Biden's Last Gasps
Plus: Venezuelan election follow-up, racial segregation is back (for Kamala), and more...

Biden's SCOTUS proposal: "I have great respect for our institutions and the separation of powers laid out in our Constitution," President Joe Biden said yesterday at an event in Austin, Texas. "But what's happening now is not consistent with that doctrine of separation of powers. Extremism is undermining the public confidence in the court's decisions."
He's right—the chief executive is attempting to curtail the power of a conservative-majority Court, citing recent decisions he disagrees with as the justification—but I think he's only being self-aware by accident.
To bolster the implication that the Supreme Court is illegitimate, or less legitimate than it used to be, Biden started down a laundry list of "extreme opinions" handed down by the Court that "have undermined long-established civil rights principles and protections," like the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson, which overturned Roe v. Wade and returned abortion lawmaking to the states.
"Most recently and most shockingly, the Supreme Court established in Trump v. United States a dangerous precedent," said Biden. "They ruled, as you know, that the president of the United States has immunity for potential crimes he may have committed while in office." Biden's portrayal of the immunity decision removes a lot of nuance, though. The Supreme Court actually "held that a former president enjoys 'absolute' immunity for 'actions within his exclusive constitutional power,' 'presumptive' immunity for other 'official acts,' and no immunity for unofficial acts," writes Reason's Jacob Sullum. Justices disagreed about which conduct might fall into which category, and the Trump case was remanded to a lower court.
(The ruling is "based on the concern that the threat of criminal charges is apt to have a chilling effect on a president's performance of his duties," notes Sullum. But "in weighing the risks of presidential paralysis against the risks of presidential impunity, the ruling raises troubling questions about when and how a former occupant of the White House can be held criminally liable for abusing his powers.")
In his speech yesterday, Biden proposed 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices, an enforceable code of ethics for justices, and a constitutional amendment that would fully strip presidents of immunity for any crimes committed in office. Hemming in the judiciary in such a manner would require congressional approval, which is unlikely to happen.
Note the irony of Biden, who has just now recognized that his 51-year stint in the political limelight is coming to a close, suddenly caring a lot about term limits. For those who may need a refresher: Biden has been experiencing notable cognitive decline for a while, which has been hidden from the public by his inner circle. Following a horrible debate performance at the end of June, Biden claimed for weeks on end that he was still mentally fit to seek the presidency—until nine days ago, when he finally suspended his reelection campaign. Biden is not some man of principle, he's someone oddly seeking to capitalize off of the Supreme Court's crisis of legitimacy—something at least in part created by Democrats repeatedly claiming the Court is corrupt whenever it hands down a decision with which they disagree.
Segregation is back: Not to be outdone by the "white women for Kamala" Zoom organizing call (attendance: 150,000), progressive organizers not technically affiliated with the presumed Democratic nominee's campaign conducted a "White Dudes for Harris" call last night, helmed in part by Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who called the "vibes" of the call "incredible."
"What a variety of whiteness we have here," joked (if you call that a joke) actor Bradley Whitford during the opening remarks. "It's like a rainbow of beige." Actors Jeff Bridges, Mark Hamill, Mark Ruffalo, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt also made appearances.
"Win With Black Women" and "Win With Black Men" calls have also been held by progressive organizers who seek to raise money for Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign. Ditto for other groups—Hispanic women, Native Americans, and queer people, for example.
All of this feels very Pantsuit Nation. Very retrograde, like we're pre–cancel culture movement, pre–Trump election, back before non-academics knew what "wokeness" meant, back before Robin DiAngelo bamboozled human resources departments in consulting firms across the country into giving her gobs of cash to hector people about unpacking their role in white supremacy (at work), back before our long national nightmare of Race2Dinner, before the "funeral procession" at the Javits Center when that glass ceiling wasn't shattered. The fixation on racial "affinity groups" (whatever that means) and calling people out for their "privilege" feels like a stupid trend in American politics not worth reviving—and something that contributed to America's intense political polarization by gender.
Scenes from New York: It does not take all that much for ostensibly progressive Brooklynites to become raging NIMBYs.
WATCH: Brooklyn residents, who overwhelmingly voted to make NYC a sanctuary city, demand migrant shelter be closed amid violence concernspic.twitter.com/DLi7vKIOgP
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) July 28, 2024
QUICK HITS
- "Venezuela's opposition can prove that Edmundo González won Sunday's election, according to María Corina Machado, who led the campaign against President Nicolás Maduro," reports Bloomberg. "She told supporters at her party's campaign headquarters on Monday evening that the opposition has enough of the 'actas,' or voting tabulations to prove they won the election. Last night, they had access to about 40% of them, now they say they have over 70%. The figures show a categoric and 'irreversible' triumph: 6.2 million votes for González compared to 2.8 million for Maduro."
- Related: Some of the most appalling mainstream media dishonesty I've ever seen.
The New York Times concludes that Venezuela was destroyed by "brutal capitalism." Unreal. pic.twitter.com/a7mM46bnPe
— Michael C Moynihan (@mcmoynihan) July 29, 2024
- "The dominance of cars has turned children's play into work for parents, who are left coordinating and supervising their children's time and ferrying kids to playgrounds and play dates," writes Stephanie Murray in The Atlantic. "But it has also deprived adults of something more profound."
- North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper says he doesn't want to be considered by Kamala Harris to run on her ticket as vice president. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz is looking increasingly likely.
- The only person convicted in relation to their role in the My Lai Massacre is now dead, at 80.
- Absolutely bizarre supercut about how Republicans, Sen. J.D. Vance (R–Ohio) especially, are "weird."
- The best thing on the internet today, courtesy of Mary Katharine Ham.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Crazy joe wants 18 year terms for Supreme Court judges, but:
As of June 2022, there have been 116 Justices. What is the average length of a Justice’s tenure? The average number of years that Justices have served is 16.
No improvement found.
Extremism!!! It must be stopped!!!
Stop with the facts and get with the narratives.
What about term limits based on skin color?
We all know why Biden's handlers are proposing this, but does this hold for appointees in the last 60 years? Seems like they get appointed and then stay on longer than that. I mean, fuck, Stevens was appointed by Ford and left 35 years later.
I bet Biden supported Congressional term limits.
I have great respect for our institutions and the separation of powers laid out in our Constitution...
BUT
We all know a certain poster who agrees Joe recognizes the constitution.
Joe doesn't recognize most of his family any more.
Leftists aren't people
https://x.com/RubinReport/status/1818083579445866884?t=PhJmblzEUZvaHPhm1tFCdw&s=19
Supercut of NPC’s being programmed to say “weird.”
[Video]
Those are fascists. The word "leftist" lost its meaning the same time "right-wing" did. We need to call out those people for what they are, a pack of little Keynesian politruks parroting shitty agitprop.
But on the plus side, I think this will backfire on them, because they are the only people on the planet who think Vance is "weird" compared to them. They've spent the last forty years trying to make people think that "weird" is a good thing, only to turn around and use it as a slur?
Not their best and brightest.
You're still beholden to leftist morality.
Shame
How so, Nardz.
The left was never a thing. There are just authoritarians and libertarians and most people fall somewhere in-between.
Keep firing backwards though. Your real enemies are the people on your own side who don't always agree with the solutions you favor 100% of the time.
The left was never a thing.
I am sure Monsieur Robespierre would disagree with you.
The left is the angry mob that burns down an immigrants' business to protest the situation at the border and kicks people in the head to protest police brutality. The left is segregating kids to teach them tolerance and exposing them to sex to teach them about gender roles. The left is the proverbial idiot masses weaponized to destabilize the state in preparation for revolution.
Don't fool yourself. There are authoritarians and there are those who would gleefully see millions starve and millions more in prison camps just to bring everyone down to their level of incompetence.
The vast majority of Americans are kulaks.
https://x.com/Nick_Jay_D/status/1818087660138963030
That's weird...
Ya, right.
Everyone else in the world, from CEO to janitor, has to worry about the chilling effect of criminal consequences on performing their duties. Why should heads of state be immune from this chilling effect?
Perhaps it's a clue that the President has too much power.
"Perhaps it’s a clue that the President has too much power."
Only republican presidents.
Especially ones named Trump.
CEO’s and janitors don’t normally have people sent into war.
Maybe Presidents shouldn't do that either.
"Sent" implies involuntary. Are you a conscriptionist, a slaver? Do you favor aggressive wars, as opposed to self-defense?
I’m not in favor of wars at all.
It is what it is.
Then you want no changes?
What do you want?
Should the Prez have that power? How much power should the Prez have? How much does he have? How much power does his staff have?
All of government has too much power. Way too much.
That's exactly my point. Government will have its appropriate level of power when the President, and all politicians, face the exact same chilling effects of criminal prosecution as everyone else in the country.
Where are the prosecutions happening both ways?
On one side you have to have gold bars in a closet. On the other you have to list a legal expense as a legal expense.
Voluntary members of the military still get sent places whether they like it or not. That's kind of the deal, isn't it? I think presidents should do a lot less of that, but it is a constitutional power (at least once congress has declared war).
And is it unlimited, even by current standards? Would a President who sent troops into, say, Russia or China or North Korea or Iran, be immune?
And there are a ton of non-military powers which matter too. Why should the President be immune to the chilling effects of criminal consequences for trying to shift $400 billion of debt from rich students to taxpayers? If the CEO of Bank of America tried to shift loan balances from borrowers to depositers, would he be immune to the chilling effect of worrying about criminal consequences?
The President should not be immune to any criminal consequences, any more than anyone from CEO to janitor should be.
Impeachment is the correct response, and Republicans are too much controlled opposition to use it.
Plus they get rich off war too.
No it fucking isn't. Everyone else has real criminal consequences at stake. Why should one single person be immune to criminal consequences?
Criminal consequences can occur after impeachment...
Thats literally the process.
Under our current constitutional republic it is.
If you are so happy with our current system, why are you posting unhappy comments here?
If, in fact, you are unhappy with our current system, why are you unhappy with me being unhappy with our current system?
Nobody disagreed with anything you posted. You're arguing with yourself. Calm down.
I'm not sure what those criminal consequences would be. I don't know of any laws that would apply. The constitutional recourse available is impeachment, or being voted out of office.
I'm not saying this is ideal, but I think that's how the constitution is set up. There would be separation of powers issues if congress tried to make criminal law that applied to the president like that. Congress's check on executive power consists of impeachment and funding and deciding when we are at war. I'd say the real problem is that separation of powers is broken.
If I were happy with the current state of affairs and constitution and interpretation, I wouldn't be here bitching. Everyone else here bitching has some measure of disgust with the current situation.
Your faith in government integrity is astounding
What faith? When have I ever shown any faith in any government?
You're out here crying that the opposition and career bureaucrats can't lock up the president...
Plenty of disgust, yes. But just making the president not immune in our country under our current circumstances would make most of what I’m disgusted about worse.
I got plenty of disgust. I'm just not sure what would make it better. Less power for government in general, yeah. But how do we get there?
President also does have a small time frame without congress.
So after watching the BS impeachments and the weaponization of law with novel interpretations, your thought is that it's all fine. Maybe try starting off in reality before insisting on your fantasies.
Maybe you could control my fantasies a bit better if you wrote comprehensible sentences. Try a little punctuation, some better words.
Or even respond to the question of why the Prez has so much power and why that is justified.
His statement was perfectly clear.
He is calling out the ignoring of current reality to pretend we are in an ideal state. It is a huge problem with libertarians in general.
It would be like designing an airplane with no winds, turbulence, and perfect atmospheric assumptions. No mechanical failures. Etc.
Right, so every other person in this country somehow manages to operate with the constant daily chilling effect of criminal prosecution, yet the President is so special that he needs special immunity.
Why don't we just skip the facade and go straight to absolute power?
And damn straight I don't like the "current reality." That's the whole point of politics, of being a human being. The Industrial Revolution was a direct consequence of being unsatisfied with the current reality.
