US Politics

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/01/us/politics/pentagon-civilian-casualties.html

499 innocent civilian deaths by air strike alone confirmed by the Pentagon for 2017. True numbers likely to be a multiple of that.

And Trump logic has taken over everywhere:
The report asserted that “although civilian casualties are a tragic and unavoidable part of war, no force in history has been more committed to limiting harm to civilians than the U.S. military.” It was unclear what Defense Department officials based that assertion on.
Click to expand...
 
Raoul said:
Yeah every seat counts massively at this point. The results will have a massive impact on Trump's final two years (assuming he lasts that long).
Click to expand...

Its why people should be giving money to candidates in tight congressional races and not chucking their money down the drain by donating to Beto O'Rourke.
 
Fergies Gum said:
Its why people should be giving money to candidates in tight congressional races and not chucking their money down the drain by donating to Beto O'Rourke.
Click to expand...

I agree that Dems should be working on winning winnable races. In some instances its for progressives, in others its for moderates who can win their district. It just goes to show how fractured the Democratic party is at the moment.
 
Raoul said:
It would've been 5-4 but two justices on the left side opted to side with the majority to promote more unanimity in the ruling.
Click to expand...

Interesting to surmise what this ruling might have been if Garland was the sitting justice, not Gorsuch.
 
calodo2003 said:
Interesting to surmise what this ruling might have been if Garland was the sitting justice, not Gorsuch.
Click to expand...

It would've likely been the same since Garland is considered a moderate. In today's ruling, Breyer and Kagan - who are both considered to the left of Garland - voted with the conservative majority. Only Sotomayor and Ginsburg voted against.
 
Raoul said:
It would've likely been the same since Garland is considered a moderate. In today's ruling, Breyer and Kagan - who are both considered to the left of Garland - voted with the conservative majority. Only Sotomayor and Ginsburg voted against.
Click to expand...

I never saw him as that much of a moderate, his vote would have been crucial in this vote in my opinion. Having 5-4 in favor of the couple would potentially have ameliorated the two ‘moderating’ votes of today.

That said, I can find some joy in the ruling as it is über-narrow, but more consternation overall.
 
Drifter said:
Religious nut jobs have a friend in the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
No, it's about the Supreme Court of the United States doing its job. It's the same court that made gay marriage legal in June 2015.

And I say that as someone who is not happy with today's ruling. But, I respect our judiciary system more than anything else.
 
"As the sun set on Sunday night, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) went to a shuttered Walmart in Brownsville, Texas, that has been converted into a detention center for immigrant children who have been separated from their parents. He asked for a tour. Instead, the government contractor that runs the converted store called the cops. An officer filled out a police report, and the senator was asked to leave."
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...486fe30fb04092c75ae42/?utm_term=.57d6d46fee9c
 
Eboue said:
check out this rapist piece of shit
Click to expand...
Yeah, he's vile, and the alarming amount of men (plenty on this forum) who have consistently treated his behaviour as something to be proud of is a pretty good indicator of why #metoo won't be enough.
 
Big day ahead with the primary races in California. The worry for Dems is that the field is crowded and votes may be split, which would give the GOP the chance to get their 2 candidates on to the ballot and lock out the Dems in some districts.

Also interesting to see who will join Newsom on the ballot for the governor race. It will be a bad night for the GOP if Cox doesn't get enough votes, because they need their candidate on the ballot for the governor race as it will increase GOP turnout for the local races.
 
Last edited:
Good decision by the SC of US. Great decision in fact. Some people are pushing the argument that if a straight couple came into the bakery asking for a cake, would the baker have asked them questions like "do they have kids out of wedlock?" or "do they have sex out of wedlock?". Well, in this imaginary situation, they aren't asking for a cake for an event to celebrate the fact that they are having sex out of wedlock, are they? Plus, who knows what the baker's views are.

He said he would sell them anything they wanted in the store. He has also declined to make cakes with hateful anti gay messages in the past (yeah, some people asked him to do that as well apparently, look at the Megyn Kelly episode with him).
 
Nikhil said:
Good decision by the SC of US. Great decision in fact. Some people are pushing the argument that if a straight couple came into the bakery asking for a cake, would the baker have asked them questions like "do they have kids out of wedlock?" or "do they have sex out of wedlock?". Well, in this imaginary situation, they aren't asking for a cake for an event to celebrate the fact that they are having sex out of wedlock, are they? Plus, who knows what the baker's views are.

He said he would sell them anything they wanted in the store. He has also declined to make cakes with hateful anti gay messages in the past (yeah, some people asked him to do that as well apparently, look at the Megyn Kelly episode with him).
Click to expand...

So why exactly do you think this was a 'great decision'?

I think you got two cases mixed up together in your second paragraph. The case where the baker refused to sell a cake with anti-gay messages was a different one, but taken by the SC judges for analogical reasoning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.