US Politics: In A Hypocritical Condition

[argonak]

48 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

Hey @sologdin remember how I said gay marriage is going bye bye

 

Overturning either this or Roe v Wade would be a huge mistake for the GOP.  But they're dumb enough to do it at this point I guess.  The Roe v Wade is one of their best dog whistles, and if they gave that up all those evangelical suburban mothers might suddenly start to notice all the other nasty stuff the GOP does and how their support of them is disgusting all their estranged children.  without the baby murder cause, they'll lose a lot of votes I think.

Also, i'm surprised they even care about gay marriage anymore.  They're finally starting to pick up a small section of the homosexual vote, and they're going to trash that now?  Seems unlikely.  

But the last four years have shown that the GOP is like a Dog who chases cars all day, and one day he catches one, but doesn't know what to do with it.

[Trebla]

6 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Kayleigh! Kayleigh! Kayleigh!

I expect all you atheist bastards to get baptized now!

It's getting almost biblical with the people who have now tested positive for it. I keep thinking of a certain Johnny Cash song...  

"Go tell that long tongue liar
Go and tell that midnight rider
Tell the rambler
The gambler
The back biter
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em down
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em down"

(No, I don't hope that any of them die but I'm good with the humbling)

 

 

[Fragile Bird]

12 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

I can totally see Trump faking it to show people it's a hoax. The issue is I don't think the docs would go along with it.

The doctors at Walter Reed are military. Trump is literally their commander-in-chief. Disobey an order and I assume they could be court martialed. There are rules about when orders can be disobeyed in the military but I bet they don’t cover not releasing full details about a patient’s health.

eta: and do you doubt Trump wouldn’t demand court martial?

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

If the marriages happened in states that have anti- same-sex marriage statutes that were superceded by Obergefell, I think they might be able to invalidate those marriages.

Agreed, and that's a lot of states.  The only saving grace is the shift in public attitudes in some of those may enable direct democracy efforts to overturn such statutes and/or amendments.

[Jaxom 1974]

Hasn't Trump made the SC nomination already? It's official and in the books?  So the only hope is the Senate shut down to function properly on committee stalling the procedures and the its flipped and the committees continue to flounder until the Democrats take control... then they just make the nomination go away?

 

[Argonath Diver]

I think the country would be better off if we restricted marriages based on what is happening in the kitchen rather than the bedroom. My best friend should never be allowed to marry, not because he has a borderline obsessive crush on Tom Holland and belongs to a Norn Eire bears Facebook group, but because his constant photos of atrocious "meals" turn my stomach worse than his choice of partner nauseates Bible-thumping evangelicals.

[DanteGabriel]

16 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Kayleigh! Kayleigh! Kayleigh!

I expect all you atheist bastards to get baptized now!

If McConnell goes down I'll burn a fatted calf.

[mormont]

2 minutes ago, argonak said:

Overturning either this or Roe v Wade would be a huge mistake for the GOP.  But they're dumb enough to do it at this point I guess.  The Roe v Wade is one of their best dog whistles, and if they gave that up all those evangelical suburban mothers might suddenly start to notice all the other nasty stuff the GOP does and how their support of them is disgusting all their estranged children.  without the baby murder cause, they'll lose a lot of votes I think.

Also, i'm surprised they even care about gay marriage anymore.  They're finally starting to pick up a small section of the homosexual vote, and they're going to trash that now?  Seems unlikely.  

But the last four years have shown that the GOP is like a Dog who chases cars all day, and one day he catches one, but doesn't know what to do with it.

Yeah, but Supreme Court Justices don't face re-election. So, as I understand it, they're not really accountable, even to the party that proposed them. If Alito and Roberts want to overturn Obergefell, McConnell can't stop them, Trump can't stop them: only five or more of their fellow Justices can stop them. And if it wrecks the GOP's popularity, they don't have to care.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

So the only hope is the Senate shut down to function properly on committee stalling the procedures and the its flipped and the committees continue to flounder until the Democrats take control... then they just make the nomination go away?

Well, I suppose there's two hopes.  One is that Trump and Pence both die and acting president Pelosi rescinds the nomination.  The other is that enough GOP Senators are too sick to vote for confirmation.  If you take Murkowski and Collins at their word, that'd only be two of them.

[Kalbear]

8 minutes ago, DMC said:

Of course Thomas and Alito want to overturn Obergefell - they voted against Obergefell.  They still denied cert to that nut Davis' latest appeal.  Not sure what you're claiming credit for here?  I agree Obergefell is just as at risk as Roe, but Thomas rambling doesn't have any substantive relevance to that.  It's pretty cute though when you get all puffed up like a legend in your own mind.  Who's a good puppy?

I'm claiming credit for claiming that the new court will want to get rid of it, when @sologdin thought that those rights were going to be safe and progress was made. And Thomas and Alito doing this at the very start of the SCOTUS course matters because they're very loudly exclaiming their intentions; it isn't just people guessing. Not everything is about you. 

Barrett is of course also famously anti gay marriage. Meaning that it doesn't take a whole lot to tip those over. 

