[News] Post a Political News Story

Ongoing discussion of the political news of the day. This thread is for 'smaller' stories that don't call for their own thread. If a story blows up, please start a new thread for it.

….. f

Just so everyone knows, Maryland has some lovely campgrounds.

OG_slinger wrote:

I we either have to spend generations suffering under their f*cked up version of Gilead until the demographics in their sh*tty square flyover states change enough that our democracy can function again (if they'll even allow that) or we go through another civil war.

They will not allow that. Allowing minorities to have meaningful votes is against the platform.

Mixolyde wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

I we either have to spend generations suffering under their f*cked up version of Gilead until the demographics in their sh*tty square flyover states change enough that our democracy can function again (if they'll even allow that) or we go through another civil war.

They will not allow that. Allowing minorities to have meaningful votes is against the platform.

The fact that rotten boroughs like the Dakotas and Wyoming have a couple dozen senators between them while Los Angeles has as many Americans in it without a senator of its own is a large part of why there will never be positive change in America. The system is held hostage by a bunch of rural prison guards.

Seth wrote:

It sounds like GWJ has made their position - protector of the new status quo - clear. Message received y’all, appreciate the clarification.

Hey Seth, love you bro(genuinely) but f*ck off with that sh*t. They are just people trying to figure out this sh*t too. Don't lash out at them like a prick.

SallyNasty wrote:
Seth wrote:

It sounds like GWJ has made their position - protector of the new status quo - clear. Message received y’all, appreciate the clarification.

Hey Seth, love you bro(genuinely) but f*ck off with that sh*t. They are just people trying to figure out this sh*t too. Don't lash out at them like a prick.

Appreciate the sentiment but I thought it was kind of funny so didn't clock it on the first pass. Our team is a some queer folk, some ND folks, a black woman, and some Canadians (the venn diagram overlaps among the 4 of us), so I'm not exactly sure which "new status quo" would apply to that demographic selection there so just kind of let it ride.

Lot of frustration and anger, and rightly so, aimed in a lot of sideways directions instead of continuing to punch up to the powers that are too old and rich to benefit from their own fascist-friendly policymaking to oppress the most vulnerable in our populations that will be impacted.

There are lots of other things that are protected under the same legal justification that Roe v Wade was:

- Marry a different race
- Marry in prison
- Obtain contraception
- Reside with relatives
- Make decisions about the education of one's child
- to not be sterilized without one's consent
- To, in certain circumstances, not be forced to undergo involuntary surgery, administration of drugs, or other similar procedures
- Engage in private, consensual, sexual acts
- Marry of the same sex

-Privacy

State's rights, state's rights, state's rights.
Why the f*ck do we deify state's rights?
State's right are supposed to protect its citizens against government overreach.
But what it ends up being is justification for immoral righteous fighter breeding grounds. Ones that, block government protections against discrimination, and over rule large population progress with diversity and equity.
And in this case, a state was not only able to oppress its own citizens. It was allowed to remove rights from all citizens in all states.
f*ck State's Rights

Seth wrote:

like does anyone really think they’ll convince Nomad or literally anyone else how putrid and hateful their position is or are we just getting our dunks in on this horrible horrible day

I mean the mods are still pining for civility lol

FWIW, as someone who tends to stay quiet in abortion debates because it's a complicated issue, one I'm not entirely sure how I feel about, and one in which I have little enough personal stake that I'm not sure how valuable my opinion would be to share if I ever formed a strong one, I saw arguments made in response to Nomad that I hadn't seen before and which have given me a lot to think about. Dismissing him as "putrid and hateful" isn't one of those thought-provoking arguments.

There is value in staying civil and refraining from ad hominem attacks, not for the benefit of the person you're arguing against, but for the benefit of those watching from the sidelines. Will you ever convince Nomad? Probably not. Will you convince someone else? Maybe.

In unrelated but also not great news, ”Q” has resumed posting. This is the first time Ron Q has made an appearance since December 2020. Jim Watkins has confirmed it’s authenticity.
I guess Ron Watkins got bored with his congressional run.

Tanglebones wrote:
fangblackbone wrote:

At least it was a 5-4 decision. I guess that is a microscopic silver lining...

Also, doesn't Thomas perjure himself? I know we went back to hear from Barrett, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.
If Thomas also gave the "established precedent" non answer, his written opinion could prove he lied under oath.

6-3, not 5-4

I think some places are reporting it as 5-4 because Roberts concurred with the decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, but against overturning Roe v. Wade, at least in this particular case.