If you are satisfied with the current reality, what the hell are you bitching in these comments for?
How many of these imaginary people have had DAs run campaigns to target them? Have threats of 800M in fees for banks who want to do business with them? Have dem activists screaming rape to try to send them to jail?
So you are either stupid or dishonest, maybe both here. So the corporate shield isn't something you recognize. Executives and employees acting within their job are generally non-liable for those actions with rare exceptions, why should the President have a lower standard?
Your argument is basically that any disagreement in policy can be treated as a criminal act. Should cash bail activists be held responsible as part of a criminal conspiracy or even just brought up on charges or suits for their votes? That ultimately is what you're demanding.
For example Boeing just got out of a criminal charge by agreeing to pay a fine for their criminal actions.
Yeah -- because the GOVERNMENT stuck its nose into it.
That's not justice. It's government.
Stop using government actions to pillory businesses which would not be immune to their victims if government didn't intrude.
The justice system is necessarily government.
Unless you're out here asking for vigilante retribution, you're asking government to intervene.
And to pile on, at some critical mass the vigilante mob becomes the new de facto government.
Upholding one portion of government, prosecutors, over elected officials makes the situation worse, not better.
It is more the open political lawfare to go after opponents as we have clearly seen. When politicians will run and campaign on locking their opponents up, a certain protection is needed. And you can't rely on the slowness of the courts to eventually get it right.
US v McDonnell is a perfect example of this issue. Jack Smith used the same form of lawfare to target him. McDonnell was forced to resign and was essentially bankrupted to have the USSC rule the prosecution was invalid a number of years later.
The proper method to hold presidents accountable already exists in the constitution and requires impeachment.
Which is exactly my point. All this lawfare works precisely because the President has too much power, so do all levels of government.
Trump wasn't charged due to his powers. He has been charged with false novel interpretation of the law. Only the classified documents case is remotely in the realm of what you're talking about.
They would go after him with or without the power.
They go after him and their enemies to get a foot in the door to further expand their power.
Giving political activist local DAs the power to undo elections with threats is not better than executive power.
But the problem isn't that the president has too much power- it is that the government in general has too many laws, and it is impossible to avoid falling afoul of those laws. Whether you are a CEO, President, or Joe the Plumber, we have reached a point where if you become inconvenient enough to enough people, they can "find the crime".
Now there is merit to asking why the President should get special treatment here, instead of everyone in the country. I liken this to a crisis decision. Until we roll back the scope and power of this legislative/prosecutorial retaliation, we have to save somebody. The president is going to be a key person in that roll back, so I can see the argument to prioritize his protection first (just as we totally protect him with the SS).
Is it even special treatment?
Congress, judges, prosecutors, and even your standard gov employee has some form of immunity.
The outlier case we are being asked to do is exclude the president from any and all immunity.
I think it is more a clue that the government has criminalized everything. 3 felonies a day and all that.
I have been trying to cut back to one.
Have you tried vaping your felonies?
Everyone else in the world, from CEO to janitor, has to worry about the chilling effect of criminal consequences on performing their duties. Why should heads of state be immune from this chilling effect?
First off, I agree with you 100%
What I’m curious about is how much wiggle room there is in the interpretation of this ruling. For example, if the president accepts a bribe to appoint an official, courts have found that although the appointment is an official act, accepting the bribe is not and therefore remains criminal.
In the example argued above, sending troops to war without a declaration of war by congress, it is conceivable that could be found not to be official. Obviously this not going to happen any time soon though.
I have no doubt the common hyperbole of having soldiers kill a political target would be found unofficial.
Your example of the president “trying to shift $400 billion of debt from rich students to taxpayers” wouldn’t be prosecuted with or without this ruling in the current political climate.
Still, I agree this shouldn’t even be open for interpretation.
Because Sullum is being less than complete in the concern. In an age of trumped up (pun unintended) charges as a means of political competition, the absence of immunity would mean a breakdown into all out political warfare. When you can craft law after the fact to make something criminal because it was related to some unproven or even specified crime, there's nothing to stop the arrest of even a fully good-faith, law-abiding actor. Add to that, when the consequence of losing an election is imprisonment, you make the ruthless retention of power an imperative, even for the genuinely innocent.
That was well said.
...but I think he's only being self-aware by accident.
Was this event between the hours of 10AM and 4PM?
Fact check: There is no difference in Joe Biden's mental capacity between 10AM & 4PM, and the rest of the day.
Vox (June, 2024): Liar!
Vox (July, 2024): Kamala!
Vox (always): Wrong!
Biden has nothing to do with this, and honest people should stop pretending he does.
You need the dishonest ones to stop too if you intend to include the media.
I have no realistic hope that most media will ever be honest, it’s their job not to be. I have higher expectations of Liz.
Not me. She's the tallest midget at Reason. Huzzah.
Time once again to refer to the great philosopher Kris Kristofferson:
It's time for truth the barker said and poured his self a beer
Oh yeah forsooth said Ben the Geek but who'll be left to hear
They've driven off the fools and saints and now they've stole the show
It's all a bloody circus mates and clowns are in control
If that's the truth said Marzipan the Midget from the floor
I know there won't be no demand for Midgets anymore
We used to be a novelty by simply being small
But next to them unholy men now Tiny Tim looks tall
And it's harder to matter at all when it's all comin' down (and it's all comin' down)
You've still got your duty to choose how you live or you die (that's just the way it is)
So many warnings to turn this old rascal around
We better heed 'em while we got the freedom to try
(Slouching Toward the Millennium)
Segregation is back:
Skin color is the most important thing.
ya, aint no "back"
Its literally been 90% of their playbook for the last 8 years. "Let us control the things or you hate black people"
Last 16 years. Obama brought it back and the DNC ran with it.
Last 60 years. LBJ built the foundation of economic and political dependency.
All Dems. How about that!
buT tHE ParTiES SwitChED!
Nah. Democrats have been telling darkies what to do since 1827.
May 21, 1827, written right into their bylaws.
Eh, like I've mentioned before, it really stems from the mainstreaming of "whiteness" and "privilege" shibboleths from academia into the mainstream over the last 20-some years. Up until that point, the goal had been for a relatively "color-blind" society where everyone had the same opportunities, and if someone didn't like you for whatever reason you'd just go kick it with someone else.
There was actually a pretty small window there in the late 90s where the culture seemed to have finally gone in that direction, and when you read transcripts of Obama's old speeches, he's echoing those same themes. The problem is that the left found those shibboleths I listed to be very effective in manipulating their political enemies right around the same time, and they became part of their standard vocabulary during his election and then the Occupy protests. The Floyd riots were just a logical result of that same poisonous ideology becoming mainstream.
Until you go after the source of the problem, which is academia, you're really just playing defense and being reactionary. That institution has been the root of the problem for about 35 years or more due to the class's utter obsession with intellectual fashion and marxist utopianism.
"mainstreaming of “whiteness” and “privilege” shibboleths from academia into the mainstream over the last 20-some years. Up until that point, the goal had been for a relatively “color-blind” society"
The shift from equality to equity is a power grab by those that have taken the reigns, culturally.
They got equality. Not only is the CRA a thing, but if there was even a hint that you didn't hire someone because they are a POC, you would be publicly tarred and feathered.
Now that they got equality and see that they have the mob at their backs, its about revenge. Its about, now that there is an even playing field...how do I now tilt it in MY favor. How can I game the system against people who I dont like and call it "fairness".
Now that they got equality and see that they have the mob at their backs, its about revenge. Its about, now that there is an even playing field…how do I now tilt it in MY favor. How can I game the system against people who I dont like and call it “fairness”.
The "anti-racist" activists like DiAngelo and Kendi are quite explicit about the fact that their ideology requires systemic discrimination against white people. They don't try to hide it at all. And you look at academia and the mass media, including Hollywood, those are already being put into practice. It's not an accident that 14% of the population appears in 99% of the advertising since the Floyd riots.
Ive mentioned on here before, that one black girl media company that was openly bragging on a public stream/video that "ya, we dont hire white people at all, they make people uncomfortable"
That statement is an automatic lawsuit, and they felt very comfortable and proud to shout it from the rooftop.
Its about revenge
I always find it odd how woke leftists will try to redefine racism as "power plus prejudice" and then exempt everyone who's not white from that label, as only white people have "institutional power."
What else other than POWER would you call being able to so brazenly violate the CRA and brag about not hiring white people?
"redefine racism as “power plus prejudice” and then exempt everyone who’s not white from that label,"
And that is absolutely the entire point of that reframing, its just standard academia "whites bad" tactic. The quick hack against this tactic is simply asking them if you took any middle class US white man (that would of course qualify as being part of white supremacy and systemic racism, also the patriarchy) and dropped them off in Africa or China, and they had some complaints about the African people (who hold all the power, esp compaired to the random white traveler) or the Chinese, would it be racist? How can it be after all, this person is completely powerless in these countries.
Usually a dance ensues involving some sort of triple axle of mental gymnastics to land on "...yes, somehow the white man is still racist" despite absolutely following along with the rules they just prescribed 5 seconds ago with a Euro/America-centric lense.
I do think some progressives are motivated by the urge to "do something", and can't accept that many of these issues have been solved to the 98% level. And so they inflate that 2% into an existential crisis, and feel righteous.
As many people have pointed out, leftist 'woke' and 'anti-racist' ideology is a defacto religion at this point. One where pointing out and berating the sins of others earns you FAR more social capital than reflecting on your own.
They're marxists. And as marxists, that means they're hyper-materialists who believe that you absolutely cannot ever stop working to bring the communist utopia to fruition. They don't give a shit about the 98%, the fact that 2% still exists is an offense to their religion. That's why these fucks are always going on about "we've come so far, but still have so far to go."
Xeno's paradox of race relations?
Pretty much. Having a religious ideology that believes in perpetual revolution is ultimately going to result in a self-defeating cycle because True Marxism is always somewhere over the rainbow. Even Freire admitted that marxist society is anarchic at its core because marxists always view any sort of status quo, whatever it is, as a fundamentally oppressive construct that has to be dismantled. The "new normal" is always the status quo that has to be overthrown.
This is ultimately why marxist historic determinism is so stupid, because even if they "win," nothing they've won can be sustained and passed on, and the whole project either falls apart or evolves into something that can actually be perpetuated, which isn't anything like the communist utopia the "dreamers of dreams" envisioned.
That's what happens when you get someone who believes that heaven can be created on earth. Just because Marx was influential doesn't mean he wasn't a short-sighted, delusional idiot.
The situation is not too badly summed up by a demotivator poster. It is not an exact fit, but I think it captures the spirit in some cases.
Consulting
If you're not a part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem.
https://despair.com/products/consulting
There are some funny posters there.
Similarly, gay rights was once about supporting the same rights for more people, but then escalated into demands that we officially celebrate the freak show end members. It was one thing to allow some LBGTQ group to march in parades, but another to accept their porn show floats.
I do agree about the core infestation in academia. Crazy revolutionaries will always exist, but universities give them gravitas--and cover--that they would not otherwise have.
demands that we officially celebrate the freak show end members.
I had a sudden vision of Napoleon wearing a Pride flag like a cape teaching the sheep to bleat, "Two dicks good. One dick baaaad!" Which would make for a hilarious modern musical adaptation of Animal Farm
During the finale, the sheep would dance in front of a Trans flag and the rams would bleat "No dick good." Then the ewes would chime in, "No dick baaad!"
This happened because the Marxists realized that their Economic-Class warfare wasn't working in the US. American history is replete with rags-to-riches stories, and so the model of the bourgeoisie and proletariate being at war just did not find purchase here.
But the racial divides were easy to exploit, and so the marxist theories coalesced around that.
One of the most effective mechanisms of any power-structure theology is the creation of tribes. It has been done in religions, and governments and cults and in secular marxism. It is all a way for people to abdicate the responsibility for their actions, gain privilege just for membership, and find scapegoats for everything else.
McCarthy was right. The Marxists must be exterminated.
