Print

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

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[bambu.]

Rudy Giuliani's Daughter Suggests You Ignore Her Dad And Vote For Joe Biden

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/rudy-giuliani-daughter-vote-biden-212639506.html

Kids are cute...when they're little.
After that it doesn't take most of them long to hate you....and do that to you.
whereas a dog will love you forever...if you pick the right breed.

Tell us about YOUR kids, bambu. I thought you didn't have any? if so, how can expound on their development?

I've observed the horror inflicted on friends by their adult children.
Friends, family, work colleagues, neighbours, media.

Doesn't count. if you've never raised children, you don't know shit about them.

I have adult children and I have very open and honest communication with them. Daily. And without drama.

Many of my friends have the same situation. So, run along and play with your poodle, Sunshine.

Then you and your friends are the lucky ones.  A rarity.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Rudy Giuliani's Daughter Suggests You Ignore Her Dad And Vote For Joe Biden

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/rudy-giuliani-daughter-vote-biden-212639506.html

Kids are cute...when they're little.
After that it doesn't take most of them long to hate you....and do that to you.
whereas a dog will love you forever...if you pick the right breed.

Tell us about YOUR kids, bambu. I thought you didn't have any? if so, how can expound on their development?

I've observed the horror inflicted on friends by their adult children.
Friends, family, work colleagues, neighbours, media.

Doesn't count. if you've never raised children, you don't know shit about them.

I have adult children and I have very open and honest communication with them. Daily. And without drama.

Many of my friends have the same situation. So, run along and play with your poodle, Sunshine.

Then you and your friends are the lucky ones.  A rarity.

No luck. Hard work and good genes.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Winter is on its way, so let's see what Chi-town is up to. Check it out: With the arrival of cooler weather in Chicago, restaurants and bars are beginning to make accommodations to lengthen the outdoor dining season, an attempt to retain expanded capacity during an era of coronavirus occupancy limits indoors. Friday, five prominent restaurants in the Fulton Market district will begin welcoming guests to dine “al fresco” in igloo and greenhouse structures.

Beatrix, Duck Duck Goat, Gus’s Fried Chicken, Kuma’s Corner and the Publican make up the participating restaurants in the Dining Together, Apart initiative, an effort from Anheuser Busch and Stella Artois to help restaurants extend their outdoor dining service into the colder months. Diners were seen using the spaces Thursday evening as part of a soft opening, and the initiative officially kicks off Friday.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-food-chicago-cold-outdoor-dining-fulton-market-20201016-dk3af25hwjfctimnuw732ts33m-story.html

Igloo for two? Right this way, sir.

[barton]

Amended is the most widely used term.  27 times. It is the brilliance of the founders that to change or add to the Constitution it must be done with the consent of the people through their representatives. That is the working definition of a living Constitution...

Now I'm even more dazed.   And confused!   I thought the people elected Senators to vet SCt appointments so the appointed ones would make decisions and interpretations and set precedents that furthered a Living Constitution.   Which Living Constitution  you just said you're in favor of.   But then you said only amendments can modify a Living Constitution.  So,  if over 60% of Americans want a Constitution with a Roe v Wade interpretation,  the will of the people doesn't matter?   It's not an amendment so we can ignore it and appoint an Originalist who would gladly dump it?     

An Amendment to the Constitution is not needed to settle disputes to Abortion.  A simple act of Congress signed by the President would suffice.

Then,  given that over 60% of Americans favor a woman's right to choose, why has this simple act not been passed?   You earlier said the will of the people, expressed through their representatives, should prevail on the matter.   Did it not happen because people believe Roe V Wade has the weight of law?   I'm  so confused... it almost sounds as if legal precedents matter!   

[barton]

But... that can't be right.   Because if legal precedents matter then Amy Barrett wouldn't be upholding something that most Americans consider to be settled law.   And would thus thwart the will of the people i know you value so deeply.   

Help me,  Obiwan,  our constitutional Jedi!

[kiidcarter8]

I liked much of Joe's Michigan speech today.  PEDs really working.

