ChiGoose
-
Posts
4,256 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ChiGoose
-
-
4 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:
Why did they do that again?
What happened on October 7?3 minutes ago, daz28 said:The Iranian response is wholly excessive. The US is already taking some drones down. In a way, Iran finally sticking their necks out may be a good thing.
I’m not making any judgment on it. I’m just saying that if you destroy a country’s embassy, you better be prepared for retaliation.
Though I will note that doing the retaliation in a way that allows Israel to defend against it (like drones taking hours to get there) could help prevent further escalation
-
-
Israel had to have expected this after destroying Iran’s embassy in Syria.
Hopefully they prepared.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Doc said:
It's less about blame than what you said about 2nd and 3rd order effects. I've always believed people should think first before they act. It's how I live my life. If a person walks through a bad section of town at night and gets mugged/injured/killed, do you blame them for what happened?
I just didn't think the juice was worth the squeeze, seeing as how it reduced the abortion limit by just a week from JCHO's own limit. And it certainly wasn't worth it considering the outcome.
That’s just a long load of nonsense that amounts to: who gives a damn about the constitution? Let states ignore it. -
-
10 hours ago, BillStime said:
You are dreaming if you think none of this connected. Acosta got the job in the Trump administration for a reason. He was also considered for Jeff Sessions replacement for a reason.
Trump had Barr kill Epstein for a reason.
Not only did Trump fly around w Jeff - he hosted parties w Eps at Mar-a-Lago.
Stop being so fkn naive Mr Independente!
Neither Barr nor Trump had Epstein killed.-
1
-
-
It’s almost as if the GOP doesn’t want to solve the border issue because it’s a good issue to run on…
-
27 minutes ago, Doc said:
Slick's a rapist as well. Is it a sign of how desperate the Dems are that they had him campaign for Biden, when ignoring him would have been the best move and made them not look like hypocrites?
It’s a sign of something that I routinely point out here: the average American does not follow politics closely.
To many, the 90’s represent a better and simpler time. Slick Willy was president then, so they associate those feelings with him. It’s wrong, but it is what it is.
Not everyone has had their brain rotted by the internet.
-
1 hour ago, Doc said:
I'm not obtuse. You just don't like the question or that I turned the "2nd and 3rd order effects" back on you.
As for the Gestational Age Act being "unconstitutional," many have argued that Roe was. And the then and current makeup of the SCOTUS was one that could potentially overturn it.
And what I don't get is that, from what I've read, JWHO only performed abortions up until 16 weeks. The GAA wanted to limit it to 15 weeks except for danger to the mother. It wasn't worth it and again I wonder if they had to do it all over again, would they have?
No, man. I get the game you’re trying to play, you’re just very bad at it.
If JWHO didn’t challenge the law, then an unconstitutional law would be in effect. If you want to blame them for the outcome of challenging a blatantly unconstitutional law, then what you’re actually doing is arguing that states should be able to pass unconstitutional laws.
If California passed a law that nobody under 35 had a right to own a gun, the NRA would likely challenge that as unconstitutional. If SCOTUS took the case, and instead of deciding the question asked, proclaimed that nobody who wasn’t a member of a regulated state militia had a personal right to own a gun, would you blame the NRA?
Your line of questioning implies you would, and I think that’s just stupid.
-
19 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:
Aka:
"This is so correct I have no legitimate reply."
Trump was just caught accidentally telling the truth to billionaire donors, that they should donate because he'll help them. His tax plan benefitted them above all.
At least dems want them to pay their fair share.
Lying and mudslinging is all they've got because the truth contradicts them.
What a mess!
-
13 minutes ago, Roundybout said:
“Do more for their own”Like student loan forgiveness, universal healthcare, better public transit…?
Nah, tax breaks for the wealthy that explode the deficit so you can cut education and programs for the poor and working class so you can do more tax breaks for the wealthy which explodes the deficit so you can cut education and programs for the poor and working class so you can do more tax breaks for the wealthy which explodes the deficit...
-
1
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Roundybout said:
See Germany circa 1932-1939
Wonder what books they are burning here:
IYKYK: history doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, Doc said:
So you're saying that even if JWHO hadn't sued Dobbs, SCOTUS still would have overturned Roe?
Dear lord, you’re obtuse.
You do realize that the natural conclusion of your questioning is: let states pass unconstitutional laws and never challenge them because it might get worse, right?
Is that what you’re looking to defend here? Just letting whatever state pass whatever unconstitutional law it wants without any recourse?
-
22 minutes ago, Doc said:
Sorry but Slick's past and present are very on-topic. The Dems would have been better-served not dusting him off but obviously he's still very important to them.
Here’s a fun fact: Bill Clinton sucks and Donald Trump is a rapist. -
Wow. This thread certainly went off topic.