Race baiting and poverty pimping are cornerstones of the Democrat party. Always have been. The real question is, when are we going to get rid of the democrat party?
It’s got to go.
https://x.com/AuronMacintyre/status/1818294228348190925?t=qS9hIF6CqkDOqja9Jtp5-A&s=19
Never ever give in to moral blackmail from these people
They lie, they scream at you for noticing that they lie, and then once they have finally shamed everyone into silence they finally admit what you knew all along and demand that you celebrate it
"@HuffPostPol
Opinion: Kamala Harris Would Be A DEI President — And That's A Good Thing For America"
[Link]
"WATCH: Brooklyn residents, who overwhelmingly voted to make NYC a sanctuary city, demand migrant shelter be closed amid violence concerns"
That can't be right.
Fiona told us Martha's Vineyard proved blue areas always practice what they preach on immigration.
They must have slacked in providing pizza.
NYC pizza sucks.
I see you haven’t been to Chicago.
Detroit style or GTFO.
I concur.
Stay in the suburbs. That garbage they serve in the city is for tourists.
NYC pizza sucks.
Them's fightin' words!
Although being from NEPA, I'd also take the gloves off for Old Forge style.
Fuck 'em. You get what you vote for. They need to embrace the consequences.
Yep.
But jeffsarc keeps saying there are no consequences.
Whats funny is that Germany is a few years ahead of us and has seen such a spike in both welfare payments and crimes committed by illegal immigrants or illegal immigrants who were granted amnesty/citizenship. Nearly accounting for half of both.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/north-african-crime-rate-explodes-germany
Yet it's the far right who are causing all the trouble and must be banned.
You get what you vote for.
I don't. Do you?
I (almost) never have.
I did reluctantly and strategically vote for Trump over Johnson/Weld and Jorgenson/whoever for reasons I've stated here many times.
Other than that, I can't think of a significant candidate I voted for who won (e.g., I've voted for Republicans for school board or dogcatcher over Democrats, but couldn't begin to tell you who they were or whether they won or not.)
but...but...but...
THEY GAVE THEM A PIZZA PARTY THEREFORE REPUBLICANS GOT PWNED!!!
- Jeff
“It does not take all that much…..”
Lol. Yeah, actually I think it took a lot…
“Why you be trippin’ bro?” Oh, no reason. Lol.
"It's like a rainbow of beige."
He's not talking about their skin color.
That sounds like a description of skid marks.
Actors Jeff Bridges, Mark Hamill, Mark Ruffalo, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt also made appearances.
Yup, skid marks.
Who are the people that Jeff follows on X for 200 Alex.
They're skid Marxists.
+1
Beautiful! That turn of phrase needs to catch fire.
Nice
Ill be borrowing that, a lot.
Speaking of weird, this is as weird as it gets.
Brooklyn residents, who overwhelmingly voted to make NYC a sanctuary city, demand migrant shelter be closed amid violence concerns...
Brooklyn sowing: Haha fuck yeah!!! Yes!!
Brooklyn reaping: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck
#resist
I really dont understand the screams coming out of the sanctuary cities. Could it be that my ears just arent adapted to screams of joy and excitement for the economic boom with no downsides that I was promised would come? I guess red state ears cant interpret such screams
They are mostly mad that all the new food trucks are taking up all the parking spots.
Hey, actual consequences are white patriarchal oppression.
Venezuela's opposition can prove that Edmundo González won Sunday's election...
I WILL NOT HEAR IT.
No widespread fraud.
Conspiracy theory.
I look forward to Matt Welch’s immediate condemnation of these claims.
But do they have standing?
No, it’s a latches problem. Their election challenge was not timely so there’s nothing to be done now.
Yeah, all this shit will likely end up getting fixed in the street. Elections and the courts are failing us. Hell, the democrats even set Trump up to get murdered. If another is attempt is made, and successful. It will be time to go hot.
No more democrats.
Saw a nice little throwback video when I was looking into some stuff about the corrupt DNC (I know, redundant) activities in the 16 election to tip the scales for Hillary.
This one lefty outfit had a poll up at the time (I think 2018) and it had some smaller number believing the DNC fucked up, but the more notable fun side note was that some mass majority >75% of dems were certain Russia absolutely stole the election.
And that's just a testament to how great they cleaned things up, because we were able to go from a clear cut stolen election, to the cleanest election in history in just 2 years! Bless our overlords
I hope they don't storm the capitol or do some other traitorous stuff.
If there is even a whiff of boots on a desk, we should send in Seal Team 6 to just clean house over there.
Edmundo Gonzalez is stealing the election!
How do you say "insurrection" in Spanish?
Google Translate says insurrección or rebelión. But don't think it's always that easy to translate from or to Spanish - Embarazada does not mean "embarassed"!
THE BIG LIE!
"Hemming in the judiciary in such a manner would require congressional approval, which is unlikely to happen."
It would require a constitutional amendment, would it not? 2/3 of each house plus 3/4 of all states is a slightly higher bar than 'congressional approval'.
Yes, an amendment is required. Whatever Biden does would be overturned by the SCOTUS and the extremism cycle continues.
This is probably the whole point.
This can’t be… No less a mind than sarcasmic himself told us that the Biden administration follows/respects/recognizes the constitution.
(I can’t remember which one sarc said, but if you don’t use the right one, he will call you a liar)
sarcasmic 12 months ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Why wouldn’t there be? Despite all his faults, at least Biden recognizes the Constitution. Can’t say the same about Trump.
Yeah but, even by posting his exact words, you're still a liar.
"Recognizing" is not the same as "honoring". I recognize sarspasstic's posts, but my reaction has nothing to do with respect.
His entire argument revolves around Joe recognizing and respecting the constitution but sometimes acts badly with good intentions like student loans. Then he rages at Trump for saying his power to fire political appointees is not bounded.
The political firing statement is literally the one he constantly brings up to prove Trump acts unconstitutionally.
Leftist legal scholars are claiming they can do it through statute due to the good Behavior language in article 3.
The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Good Behaviour = Agreeing with whatever unhinged Progressives demand this week
There's impeachment, if that's the case. So let them try.
Since when have leftists cared about the constitution?
I think technically, scotus could reinterpret the "office" thing penumbra and emanation style if congress passed a law.
Otherwise, yes.
He's a single man. You can use real pronouns.
"I have great respect for our institutions and the separation of powers laid out in our Constitution," President Joe Biden said yesterday at an event in Austin, Texas. "But what's happening now is not consistent with that doctrine of separation of powers. Extremism is undermining the public confidence in the court's decisions."
Translation: We want what we want, and we want it now. And since we hold the executive branch we want any constraints removed. And since the SC is the biggest constraint, we want them neutered.
Damn. Disappointed in Jeff Bridges. Another one of my favorite actors bite the dust.
That's the wrong outlook. The right interpretation is that he is showing he can act in any role his employers want. He's a Great Actor!
Or he has ties to Epstein.
Ooooh, ties! You're going old school.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I can no longer abide The Dude.
The New York Times concludes that Venezuela was destroyed by "brutal capitalism."
BREAKING NEWS: New York Times Employees Economically Illiterate
Trying to spin boilerplate socialism as "brutal capitalism". Naked Marxist apologetics. The NYT is without question the spiritual successor to the Pravda. Uncle Joe would be proud.
Uncle Joe IS proud. Oh, you mean the other Uncle Joe.
More like NYT employees indoctrinated Marxists. And also illiterate.
'Biden's portrayal of the immunity decision removes a lot of nuance, though.'
"Democracy" dies in nuance. Only simplistic extremism sells papers and votes.
Segregation is back
I keep trying to tell y'all that integration was a mistake.
But Star Trek and all those beer commercials!
1969 Star Trek episode:
Abraham Lincoln: “What a charming Negress. Oh, forgive me my dear. I know that in my time, some use that term as a description of property.”
Uhura: “But why should I object to that term, sir? You see, in our time, we’ve learned not to fear words.”
Modern day leftist: “Micro-aggessor! Racist! Don’t call me dear! You used the N-word! Words are violence! And how do you know I identify as a woman?”
So is this two more of you dropping the facade?
The dominance of cars has turned children's play into work for parents...
More like the dominance of helicopters.
Parents are victims of cars?
Do they let the kids drive?
In west Virginia.
The dominance of fear...
Somehow, in the 70s and 80s, we managed to have kids play with each other in the neighborhood without the need to be ferried everywhere. I think the Atlantic (as usual) got it half-ass backwards.
Right turn on red (starting in the late 70’s) eliminated drivers even briefly stopping at a busier intersection or looking at the possible pedestrian/bike (right). Instead they looked left at possible cars so they could turn without stopping. It increased ped crashes by 60% – bikes by 100%. That info was from insurance companies.
Once the millennial boomlet started – domestic car makers phased out the station wagon as family car and instead started producing the minivan and later the SUV (worse visibility, bigger chassis, higher fatality/injury rate for anyone outside the vehicle) starting in 1983.
The combo – plus the stranger danger panic of the mid-80’s and just the sheer number of millennials compared to Genx meant mothers got all helicoptery and turned into chauffeurs instead of letting their kids walk/play outside.
Don't forget, SUVs came on the scene in part due to the government's CAFE mileage standards which forced cars to become too small to be practical, and exempted trucks and larger vehicles.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz is looking increasingly likely.
They're passing over a gay man for a cis white male? IS THIS WHAT THE EXCLUSIVE WHITE DUDES FOR KAMALA WAS SECRETLY DECIDING?
They've had 2-3 people outright reject being her VP because they know that is the end of their political career and more chaos than it's worth. The powerbrokers of the DNC are going to have to offer a huge retirement package for anyone to take that spotm
Tim Waltz is the governor who gave the Muslim Food Charity millions of taxpayers dollars and awards without ever verifying they actually provided food. Then the charity tried to bribe a member of the jury.
Appadently Penn Governor Shapiro was removed from the list because he was Jewish.
KKKamala...
Reposting...
Skin color is the most important thing.
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1816438336409444473
A glimpse of how the Harris campaign sees the voters. VP choice is focusing on several white male candidates. Source ‘familiar with the campaign’s thinking’ says: ‘Let’s just face it. There’s a lot of sexist, racist white dudes out there in America who don’t like Trump, but just need a little extra validation.’
Well, it would be totes embarrassing if Harris doesn't do at least as well as Mondale, and the DC vote is in the bag.
'The fixation on racial "affinity groups" (whatever that means) and calling people out for their "privilege" feels like a stupid trend in American politics not worth reviving—and something that contributed to America's intense political polarization by gender.'
But when your only tool is shouting "Racist!" (including gender as race), then every problem, and solution, is racism. Oh, and a dash of authoritarian socialism, as always.
Hey now. Sarc has more tools. He also screams homophobe, xenophobe, and cultist.
Those are just variations on Racist!
They really just need to distill it down to wrong-thinker, or heretic. Its all just a different flavor of the same shit.
Humans. Stoning heretics and other undesirables, since 100,000 BC.
"But when your only tool is shouting “Racist!” (including gender as race), then every problem, and solution, is racism."
This is the one line elevator pitch for Critical Race Theory, and exactly how it works in practice.
Absolutely bizarre supercut about how Republicans, Sen. J.D. Vance (R–Ohio) especially, are "weird."
Marching orders had been dispatched.
WHAT DO YOU WANT THEM TO DO? NOT MARCH???
An all time classic:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ksb3KD6DfSI&pp=ygUjUmVwb3J0ZXJzIGFsbCBzYXlpbmcgdGhlIHNhbWUgdGhpbmc%3D
Aside from it immediately going from what could have been an attack avenue to looking like a pretty obvious focus group --> CNN/Wapo/DNC/MSNBC talking point, its going to be hard for them to get this to stick for anyone that wasn't voting for them.
Anyone independent over the age of 40 in PA, GA, AZ, NV, OH is going to think the party of drag queen story hour and transing the kids is a lot more weird than "diet mountain dew?!?! NERDDD!!!!"