My suspicion is that it won't be denied outright; it'll just be permitted to be effectively banned in many states. And yes, it'll be a huge legal morass that will suck, but that's sort of the point - to make it actually suck for people, to put it at what it was like before when people could have some legal rights but most were not allowed as default, so people had to sue to spend time with their spouse in hospital. It'll be allowed that individual states can choose not to recognize marriages performed in other states under certain religious requirements. 

[sologdin]

kal--

no one should rely on twitter for anything serious, especiually law.  here's the actual 'statement.' am not sure this statement stands for the proposition that obergefell should be overturned, as it does not say that.  it says plenty of other things, some silly, some severe.  we know that thomas and alito do not agree with obergefell because they were among the four dissenting judges on the case.  importantly, however, only two judges have joined this statement--i do not see trump's judges joining it.  the totally inept thing about the statement is that it says that the obergefell dissents were correct that the right to SSM would result in sincerely held religious beliefs being treated as bigotry but then does nothing about it. 

i agree that there's a risk here, as there always is, on every issue. we are sadly not living in a disney film wherein there can be final victory over the forces of darkness.

the notion that the sex life of a couple whom one does not know except through paper marriage application somehow implicates one's sincerely held religious beliefs is a confession that the these people's religion is literally totalitarian and should be stricken from the earth.  considering, however, that this particular point is non-scriptural, i can't take it seriously as sincerely held religious belief.

 

suspicion is that it won't be denied outright; it'll just be permitted to be effectively banned in many states.

or by commercial sector, or even by individual agency.  we can see a ton of religious liberty cases coming up, claiming free exercise exemptions.  not just cake 'artists,' but also anyone associated with weddings.  we are a god fearing electricity grid and can't provide power to buildings that have sodomy in them because that makes the baby jesus cry.

[karaddin]

10 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

Hasn't Trump made the SC nomination already? It's official and in the books?  So the only hope is the Senate shut down to function properly on committee stalling the procedures and the its flipped and the committees continue to flounder until the Democrats take control... then they just make the nomination go away?

 

Delaying it until after the election, even if the appointment is confirmed in the lame duck session, means she's not on the court for any case regarding the election itself. It might not matter, but I'll take everything we can get.

[Which Tyler]

17 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

The doctors at Walter Reed are military. Trump is literally their commander-in-chief. Disobey an order and I assume they could be court martialed. There are rules about when orders can be disobeyed in the military but I bet they don’t cover not releasing full details about a patient’s health.

eta: and do you doubt Trump wouldn’t demand court martial?

Would Trump even think of a court martial? Surely he'd just sue.

 

But yes, the Doc.s are bound by patient confidentiality and by being military inferiors - if told to lie, their only option is to lie badly...

[kairparavel]

5 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

I think it's pretty surprising that he and Alito would be so very outspoken so soon. 

If they just popped up and said it, sure. But with this case and having backup waiting in the wings it's absolutely a signal to voters. Rules, decency, restraint, any of it - don't matter. 

[Xray the Enforcer]

[mod] One's overweening need to be Right On The Internet does not outweigh the need to be mindful of how one's words will be perceived by a group of people who are far more marginalized, and who will be seriously negatively affected by the discussion at hand. Keep it classy or GTFO. Thank you. [/mod]

[All Cats Are Bad]

46 minutes ago, Trebla said:

It's getting almost biblical with the people who have now tested positive for it. I keep thinking of a certain Johnny Cash song...  

"Go tell that long tongue liar
Go and tell that midnight rider
Tell the rambler
The gambler
The back biter
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em down
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em down"

(No, I don't hope that any of them die but I'm good with the humbling)

 

 

Manson's version is a more appropriate 2020 vibe IMO:

 

[DMC]

A Clear-Cut Biden Win Is Emerging as a Bull Case for Stocks

Quote

With Joe Biden’s lead widening in the polls and President Donald Trump’s campaign sidelined by the virus, investment strategists now say there’s less of a chance for a contested election.

A clear-cut Democrat victory could avoid a long and messy legal battle and provide certainty to markets that have been nervous about election risks, according to strategists from Citigroup Inc. to JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Well, I guess Trump can finally claim he's helping the economy with some validity.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Joe Biden gets to nominate...Merrick Garland. 

Garland was chosen as the nominee in part due to his "centrism" and the hopes the GOP would confirm him in fear of who a President Hillary would nominate in his stead.  If Biden is elected and the Dems take the Senate, I'd hope to do better.

[All Cats Are Bad]

Just now, DMC said:

Garland was chosen as the nominee in part due to his "centrism" and the hopes the GOP would confirm him in fear of who a President Hillary would nominate in his stead.  If Biden is elected and the Dems take the Senate, I'd hope to do better.

Your optimism is what gives me hope for our species.

[Mindwalker]

Could the hearings re Barrett be held via Zoom?

Meanwhile...

Matt Gaetz Sucks Up To Trump On Twitter

President Trump won't have to recover from COVID.

COVID will have to recover from President Trump. #MAGA

— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) October 5, 2020

 

(No puking smiley here, sadly)