fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Rantings of a lunatic
Thread for responding to lies spread by JazzyFresh
- Thread starter One Brow
- Start date
Got it.
You go ahead and pretend to be the idiot.
Like Biden saying "The day after I'm elected, I'll pack the Court with totally political wonks who'll rule my way",.
Well, you don't have "your way" or your ideas any more than Biden does. You're another brick in the wall, so to speak. You think nothing, and everything about you is to prove your usefulness, like any fool ever did, to "The Cause".
So, you have no better explanation for Antifa, you can't refute my speculation with any facts, even facts known to insiders who might actually know where the money comes from, or who the leading organizers are.
You were perhaps the first person in here who pushed Antifa as being a "good" anti-Fascist organization.
I see some commonalities between Antifa and Black Lives Matter. With Black Lives Matter, I believe there is actually Chinese money coming in, from the very intensely coordinated Chinese inner circles, which makes it literally indistinguishable, in herms of ownership, from the ordinary communist Chinese Red Army front.
There are similar, if not so deeply flowing, ties to our mainstream media and the Democrataic Party.. That would make the whole Russia collusion hoax a giant distraction from the main event now subverting American sovereignty in politics.
I don't know what difference that makes, really, considering the way things really work in the New World Order. We had a David Rockefeller say Mao "did a good job." We had a Ford Foundation line of influence running into China, so much so that in Chinese higher echelons, the Buick is the elite preferred sort of limo. We have the Chinese money compromising American National sports leagues to the extent they are now literally pawns in the Chinese push for pre-eminence, aided by institutional American support from Ford and other foundations, and the CFR, whose publications have recently been warning that Trump's negotiations and political positions are dangerous to prosperity..... and peace.
Throughout the Stalin era in Russia we had American financial interests propping up the dictator, even the New York Times doing coverups for Stalin's most brutal and deadly programs, including starving the Ukranians in the 1930s. We also had US business interests from Ford and Rockefeller wings building up Hitler in the 1930s, and all the elite University guru types talking in glowing terms about Germany's progress then.
Putin is sidelined in this current geopolitical strategy, and he is aware of that fact, building connections where he can. I won't be surprised to see China make military advances into Russian territory during a Biden administration. The only thing that would prevent that is Russia buying off Biden with billions of dollars directly into his personal accounts. And that would likely anger Xi.
So, in my opinion, if you elect the Xi/Biden ticket..... and I'm being perfectly serious here...... there will be major new wars breaking out, including a Chinese invasion of Siberia. It could go nuclear.
China is the number one aggressor nation on the planet. We turned a blind eye to Tibet, and now are being perfectly indifferent to concentration camps and the most pervasive human rights violations in history under Xi. And our Dem party is beholden to Xi.
People like you, Gameface, who have such strong enthusiasm for "The Cause", are very comproble to the intelligentsia, the intellectuals, the organizers who set up the Bolshevik Revolution. Once in power, though, Lenin looked over his shoulder, and feared what they could do to him. Lenin chose not to be controlled by these idealists who surely would soon become his critics, and he rounded them all up, and locked them up in the Lubyanka. They were the first wave of the Gulag. They were the first ones to be locked up by the government they created.
This is a fair warning to the whole gang here in JFC. You don't know what you're doing, and you can't control the results. And the results will come down most heavily on you first. Well, once the redneck rubes who idly fantasize about Constitutional government are eliminated.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
What president hasn't tried to pack the court with their lackeys? Name one that hasn't.
Judge appointments don't get classified as R or D. They have known views, but the label is not applied formally.
Here's a list of general appointments crossing party lines:
I think a closer look will in many instances bear out the club rule about the CFR. The CFR has thousands of members, drawn historically until very recently by nomination for their expertise or prominence in some field of leadership. Today, in the bush league units at least, you can just pay the dues and sign up.
I believe some CFR Presidents have nominated CFR judges nominally allegiant to the other party, but such examples really prove your point more accurately than most people could understand.
Pres. Roosevelt (FDR) did the most blatant attempt I have heard of. Even the Democrats' didn't back him.
The formal polite pretension has always been a great show of deceiving everybody, including themselves, that the Supreme Court is a third branch of the Government that will be above the fray in political wrangling and referee both the legislature and Presidency when they need it. Calls balls and strikes on the laws, and fouls and outta bounds on the President.
In our lifetimes the pretense has worn thin with political pressure for the courts to enact laws or declare administrative policies that neither the legislature nor the President really wants to take responsibility for in the public eye.
In this context, the whole idea of representative government has gone by the wayside and we have won a nine-headed dictatorial monster capable of the most insane rulings, expansively documented with incredible stretches on precedents and abstract unfounded declarations presumably with the authority of God.
I have heard some disturbing rulings or opinions handed out by whats-er-name which trend toward statist absolute authority. I don't think Trump's other picks have been very good either.
But still she seems a better choice than an outright ideological progressive, a marxist, or a crude pirate looking for the best price the market will bear.
The idea of a God capable of making final effective judgments trends towards hobbling the worst impulses, and I'm glad we will have one judge with some echo of a conscience.