In all fairness, the democrats do think not killing babies is weird.
In all fairness, the democrats do think individual freedom is weird.
In all fairness, the democrats do think parents raising their own kids is weird.
In all fairness, the democrats do think following the constitution is weird.
In all fairness, the democrats do think reducing taxes is weird.
In all fairness, the democrats do think reducing regulations is weird.
In all fairness, the democrats do think letting people decide what to buy (cars, dishwashers, shower heads, etc) is weird.
Such gravitas.
The New York Times concludes that Venezuela was destroyed by “brutal capitalism.”
"All the news that's fit to print!"
All the "news" that fits the narrative.
And if it doesn't fit we'll pound it into mush until it does.
I do have a positive observation for the editorial staff at the NYT in 2024. Nobody is going to wipe their ass with their phone.
“But what’s happening now is not consistent with that doctrine of separation of powers. Extremism is undermining the public confidence in the court’s decisions.”
What constitutes “extremism”? What Biden is largely complaining about are decisions that have restored lawmaking authority back to Congress from the usurpations of the executive bureaucracies. It has been a restoration of a proper constitutionally consistent separation of powers. It is Biden that arguing for the executive branch have greater authority unchecked by the legislative and judicial branches. He is arguing for executive dictatorship where all real decisions are made, with Congress reduced to a rubber stamp. At the same time, he is put out by the court blocking the Democrats's ability to criminalize political differences with their enemies.
What constitutes “extremism”?
Anything the left doesn't like. It isn't that difficult.
Hey, once your peer group is "Banana Republic" it's easy to get jealous of dictators who have their legislatures and courts under control.
What constitutes “extremism”? What Biden is largely complaining about are decisions that have restored lawmaking authority back to Congress from the usurpations of the executive bureaucracies.
Or, in the case of abortion, sent those decisions back to the states.
What's rather telling here is that the post-Ginsberg court largely consists of decisions telling Congress to do its job, and the left doesn't like it. And what they're really upset about is a court that isn't going along with the left's historic determinism (incidentally, MLK's stupid "the arc of the universe is long" quote fits in the same intellectual mold).
The reasoning in Roe v. Wade was always dubious. They had to ignore the 10th amendment and the lack of legislation from Congress while creating an otherwise unenumerated limit that had never previously been incorporated under the 14th amendment to rule against the states. THAT was the point at which the SCOTUS overreached its powers.
IF a right to privacy really existed, then neither the feds, nor the states, could ever limit a medical procedure or use the results of a medical examination or test in a criminal prosecution. If a woman's pregnancy is immune to legislation, then why not her BAC or opiate levels? If only an individual can make decisions about their own body, why can the state forcibly take your fingerprints? It was always bullshit.
I think scotus had overreached many times in the history of this country.
I don't understand why, in a constitutional republic, a system of checks and balances, the Supreme Court seems to be more co equal than the other branches and can shit on the founding document as they please.
If they do their job properly, there is no civil war. No war on drugs without a constitutional amendment. Even with some decisions that 95% of people accept, they went all living constitution. Freedom of association should make parts of the CRA unconstitutional. Right to bear arm has been infringed many times. Trying people twice on state and federal charges is definitely against the spirit of the founders intent. 4th amendment has no respect. I'm sure a libertarian lawyer could go on for hours.
They ultimately get pissed when they can't use the courts to brute-force their ideology down everyone's throat, especially after it's been rejected at the ballot box.
How are they supposed to defend democracy if Congress won't pass the laws they want?
The New York Times concludes that Venezuela was destroyed by "brutal capitalism."
"But in recent years, the socialist model has given way tp brutal capitalism, economists say, with a small state-connected minority controlling much of the nation's wealth."
1. Obviously, that's not capitalism.
2. I am shocked, shocked, to discover that a socialist / communist state has developed an oligarch class. It's just never happened before.
On the plus side, monocle sales in Venezuela are up 50%.
Do they have enough orphans to polish them?
Well they import immigrant labor to do the jobs Venezuelan orphans don't want to do.
They're working on it.
"with a small state-connected minority controlling much of the nation’s wealth.”
You mean a socialist utopia where everyone gets exactly the same thing, that has to be enforced against normal human nature with military strength, lead to corrupt individuals that were enforcing the socialism taking more for themselves and creating an elite upper class of "more equal animals"? Are you serious?!
If only we had years and years of history, data, and literature about this specific and now extremely predictable phenomenon.
But hey, this result (the ignorant / lying author) is the result of successful indoctrination. Damn if they didnt do a great job churning out another foot soldier.
You have to forgive (or not) the youthful Marxist staff at the Times. They are still a bunch of idealists, and if the commies in Venezuela don't match up with their utopian vision, then the problem must be capitalist Kulaks.
They simultaneously support hundreds of billions being sent to fill the Scrooge McDuck pools of cash in which the oligarchs of the Ukraine swim. The only cronies they won't support are the ones that refuse to pay proper respect to their intellectual betters in the media.
And the Jews, they won't support the Jews.
Unchecked meme email I got back in 2020:
Venezuela
28 YEARS AGO (1992) IT WAS THE 3RD RICHEST COUNTRY IN THE HEMISPHERE
19 YEARS AGO (2001) IT VOTED IN A SOCIALIST PRESIDENT
16 YEARS AGO (2004) HEALTHCARE WAS SOCIALIZED
13 YEARS AGO (2007) HIGHER EDUCATION BECAME “FREE”
11 YEARS AGO (2009) PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF GUNS WAS BANNED
6 YEARS AGO (2014) OPPOSITION LEADERS WERE IMPRISONED
4 YEARS AGO (2016) WIDESPREAD FOOD AND HEALTH CARE SHORTAGES BECAME COMMON
3 YEARS AGO (2017) ELECTIONS AND THE CONSITITUTION WERE SUSPENDED
1 YEAR AGO (2019) UNARMED CITIZENS WERE MASSACRED BY THE GOVERNMENT
DOES ANYONE WITH AN IQ OVER ROOM TEMPERATURE THINK IT WON’T HAPPEN HERE IF WE GET SOCIALISM ??
Back in 2013, leftist publication Salon thought Huga Chavez's socialist, redistributionist government was just the cat's meow...
https://www.salon.com/2013/03/06/hugo_chavezs_economic_miracle/
The Venezuelan leader was often marginalized as a radical. But his brand of socialism achieved real economic gains
They breathlessly informed us that:
Then there's this laughable tidbit:
And these knee-slappers:
"Venezuela’s policies that so rapidly reduced poverty"...the Guardian reports that its “extreme poverty” rate fell from 23.4 percent in 1999 to 8.5 percent just a decade later"
The bad news: the norm is for 99% of the population to be in either "normal" or "bad" poverty...the good news: "extreme" poverty was less! Progress!
"college enrollment has more than doubled, millions of people have access to health care for the first time and the number of people eligible for public pensions has quadrupled"
What amounted to occasional access (with a wait list, of course)to bandaids, aspirin, and maybe a mercy amputation, a public pension that will get you a guaranteed 7% return per year on a currency we devalued by 10,000% so in 30 years you might have enough to buy a bunch of bananas (if the market is kind), and a college degree worth less than an American high school degree (which isnt a lot). Progress!!
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-04-14/news/sns-rt-us-venezuela-election-expatsbre93d0a0-20130414_1_popular-venezuelan-restaurant-venezuelan-expatriates-wealthy-venezuelans
Ex-pat Venezuelans in the US had to travel to New Orleans to cast their votes, which almost certainly were then throw away by the incumbent government since virtually all (99.18%) of the ex-pat votes were for the opposition.
"For the second time in five months, Venezuelan residents in the United States, including many who traveled by bus or flew in from Florida, lined up outside a Ne w Orleans voting center on Sunday to cast ballots in Venezuela's presidential election."
"We still have hope, even though this time we are conscious that Capriles most likely won't win," said Becky Prado, 34, a schoolteacher who paid $75 for the 16-hour bus journey from Miami.
But voters in our country can't even be expected to, you know, be able to produce ID...because it's such a hardship to get an ID...and racist...
"Some of the most appalling mainstream media dishonesty I've ever seen."
* shrugs *
MSNBC insisted 80-year-old Joe Biden is mentally sharper than he's ever been. Misrepresenting the economic situation on another continent seems mild in comparison.
I’ve learned from a certain radical individualist that suspecting Joe had dementia any time before June 27th, 2024 was unsubstantiated conspiracy theory.
He of course moves the goal post to pretend the argument is focused solely on 2018, to create a nice puffy strawman.
Those pesky facts always changing later to match jeffsarc’s enemies position.
Damned MAGAs!
'It does not take all that much for ostensibly progressive Brooklynites to become raging NIMBYs.'
No ostensibility about it. Our current breed of progressives are all oblivious, self-centered snowflakes. Can you imagine campus protestors in the 1960s occupying buildings, and then demanding precious dietary meals and free tampons?
Also of note in this story, the only real solution will ever be is to make them wallow in their own shit and face the consequences of their policies.
These people were told daily what would happen, and loudly, defiantly insisted on being sanctuary cities and that everyone else was a stupid ignorant racist for suggesting it was a bad idea. After dealing with a fraction of what border states have dealt with forever, for a short period of time, they are screaming for help.
This has to happen more often.
Is it really NIMBY to be against your tax dollars going to illegal immigrants?
If you still advocate for spending other people's money on immigrants, then yes.
It's hypocritical as fuck. Where were they when Texas & your state is being overwhelmed? They were not bitching about "their" tax dollars then.
I agree. I’d prefer it was none. But the way reason uses this term is as a pejorative against that realization. No against the funding of illegals.
Totally agree.
"Venezuela's opposition can prove that Edmundo González won Sunday's election, according to María Corina Machado, who led the campaign against President Nicolás Maduro," reports Bloomberg. "She told supporters at her party's campaign headquarters on Monday evening that the opposition has enough of the 'actas,' or voting tabulations to prove they won the election. Last night, they had access to about 40% of them, now they say they have over 70%. The figures show a categoric and 'irreversible' triumph: 6.2 million votes for González compared to 2.8 million for Maduro."
Silly Venezuela MAGAs are still hung up on votes cast by people. When will then learn that election wins are based on vote tallies and official tabulations?
Yeah. The weird turn of Sullum raging about Trump discussing illegal votes to now Reason seemingly agreeing with illegal votes is weirder than JD Vance.
'Related: Some of the most appalling mainstream media dishonesty I've ever seen.'
It's the New York Times. That's what they do.
You can be certain Jeff will parrot the same line in the near future.
The left has blamed capitalism and the US for every failed socialist state for 70 years.
There is a certain truth to this:
Capitalism can exist perfectly well without communism. Communism, OTOH requires capitalism to provide what communism can't (like, oh, real money). When capitalism refuses to provide that, communism fails.
Failure caused by capitalism, see?
And if any attempt, sanctioned or not, by people trying to stay alive involves some type of independent economic activity and proves successful, it will be seen as subverting the Master Plan--and hated by the commie faithful.
One of the books by a NK escapee makes it clear that the only legal action during one of the famines was starvation. Growing food, harvesting wild animals or vegetables was prohibited and the gov't stopped supplying the rations.
The tankie commies can never explain to me why people that got the great privilege of trying out real socialism are moving in droves away from the hell holes that are created and toward a nazi capitalist fascist pig nation that America is.
Its just really weird that they achieved utopia, and are willing to sacrifice all that to regress back to capitalism.
I suppose the above NYT lie is the cognitive dissonance a commie has to deploy here. "Ya, uh....nu uh! It was capitalism all along that destroyed their country!"
Also, all those POCs flooding in to our racist country. The UK too.
They think the fences around N. Korea are to keep people out!
Back in 2019...
[I've lost the source for this quote]
A group of teachers with the Chicago Teachers Union took a trip to Venezuela and came back praising dictator Nicolas Maduro, seemingly ignoring his record of starving his own people and conducting a sham election that has kept himself in power.