[barton]

Red,  I went to a website that explains law to simple-minded people like me.   It said this about precedent:

   In common law legal systems, a precedent or authority is a legal case that establishes a principle or rule. This principle or rule is then used by the court or other judicial bodies use when deciding later cases with similar issues or facts.  The use of precedent provides predictability, stability, fairness, and efficiency in the law. The Latin term stare decisis is the doctrine of legal precedent.

The precedent on an issue is the collective body of judicially announced principles that a court should consider when interpreting the law. When a precedent establishes an important legal principle, or represents new or changed law on a particular issue, that precedent is often known as a landmark decision. 

Then I went another place that helps simpletons and they said that Roe was a landmark decision.    

Don't we want "predictability, stability, fairness, and efficiency in the law?"

So wouldn't a scotus justice who has regard for landmark decisions help promote those good things?   

[kiidcarter8]

Also note the next election is in 2024. If you haven't developed a new slate of candidates by then, you have issues.


Normally it would be a Pence making the run

I don't have a cystal ball, sorry.

[barton]

Well there's clearly some kind of cyst growing in there.

[facilitatorn]

Being a mouth piece for a disease ridden wanna be despot is bound to cause some kind of growth.

[facilitatorn]

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/10/16/1987034/-Gov-t-investigation-says-Trump-let-aviation-companies-lay-off-workers-while-taking-bailout-money

Theft invites theft.

Another reason we must topple trump.

Perhaps Kiid can find him a spider hole.

I’ve already got the playing cards printed up.

[bodiddley]

I thought Jared was the future of the GOP.
I mean we're going to have to wait a while for Barron to be eligible.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Amended is the most widely used term.  27 times. It is the brilliance of the founders that to change or add to the Constitution it must be done with the consent of the people through their representatives. That is the working definition of a living Constitution...

Now I'm even more dazed.   And confused!   I thought the people elected Senators to vet SCt appointments so the appointed ones would make decisions and interpretations and set precedents that furthered a Living Constitution.   Which Living Constitution  you just said you're in favor of.   But then you said only amendments can modify a Living Constitution.  So,  if over 60% of Americans want a Constitution with a Roe v Wade interpretation,  the will of the people doesn't matter?   It's not an amendment so we can ignore it and appoint an Originalist who would gladly dump it?     

An Amendment to the Constitution is not needed to settle disputes to Abortion.  A simple act of Congress signed by the President would suffice.

Then,  given that over 60% of Americans favor a woman's right to choose, why has this simple act not been passed?   

Because Congress has displayed no backbone in trying, relying instead on nine robed and unelected justices to do their work.

You earlier said the will of the people, expressed through their representatives, should prevail on the matter.   Did it not happen because people believe Roe V Wade has the weight of law?   I'm  so confused... it almost sounds as if legal precedents matter!

It did not happen because Congress does not do its job. 
It could also reflect that the country is split on wanting abortion to be legal but also wanting some restrictions.

[facilitatorn]

I liked much of Joe's Michigan speech today.  PEDs really working.

The giant crack bong that all republicans heave been smoking for the last several years has left you and your candidates all sickly, weird and useless.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Red,  I went to a website that explains law to simple-minded people like me.   It said this about precedent:

   In common law legal systems, a precedent or authority is a legal case that establishes a principle or rule. This principle or rule is then used by the court or other judicial bodies use when deciding later cases with similar issues or facts.  The use of precedent provides predictability, stability, fairness, and efficiency in the law. The Latin term stare decisis is the doctrine of legal precedent.

The precedent on an issue is the collective body of judicially announced principles that a court should consider when interpreting the law. When a precedent establishes an important legal principle, or represents new or changed law on a particular issue, that precedent is often known as a landmark decision. 

Then I went another place that helps simpletons and they said that Roe was a landmark decision.    

Don't we want "predictability, stability, fairness, and efficiency in the law?"

So wouldn't a scotus justice who has regard for landmark decisions help promote those good things?

Except of course, you can’t produce a law, only a court opinion.  50 years after this “ landmark decision” the country remains split on the issue of abortion.