The Democrat Utopia

[DevoHusker]

@knapplc posted about this guy in the R Utopia thread. Looks like he might be non-partisan

 

 

 

[knapplc]

10 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

@knapplc posted about this guy in the R Utopia thread. Looks like he might be non-partisan.

 

I put that in the Republican Utopia thread because Jeff Fortenberry is Republican. It was a local reporter covering a case about a local politician.

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[DevoHusker]

6 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

I put that in the Republican Utopia thread because Jeff Fortenberry is Republican. It was a local reporter covering a case about a local politician.

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Yes, I saw that and provided additional information that implicated Lee Terry as well.

 

I put this link here as he seems to be equal opportunity, and because...well...the Clintons. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

23 hours ago, DevoHusker said:

 

 

 

Oh f#&% you, Ross. We're living in the America no one wanted, where the two entrenched parties have declared all politics a zero sum game, where even good ideas supported by a majority of Americans are repackaged to assure that nothing happens and nobody gets credit for anything.

 

The cultural shifts and social progress have been decades in the making, and untold American have died and suffered for the most basic of human rights, stuff that Conservatives have typically fought against, while feigning love for our Constitution. 

 

Why would Liberals celebrate this moment? It sure doesn't feel like a win when absolute bedrocks of progressivism and basic human dignity are suddenly at incredibly high risk, from Republicans undermining the Voting Rights Act, to Roe vs. Wade, to Corporations are People, to a full-fledged American coup planned by a sitting President who openly sympathizes with the Confederacy and White Supremacists. There's his stacked Supreme Court that appears open to over-riding the will of a majority of Americans, and a violent minority of conspiracy theorists and Trump supporters empowered like no other time in my life. 

 

This s#!tshow is the unintended consequence of liberalism?  Again, f#&% you, Ross. 

 

And yeah....a dancing old hippie in a tye-died shirt. That's liberalism for you. f#&%wit. 

[Archy1221]

17 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

There's his stacked Supreme Court that appears open to over-riding the will of a majority of Americans,

Bending to the will of a majority, minority, or whatever ority is not the job of the Supreme Court as you are well aware.  

[Guy Chamberlin]

17 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Bending to the will of a majority, minority, or whatever ority is not the job of the Supreme Court as you are well aware.  

 

 

But bending to the will of them that appointed you is always the subtext. It's why we can typically (not always) predict judgements ahead of time. 

 

To his credit, John Roberts appears to understand this better than anyone. He came in as the center of the Supreme Court (although historically pretty darn Right) but suddenly finds himself in the position of Center Left. While he's still in a position of power, he's also in a position to be criticized by everyone. These folks are human. 

 

The Supreme Court has handed down some surprises, but per the point in question: there's little reason for a liberal to celebrate the current make-up of the Supreme Court, especially having watched Merrick Garland turn into Brett Kavanaugh, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg turn into Amy Comey Barrett for reasons that are 100% partisan politics, as you are well aware. 

 

So no, Ross Douchewit, this isn't what we asked for. 

 

 

 

[Archy1221]

15 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

especially having watched Merrick Garland turn into Brett Kavanaugh,

Garland was never on the Supreme Court so he didn’t turn into anything.  

[DevoHusker]

1 hour ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Oh f#&% you, Ross. We're living in the America no one wanted, where the two entrenched parties have declared all politics a zero sum game, where even good ideas supported by a majority of Americans are repackaged to assure that nothing happens and nobody gets credit for anything.

 

The cultural shifts and social progress have been decades in the making, and untold American have died and suffered for the most basic of human rights, stuff that Conservatives have typically fought against, while feigning love for our Constitution. 

 

Why would Liberals celebrate this moment? It sure doesn't feel like a win when absolute bedrocks of progressivism and basic human dignity are suddenly at incredibly high risk, from Republicans undermining the Voting Rights Act, to Roe vs. Wade, to Corporations are People, to a full-fledged American coup planned by a sitting President who openly sympathizes with the Confederacy and White Supremacists. There's his stacked Supreme Court that appears open to over-riding the will of a majority of Americans, and a violent minority of conspiracy theorists and Trump supporters empowered like no other time in my life. 

 

This s#!tshow is the unintended consequence of liberalism?  Again, f#&% you, Ross. 

 

And yeah....a dancing old hippie in a tye-died shirt. That's liberalism for you. f#&%wit. 

 

Don't hold back Guy, tell us how you really feel, lol.

 

While I don't hold your views on much of the rest of your reply, the bold is something that we both agree on. 

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

Garland was never on the Supreme Court so he didn’t turn into anything.  

 

You really want to play thick-witted on this? 

[Guy Chamberlin]

1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

 

Don't hold back Guy, tell us how you really feel, lol.

 

While I don't hold your views on much of the rest of your reply, the bold is something that we both agree on. 

 

 

Yeah, I get that. The part where I say both sides are to blame.

 

But one side is worse. They really, truly are.

 

History is over there shaking its head at all the false equivalencies. 

[knapplc]

10 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Yeah, I get that. The part where I say both sides are to blame.

 

But one side is worse. They really, truly are.

 

History is over there shaking its head at all the false equivalencies. 

 

Both sides committed penalties in the 2010 Texas A&M game, Guy. 

 

Both sides.

[Guy Chamberlin]

29 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Both sides committed penalties in the 2010 Texas A&M game, Guy. 

 

Both sides.

 

Are you suggesting what I think you're suggesting? 

Bo Pelini to the Supreme Court? 

[Archy1221]

52 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

You really want to play thick-witted on this? 

Was he on the SC or not?  I say no.  
 

Now to your larger point.  You get to complain either about Kavanaugh or Barrett.  You don’t get to complain about both, because if Garland goes through in an election year then so does Barrett by that standard. 
 

 I got no problem with people saying McConnell manipulated the system.  He was in charge and did what ANY OTHER politician would have done in his position though.  
 

 

[Lorewarn]

5 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

You don’t get to complain about both, because if Garland goes through in an election year then so does Barrett by that standard. 

 

 

 

Garland didn't go through. Remember?

 

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Garland was never on the Supreme Court so he didn’t turn into anything.  

 

[commando]

7 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

 

 I got no problem with people saying McConnell manipulated the system.  He was in charge and did what ANY OTHER politician would have done in his position though.  
 

 

is mitch still determined to have the united states default on the debt?    is that something any politician should do if they were in power?