate a new vision of American government. He insisted that democratic government should actually look like a democracy: it should be formed by the votes of local people, not those from some far-off capital, and it should be made up of those same ordinary voters, not eastern elites like Adams, whose wealthy president father, John, had reared his son to follow in his footsteps. Jackson’s new vision made ordinary Americans central to the democratic system. Democratic government put the power into the hands of individual voters. Local and state government was the most important stage of this system; the federal government always ran the risk of being taken over by an elite cabal that could override the will of the people. It must always be kept as small as possible. But there was a power play in this argument. By the time Jackson was elected president in 1828, white southerners already knew they were badly outnumbered in the nation as a whole. In that year, quite dramatically, a congressional fight over tariffs ended up with a strong bill that hurt the South in favor of northern manufacturing. Outraged, southern leaders with Vice President John C. Calhoun of South Carolina at their head claimed the right to “nullify” federal laws. (Jackson later said that one of the two regrets he had at the end of his term was that he “was unable to…hang John C. Calhoun.") Congress lowered the tariff and the southerners backed down, but the idea that states were superior to the federal government only gained strength among southern enslavers as they felt the heat of a growing movement to abolish slavery. When it became clear that the U.S. might well acquire territory in Latin America, Democrats sympathetic to the South pushed back against the national majority that wanted to stop the spread of slavery into those lands by insisting on the doctrine of “popular sovereignty”: permitting the people who lived in a territory to decide for themselves whether or not to permit enslavement in it (although Mexico had outlawed enslavement in 1829). The U.S. acquired the vast territory of the American West in 1848, and two years later, Congress turned to popular sovereignty to try to avoid a fight about enslavement there. The issue turned volatile in 1854 when Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas pushed through Congress a law overturning the 1820 Missouri Compromise and organizing two super-states out of the remaining land of the 1803 Louisiana Purchase. Rather than being free as the Missouri Compromise had promised, those huge states of Kansas and Nebraska would have enslavement or not based on the votes of those who lived there. This, Douglas insisted in his debates with Illinois lawyer Abraham Lincoln in 1858, was the true meaning of democracy: “I deny the right of Congress to force a slaveholding State upon an unwilling people,” he said, “I deny their right to force a free State upon an unwilling people…. The great principle is the right of every community to judge and decide for itself, whether a thing is right or wrong, whether it would be good or evil for them to adopt it…. It is no answer to this argument to say that slavery is an evil, and hence should not be tolerated. You must allow the people to decide for themselves whether it is a good or an evil….” “Uniformity in local and domestic affairs,” he said, “would be destructive of State rights, of State sovereignty, of personal liberty and personal freedom.” A strong majority in the U.S. opposed the extension of enslavement, but Douglas’s reasoning overrode that majority by carving the voting population into small groups the Democrats could dominate by whipping up voters with viciously racist speeches. Then, in the 1857 Dred Scott decision, a stacked Supreme Court blessed this plan by announcing that Congress had no power to legislate in the territories. In our system, this would mean that states taken over by pro-slavery zealots would eventually win enough power at the federal level to make enslavement national. “A house divided against itself cannot stand," Lincoln warned Americans. “I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new—North as well as South.” After the Civil War had proved the power of the federal government to defend the will of the majority from the tyranny of the minority, Congress found itself once again forced to override the will of state governments. When state legislatures put in place the Black Codes, which created a second-class status in the South for Black Americans, Congress passed and the states ratified the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, overriding the Dred Scott decision to make Black Americans citizens, and establishing that “[n]o state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Almost 80 years later, it was this amendment—the Fourteenth—to which the Supreme Court turned to protect the rights of Black and Brown Americans, women, LGBTQ, and so on, from state laws that threatened their health and safety or treated them as second-class citizens. In using the power of the federal government to guarantee “the equal protection of the laws,” it made sure that a small pool of voters couldn’t strip rights from their neighbors. It is this effort today’s Supreme Court is gutting. When today’s jurists talk of sending decisions about civil rights back to the states, they are echoing Stephen Douglas. “Citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting” is indeed precisely how democracy is supposed to work. But choosing your voters to make sure the results will be what you want is a different kettle of fish altogether. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stilgar Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 33 minutes ago, Poof said: You literally believe in a narrative based on right wing propaganda to disillusion you to the party. Ending the filibuster or whatever weird demands you guys have won’t mean shit if you just become complacent until republicans win a 51 majority and undo everything you did. you guys haven’t “voted enough” if dems don’t even have 60 majority. You’re bitching that they haven’t done anything with the power you’ve given them but you don’t give them power you bitch at them for not having enough power. What has the democrats actually done to stop republicans from getting their way? The time for voting has long since passed. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discolé monade Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 7 minutes ago, stilgar said: The time for voting has long since passed. here! here!! 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naraku360 Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Poof said: You literally believe in a narrative based on right wing propaganda to disillusion you to the party. Ending the filibuster or whatever weird demands you guys have won’t mean shit if you just become complacent until republicans win a 51 majority and undo everything you did. you guys haven’t “voted enough” if dems don’t even have 60 majority. You’re bitching that they haven’t done anything with the power you’ve given them but you don’t give them power you bitch at them for not having enough power. I'm in a deep blue state. Pretty much every city, county, state, or federal election I have any impact on goes Dem whether I vote or not I'm not sure why you're more inclined to villify the voters over politicians who currently hold enough power to do anything, like Biden's refusal to codify Roe v. Wade which isn't even effected by the filibuster. What's his excuse? Edited June 27, 2022 by naraku360 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobdog Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 2 hours ago, Poof said: You literally believe in a narrative based on right wing propaganda to disillusion you to the party. Ending the filibuster or whatever weird demands you guys have won’t mean shit if you just become complacent until republicans win a 51 majority and undo everything you did. you guys haven’t “voted enough” if dems don’t even have 60 majority. You’re bitching that they haven’t done anything with the power you’ve given them but you don’t give them power you bitch at them for not having enough power. I voted for Bernie, and look what I ended up with. Thank God for Gavin Newsome and state legislature that regularly fucks over the GOP. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1pooh4u Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 I love the apologists that are saying “tHiS rUlInG dOeSn’T AlLoW pRaYeRs iN sChOoLs!” When clearly Gorsuch was like private religious speech is fine and mentioned classrooms specifically so that when a case for prayer in school is ever to be brought before them they’ll allow it. What’s to stop a teacher from saying “I’m not advocating religion. I’m praying privately?” 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katt_goddess Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 4 hours ago, 1pooh4u said: You know what fuck it. I want all the Muslim Jewish and any Satan worshippers to lead prayer in the classroom. Let’s get this reversed quickly as those teachers are sure to get warned and fired if they do this Yep, this was my thought as well. I should make a 'Little Book of Big Prayers' that consist of 'prayers acceptable for use in public schools due to SCOTUS rulings' - that will be nothing but pages and pages of prayers to any deity that isn't in the Judeo-Christian pantheon. Totally including Cthulhu. Suck it. 2 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.