To bring it back to the original topic, here’s a fun and legal thing you can say:
Donald Trump is an adjudicated sexual abuser.
-
11 minutes ago, B-Man said:
Until those kids are born. Then, let them starve and suffer. That’s the GOP way! -
27 minutes ago, Doc said:
The fact remains that they were responsible for RvW being overturned. You know, those 2nd and 3rd order effects were you talking about earlier.
No they weren’t. SCOTUS was. I don’t think overturning Roe was even part of the certified question that SCOTUS was asked to address.
It’s such a weird and illogical way to look at this. Just trying every trick to excuse the people actually responsible because it makes your side look bad.
State passes unconstitutional law
Petitioner: hey! That’s unconstitutional
SCOTUS: we are changing the constitution to allow things way beyond the law we were asked to look at
Internet geniuses: this is the petitioner’s fault.
-
2
-
-
20 minutes ago, Doc said:
You think the JWHO regrets their decision? Or does the political fallout make it worth it?
Can’t blame them here. They challenged a law that directly contradicted the Constitution as held by SCOTUS. SCOTUS then decided to change the rules on them.
Blaming people for challenging problematic laws instead of blaming the people who pass those laws is an interesting way to burden shift.
-
3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:
By whom?
The Arizona Supreme Court says it's a valid law.
So the appeal is to ... the U.S. Supreme Court, which just told us (thank you Trump and your rushed nomination of Amy Coney Barrett) that this is an issue for the states to decide.
Fascinating how the anti-abortion rights people are now all waiting for some court, somewhere to save them from themselves.
They are the dog that caught the car.
Abortion was a good issue for the Right while Roe was in place. Now it’s a weight around their necks.
-
3
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, Pokebball said:
The bill was crafted by a dem, a repub and an independent (who was a dem the year before). It was shoved down the others throats in the 11th hour with very little knowledge of what was in the bill prior to that. Too many found to much in the bill they didn't like so they refused to support it. And I'm talking dems as well.
I'm not going to defend most in DC. Most are sorry excuses for reps that are more interested in partisanship than they are representing those of us across the country.
Biden can strengthen the border with a few strokes of his pen. Schumer can pick up HB2 and start working it. Amend it to his hearts content. Do something. He doesn't because of partisan politics.
Clowns!
Lots of excuses for the GOP here.
Would the bipartisan bill be better than the status quo? Most experts seem to think so.
Is there any chance that HB2, a solely partisan job with no bipartisan input will be signed into law? Nope.
Seems like the Senate bill should have been able to move forward. But that would have made the godking mad, so now the toadies need to bend over backwards to excuse a tremendous GOP self-own.
-
16 minutes ago, Pokebball said:
Dems control the senate though. Dems could have passed it on their own. They didn't need the repubs if all of 'em supported it. I guess we're good calling it a bipartisan refusal to pass it?
So we are left today, where I thought we were. The house passed a border bill that is collecting dust on Schumer's desk. The Senate has done nothing of any value. Nothing the dem senators collectively support. The balls in Schumer's court.
Disagree. The Dems had the GOP craft a border bill that the Dems would never support on its own in exchange for supporting democracy abroad. The GOP reneged and trashed the whole endeavor the second their godking expressed displeasure. That is not the same as one side of the House passing an extreme bill that had zero chance of success.
Back to the topic at hand, the GOP could potentially save themselves from serious problems in November and put the Dems in a really tough spot by bringing a bill to the the House floor that expands access to contraception and healthcare, emphasizes prenatal care, guarantees paid parental leave, and makes healthcare affordable.
Not only would such a bill greatly help reduce elective abortions, but it would provide a much-needed lifeline to GOP candidates.
So why won’t they do it?
-
Just now, daz28 said:
When you're born is when the government begins considering you a person. That's when your "life" begins. Before that, you are a fetus, albeit a human one. You don't have to answer any questions you're afraid to answer, and you're not controlling the discussion.
When you’re born is also when the GOP stops considering you a person.-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Pokebball said:
You have that link to the senate border bill that is sitting on Johnson's desk? If I'm mistaken, I'd like to know.
You’re right. I totally forgot that the Senate GOP scuttled their own bill. They’re even bigger cowards than I usually think of them. -
4 minutes ago, daz28 said:
.
SOOOOO much this, but they claim it's the other side who only thinks with their feelings. LOL Like if there were a biological difference between conservatives and others, it would be the ability to think beyond step 1.
It’s just projection on their part.
Most everything is emotionally tinged on the right because if they came right out and said “we want to take your money and what you work for and give it to millionaires and billionaires,” people wouldn’t vote for it. So they stoke a culture war to scare hard-working Americans into supporting their corporate masters.
-
2
-
Iran attacks Israel
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
It’s rare for them to do something well, so that’s a nice change of pace.