Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Very

6 (50%)

Some

4 (33.3%)

Not sure

0 (0%)

Not really

1 (8.3%)

Not in the slightest

1 (8.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: February 15, 2022, 10:51:36 AM

[Hairy Lime]

BTW,  almost everyone here has an insult name -- Che,  Mao,  Buckwheat, Forrest (doubly clever,  as it could be either Gump or Nathan), Fat Albert,  Sheriff Bart,  and the half dozen or more Fac has for Red which I haven't kept up with.  I feel a bit left out.   I could offer some suggestions, if you're in a hurry and need a quick insult off the shelf.

You forgot Stupid Upside Down Little Aussie C***.

[Hairy Lime]

Any BLM Protests for THIS?!!

https://abcnews.go.com/US/mom-gunned-trip-drop-off-son-naval-academy/story?id=78577783

Did a cop snoot the young man’s mother?

She is a victim of a fucked up criminal act.

Racists like Forrest love to tell black people what they should and should not focus on. It is there way of justifying ignoring the point of the focus.

Leninists like Mao love to limit discussion and edit language in order to foster the party's message.

How's he limiting yours??

I don't think Mao was a Leninist but Forrest is not big on fine distinction. Or accuracy.

He is not being limited. He is being called out on what he says. That is what he doesn't like.

[Hairy Lime]

And a million dollars could have gotten a lot more "technical backup" than 50 NG soldiers can bring.

It's beyond stupid.   If Tennessee money bags just sent the check to Texas,  then it wouldn't have to pay for the transport from SD.   Why would SD troops, from an interior state,   have special expertise on border control?  .

They don't. They are about 2024, not actual border policy.

[Hairy Lime]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/01/politics/kevin-mccarthy-january-6-commission-committee-assignments/index.html

"If you serve on this bipartisan commission, I'm going to strip you of your committee assignments!"

McCarthy and the GOP are so afraid of having a bipartisan group examine Jan 6.

You have to wonder why. What does he expect them to find?!

“They” have already decided that.
Biden is so impotent as a leader the dems need to keep focusing on Trump.

Biden Is so popular the right wing blogs you regurgitate focus on Harris.

The party that launched 8 congression investigations into Benghazi over three years thinks one investigation into something that happened 6 months ago is focusing on the past.

[Hairy Lime]

Any BLM Protests for THIS?!!

https://abcnews.go.com/US/mom-gunned-trip-drop-off-son-naval-academy/story?id=78577783

Did a cop snoot the young man’s mother?

She is a victim of a fucked up criminal act.

Black lives only matter when cops are involved? Otherwise black lives are expendable within the black community? That's quite a philosophy you have there, Lawrence. If that is the case, then what Black Lives Matter really becomes is an excuse to hamper policing so criminals can work more freely.

Once again, Racists like Forrest love to tell black people what they should or shouldn't focus on. Helps them feel better to try to redirect focus away from the issue.

[Hairy Lime]

The justices held 6-3 along ideological lines that two state policies prohibiting out-of-precinct voting and ballot harvesting were not “enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose.”

Is that really the basis for the decision? The AZ laws were struck down under Section 2 of the VRA, which Congress amended in response to Mobile v. Bolden, specifically to apply the statute to discriminatory results, rather than purpose. If that is the basis of the SCOTUS decision they are ignoring the text and history of the statute.

[REDSTATEWARD]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/01/politics/kevin-mccarthy-january-6-commission-committee-assignments/index.html

"If you serve on this bipartisan commission, I'm going to strip you of your committee assignments!"

McCarthy and the GOP are so afraid of having a bipartisan group examine Jan 6.

You have to wonder why. What does he expect them to find?!

“They” have already decided that.
Biden is so impotent as a leader the dems need to keep focusing on Trump.

Biden Is so popular the right wing blogs you regurgitate focus on Harris.

LOL Harris is everyday proof of his incompetence.
She is a daily headline of stupidity that even liberals are embarrassed about.