"Luckily, having a leader like Maduro, who was a worker, a union leader, and a lefty his whole life, you know the direction the country is going in."
- One of the Chicago teachers on their trip to Venezuela
As one Chicago Tribune columnist said in her rebuke of the teachers,
"The teachers must not have seen areas of Caracas where families occasionally dig through rubbish for food, where women sleep on cardboard boxes outside of grocery stores hoping to bring home cornmeal, where ATMs are empty, hospitals are barely staffed and where tuna fish and flour are luxuries."
"The dominance of cars has turned children's play into work for parents, who are left coordinating and supervising their children's time and ferrying kids to playgrounds and play dates," writes Stephanie Murray in The Atlantic. "But it has also deprived adults of something more profound."
Fuck off Stephanie. We had just as many cars (and car-dependent geography) in the 1960s as now. What we have now that is different is paranoid snowflake helicopter parenting, and co-dependent mental illness, mostly on the left.
There are almost twice as many cars per capita in the US now as there were in 1960.
But we are more urbanized by far, so presumably kids can get around more easily without cars--if mom let them.
I rode a bike to do stuff. My kids rode bikes to friends’, soccer, etc. They rode ATV’s when they were early teens and drove cars @ 15.
Typical summer day:
“Hey dad, can I go to Billy’s house?”
“Are your chores done?”
“Yes!”
“Bye. Be home before dark”
Typical summer day when I was a kid:
"Where were you all day?"
"Around"
"Wash up, dinner's on."
And we have legal penalties for parents who do not helicopter.
Furthermore, children's play tends to more institutionalized rather than organic to the neighborhood.
I’ve mentioned before that you can’t really underestimate how traumatic the Amber Hagerman case was for Gen-X parents. Lenore Skenazy attributes it to the Etan Patz case, but that was in 1979 and kids were still allowed to free-range for several years after that happened. The Patz case led to the milk carton kids.
There already was a “soccer mom” stereotype emerging, but parents were still willing to let their kids roam around and form relationships outside of organized constructs. The rise of helicopter parenting can be directly linked to that event.
Lol, not even close. There are probably 10 times as many cars as there were in the 60s.
'Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz is looking increasingly likely.'
Gotta lock up the Somali vote.
Gotta at least try to match Mondale in the Electoral College.
Calley was a war criminal who was lucky. Had he done exactly the same thing only as a Japanese or German soldier in WWII, he'd have been executed forthwith.
He was also a scapegoat.
+1
Yes and no. He was a scapegoat inasmuch as he was burdened with all the sins of the higher-ups, but he was nonetheless guilty in his own right.
Throw the Lieutenants under the bus, but leave the top brass, and other leadership alone.
Had he done exactly the same thing only to Japanese or German soldier in WWII, he’d have been given a medal.
“Had he done exactly the same thing only as a Japanese or German soldier in WWII, he’d have been executed”
Really? Platoon level leaders were executed? Can you provide examples?
The Nuremberg and Tokyo trials focused on people just a bit higher up than fucking platoon leaders and company commanders.
I didn't say he'd have been tried by a Nuremberg court. The French resistance executed a large number of lower-level war criminals, as did previously occupied far East countries.
You’re doing some serious pretzel logic to get from your first comment to this one. Also, as noted above, Calley wasn't so much a war criminal as a scapegoat.
He was both a war criminal - it is indisputable that his troops murdered many unarmed women and children at his command - and a scapegoat for all the others.
As I recall, the chairman of either the Senate or the House Armed Forces Committee found a technicality to protect the enlisted men under Calley. They were all called to testify before the committee, and then the chairman refused to release the transcripts. Without those transcripts to help prepare their defense, they could not be prosecuted.
Then Calley used the defense lawyer supplied by the Army, who did not go beyond the four corners of the oral and written orders Calley allegedly received, Calley's own actions, and those of his men. That is, just the stuff that legally mattered, given that both the Nuremberg precedent and Army regulations make the individual who follows illegal orders as responsible for the crime as those that gave those orders.
Captain Medina, who was also on the ground during the massacre and Calley's superior, hired an aggressive civilian attorney, who clearly intended to put the entire chain of command on trial, right up to General Westmoreland who was circling overhead in a helicopter throughout the operation, and beyond, never mind the lack of legal relevance. And suddenly he was off the hook!
So the entire guilt for the actions of dozens of men, and the orders apparently passed down from on high, fell on one man - a man of below average intelligence who had completed no college-level courses, and wasn't even close to the normal standards for an officer. Was it reasonable to expect him to judge whether his orders were illegal and understand his responsibility if they were?
All this really amounts to saying is, if the NVA or VC could have, they would have killed Calley or captured him, no different from what they tried to do with any other US Soldier, all of whom they considered "war criminals".
Japanese soldiers did a lot worse things in WW2.
And we hanged their commanders. But I don't think we reached as low as a Lieutenant in pursuing war crimes, aside from a few prisoner guards who went above and beyond both their orders and the sadism that had been trained into the entire Japanese military.
“”What a variety of whiteness we have here,” “It’s like a rainbow of beige.” Actors Jeff Bridges, Mark Hamill, Mark Ruffalo”
“All of this feels very Pantsuit Nation. Very retrograde, like we’re pre–cancel culture movement, pre–Trump election”
Just a reminder, this kind of shit is absolutely one of the things that turned people off from Hillary, an unexciting candidate that was forced on everyone. Hillary deployed more subtle methods, somewhat, with her “we all have implicit bias” and sometimes more obvious “basket of deplorables”.
But notably, Abrams who enjoys an unpopularity and radical left politics similar to Harris, also tried this more direct race focused stuff. At a time where Dems in GA took control and made the senate blue, riding the support the dems for from abortion recently, she got sent packing, again. Why? Bad policies, bad candidate, and she ran a campaign focused on racial guilt. Famously screaming at black men and white women for not showing up.
There are a lot of things rhyming with Kamala and this campaign, but if this is what they think is going to win 1 single white male vote that isnt already a cucked self hating (and dem voting) soiboy, you best get back to those focus groups and come up with something better than “arent we white guys so lame!” and “arent those other guys WEIRD?!”
I predict this will backfire on them big time. And January 20 we will see green-haired septum-ringed feminists screaming at the sky.
I think the same girl should do an updated video, I thoroughly enjoy the thumbnails and gifs.
I can't think of anything less appealing as a white male as being directly pandered to because of my race while at the same time engaging in the self-deprecating attitude of a white male lefty.
I don't hate myself because of the color of my skin, so I just can't hang with those type of dudes, much less participate in a zoom call with them.
I don’t hate myself because of the color of my skin, so I just can’t hang with those type of dudes, much less participate in a zoom call with them.
I've mentioned before that I don't mind these white shitlibs hating themselves for their skin color. They belong to a political theology and in the actors' cases, an industry that demands such self-loathing and self-mortification on their part to receive blessings. White liberals are the only ethno-political demographic that hates people of their own skin color for a reason.
What I don't like is their demand that every other white person feel the same way. It's why I plan to desecrate Noel Ignatiev's grave if I ever run across it.
"...It’s why I plan to desecrate Noel Ignatiev’s grave if I ever run across it..."
I'd do the same, but I don't like crowds and standing in line.
I think it's a trick to race bait some of the less thoughtful trump supporters.
If you think about it honestly, Harris is a worse candidate than Biden or pretty much anyone other than Stacey Abram or Beto.
The only chance she has is a Trump implosion. The man himself is too smart to do it, but his fans alienating people online might make it happen.
The only chance she has is a Trump implosion.
A Trump explosion would work equally well. The most precise way to put it is that the only chance she has is if Trump loses his head. That covers both figurative and literal contingencies.
Of course it is:
Skin color is the most important thing.
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1816438336409444473
A glimpse of how the Harris campaign sees the voters. VP choice is focusing on several white male candidates. Source ‘familiar with the campaign’s thinking’ says: ‘Let’s just face it. There’s a lot of sexist, racist white dudes out there in America who don’t like Trump, but just need a little extra validation.’
I heard that Abrams and O'Rourke (and Buttigieg) were "rising stars" of the Democrat Party though.
In retrospect, maybe importing Hollywood to Georgia to attract film industry investment and jobs was a bad idea.
"Ethnic studies to become graduation requirement"
[...]
"To allow for adjustment and feedback, the Palo Alto Unified School District is in the process of planning the Ethnic Studies course early for the 2025-2026 school year and set it as a graduation requirement by 2030.
The approval of California Assembly Bill 101 mandated the statewide addition of Ethnic Studies as a graduation requirement, which PAUSD plans to incorporate through the replacement of a semester of freshman year world history..."
https://palyvoice.com/174081/news/ethnic-studies-to-become-graduation-requirement/#:~:text=Starting%20in%20the%202025-2026%20school%20year%2C%20the%20Palo,for%20ninth-graders%20because%20of%20the%20discussions%20about%20identity.
According to a school official quoted in today's Chron article, it 'won't be political' (!)
Do they include a class project on vote harvesting? For anti-racism, of course.
Yay, world history of minor importance compared to race conscious struggle sessions.
“… in weighing the risks of presidential paralysis against the risks of presidential impunity …”
Presidential paralysis has NEVER been a problem in the United States. The problem is over four thousand unconstitutionally broad and vague Federal laws and uncounted state and local laws which make it almost totally impossible for ANYONE to be sure that she is not violating one or more laws with any particular action he might take.
On the other hand, Presidents have NEVER hesitated to take any action no matter how egregious or obviously illegal or unconstitutional to further the powers of the Chief Executive. Absolute immunity and executive privilege no doubt encourage them in this dangerous behavior, but history has proven that nothing bad will ever happen to them legally as a consequence of this approach, and that only rarely (until recently) have the voters even voted them out of office for bad behavior.
I do not fear Presidential paralysis therefore, but I increasingly fear official immunity. But thanks to the Supremes for raising a straw man that is so easily dismissed. They have dodged yet another judicial bullet and managed to avoid making a meaningful decision about a crucial Constitutional issue yet again.
Interesting deep dive into JD Vance's weird (Ha) evolution into a "populist". Specifically covers his rejection of Reason/Koch style libertarianism.
https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/can-jd-vances-populist-crusade-succeed
"So what does Vance think? He is in agreement with the views of a rising set of younger conservatives, populists like Sohrab Ahmari and Oren Cass, who assert that libertarianism is a cover for private rule, most explicitly in Ahmari’s book Tyranny, Inc. It is flourishing of the family that animates this new group, not worship of the market. At Remedy Fest, Vance was explicit in his agreement with this notion, saying “I don't really care if the entity that is most threatening to that vision is a private entity or a public entity, we have to be worried about it.”
“If I can beat up on my fellow Republicans a little bit,” he added "[many believe] something is not tyrannical so long as a private entity does it. There's this famous meme of two guys on their knees. And one guy has a gun pointed to his head, and the other guy looks at him and asks, ‘Aren't you glad this was done through the free market?’ And the person holding the gun is Google.”
More than disagreeing with some abstract notion, Vance deconstructed the very idea of a ‘free market,’ pointing out every market is structured by rules. He even attacked the idea of economics as a science, and praised Khan’s approach to moving beyond the consumer welfare standard in antitrust."
Which is exactly what the point of having "a nation of laws" instead of "a nation of men" is. He's right that private tyranny is not better than official tyranny, but it is almost impossible for a private or corporate entity to establish a tyranny without violating a myriad of reasonable and necessary laws to be encoded and enforced by the officials. So this is a straw man, easily dispensed with by solving the issue of official tyranny. Libertarians mostly do not agree with anarchy. Strictly limited scope of government does NOT imply no government at all. A small number of clearly defined laws to be enforced does NOT imply lawlessness. Allowing private actors to contract ad lib at any mutually agreed-upon price does NOT imply that the losers in such an arrangement are the victims of tyranny. Do not buy any of this tripe ...
