What's new

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics


JazzGal

Well-Known Member
Contributor
When left wing rhetoric turns violent. A left wing terrorist hunts down and kills a teen republican.
Very sad.


View attachment 13079
All murder is sad.

Sent from my SM-A426U using JazzFanz mobile app
 


Al-O-Meter

Well-Known Member
if people who know better object, just “eff them”? ... And if noted historians object, “eff them”? ... when medical authorities said “but this is nonsense”, in so many words, regarding false claims and phony cures, then the correct reply should have been “eff them”?
Of course not. People who know better, noted historians, and medical authorities should be encouraged to inform the public. The problem is in the "stamping out" part, the establishment of "gate keepers" given the power to control which opinions are able to be voiced. I'm a big believer in the first amendment even if it gives morons the ability to push destructive untruths like Q Anon, the big lie, or the 1619 Project. If elites want to voice informed opinions and have those opinions amplified, that is fine. If elites want power to quash dissent then eff them.

With the idea that elites should function as gate keepers of opinion, would you support a proposal to only give free speech rights to citizens who can pass an aptitude test that proves they've been though your proposed education? Would you have the government issue speech licenses to stifle challenging opinions voiced by non-elites? In this authoritarian hellscape you claim to not want while at the same time posting piece after piece pushing that direction, how do you propose we eliminate people having wrong opinions?
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
I have been honest. I post with data, articles and logic. Just because you don’t like the debate and quit, doesn’t make it dishonest.
As far as I can tell, I agree that you post in a serious fashion intended discuss and debate with seriousness and accuracy (however much we might disagree on your success rate there ;)). I hope you don't think you are genuinely someone who has done away with passion and perspective in your postings. Not only would that make you inhuman, it would make you less interesting.
 

fishonjazz

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
In regards to the border/immigration issues, trump of course always has the worst and most cruel ideas possible: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...newsntp&cvid=3d904b44da5444049d39f5b0159cb2a9

Miles Taylor, a former DHS chief of staff, is weighing in on the controversy and revealing Trump's take on the situation. Per the news outlet, Taylor recalled how Trump "once took the idea of shipping migrants north to the next level."

Taylor noted that in 2019 Trump instructed officials to transport immigrants to blue cities and states across the country, he also emphasized that the former president had specific instructions.

Speaking about the situation during an appearance on CNN, Taylor elaborated.

“He wanted us to identify the murderers, the rapists, and the criminals and in particular, make sure we did not incarcerate them, and we put them in those cities,” Taylor said during the news broadcast. “It doesn’t take a lawyer or genius to recognize that this would likely be illegal to do.”
 

Bucknutz

Well-Known Member
This is pretty harrowing.


View: https://twitter.com/timodc/status/1572704290766192641?s=46&t=_HGRBVRP1IVlA7YWh3D0fw

I mean, I know Johnny Depp said something a few years ago, AOC triggered someone, paying a few more bucks in gas is annoying, and Democrats don’t have all the answers to every problem, but one entire political party wants to guarantee wins politically AND make any crime legal for their leader to commit.

Wow, very misleading here Thriller. You do know the Senate has the original version of the Electoral Count act and it is co sponsored by a Republican and a Democrat. It also has more than enough Republican support to pass the “Filibuster”.

They knew passing this bill was going no where in the Senate. Why is that?


“A Senate aide close to negotiations on the chamber’s bill said the most fundamental issue between the two pieces of legislation focuses on how lawsuits can be taken up in federal courts.

“This was the hardest issue for the bipartisan Senate group to resolve,” said the aide, who requested anonymity to speak freely about the group’s thinking.

The Senate’s provision uses existing state and federal remedies to resolve election disputes, while the House bill creates four new ways to sue in federal courts, the aide said. “That’s a nonstarter with Senate Republicans.”

4 new ways to sue in the partisan courts. Sounds like a nightmare. You think the Republicans would love to sue using extra options, if a Democrat won? Taking it to a Trump appointed Judge? I do.
 

The Thriller

Well-Known Member
Wow, very misleading here Thriller. You do know the Senate has the original version of the Electoral Count act and it is co sponsored by a Republican and a Democrat. It also has more than enough Republican support to pass the “Filibuster”.

They knew passing this bill was going no where in the Senate. Why is that?


“A Senate aide close to negotiations on the chamber’s bill said the most fundamental issue between the two pieces of legislation focuses on how lawsuits can be taken up in federal courts.

“This was the hardest issue for the bipartisan Senate group to resolve,” said the aide, who requested anonymity to speak freely about the group’s thinking.

The Senate’s provision uses existing state and federal remedies to resolve election disputes, while the House bill creates four new ways to sue in federal courts, the aide said. “That’s a nonstarter with Senate Republicans.”

4 new ways to sue in the partisan courts. Sounds like a nightmare. You think the Republicans would love to sue using extra options, if a Democrat won? Taking it to a Trump appointed Judge? I do.
Tell me you don’t follow politics without telling me you don’t follow politics.

The House and Senate often work on different pieces of legislation that deals with the same issue. That way they can be amended later.

The main issue, which you conveniently left out, is the vast majority of House Republicans voted against this. The majority of Republicans in the Senate will most likely vote against their own version too. True, it’s looking like they’ll have enough votes for the filibuster to not be enacted.

But it’s telling that the majority of Republicans don’t want to amend the ECA to prevent another Jan 6.

Why is that?
 

The Thriller

Well-Known Member
This isn’t going to end well. It’s going to get someone hurt or killed. It’s this kind of rhetoric that inspires shootings like we’ve seen in El Paso, Christ’s Church, Pittsburg, Jan 6, and countless school board meetings.

This kind of rhetoric is just so dangerous.


View: https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1572766051573829632?s=46&t=nTyDGuSTw9zPVSKb-e9AKQ



View: https://twitter.com/esqueer_/status/1572778677443743744?s=46&t=nTyDGuSTw9zPVSKb-e9AKQ



View: https://twitter.com/erininthemorn/status/1572784255058550785?s=46&t=nTyDGuSTw9zPVSKb-e9AKQ
 

fishonjazz

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
This isn’t going to end well. It’s going to get someone hurt or killed. It’s this kind of rhetoric that inspires shootings like we’ve seen in El Paso, Christ’s Church, Pittsburg, Jan 6, and countless school board meetings.

This kind of rhetoric is just so dangerous.


View: https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1572766051573829632?s=46&t=nTyDGuSTw9zPVSKb-e9AKQ



View: https://twitter.com/esqueer_/status/1572778677443743744?s=46&t=nTyDGuSTw9zPVSKb-e9AKQ



View: https://twitter.com/erininthemorn/status/1572784255058550785?s=46&t=nTyDGuSTw9zPVSKb-e9AKQ

Wow. Deplorable
 


Top