Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Da Geezer]

Something really worth reading:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/immigration-public-charge-rule-food-stamps-public-housing-welfare/

I've always wondered how only half of the illegals could be considered on welfare. I live in a 50% Hispanic area and I know of no illegals who are not on welfare. Isn't it clever to somehow say that food stamps, public housing, and Medicaid are not welfare.

[Kapture1]

creepy piece of shit porn lawyer made his account private after walking back expectations of his supposed accuser.

[Da Geezer]

Jon said:
Your comment about the left, whatever that is, is on an absurdity level usually only put forth by our resident imbecile Kapture1. You're no dummy Geez so I see no value in putting forth nonsense that is usually heard only at a Trump rally for the drooling masses.

I believe you are referring to my statement that the burden of proof is being reversed. What else do you call it when Kavanaugh is expected to prove his innocence. This is not some form of right-wing thought unless you consider the framers of the Constitution to be right wing. How many of the Senate Dems have come out and said that Kavanaugh should prove his innocence? Many of them have. This is a characteristic of a statist system. The accusation comes from someone in government, and the accused is put to the test as to whether he can prove that what is alleged did not happen. Look up "star chamber proceedings" and you will get the drift from the Henry VII and VIII time. One of the biggest accomplishments of Western Civilization was to assume the accused to be innocent and have a jury determine guilt. You didn't see any "assumption of innocence" under the Nazis, Soviets, Islamicists, or Maoists. Tyranny thrives when individual rights are quashed. Libertarians believe that first and foremost. And you claim to be Libertarian.

But, Jon, you know all that. Look at your post and re-read it. You will see your answers to my questions are in the vein of "...but what about X...." I don't remember who made the point that the Rs didn't try to destroy Merrick Garland, but that is a good point. Why does the left have such hate in their hearts that a good man and his family are being destroyed? How much do the Dems respect Dr. Ford if she wanted to remain anonymous? Instead, they leak the supposed contents of the letter (although no one has actually seen the unredacted letter yet). Now Dr. Ford will be facing the whole country if she chooses to testify. She didn't sign up for that, but the Dems had no more regard for her wishes than they had regard for Kavanaugh's reputation. Parenthetically, I heard today that the Senate Investigatory staff has statements "under threat of felony (not perjury)" from all persons who Ford named. They all deny each basic allegation Ford has made. But I further heard that Ford contacted the White House during Trump's deliberative process leading up to the nomination with essentially the same story.

So I come back to my original question. I would appreciate hearing your own reasoning as to why you hate Trump. I'd appreciate hearing from any of the progs about this. Disagreement is far different than the level of vituperation directed at the President.

[hack]

The Rs, thanks to President Obama, controlled the Senate. Democracy. And then put the nomination up to newly elected President -- again, Democracy. Never did the Rs say a bad word about Garland. They didn't slander him. They didn't attack him. They didn't proclaim their Spartacus moment. They were in control, thanks to the rules of our system, and let the nomination fall to the results of our system. The Ds lost. And when the Ds lose playing by the rules they play outside of them.

As I noted, I am done. I will never vote for a D again, at least based on what the party is and where I see it going. So, Sherrod Brown, who I would have voted for, will crush Renaci by one less vote (I will not be voting for him, either).

"People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage. Intellectual myopia, often called stupidity, is no doubt a reason. But the privileged also feel that their privileges, however egregious they may seem to others, are a solemn, basic, God-given right. The sensitivity of the poor to injustice is a trivial thing compared with that of the rich."

[WingsFan]

Oh hack, hope it wasnt your pie - your favorite pizza and its looks like the square kind you like yes?


Little Caesars Pizza spitter faces 4-year felony


https://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...it/1420066002/




safe_image.php?d=AQA6VyMC2SMub_FH&w=540&h=282&url=https%3A%2F%2Furbanleak.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F09%2FScreen-Shot-2018-09-24-at-4.32.25-PM.png&cfs=1&upscale=1&fallback=news_d_placeholder_publisher&_nc_hash=AQBanisX

[iam416]

Johnny Galbraith is a tool.

[iam416]

Hard for me not to agree with Rich Lowry on this one -- https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/...pian-politics/

I think it was Hannibal who routinely made the point that DJT's popularity, in part, stems from his willingness to stand up to the #GentryProg Orwellian Bullies and Lynch Mob. We'll see if the Rs have the same backbone.

[hack]

One of the best in anyone's kit. Here in this thread I may use his extremely versatile bag of quotes as one. Here's another one that suits this place:

It has been the acknowledged right of every Marxist scholar to read into Marx the particular meaning that he himself prefers and to treat all others with indignation.

[hack]

I get mine in the hood, WF. Which is easier than ever now that we live in Baltimore.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The Rs, thanks to President Obama, controlled the Senate. Democracy. And then put the nomination up to newly elected President -- again, Democracy. Never did the Rs say a bad word about Garland. They didn't slander him. They didn't attack him. They didn't proclaim their Spartacus moment. They were in control, thanks to the rules of our system, and let the nomination fall to the results of our system. The Ds lost. And when the Ds lose playing by the rules they play outside of them.

As I noted, I am done. I will never vote for a D again, at least based on what the party is and where I see it going. So, Sherrod Brown, who I would have voted for, will crush Renaci by one less vote (I will not be voting for him, either).

I'll probably have more thoughts later but how was leaving a Supreme Court seat open for 14 months, by refusing to contemplate literally anyone nominated by Obama, "playing by the rules"? The rules don't say that the voters are to determine the fate of certain Supreme Court seats but not others. And it seems to me that advocating the idea that elections should determine the fate of Supreme Court seats is, in effect, further politicizing the process.

[Hannibal]

It scares me when I agree with Hannibal.

It gets worse from here.

[Hannibal]

I'll probably have more thoughts later but how was leaving a Supreme Court seat open for 14 months, by refusing to contemplate literally anyone nominated by Obama, "playing by the rules"? The rules don't say that the voters are to determine the fate of certain Supreme Court seats but not others. And it seems to me that advocating the idea that elections should determine the fate of Supreme Court seats is, in effect, further politicizing the process.

It was a natural outcome of making the court system a de facto unelected legislative branch. Bound to happen sooner or later.

[Dr. Strangelove]

It was a natural outcome of making the court system a de facto unelected legislative branch. Bound to happen sooner or later.

Well then you should go to your grave cursing the name "John Marshall" every night.

[iam416]

I'll probably have more thoughts later but how was leaving a Supreme Court seat open for 14 months

Well, it was 9 months from the election, but I'm sure thoughts will be outstanding. The Senate implemented the Biden rule, which, of course is fine by the rules and such. But, in any event I'm sure you'll reach the conclusion that the Rs were acting terribly and justified whatever the Ds are doing now, even though the Ds are just seeking justice for "survivors." Should be a great read.

[iam416]

Well then you should go to your grave cursing the name "John Marshall" every night.

Because John Marshall=William Brennan=Sotomayor=any judge who engaged in judicial review, ever. Of course.