Well my point of view may be limited but it became clear to me in 2020 that there was no rule of law that protected us from Covid tyranny. Every governor, mayor and local health bureaucrat declared that they had the authority to deprive us of free association and our livelihood. The federal government imposed experimental medical treatments which they called vaccines. Far from being limited by some reasonable law, the social media giants imposed unprecedented censorship on anyone who disagreed with the official government narrative. Throughout all of this Reason libertarians told us that private companies were free to censor as long as government didn't demand it even though they obviously spoke with a single voice. I don't necessarily endorse anything Vance is proposing in terms of legislation or policy but the current rule of law has clearly failed us. Reason has taken the position that Vance's endorsement of Khan's positions are just plain crazy talk. Okay. But I found it interesting to see how he arrived at that conclusion.
Reason has taken the position that Vance’s endorsement of Khan’s positions are just plain crazy talk.
That’s because Reason supports economic liberty, while the GOP has gone full progressive with regards to the economy.
How so, Sarckles. Give us an example.
Reason has given plenty.
That's not an answer. You see, I'm saying your bullshitting, but you can prove me wrong with an actual example.
You've never argued with me in good faith before, so I doubt you're starting now for the first time. Not playing.
Youre refusing to answer in bad faith. He asked you to back your assertion.
Besides that, I don't know if this is you or the guy who is impersonating you. Judging by the lack of shrill hostility, I'm betting it's the impersonator.
Not going to appeal to google.com?
Private entities cannot use force. So he’s entirely full of shit and just trying to justify government force and coercion against private entities he doesn’t like. This is the GOP taking a hard left turn with regards to economic liberty.
So debanking someone isn't an act of force in your book? Lol.
Private entities cannot use force.
The fuck they can't. Larry Fink even admitted they have that power.
I meant they cannot initiate force. Government has the monopoly on that.
You mean in theory, or ideally this would be the case? Because in current year reality, this is definitely not the case.
Really making us meet you way more than half here, buddy.
What are you talking about? Force isn't just at the point of gun. Money is just as potent of a weapon as firearms.
"You have to force behaviors. If you don't force behaviors, whether it's gender or race or just any way you want to say the composition of your team, you're going to be impacted. That not just recruiting, it's development," Fink said. "We're gonna have to force change."
This is exactly what they've fucking done. This wasn't some firewalled discussion that got leaked, it was right in the open during an NYT panel discussion.
What do they mean by force? Do this or you're out of a job? That's still a choice. Government force doesn't leave you any choice.
You're shifting the goalposts.
No I'm not. When you work for someone you do what they tell you. If they change the rules you follow the rules. If you fail in this then they let you go. If you don't like it you can quit. That's how jobs work. You're shifting the goalposts by claiming conditions of employment are force.
When you work for someone you do what they tell you. If they change the rules you follow the rules. If you fail in this then they let you go. If you don’t like it you can quit. That’s how jobs work. You’re shifting the goalposts by claiming conditions of employment are force.
Uh, "go along with this politically-driven program or you lose your job" isn't any different than "do what we say or we throw you in jail." Corporations are not these holy, sacred institutions whose behavior is never wrong and can always be excused as the rational pursuit of money.
Uh, “go along with this politically-driven program or you lose your job” isn’t any different than “do what we say or we throw you in jail.”
Sure it is. You can tell them to get fucked and go find another job.
Corporations are not these holy, sacred institutions whose behavior is never wrong and can always be excused as the rational pursuit of money.
Never said they were. The difference between corporations and government is choice.
You don't have to work for corporations and you don't have to buy their stuff.
You do have to obey government and you do have to pay taxes.
I know people who quit their jobs over vaccinations. They weren't forced to get a jab. They were given a choice: get vaccinated or quit. So they found a different place to work.
And you were angry not enough businesses collided together at the behest of government regulators to force them to do it.
Sarc, the more you discuss ideas the clearer it is you actually do support Italian fascist rule.
Government influences “private" business all the time. And you support it openly claiming at least it isnt the government.
Youre a fucking fascist.
Speaking of Google:
Former Google executive Ryan Olohan obtained a settlement with the tech giant last week after the company fired him for allegedly not being “inclusive.”
Prior to his termination, Olohan was Google’s managing director of food, beverage, and restaurants. Google’s Employee Investigations team explained Olohan was not inclusive because he “show[ed] favoritism towards high performers” and remarked on the “walking pace and hustle” of employees, which the company referred to as “ableist.”
How is that not force?
Because there's a choice. With government there is no choice. It's literally do or die, because people in government will kill you if you put up too much of a fuss. With corporations, if you don't like it you can leave. If you don't like what they're selling you don't have to buy it. If you don't like their policies you don't have to work there. You're not being forced.
With government there is no choice. It’s literally do or die, because people in government will kill you if you put up too much of a fuss.
Governments aren't going to kill you for not paying your taxes. Ask Wesley Snipes.
Governments aren’t going to kill you for not paying your taxes. Ask Wesley Snipes.
Eric Garner would beg to differ. Oh, he can’t.
Ultimately all laws are backed with the death penalty. That’s why cops carry guns.
My boss has never threatened me with a gun. Has yours?
It’s a lot different. For one thing, you’re not in jail.
If the employment conditions become too onerous, the companies can’t find competent employees. Which seems to be partly driving the push to lower hiring standards so as not to require degrees.
And the logic gets twisted worse than a pretzel if you say the guy pointing out that employees are free to take or leave a company's employment conditions a fascist, and your counter-proposal is an actual fascist plan for the government to directly control those companies.
The entire movement of fascism is to hide government force behind "private" entities. Such as businesses during covid or the censorship regime you deny.
Vance was a disastrous pick for VP.
Hopefully not so disastrous that Harris wins though.
And a good insurance policy against a rush to impeach Trump this time around.
“So what does Vance think? He is in agreement with the views of a rising set of younger conservatives, populists like Sohrab Ahmari and Oren Cass, who assert that libertarianism is a cover for private rule, most explicitly in Ahmari’s book Tyranny, Inc. It is flourishing of the family that animates this new group, not worship of the market. At Remedy Fest, Vance was explicit in his agreement with this notion, saying “I don’t really care if the entity that is most threatening to that vision is a private entity or a public entity, we have to be worried about it.”
He isn't entirely off base here. A corporation can be just as tyrannical as a government can, especially when it's working in concert with government, such as what happened in 2020 with the tech orgs and media corporations. We can call it fascism, I suppose, but ultimately it's a form of neo-feudal managerialism that is supported on a global scale by extremely powerful people with god complexes like Soros, Schwab, Ursula von der Leyen, Hansjorg Wyss, Larry Fink, and the various elite "philanthropists" and political donors like Bill and Melinda Gates, MacKenzie Scott, Jeffrey Katzenberg, the Pritzkers, Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Roosevelts, etc.
A corporation can be just as tyrannical as a government can, especially when it’s working in concert with government
Of course they can when enabled by government.
Got any examples of corporations initiating force on people without the aid or approval of government?
Virtually every single one of the banana republics in South America. Those companies overthrew how many governments?
Got any examples of corporations initiating force on people without the aid or approval of government?
Why is the "aid or approval of the government" or "enablement" have to be inserted as a qualification here? Whether they're being "enabled" by the government or not, they're still doing it.
Google didn't need any help from the government to can James Damore for wrongthink and then forcing struggle sessions on the rest. Bank of America didn't need any help from government to shut down accounts over non-leftist speech. They just did it.
Why is the “aid or approval of the government” or “enablement” have to be inserted as a qualification here?
Because otherwise the initiation of force would be unlawful.
Google didn’t need any help from the government to can James Damore for wrongthink and then forcing struggle sessions on the rest. Bank of America didn’t need any help from government to shut down accounts over non-leftist speech. They just did it.
People are still free to find another job or another bank.
People are still free to find another job or another bank.
That doesn't refute the fact that force was initiated. Someone can choose to not resist the bully and get the shit beat out of them, but that doesn't mean force wasn't used on them.
You're arguing that force means that choice is eliminated entirely. That is not the case at all.
You’re arguing that force means that choice is eliminated entirely.
It is when it comes to government. That’s the key difference that the people who want to control corporations with government tend to overlook or ignore entirely. They say “These corporations are just as bad as government! They put a gun to their employees’ heads and force them to do things!” But that’s a lie, because employees can leave. You can’t just go find another government to live under without relocating to another state or country. That and government will happily point a gun at your head and pull the trigger.
Your ignorance continues to show youd be happy with a fascist government that can hide force behind a veneer of private companies.
It is very telling.
Corporations that operate as a pseudo-government aren't any less of a force-initiating entity than actual governments are. Especially when they can use the veneer of "it's a private company" while using the guns of the government for their own purpose.
But that’s a lie, because employees can leave. You can’t just go find another government to live under without relocating to another state or country.
Wait, what? You're saying that employees can get fucked if they don't want to fit in with wokeist corporate culture, because they can always move to another job, but that literally moving to another state that better fits your values isn't the same thing?
You’re saying that employees can get fucked if they don’t want to fit in with wokeist corporate culture, because they can always move to another job, but that literally moving to another state that better fits your values isn’t the same thing?
Employees are not slaves. If they follow policies they don’t like, it’s because they choose to do so. They have a viable alternative: get another job. That’s totally different from having to relocate to someplace else, leaving people behind, to be ruled by a different governmental overlord who will force you to do what they say and force you to pay for things you neither want nor need.
Employees are not slaves.
Residents of blue states aren't, either.
If they follow policies they don’t like, it’s because they choose to do so. They have a viable alternative: get another job. That’s totally different from having to relocate to someplace else, leaving people behind, to be ruled by a different governmental overlord who will force you to do what they say and force you to pay for things you neither want nor need.
No it's not. It's the exact same fucking thing under your construct.
I don't have to move to get another job with rules that I prefer.
No one forces anyone to work for Google.
No one forces anyone to search with Google.
It's a choice.
No one forces anyone to live in California.
No one forces anyone to move to California.
It's a choice.
So you're going with the social contract argument? Sorry but I never bought that one. Because you don't choose where you're born.
Because you don’t choose where you’re born.
OK, but I think I can think of a few million people who can confirm that there are little to no consequences for ignoring it.
Ask the Pinkertons.
They were contracted by the government.
They were also contracted by corporations separate from government influence.
If government didn't enforce the law then that's implicitly allowing them to break it.
Read the link, but I know you wont so here is the salient point.
Following the Civil War, the Pinkertons began conducting operations against organized labor.[5] During the labor strikes of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, businesses hired the Pinkerton Agency to infiltrate unions, supply guards, keep strikers and suspected unionists out of factories, and recruit goon squads to intimidate workers.
I’m aware of their history. This was a failure of government, implicity approving by turning a blind eye to illegal initiations of force. Which still furthers my original point, which is that corporations don’t get to initiate force unless government lets them.
Are you aware though?
So every murder in the US is beacuse the government allowed it by not enforcing the law? So if something happens it is because government did it or allowed it to happen? Would expect nothing less then circular logic from you.
If a company hires a gang of thugs to do criminal shit, and the government doesn’t respond, then that’s the fault of government.
You can reply to what I actually say, or be a Jesse Jr and give a moronic response to the most moronic voice in your head.
$20 says you'll do the latter.
This was a failure of government, implicity approving by turning a blind eye to illegal initiations of force.
What illegal initiations? Can businesses initate force or not?
If a company hires a gang of thugs to do criminal shit, and the government doesn’t respond, then that’s the fault of government.
What "criminal shit"? Nothing the Pinkertons did at the time fell outside the purview of existing law. You're claiming out of one side of your mouth that only government has a monopoly on force. Then, in this thread, you're claiming that the government failed by not stepping in to use that same application of force, this time to prevent the Pinkertons from carrying out their independently contracted duties with businesses.
Can businesses initate force or not?
S&M was claiming that they did, so my response was that that's a failure of government.
S&M was claiming that they did, so my response was that that’s a failure of government.
