Jump to content

US Politics: Killin' Ya Hard With Hate


Zorral
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Why would a fire alarm open a door?  Seriously?  Who thinks that?  We aren’t sending our best and brightest to the US Congress… are we?

https://x.com/repbowman/status/1708299648782262656?s=46

Have we ever?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Yes

When? Was it during the era of slavery? Or during the McCarthy era? Or more recently with the likes of Ted Cruz and MTG? Great men and women have served, but that doesn't mean we've come anywhere close to sending our best and brightest. 

And that's before we examine how even the best people can be easily bought. 

Edited by Tywin et al.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This needs to recognized—the framing by reactionaries is that they are merely expressing the will of local parents and/or that it’s primarily about  the parents of a local district deciding what material is appropriate for their children.

Like the states right argument for abortion it is a lie, a trick or rhetoric meant to placate moderates.

I also reminded of people just making cross country trips to rant about local election commissions rigging things for democrats. 

Edited by Varysblackfyre321
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Jesus wouldn't vote for any Republicans if he were alive today. It's part of what makes their entire party a sick joke.

 

Eh, I don’t like debating what x religious figure would see as appropriate or good especially one like Jesus where things can be muddied and one’s interpretations on what to do for a religion can be genuine even if destructive.

Though I’ve seen a Christian nationalist just flat out say even if there wasn’t a god he’d still push for a Christian oriented theocracy and a number of people(lot of times fans of Jorden Peterson) just remark on the instrumental use of religion(completely giving up the game of caring for truth)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Eh, I don’t like debating what x religious figure would see as appropriate or good especially one like Jesus where things can be muddied and one’s interpretations on what to do for a religion can be genuine even if destructive.

Though I’ve seen a Christian nationalist just flat out say even if there wasn’t a god he’d still push for a Christian oriented theocracy and a number of people(lot of times fans of Jorden Peterson) just remark on the instrumental use of religion(completely giving up the game of caring for truth)

I do, just like I enjoy mocking Christian fundamentalists who clearly hate the teachings of Christ.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

especially one like Jesus where things can be muddied

 

Some things about Jesus' teachings can be muddied or misinterpreted.

Others very much cannot. 

Condemnation of religious peacocking is a huge and unquestionable part of the gospels, and the Republican party indulges in it all the time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I do, just like I enjoy mocking Christian fundamentalists who clearly hate the teachings of Christ.  

No. They just have a fundamentally different interpretation on what those teaching are.

Matt Diualinity, a  professional atheist debator and radio host was asked if fundamentalist Christian could be moved over by climate activism through some allusions to the idea of god wanting humanity to be Shepards  of the earth. He put forward that a fundamentalist can and often do believe climate change simply isn’t an issue, god will usher in paradise before humans goes extinct and remarked how he’d be disgusted if an atheist tried to utilize what he’d perceived as a misinformed view of Christianity against an actual devout believer.

3 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Some things about Jesus' teachings can be muddied or misinterpreted.

A decent bit.

3 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Others very much cannot. 

Eh.

3 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Condemnation of religious peacocking is a huge and unquestionable part of the gospels

I’m Not a Christian, not even a theist, just a secular humanist wary of attacking people on perceived authenticity towards a religious ideal.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Habemus Senator.

Newsom sends Laphonza Butler to fill Feinstein's seat.

I can see his reasoning.

He kept his promise to appoint a black woman, if he has to fill another seat. And he avoids appointing somebody who is campaigning for the seat, thus trying to keep the appearence of impartiality.

I am sorta curious what happens, if Butler files the paperwork to join the race for the seat permanently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

 I have to put this as an 'unverified rumor of dubious quality,' as the GOP House majority is so slender they need every congress critter they can get. Still...

House GOP members seek to expel Gaetz amid renewed threat to vacate House Speaker McCarthy (yahoo.com)

Probably—but it’s funny to about for the time being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

 I have to put this as an 'unverified rumor of dubious quality,' as the GOP House majority is so slender they need every congress critter they can get. Still...

House GOP members seek to expel Gaetz amid renewed threat to vacate House Speaker McCarthy (yahoo.com)

Not impossible actually, Gaetz is from a deep-red district (R+19) that will elect another Republican, in a state controlled by the Republican party. Ironically, this makes him less safe than if he was in a swing district (this is why George Santos is untouchable), since his removal won't affect the Republican control of the Congress.

Edited by Gorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Habemus Senator.

Newsom sends Laphonza Butler to fill Feinstein's seat.

I can see his reasoning.

He kept his promise to appoint a black woman, if he has to fill another seat. And he avoids appointing somebody who is campaigning for the seat, thus trying to keep the appearence of impartiality.

I am sorta curious what happens, if Butler files the paperwork to join the race for the seat permanently.

Call me ageist, but I would much prefer her over 77-year-old Barbara Lee. Especially since Lee has some landmines in her voting history (particularly her voting against certification of 2000, 2004, and 2016 presidential elections, which is not a good look for a Democrat in 2023).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something, o I dunno, is it insane, stupid or hilarious?

The trial began this morning here on the orange crime family's financial biz frauding.  It's a bench trial, not a jury trial.  Because, get this . . . his attorneys didn't do the thing that lawyers do, which is request a jury trial.

In any case, it's incomprehensible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Something, o I dunno, is it insane, stupid or hilarious?

The trial began this morning here on the orange crime family's financial biz frauding.  It's a bench trial, not a jury trial.  Because, get this . . . his attorneys didn't do the thing that lawyers do, which is request a jury trial.

In any case, it's incomprehensible.

It seems like the natural consequences of constantly abusing bankruptcy proceedings and failing to pay professional service providers completely and on time.

Eventually, you don't get to select professionals from the top drawer, as they won't take your business, knowing that you won't pay for it.  The one guy you definitely need to pay, if you are a dodgy actor, is your counselor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...