Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

You think that one of the things atop the conservative agenda isn't going to be attempted once it's more feasible than ever?

I don't think the Supreme Court will touch Roe. It's as simple as that.

As I indicated in my post, conservatives already have been going after abortion, with success, for a long time. But legislating is considerably different from judicial ruling. And as poorly reasoned as Roe is, I can't see it being reversed any more than I can see the similarly reasoned gay marriage case being reversed (and to note, I agree with or am otherwise kosher with the outcomes in both; the constitution reasoning I find lacking, to be kind).

Anyway, as it's a prediction of future behavior there's not really much to discuss. Froot certainly thinks it will happen. I don't. One of us will be right.

[Kapture1]

Stephen Miller is a badass, lower odds than the President's daughter and son in law lol

[iam416]

Oh, I didn't even see that. Yeah, it's not Ivanka. Good grief.

[Kapture1]

Well, it IS horrible. And it makes Sanders look unhinged to YOU, but to the Ds? -- I think it's a winner. But, it has to wait in line behind single payer, free college and living wage.

J2LfQ3nlsOT7J_lO12_8rKLeQwyuLDWkzcz-KzeN-Qo.jpg?w=720&s=d919275148fce495cfc92ba6536e806e.jpg

[hack]

I think it's as simple as what I already said. What's been near the top of the conservative agenda for more than a generation will soon be more possible than ever. 2+2=4. But, yes. We will see what the Supreme Court does, yes. We know the abortion people will be trying their hardest. More culture wars to come.

[hack]

I figured I would get kudos from you by spelling it 'honourable'.

Deepest apologies for failing to spot that.

[Panoptes]

Hey leftists, want to keep proving how stoopid you are?

/rhetorical question

DmdjLaSUYAEbtuj?format=jpg&name=orig.jpg

[Dr. Strangelove]

"Hey that guy behind trump is reacting as if the boss is talking crazy! Replace him with a young chick!"

"Hey that local couple isn't cheering enough! Replace them with the bubbly blonde intern! If the boss sees this he'll lose his shit!"

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-montana-rally-people-replaced_us_5b926b14e4b0162f472c5612

[Panoptes]

More HuffPo poo.

[Kapture1]

Conspiracy theroists haha

"NOW SHE'S TOUCHING HER CHIN LIKE THAT GREEN FROG!!!"


pfaf61q.jpg

[Kapture1]

HWfCeGYQsxpjffC_JQcie6fLPS--DR_-KJPAnFX44aA.jpg?w=640&s=bbbcaa9bfe226ed24c9d05bb71f19ffb.jpg

[Whitley]

I think Hack is right that conservatives will try to get Roe thrown out, but it is going to be problematic for them in a couple ways: 1) Finding a case that would allow an overturn and 2) Finding said case that SCOTUS is going to take on. In the meantime, they will continue carving up abortion rights in the states and putting as many conservative judges as they can on the federal courts. Also neither party really wants culture wars to stop since it fires up segments for their base.

On the federal judges, I think the last count was that Trump had like 60 of them confirmed already. In fact, Sen Schumer recently made a deal that would allow 15 Trump nominated judges to be fast tracked. Why would he do such a thing? Because that would allow Senators to go back to campaign an extra 2-3 days (ie meet with their donors/fund raise) this is especially meant for the Senators in red states. What an absolute idiot (Schumer). Fast track 15 judges in exchange for something those Dems could do on their own.

I would like to see the details on the Sanders proposal. However, it is does bring up one of the huge problems with the economy in general. Big Business (not all but most) have moved to the extent that they have socialized their losses while privitizing their losses. I don't blame them for that. Businesses have primarily one motivation and that is to make as much profit as they can. There needs to be a conversation in this country to what extent should this happen and how it should be addressed. I think raising the minimum wage provides an excuse to fast track automation in those areas where it can be done (self checkouts being one example, kiosks to order at fast food places another). The question that needs to be answered is this: Are companies intentionally setting their wages at such amounts that it forces people that work full time onto government benefits (such as SNAP). If they do then yes they should incur a penalty for it, but how would you determine such a thing and then outside of the cities....would there be enough people for a statistically valid study of....would you have to go on a county level? higher? lower? Not sure.

[Kapture1]

"Hey that guy behind trump is reacting as if the boss is talking crazy! Replace him with a young chick!"

"Hey that local couple isn't cheering enough! Replace them with the bubbly blonde intern! If the boss sees this he'll lose his shit!"

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0162f472c5612

ah, he was one of yours


wearing a sticker of the DSA rose. Democrat Socialist

CDlYWGDZXzN4dvn1QW7SYBgtNddb3__pie2atNSirX8.jpg?w=707&s=fe0aefde25a5b58232795d22d50411ef.jpg




Trump talking about how great tax cut has been for the economy




For the Rich


He was removed shortly after pointing to his sticker.

[Kapture1]

b_8mXOneLqOol_i-o-v8uoOyEQiOB2W2mkTegX_JmOk.jpg?w=564&s=9be5e48737206aac92d1ee5efc8df37b.jpg

[Kapture1]

lol

nTBkt7JI9CPuoB3oU0OSay2LmuscNDrsI3VizvlgaP8.png?w=1024&s=44320ea6567de142f01559a2f2a259aa.png