The failure to use force against the Pinkertons?
The failure to use force against the Pinkertons?
If they were initiating force, which was his argument, then yes. Responding to the initiation of force is a basic duty of government. It's why we create them in the first place. We delegate the use of force to government so we can live productive lives, instead of focusing all our energy on trying to survive.
This was a failure of government, implicity approving by turning a blind eye to illegal initiations of force.
You display the vast depth of your historical ignorance as usual. The governments actually chose rightly not to get involved until the unions whined and cried so much they turned public opinion and it came down to not having the votes to stay in office if they continued to let the assholes on both sides sort it out themselves as they should have.
The employees were infamous for initiating force through sabotage and getting scabs killed. It is just as valid to opine that the Pinkertons were only responding with the force necessary in the face of organized criminal activity which was well beyond the capabilities of the local governments in that era to interdict. They couldn't arrest the industrialist and they couldn't arrest half the fucking town.
Suggest you read "Meet You in Hell", Standiford. He's anything but a capitalist tool, but will certainly give you a view of Pinkerton agents far different from Wiki (which is NOT a source).
SF has too many drugged bums, so how about paying them?
""Cash Not Drugs" program would give San Francisco residents up to $100 weekly for staying clean"
[...]
"Eligible San Franciscans could soon receive payments of up to $100 per week for abstaining from illicit drugs under a proposed "Cash Not Drugs" legislation..."
https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/cash-not-drugs-program-would-give-san-francisco-residents-up-to-100-weekly-for-staying-clean/
No way this'll get gamed! Nope!
Except a pint of my blood would bring in a couple $K.
What if we paid them to OD?
I think thats called Canada
Just give them clean pure drugs and wait for it. Drugs are relatively cheap if government bought them wholesale and in bulk direct from the suppliers.
Aren't you glad you don't pay taxes in SF? Don't you hope that this doesn't go national so you can't escape paying taxes to support drugged bums?
Biden is keeping a close eye on the debt. At least as close an eye as he can keep on anything:
"Biden administration announces new $1.7 billion lethal aid package for Ukraine"
https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/29/politics/ukraine-lethal-aid-package-us/index.html
"Unlikely"? Understatement of the day. It's comically absurd and dead on arrival.
Biden’s portrayal of the immunity decision removes a lot of nuance, though. The Supreme Court actually “held that a former president enjoys ‘absolute’ immunity for ‘actions within his exclusive constitutional power,’ ‘presumptive’ immunity for other ‘official acts,’ and no immunity for unofficial acts,”
That’s not the ‘nuance’ of the decision. The decision in Trump v US is a complete load of shit – with no nuance and no pony whatsoever. There is nothing ‘originalist’ in any of it. If the majority is so convinced that Prez has immunity, then Prez should be talking about the discovery of a conspiracy among domestic enemies of the Constitution within the judiciary to create a monarchic autocracy counter to 250 well-documented years of the view of Presidential compliance with the law not immunity from it. What should be done with domestic enemies of the Constitution? See how comfortable they feel with a ‘vigorous and energetic’ executive wielding his power against them personally. FU Roberts.
The ‘nuance’ occurred Nov 15 2022. THAT is when Trump declared his entry into the 2024 presidential campaign. Before that, there is no real reason for Trump’s election actions to be revisited - with legal liability. Yes he can talk all he wants and peddle his conspiracies to his flock of morons. Do morons flock or gaggle? But after that – his conspiracies and lies are no longer just fodder for yapping. They are potentially VERY consequential for future elections.
The nuance at that point was – how does an existing President of the US deal with that sort of threat to an institution by his predecessor? Biden chose to deal with that threat not purely as a President but as a candidate. He chose to use the powers of his office to conduct lawfare against a competing candidate. Biden chose to diminish the office of President because he wanted a 2nd term himself.
And yes – from Biden’s perspective I’m sure he’s pissed that Trump’s reentry forced him to choose between acting as a President (with no personal conflict of interest) or acting as a candidate (with 100% conflict of interest and excessive arbitrary power). But life’s a bitch and sometimes shit happens. Biden chose wrong. THAT is the nuance where the outcome ends up being a SC majority that has now become a domestic enemy of the Constitution.
Why can't you just let the left arrest political enemies screams JFree.
Sell your election conspiracies you piece of shit. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it.
FOAD, asshole.
Do I need to repeat.
THAT is the nuance where the outcome ends up being a SC majority that has now become a domestic enemy of the Constitution.
The executive has always been the strongest branch, by design.
It's the primary reason we aren't a parliamentary system.
The executive branch is the strongest only because Congress has delegated so much power to it. Take away the alphabet agencies that write, enforce, and adjudicate regulations that have the power of law, and the executive loses most of its power.
Thankfully the recent Chevron decision was a move toward taking away this power.
IIRC it was none other than Mr. Jeff who made the loudest objection to that here.
Phone logged me out so I accidentally read your comment. Amazingly it's cogent. I'm flabbergasted. I still don't care about anything you have to say, so back on mute you go, Jesse Jr.
"Phone logged me out"
Why bother with this?
Because I’ve called him out for the last 3 days about his fake mute list.
The exec was never 'designed' as the 'strongest branch' which is why the SC immunity opinion had no 'originalist' rationale. It had two WORDS from Hamilton's Federalist 70 - and Hamilton himself disagreed with an unrestrained executive outside Federalist 70 - and every other founder opposed Hamilton's notions of president as monarch
The 'theory' behind the SC majority is not any 'design'. It is a modernist invention. Maybe 40 years old. In Roberts case - it probably dates to the Bush admin desire to normalize torture, renditions, Gitmo. Now - authorized for all Americans to experience if the Prez desires.
Parliamentary system is only about an executive subject to a parliamentary MAJORITY. A monarchy is about an executive superior to (immune from) the legislature itself. That's what the SC just opined we are. A presidential system is about independent authority for Prez (separate election) but a legislature that can check the executive. That's what we used to be before July 1 2024.
Poor, poor, JFucked, been on a losing streak since masks were declared worthless, and can’t seem to find anything where he has any comment which isn’t idiotic.
FOAD, steaming shit-pile.
"...The decision in Trump v US is a complete load of shit – with no nuance and no pony whatsoever..."
Poor, poor, JFucked, been on a losing streak since masks were declared worthless, and can't seem to find anything where he has any comment which isn't idiotic.
FOAD, asshole.
the "funeral procession" at the Javits Center when that glass ceiling wasn't shattered.
Always love a feel-good story. Thanks for the link, Liz!
“Biden’s Last Gasps”
Is it acceptable to point out that the new candidate is part of the Biden admin right now, and thus a power grab like this isn't just on Biden himself? Or is that wrongthink?
I saw the title and thought maybe he stopped breathing.
Has anyone run a speech analyzer or a DNA test before and after his disappearance?
I helped build that migrant shelter. I, for one, am shocked at the murders! Never would've expected it from such nice people that jumped the cops all the time.
"But what's happening now is not consistent with that doctrine of separation of powers. Extremism is undermining the public confidence in the court's decisions."
Neither one of those things is true. The Courts aren't meddling with the Executive or the Legislative. They're just interpreting the Constitution impartially and without bias. Sorry not sorry that abortion can't survive actual Constitutional review.
And Extremism doesn't factor into anything. There hasn't been anything "extreme" in any of this years SCOTUS decisions. If anything, they seem to be trying to temper the extremism and bring people back to a place of balance and objectivity. If the public's confidence is being "undermined" - it's because they fail to understand that the Court is a neutral arbiter, rather than the partisan agenda advancers they want them to be.
Scenes from New York: It does not take all that much for ostensibly progressive Brooklynites to become raging NIMBYs.
Yeah, a few actual migrants.
When we said we wanted open borders, we meant in Texas.
"White Dudes for Harris" call last night, helmed in part by Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who called the "vibes" of the call "incredible."
The next person who use the word "vibes" is getting kicked in the nuts.
I'm surprised they called it "White Dudes for Harris" given that they think terms like "Chicks" or "Broads" or "Dames" is totes demeaning towards women.
There are no terms deemed demeaning to white men. They are to suck it up and accept any slur hurled in their direction.
So you think those 'white dudes for harris' have nuts to kick?
In their masters' purses. (Can we still say "purse"?)
Those dudes were mad ugly, does Pete have no homo standards?
All of this feels very Pantsuit Nation. Very retrograde, like we're pre–cancel culture movement, pre–Trump election, back before non-academics knew what "wokeness" meant, back before Robin DiAngelo bamboozled human resources departments in consulting firms across the country into giving her gobs of cash to hector people about unpacking their role in white supremacy (at work), back before our long national nightmare of Race2Dinner, before the "funeral procession" at the Javits Center when that glass ceiling wasn't shattered. The fixation on racial "affinity groups" (whatever that means) and calling people out for their "privilege" feels like a stupid trend in American politics not worth reviving—and something that contributed to America's intense political polarization by gender.
Liz Wolfe telling me she has the same YouTube feed as me without telling me she's got the same youtube feed.
What Adults Lost When Kids Stopped Playing in the Street
In many ways, a world built for cars has made life so much harder for grown-ups.
Do I have to read this article to find out how retarded this take is, or can I assume its retardation from the headline?
I'm trying to think of a more backwards take on the state of the culture, but one isn't coming to mind. The problem isn't that we have a world built for cars, it's that we have a world where parents helicopter their kids. People didn't start helicoptering their kids because in 1995, the world "wasn't built for cars" but now in 2024 it totally like is and stuff. The US world was built for cars by 1950.
Gen X here and I grew up in a medium sized town in the desert southwest. There was literally no public transportation. It didn't exist. There were no city buses, let alone trains or subways. Everyone and I do mean everyone owned a car, including the poorest residents. I lived in a suburban neighborhood with wide streets and intersections designed for easy visibility for cars to turn on. Speed limits were high with long stretches of roads with no traffic lights and crosswalks literally didn't exist. The only crosswalk on a wide road that people sped on was in front of the elementary school about a mile down the road. And... AND there was no crossing guard employed at that crosswalk during school hours until the late 1970s. When the school hired a crossing guard, we (the kids) found it kind of novel. We were all like, "Huh, so there's a dude who stands there in a yellow vest and has the authority to stop traffic... isn't that odd..."
Every kid had a bike and we rode it in traffic, throughout the neighborhoods where stop signs were scarce. We walked across the highway which connected our neighborhood to a vast open patch of desert where we hunted sparrows with our pellet guns.
Make no mistake, cars were everywhere and no one went the speed limit.
So fuck off and sell "late stage capitalism has ruined childhood" somewhere else. We're all stocked up here.
In the summer of 2009, Amy Rose and Alice Ferguson, two mothers living on Greville Road in Bristol, a midsize city in southwest England, found themselves in a strange predicament: They saw entirely too much of their kids. “We were going, like, Why are they here?” Rose told me. “Why aren’t they outside?” The friends decided to run an experiment. They applied to shut their quarter-mile road to traffic for two hours after school on a June afternoon—not for a party or an event but just to let the children who lived there play. Intentionally, they didn’t prepare games or activities, Rose told me, as it would have defeated the purpose of the inquiry: “With time, space, and permission, what happens?”
Millennial moms discover motherhood, film at wine-o’clock.
What has ruined spontaneous outdoor play for kids is not cars but all the activities and sports they sign up for, most of which require driving them there. If you don’t sign your kiddo up for soccer, music lessons, math tutoring starting at kindergarten, there is this fear they won’t get into an elite college. But go ahead and blame it on cars because they are the cool thing to hate now.
Funny that the left-elite don't want to hate themselves (yet) for screwing up their kids. Maybe we need to connect it to racism.
Do you think they are going to give up their spots at Harvard and Yale so kids from the Bronx (or parents are Trumpers from West Virginia ) can go there? Not in a billion years!
When I was a kid, we played baseball against whoever showed up, across a range of abilities and ages. If we were short a few kids, it just made the game more interesting. Some people kept track of how many home runs they hit in a summer or how many bases they stole, but no one tracked wins or losses, and there was no travel team. We just divided the teams up each day to try to get a close matchup. No orange slices or juice boxes either.