Roberts's opinion is on pages 136-147. While he thinks the original decision on Roe was wrong, he's against overturning it because he believes SCOTUS should decide the cases before it, and not issue broad opinions. "But that is all I would say, out of adherence to a simple yet fundamental principle of judicial restraint: If it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of a case, then it is necessary not to decide more. "

I guess I can respect that he sticks to judicial restraint, but if he's OK with chipping away at Roe case by case until there's nothing left, the final result is the same.

Did he exercise judicial restraint with overturning the NY gun laws?

Good analysis about the institution and how the traditionalists have decided they're kings.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...

This is definitely a "Let them eat cake" scenario.
I really abhor abusive retribution but I cannot calm my desire for "reaping what you sew" for the majority justices. It is hard not to hope each is personally effected by this several times over. Whether it is difficult pregnancies for their wives or daughters, intimate monitoring of their menstrual cycles with detailed reporting of any anomalies or forcing each to adopt 2 young special needs foster children they would seem to get off lightly.

Perhaps we can also ban supreme court justices from prosperity. If you want to be on the supreme court, you have to take a vow of poverty that extends 5 years after you retire from the court. Your family may each only earn minimum wage for that term and acquire zero pension. Or maybe kill two birds with one stone. Justices may only be selected from the public defender's office...

I wholly support the idea that future justice nominees will have an additional litmus test of whether they had any involvement with the terrorist organization the Federalist Society.

FOX is taking the football MTG just threw and running with it, calling the events at the Arizona State Capitol an "insurrection" attempt.

They're going to use that for any/all non-RW protests now, so just be prepared.

fangblackbone wrote:

This is definitely a "Let them eat cake" scenario.
I really abhor abusive retribution but I cannot calm my desire for "reaping what you sew" for the majority justices. It is hard not to hope each is personally effected by this several times over. Whether it is difficult pregnancies for their wives or daughters, intimate monitoring of their menstrual cycles with detailed reporting of any anomalies or forcing each to adopt 2 young special needs foster children they would seem to get off lightly.

I know you are speaking out of anger and frustration, but women are not responsible for the crimes of their fathers, and special needs children are human beings, not karmic punishment. Those are ugly sentiments, and not toward those who deserve it because of their actions.

Prederick wrote:

FOX is taking the football MTG just threw and running with it, calling the events at the Arizona State Capitol an "insurrection" attempt.

They're going to use that for any/all non-RW protests now, so just be prepared.

I assumed this was an inevitable play on the part of right-wingers.

hbi2k wrote:

I know you are speaking out of anger and frustration, but women are not responsible for the crimes of their fathers, and special needs children are human beings, not karmic punishment. Those are ugly sentiments, and not toward those who deserve it because of their actions.

Also, I can't imagine that people who would vote the way they do with such regularity would be the kind of people to treat special needs children with the love and affection they require. It would be more a punishment towards the children than the justices.

You could even say that the punishment, for the children, would be cruel and unusual.

Looks like we have one more SCOTUS decision to worry about on Monday. It's the last day of their session, which means they have to issue their ruling on West Virginia v. EPA.

It's expected the conservative majority is going to severely reign in the EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gases that will likely also open the door to overturning or sharply limiting all federal regulation.

How much are we going to have to donate to the Democrat establishment candidates to save the environment? Twenty bucks?

$5 per person who solicits you per day.
It adds up quickly

A Tik Tok story from Day One in the new Christian Nationalist America where a woman in a trigger law state came in to the hospital with an ectopic pregnancy that had burst. She had to wait *NINE* hours for treatment while bleeding out because the doctor had to consult with a lawyer to figure out how they could save the woman's life without immediately losing their medical license.

There are about 200,000 ectopic pregnancies a year meaning, on average, this scene is going to be repeated in hospitals across America 550 times a day. A lot of women are going to die.

Sadly someone needs to create a pro-life death counter so all those high and mighty religious folks can know exactly how many deaths they are responsible for.

Be sure to include all those pregnancies that have been forced to come to term despite the fetus being "dead" weeks or months prior. It occurs about 1 in 160 and there are 6.36 million pregnancies in the US annually. (over 39K per year)
There are 368K births in TX alone. That equals 2300 still born TX babies annually.

Feature, not a bug, guys.

Sam Jackson knows. f*ck Clarence Thomas.

https://people.com/movies/samuel-l-j...

John Cornyn wants a revisit of Plessy and Brown.

Whitelife I guess.