Jump to content

US Politics: Supreme Courting to insanity.


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

For people who are actually considering it I did a bunch of research, and in general the best overall place to emigrate to for the next 25-30 years if you want English speaking was New Zealand. Good, stable political climate, best overall political system, good healthcare, relatively shielded from the worst of climate change issues, reasonably good cost of living. It can be difficult to emigrate - they have a skills-based quota system - and for us the big gotcha was having an adult son with medical needs we would need to cover out of pocket (he could come and be there, but he would not be a NZ citizen and not be covered under the medical coverage unless he got a job). But that's a relatively niche issue and would probably not be a problem for most others. 

My best friend actually lives in New Zealand. Has for a little over 25 years now.  He and his partner would come back to the States and visit yearly. They discussed moving to the States once the time was right. Covid stopped the trips back. And now he'll likely never come back.  Though I've told him to save the spare bedroom at his place for me and my family...

But serious research into options seems more necessary these days...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do I get the foreboding that in 30 years they'll be a movie revealing that Clarence Thomas was instrumental in having his own interracial marriage declared invalid, illegal and unconstitutional?

He is destined to become his generations " Benedict Arnold".

What is in this fuckers Kool-Aid anyways?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

He is destined to become his generations " Benedict Arnold".

Well I think there's another infamous derisive nickname/moniker from American history that would spring to mind when describing Thomas, but let's just leave it at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many human rights abuse/climate change/refugees do you all think New Zealand can and will handle?

There is nowhere to run and hide on this globe in these times.  You are forced to stay and fight, or roll over, and rolling over won't save you either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happy to report that even my generally conservative mother (generally republican and conservative in that she doesn't actually research too many things and tends to argue for the sake of arguing...generally just wrapped in the cocoon of privilege) was outraged over Roe. She is a nurse and knows that this decision is bad for women.  I just wish she'd understand that this is a step toward authoritarianism and not communism...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Well I think there's another infamous derisive nickname/moniker from American history that would spring to mind when describing Thomas, but let's just leave it at that.

Harriet Beecher Stowe or do you think of another one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

How many human rights abuse/climate change/refugees do you all think New Zealand can and will handle?

Not a lot. I recognize that emigrating there is a major privilege. New Zealand isn't going to take a crazy amount of refugees, and I'm not talking about trying to go there as a refugee. 

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

There is nowhere to run and hide on this globe in these times.  You are forced to stay and fight, or roll over, and rolling over won't save you either.

Some places are a lot better than others. And you're welcome to stay and fight, but I don't think you understand either what that will mean or what you'll be able to accomplsh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Longrider- "The SC has changed the subject from the Jan 6 hearings."   :angry2:

BINGO!!

No, not really. I mean, it has happened but I'm pretty sure that a decision that has been months in the making and also was leaked over a month ago was not planned to be released just so it could coincide with the Jan 6th hearings, especially since this is the 'normal' time that SCOTUS decisions get done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

No, not really. I mean, it has happened but I'm pretty sure that a decision that has been months in the making and also was leaked over a month ago was not planned to be released just so it could coincide with the Jan 6th hearings, especially since this is the 'normal' time that SCOTUS decisions get done. 

Idk, it's tough to say. They did it intentionally on a Friday, that was not random. But my guess is they don't understand Friday News dumps don't work anymore. The five conservative politicians on the SC would certainly be open to helping their side, there's no doubt in that.

Ultimately though I'm not sure it matters either way. I don't think people are paying much attention anymore. I have still yet to see or hear anyone who isn't a political junkie talking about it. Shit, even some people I interact with all the time who do follow politics are tuned out. Everyone knows Trump is guilty, but enough people don't care. 

Let's see if today's events finally woke people the fuck up. If not, the slide to authoritarianism will progress, likely at a slow enough pace for most people to not even notice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Idk, it's tough to say.

It's really not.  Based on the SC calendar and when the hearings were held there was really no way the two wouldn't intersect.  Anyway, as you said, it really doesn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realize that their timing really wasn't about knocking the J6C off the news cycle, it did though.  Would I like to leave the USA?  Yes, do I have the means or the skills?  No.

A few weeks ago, my roommates and I put on a little celebration for our landlady as she had passed her citizen test.  She's from Korea and is a lovely person.  But during our little party, I had in the back of mind that the USA just isn't what it used it used to be and could go down fast.  Made me feel rather sad.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

It's really not.  Based on the SC calendar and when the hearings were held there was really no way the two wouldn't intersect.  Anyway, as you said, it really doesn't matter.

It was always going to happen around this time, true. I was just pointing out dates aren't selected by accident. When an athlete demands a trade, when a studio picks a release, when a piece of legislation gets passed or signed, etc., there's usually some premeditation as to why the date was selected. That's all I was saying and in this instance there could be a few motivating factors to pick today. If they did it yesterday I'd lean towards a birthday gift for Thomas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I was just pointing out dates aren't selected by accident.

Honestly I don't even get the apparent underlying assumption that the hearings and the decision being handed down coinciding - and even "stepping on each other" - is a bad thing.  Most voters do not approve of what happened on January 6.  Most voters do not approve of this decision.  Most of the voters that think one of those two things very likely think the other thing as well. 

Why putting them together temporally is a bad thing needs to be explained to me.  Because my initial thought is that should only help in terms of PR/outreach/mobilization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Why putting them together temporally is a bad thing needs to be explained to me.  Because my initial thought is that should only help in terms of PR/outreach/mobilization.

I believe average Americans are already so overwhelmed by the current political landscape and politics aren't the first thing on most people's minds. They're only going to be focusing on a few things at best and something like overturning Roe basically knocks everything else off of their radar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I believe average Americans are already so overwhelmed by the current political landscape and politics aren't the first thing on most people's minds. They're only going to be focusing on a few things at best and something like overturning Roe basically knocks everything else off of their radar. 

Right but the in terms of mobilizing those who do care - which is really all that matters in elections - putting the two together to emphasize the stakes sounds like a good thing from what I can tell.  Again, somebody is going to need to explain to me why it isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...