My mom did take me to music lessons once a week, but she served as my math tutor before I even started school. It was sixth grade before I learned anything at school that I hadn’t already been exposed to at home.
100% agree - Wide roads have become narrow streets that are shared with bikers with little to no visibility, the "village" style planning with winding patterns may look cute but it sure hasn't helped.
Plenty of kids were still playing in the street in the 1970s and the 1980s, in suburbs with nice wide streets for those cars, because it was a lot safer than the narrow, crime-filled streets in the cities.
Kids stopped playing in the streets in the 1990s and later, mostly due to video games, cable TV, and the Internet, in addition to parents suddenly panicking about "stranger danger" which was worse in the 70s.
Liz Wolfe, charter member of Libertarians For Absolute Immunity For Government Officials.
She'll probably have a booth at the next conference of Libertarians for Statist Womb Management, Libertarians for Authoritarian Immigration Policies and Practices, Libertarians for West Bank Terrorism and Land Theft, Libertarians for Big-Government Micromanagement of Ladyparts Clinics, Libertarians for Torture and War Crimes, Libertarians for Social Conservatism, and Libertarians for Republican Faux Libertarians.
FOAD, asshole bigot.
Also agree - Anime loser Kirky probably thinks he's not the "Weird" one!
Thank you for your continuing compliance with the preferences of your betters, clingers.
You get to whine and whimper as much as your like, of course, about getting the bigoted, disaffected, right-wing shit kicked out of you in the culture war.
Until replacement.
Replacement...BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
We out-breed you, asshole.
Zzzzzzzzz....I quit reading at "Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland".
He's always worth a short bit of profane invective, but nothing more.
Just a grey box.
Question: how many of the White Dudes for Kamala were born with dude “equipment”?
Were observed to have been assigned said equipment at birth?
I gave up on all this shit years ago.
Your reality check:
Men are men.
Women are women.
Men cannot become women.
Women cannot become men.
The earth is not flat.
If you have a problem dealing with reality, it is your problem, not mine.
Saw that Kindergarten Cop was on MTV Sunday. Didn't stick around to see if they had sanitized it for 2024 consumption (i.e., removing the kid that says, "boys have penises, girls have vaginas").
The most egregious example of that I ever saw was the movie Executive Decision.
They scrubbed/sanitized/voiceovered every single line that suggested that Muslims had taken over an airplane with the intent of committing mass terrorism against the United States.
The first time I noticed it - when the lips didn't match the words - I went and pulled out a VHS copy and queued it right up to the streaming version.
Every. Line. Changed.
The bad guy - the genocidal jihadist and his plane full of flunkies - was completely rewritten into some lone wolf fanatic with loyalists.
Looks like EU was behind that one. Apparently the European cut removed references to Islam and it has been used for Bluray and streaming releases.
Thankfully they haven't done that on True Lies yet--the whole plot revolves around a bunch of Muslim terrorists who literally call themselves "Crimson Jihad."
Executive Decision (from 1996) is still the last Hollywood movie that had Islamic terrorists. In every other movie, they are “Eastern European” terrorists, and their motivation is financial gain (from blackmail or from shorting stocks, or both) rather than a religious vendetta.
True Lies was from 1994.
The Siege was from ‘98.
I watched kindergarten cop a few months ago with my 11 yo. Still the same, thankfully!
Likely to turn into "local news" quickly if not already. Originally reported as "Mass Shooting at City Park Leaves One Dead, Six Injured". In an age where skin color is the most important thing, it seems telling that even the next day there is no description of shooter(s) or victims, probably will end up not fitting the narrative.
----------------
Rochester police say they responded to the park on Bridge View Drive around 6:20 p.m. for the report of a large gathering with shots fired.
Officers found several people suffering from gunshot wounds, and a large group of people fleeing from the scene. Police say some people were transported to the hospital by private vehicle throughout the night and others by ambulance.
Seven victims were treated at local hospitals. Police said 25-year-old Tyasia Manning passed away despite life-saving measures. 43-year-old Phylicia Counsel also succumbed to her injuries hours later. It is believed the other five victims are in non-life-threatening condition.
“At this point we don’t know how many people were shooting. We are trying to work our way through that. We are trying to work our way through as many witnesses as we can,” Captain Greg Bello said.
Police say they have no suspects in custody at this time.
News 8 did speak with neighbors who live along Maplewood Drive and said they have never seen anything like this happen in the area before and were scared and shocked.
“Looking out the window, this whole park, which was full of people was then running for their lives. There were people hiding behind cars, jumping my fence, crying. It was pure terror,” one resident said.
“We looked out the front window and there were two kids here on our front porch with guns drawn, and then it was kind of like ‘Now what?,’ Shelley Strong, who also lives on Maplewood Drive told News 8.
Every time turd doesn't show up, it gives me hope that some parent caught that slimy pile of lefty shit around his/her kid and beat him to a really painful death with a Louisville Slugger.
https://wcyb.com/news/local/police-man-accused-of-molesting-children-beaten-by-father
SPOTSYLVANIA COURTHOUSE, Va. — Police in Virginia say they may have saved the life of a man who was accused of molesting two small children and then attacked by the children's father.
Authorities in Spotsylvania County told The Free Lance-Star on Thursday that the father was not charged. But the other man was arrested after he was rescued from a beating.
Mark Anthony Stanley, of Burlington, North Carolina, faces two counts of taking indecent liberties with a child and assault.
Police said deputies rescued Stanley from further injury after the father obtained a weapon.
[Crap, it said 2 days ago when I first saw it, but it was actually back in 2020].
https://www.abc10.com/article/news/crime/citrus-heights-father-confronts-intruder/103-bf6ed494-7e0b-439a-bc08-29add0d028b3
Published: 5:30 PM PDT July 19, 2024
Updated: 5:30 PM PDT July 19, 2024
Facebook
CITRUS HEIGHTS, Calif. — A Citrus Heights father sent the man who allegedly broke into his home and attacked his children to the hospital Thursday night.
"He attacked my 14-year-old son from the back. He jumped on him choking him out to the ground, and then he moved on to my 11-year-old," said Bobby Tucker.
Tucker says a stranger who was screaming and growling came into his home and attacked two of his children around 5:30 p.m. Thursday.
Tucker, who works as a security guard, says he was in the back of the house with his youngest son when he heard the commotion. He rushed out from his hallway and saw the man hitting his 11-year-old.
"My mind was completely clear. I wasn't thinking of anything, just getting that guy off my son. I admit I blanked out for a while, probably scared my kids too. Hitting the guy, hitting the guy and I could hear them saying someone call 911," said Tucker.
Citrus Heights police responded within five minutes and took the man into custody. They say he will be charged.
"He was out cold, unresponsive. Paramedics tried to get him to wake up or respond. He was just out," said Tucker.
Police aren't releasing the man's identity yet and can't say yet if he was on drugs or had mental health problems.
The father of four says his door was unlocked at the time because his children had just taken out the trash. He later posted photos of the man on social media.
One of the photos shows the man entering Tucker's home and the other shows him being taken out on a stretcher.
"He chose the wrong house to mess with," said Tucker.
Tucker says he wants this to serve as a warning to other homeowners.
"Definitely get you something inside your home to protect yourself whether it's mace or a firearm, anything to make sure you have something to protect yourself. Always keep your doors locked, alarm system, definitely something with a camera on the outside," said Tucker.
The father of four says his focus now is getting his sons through the trauma of being attacked.
"Looking into trying to get them at least a little bit of therapy so they can talk about it and not be afraid or scared because your home is supposed to be your sanctuary. Right now they're feeling like nowhere is safe," said Tucker.
Police say Tucker did nothing wrong in responding the way he did. They say its a resident's right to protect themselves and their family.
The alleged intruder will face felony assault and burglary charges. It's unclear why he broke in to begin with.
https://twitter.com/MikeSington/status/1816846044124352892
New York Times does detailed analysis of bullet trajectories, video, photos, and audio of shooting at Trump rally. They conclude Trump was most likely grazed by the first of eight bullets fired by the gunman, and not shrapnel or something else.
This is in line with FBI report:
the FBI confirmed Friday that it was indeed a bullet that struck the former president’s ear, moving to clear up conflicting accounts about what caused the former president’s injuries after a gunman opened fire at a Pennsylvania rally.
“What struck former President Trump in the ear was a bullet, whether whole or fragmented into smaller pieces, fired from the deceased subject’s rifle,” the agency said in a statement.
The fact that this has been so in question is truly a testament to how unhinged and deranged the left is and how badly they want to score a point on Trump, even during his assassination.
"The thing that hit Trump's ear, as multiple bullets flew by his head, one of which killed someone behind him, HAD to have been glass from some broken object somewhere (will find later) or shrapnel or something. To say it was a bullet....will require much more analysis"
They hate that their rhetoric is plainly what caused it, they hate that he missed, and they hate they have to see that photo over and over, and they are salivating to be able to put an (*) on it so they can say "ohhhh cmon it was just a little cut from a piece of glass!"
Un. Hinged.
I think someone here was saying this doesn't happen.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/a-maryland-couple-lost-custody-of-their-autistic-son-after-refusing-to-transition-his-gender-now-theyre-suing?utm_medium=email&utm_source=cnemail&seyid=12579
Military veterans who reportedly lost custody of their autistic son after they refused to transition his gender are speaking out after suing a major hospital in Washington, D.C.
The Maryland couple ... said their son had never shown any transgender tendencies until after a breakup with his girlfriend in 2021. The boy was 16 at the time and ended up in the hospital after harming himself following the breakup.
In May 2021, before the breakup, the teen had texted friends to say he was LGBT, but still used masculine pronouns and never indicated that he identified as transgender, the Mail reported. Around this same time, he was being tested for autism and being counseled by a service for disabled children.
But while at Children’s National Hospital in November 2021, the family was informed that the boy wanted to be a girl, and the family needed to start referring to him with she/her pronouns, according to their lawsuit reviewed by the Mail. The boy’s parents rejected this suggestion, reportedly telling hospital staff that their son was “impressionable” because he was autistic.
The couple say in their lawsuit, filed earlier this year, that the hospital began a “full-on campaign to transgender this child” going so far as to say the hospital engaged in “mental re-programming.” At one point, they said, the boy was forced to write letters to his friends rejecting his previous male identity, the Mail reported.
The family says in their lawsuit that the hospital was able to use its emergency policies to keep the boy from his parents and reported them to child protection services. He was held at the hospital for 41 days before being placed into foster care with a single foster mother who was allegedly a friend of the hospital’s “non-gendered” chaplain and who had a previous assault charge. The boy is currently living with the chaplain, according to the Mail, because the foster mother died.
In July 2022 – months after being taken from his family and referred to by feminine pronouns – the boy attempted suicide a second time, and was readmitted to Children’s National Hospital as a girl, the Mail reported.
"In July 2022 – months after being taken from his family and referred to by feminine pronouns – the boy attempted suicide a second time"
Who woulda thought, the kid with severe and debilitating mental illness didn't get magically better when he was taken from his parents and put in the care of someone who catered to his delusions. Who could have predicted this.
Next you are going to tell me that screaming "Yes, you ARE a fat piece of shit!" at an anorexic girl will lead her to have further health consequences, or that telling a young boy that identifies as a car to play in traffic will result in him being run over. Not possible, no way.
"I have great respect for our institutions and the separation of powers laid out in our Constitution," President Joe Biden said yesterday at an event in Austin, Texas. "But what's happening now is not consistent with that doctrine of separation of powers.
"Having said that, if my supporters need their student loans paid off, I'm not going to let some 200 year old parchment stop me from raiding the public Treasury to pay those loans off, even if Congress never authorized a penny for that purpose. The Constitution isn't a suicide pact, nor is it a stingy parent who expects you to pay for something if you broke it."