[REDSTATEWARD]

The justices held 6-3 along ideological lines that two state policies prohibiting out-of-precinct voting and ballot harvesting were not “enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose.”

Is that really the basis for the decision? The AZ laws were struck down under Section 2 of the VRA, which Congress amended in response to Mobile v. Bolden, specifically to apply the statute to discriminatory results, rather than purpose. If that is the basis of the SCOTUS decision they are ignoring the text and history of the statute.

You seem a little confused.
Perhaps you need to read the decision.

[facilitatorn]

You seem like a fucking idiot, Red. You seem like an idiot and a dickwad bent on undermining the country that has so far let you suckle at it’s tit.

By all means poison your terribly weak mind with all sorts of fascist and authoritarian and white nationalist bullshit. Just know when you regurgitate it here, it will be promptly kicked back in your ugly face along with a good portion of scorn and derision, though less scorn and derision than you clearly deserve.

[josh]

Ward likes to mock others' reading of things, while almost always avoiding specifics that would expose either his own argument's flaws or his own lack of grasp of the issues.

[Holly Martins]

Cops that just want to kill drivers.

It's a horror movie.

It's necessary to read the article, Kid Catheter.

<click>

By all means, cancel anyone who might be questioning your take (whatever it was) on the shooting of an unarmed black man in a car whose battery was detached yet the shooter claimed the man was trying to run him down.  Keep Right Wing cancel culture alive and healthy! 

[Holly Martins]

And a million dollars could have gotten a lot more "technical backup" than 50 NG soldiers can bring.

It's beyond stupid.   If Tennessee money bags just sent the check to Texas,  then it wouldn't have to pay for the transport from SD.   Why would SD troops, from an interior state,   have special expertise on border control?  .

They don't. They are about 2024, not actual border policy.

Yes.  Without my other posting on the topic, that one wasn't as clearly a rhetorical question - which it was. 

[Holly Martins]

The justices held 6-3 along ideological lines that two state policies prohibiting out-of-precinct voting and ballot harvesting were not “enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose.”

Is that really the basis for the decision? The AZ laws were struck down under Section 2 of the VRA, which Congress amended in response to Mobile v. Bolden, specifically to apply the statute to discriminatory results, rather than purpose. If that is the basis of the SCOTUS decision they are ignoring the text and history of the statute.

Was there data on results that could have been presented to the Court?  Certainly in the case of "ballot harvesting," there would seem to be data somewhere showing that it disproportionately impacted Indigenous reservations and the ability of voters there to get ballots to the county seat. 

[Hairy Lime]

And a million dollars could have gotten a lot more "technical backup" than 50 NG soldiers can bring.

It's beyond stupid.   If Tennessee money bags just sent the check to Texas,  then it wouldn't have to pay for the transport from SD.   Why would SD troops, from an interior state,   have special expertise on border control?  .

They don't. They are about 2024, not actual border policy.

Yes.  Without my other posting on the topic, that one wasn't as clearly a rhetorical question - which it was.

is it permitted to answer rhetorical questions?

Answering that question "No" creates the type of paradox that has been known to seize up AI.

[Hairy Lime]

The justices held 6-3 along ideological lines that two state policies prohibiting out-of-precinct voting and ballot harvesting were not “enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose.”

Is that really the basis for the decision? The AZ laws were struck down under Section 2 of the VRA, which Congress amended in response to Mobile v. Bolden, specifically to apply the statute to discriminatory results, rather than purpose. If that is the basis of the SCOTUS decision they are ignoring the text and history of the statute.

Was there data on results that could have been presented to the Court?  Certainly in the case of "ballot harvesting," there would seem to be data somewhere showing that it disproportionately impacted Indigenous reservations and the ability of voters there to get ballots to the county seat.

The gist of the opinion is a rewriting of the text of Section 2. The Court also ruled that the Appeals.Court erred in instructing the DC to review the question of intent to determine if the AZ legislature.were, essentially, dupes for Race based animus. It is a concept from employment law that allows a Court to look beyond the actual decision maker to find animus.