Overall, the idea of packing the court with simple political activists pushing their cause creates some fear in reasoning folks. And fans the blazes of the intellectually unbalanced political activists whose cause is going to be promoted.
That is a formula for destroying the inertial restraints on governance run amok.
And it won't save the world from overpopulation, climate change environmental ruin, resource depletion, extinction, , or fascism.
Last edited:
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
You ask him to name one president. He answers with a long winded rant lol
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Last edited:
Zombie
Well-Known Member
This is hilarious even by your high standards lmao
Few presidents have actually looked that crass while nominating SCOTUS picks. The Dems today however are really getting it all wrong.
They are violating the basic tenets of the Progressive strategy...... gradualism...... because they are in the mental state of panic. Not a pandemic sort of panic, a peculiar
panic of the sort all liars experience when they are publicly exposed and have no ready response. They really don't know how to deal with this moment in time.
Gradualism is based on the premise that the world is OK as it is, for now. But for good reason we need to move things this-a-way, and because most people aren't going to accept our long-term plan today, we'll make it today's plan, broken into little pieces and just keep adding on. " One step today, maybe another next week. But the world isn't going to end if we don't get it all done right now."
If the long term plan keeps changing along the way, fine. We keep moving on towards better times ahead.
In the kind of panic that the Dems or progressives seem to have now, they think the world will end if they lose this election. The ice caps will melt, the environment will rot, people will die in the streets gassed by CO2..... which indeed would be the result if all our CO2 stores in nature were released at once. People will fry in the heat, the world will burn. Amy Conan Barrett will single-handedly overpopulate the world.
The kind of thinking going on inside Dem heads is pathetic.
The fact is, the "Progressive Era" is at an epoch-end. In the coming years, political activism will founder in a world too complex for that kind of simplification. No intellectual, no elite think tank set, will be able to give us pat answers or simple directions. technology will deliver a kind of complexity that cannot be managed. It will just happen. It will be a future people want, not a future people are forced to accept. Too many choices to control.
No AI system will be able to manage it.
The fact is no President has ever successfully packed the US Supreme Court. A pick or two, when there was an opening. Every pick has been someone who never followed up on what was expected by the President, nor by the confirming Senate. They have been more independent than that, not to say they have not been essentially political hacks of a a superior class, trying to remake the world as they thought it ought to be in some sense.
RBG was not that kind of ideologue. She loved a lot of liberal causes and really wanted things to turn out her way. But she knew she could not expect the next pick to love all those same things, or think the way she did.
When a political party crassly undertakes to pack the courts with a lower class of intellectuals who really are just partisan hacks, the net effect will be the loss of the human rights that grew out of the Magna Carta and the US Constitution, and we will be having government like what China has, forever, dynastic autocracy and no actual human rights, no room for individual success or competition in real markets.
In fact, even if Biden does pack the courts, it is human nature that anybody with power will ultimately exercise it. And likely, Biden will still find himself governed in some sense by whatever number of judges we have trying to demonstrate some independence, giving pushback to the program somehow.
But even so it would be a long way back to having a government fundamentally accountable to the people.
Look at the World Court, or other national courts. A few years ago we had administratively-oriented judges looking across national boundaries for good ways to manage their issues, their cases, the whole mess of stuff on their plates. Even in those more liberal and non-Constitutional courts, even in China, there is a growing sense of resistance to the imperatives of globalism. Courts will continue this and turn more to the side of people rather than their managers, where ever they can. In places like China, it will have to be a non-threatening relaxation of authoritarian imperatives. But it is, and will continue, happening.
The short answer is this.
There have been zero appointments that served the purpose of packing the court. A lot of muted efforts, a few flagrant efforts maybe.
Log is right in the sense that every President ever making an appointment has had some general ideas or purposes he wanted that appointment to serve. But he is wrong that it ever worked in a consistent, long-term service to the President's wish.
However, the kind of thing Dems today are on the verge of doing is really very crass, very transparent, and very very stupid. The Court will have to work hard to regain public credibility. Those packed judges will go crazy trying to look independent after they are packed in.
No reason to panic, really,
Even Amy Conan Barrett will not rule that abortions are violations of human rights intolerable in any State. She will maybe rule that it's not a Federal issue specified in the US Constitution, and likely 50 states will then set up some sort of State law. We will not go back to the coat hangers, sewage-filled alley shops where the deed is unregulated butcher shop horror. Women will find ways. Almost every state will allow it in the first trimester or for medical emergencies, which will mean in practical terms almost any woman can get an abortion somewhere in her own county. The laws locally will reflect some differences but overall the fact is, the laws will come out being what people need, what people want even.
I just don't think people anywhere will make life that damn stupid.
glad to entertain.
Historically that has been somewhat accurate. But that's been one of the main frustrations of the Republican party. They are very upset when their appointments don't vote with their party.
That's been one of the main priorities is to train up judges that will do that and get them appointed. We are just barely seeing that come to fruition with the last two appointments. It's a major swing in things.
Red
Well-Known Member
This is like a Manifesto of the Ignorant.