I used to read Matt Bruenig's old blogs and he was arguing with people saying that trespassing is rape.
US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
I used to read Matt Bruenig's old blogs and he was arguing with people saying that trespassing is rape.
I want to do a post hog joke but I can't find a way to make it funny and also it's not an appropriate time.
But yeah, it's interesting. At least 'taxation is theft' has some internal logic to it, while the rape stuff is weird on so many levels. It's shocking and provocative in a way, but surely only effective on people already on your side. With trespassing I guess it's somewhat closer, but it's still a pretty insane thing to say. Both because it's stupid and because I can't see how it's even remotely rhetorically effective.
As someone in Missouri - this was actually put forward by a female Republican lawmaker, they claim it's to even up the dress code as apparently men have to ear a shirt, tie and jacket, but in reality it's an attempt to stop the men staring at their tits
I could have put this in The Biden Presidency thread, but I thought this is good food for thought overall about justice in American politics.
This should be the very last time that a judge is named as Attorney General. The next people to hold that office better be people already being active prosecutors or who last were prosecutors/district attorneys.
Glenn Kirschner or Preet Bharara should be the current AG.
This should be the very last time that a judge is named as Attorney General. The next people to hold that office better be people already being active prosecutors or who last were prosecutors/district attorneys.
Glenn Kirschner or Preet Bharara should be the current AG.
You obviously don't know that before he was a judge one of his jobs was as a federal prosector, one of the ones that sent Timothy McVeigh to get the needle, that makes him well qualified
I do know, but even then I don't feel he is qualified nor ruthless enough for what this job demands as of today. He better explain to me why it took a while before a special prosecutor was brought in regarding the documents found at Mar-a-Lago while it only took 2-3 days to name a special prosecutor for the documents involved with Joe Biden.
Ruthlessness and fairness are the only things that should be asked from the Attorney General. Merrick Garland has shown gaping holes in both so far. He thinks too much like a judge rather than a prosecutor now.
re: the special prosecutor, that's down to Republican's taking the house, if the Democrats had won that there wouldn't be either, he'll have to explain those decisions to a nutjob committee in the house and he'll not fancy that but by appointing both he can't be accused of taking sides
I agree he could be more ruthless, he should have gone after Trump quicker and sooner but I suspect he's trying to not be labelled as a political partizan hack like Barr
She is still banging on about this even after Hobbs has been sworn in.
Even after a judge told her to feck off as well, and ordered her to pay some of Hobbs' costs, she's just trying to stay relevant in Trump world so he's nice to her
This has all the hallmarks of her flying to Mar-a-lago and Trump instructing her to never admit defeat by endlessly claiming fraud. Little does she know this makes her look like an even bigger loser.
I know that as do you, but in Trump World a loser is someone who disagrees with the orange blob!
She’s been on a weekly appearance streak at MaL for weeks now. It’s quite sad.
No it's not, it's great seeing people making right tits of themselves time and time again
Don't get me wrong, I revel in shit like this. My 'sorrow' is very superficial & fleeting.
snapI read that as pastries and I am just going to stick to that. Onward the pastry party!
That is ostensibly what Independents have become - a third party of sorts that coagulate behind candidates and policies over a particular party.
In the end they still have to vote D/R though, so it's not an alternative at all, is it? You might as well call non-voters a party.
They vote D or R but that means both have to vie for their support, which tacitly dilutes the power of both parties in pursuit of voters outside their respective bases
That's still not nearly the same as having another party or two though.
Yeah there’s not going to be a viable third party in American politics anytime soon, mainly because any attempt to start one will result in one of the two parties subsuming the platform of the new party, thereby rendering it useless. Independents are the only voting block that are a check on the two parties.
It's the "you hate to see it but you love to see it" cliche.
Lake v Sinema will be a tasty matchup in 24
You mean Lake v Sinema v Dem candidate. Sinema running might actually help the Dems as Sinema could pick off some of the "not crazy" GOP votes.
I think the Dems may consider not running anyone since it would merely split Sinema's votes and gift the election to the R.
On what planet is Sinema any better than an R candidate? She votes with the Rs, she grandstands against the Democrats and she attention seeks. Shes the worst of all worlds. At least an R wouldn’t waste Democrat’s time and money when it comes to a close vote.
She actually votes mostly with Dems. The few cases when she hasn't typically get blown up because they make it harder for Biden to pass a particular piece of legislation (this is also the case with Manchin). That won't change whether she's an independent or a Dem, but she would be infinitely better than any R MAGA grifter.
Exactly - the Dems don't run against Sanders or the other independent (King I think it is) do they?
Congratulations, everything you just said is completely wrong.
The glasses gave it away for me. They just scream DDR Stasi and I'll bet Putin chose them himself.