patrick.net

marcus says

Goran_K says

I am going to vote straight GOP tomorrow, change my mind.

Fuck you. Not becasue you're voting straight republican, but becasue you're such a troll.

Even the other right wing trolls don't like you.

Wow..

Amazing stuff...

Meanwhile, I'm still on permanent "Flag"... go figure...

Goran_K says

SCOTUS to legislate rather than interpret.

It was actually "conservative" John Roberts who legislated Obamneycare from the bench, to such a degree that many have called the legislation SCOTUScare or Robertscare. The phrases "legislating from the bench" and "judicial activism" are slogans used by "conservatives" against "liberals," but these words and phrases become so distorted as to lose all meaning. Obamneycare was not liberal, in fact errc called it HeritageFoundationCare due to the mandate idea originating in a Heritage Foundation report around 1990, and then finding its way into ClintonCare and Hillary's Plan. John Roberts legislated the final version all by himself, with no precedent nor any endorsement from any other court. Roberts' legislation from the bench changed, in a fundamental way, the relationship between the federal government and the people. It was the most arrogant judicial activism I have ever seen.

Quigley says

I should think the Civil Rights Act was enacted to fix such scenarios left undefined by the Constitution.

The civil rights acts would not address states refusing to issue driver's licenses. The hypothetical example of state discrimination against white people might seem far-fetched (at least until you consider "affirmative action"), but state discrimination against Asians would be consistent with California history. There was for years a stereotype about Asians being unable to drive. (It turned out to be related to chain migration, as one person would get a license, and then take the test for other relatives, so they got licenses without ever learning to drive.) If, in the interest of public safety of course, California were to stop issuing driver's licenses to Asians, only the 14th amendment would provide a remedy, and a "conservative" "original intent" limitation to protecting only black people would eliminate that remedy. Keep in mind, a bare majority vote can amend the California constitution, as we saw with Prop H8. What goes around, comes around: if you take away the equal protection of the laws, there is no telling who gets hit next.

curious2 says

It was actually "conservative" John Roberts

That's why I said "constitutionlism", not "conservatism". Roberts really hurts himself with his own words IMO. "[I do] not think beginning with an all-encompassing approach to constitutional interpretation is the best way to faithfully construe the document."

He's another "legislate" from the Bench type of judge unlike say a Scalia, Thomas, and Gorsuch. I also do not see Kavanaugh as this type, but far better than Sotomayor for instance.

I heard the Democrats are really helping the aged vote.

In Illinois and Florida they are running shuttle buses every half hour from the Cemeteries to the Polling Stations.

The Dems have gone so far to the left that:

20% of Americans being foreign born, and having 5 times more percentage of foreign born than the next two nations (Germany, Russia at 4.5%) is too little
That ICE should be abolished
That Men slapped with evidence-free accusations should be denied high office
That we need special Trans Bathrooms, but not unisex bathrooms because they safety of the strong, independent women.
It's no problem for a 5-year old girl to see a Ladypenis in the Women's Room but if she's 19 years old and a drunk college guy streaks past her, it's Patriarchal Oppression.
The Job of the US Military is to dick around the Middle East, but it's Tyranny for the US to use the Army like 99% of all countries (inc. most Democracies) use their Army, to patrol their land borders.
They wanted to get along with the USSR, and give up all our nukes unilaterally, but they can't stand the idea of talking to a capitalist Russia.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

That Men slapped with evidence-free accusations should be denied high office

D thinking is that "That Men should be denied high office" period

Tim Aurora says

Democrats lost the 2016 election but they still had more votes. At this point , the difference in beliefs is very large with Democrats feeling that the minority Trump administration ( he had less total votes than Hillary) has basically left more than half the country behind.

I think we can argue after the 2018 election ( Democrats win the house ) and see if the Democrats stand a chance to regain 2020 senate. Any more tilt to the right, some liberal states ( California , Washington and Portland) may start asking to secede and some companies start leaving the USA. Most of the Red states are poor and actually depend on Bluer states to feed them.

How many presidents have been elected just because of the popular vote? Zero. Democrats in general don't understand the government of the United States, let alone have actually read the Federalist papers.

If the Democrats don't win the house, will you admit the Democrats have a platform problem or are you going to "secede"?

I remember from my history classes the last time Democrats tried to secede they got their asses kicked and lost their slaves.

Aphroman says

People who constantly claime to know what “D” or “liberal” thinking is are a bunch of braindead closeted homosexuals. Not that there’s anything wrong with that

Which state, R or D run, required some amount of womyn on company boards?
Which party supports witch hunts of the type "he touched me 40 years ago"?
Which party supports #metoo and pussyhat nonsense?

dr6B says

Which party supports witch hunts of the type "he touched me 40 years ago"?

An Organized "Bitchhunt"

Aphroman says

Which party spits on the Constitution

Dems for sure. They want the abolish the 1st and 2nd amendments.

Aphroman says

Which party spits on the Constitution and sold our Sovereignty down the river to foreign governments in the name of childish make believe God?

spit on constitution - D's with Affirmative Action
sold Sovereignty down the river - R's to China (as in outsourcing all American knowledge to China by R-supporting companies), but I think D's are catching up on this also

This is why nobody should be voting Blue

Anyone else sob after voting? Praying for better !! #vote pic.twitter.com/EmwLTg3JFK

— Jennifer Esposito (@JennifersWayJE) November 6, 2018

The self-righteous, self-piteous, exaggerated moral supremacy

Aphroman says

Look the thing is that sitting around schools and university babysitting children is womens work. You can easily escape that crap by hulking it up like a real man, get your Capitalist on, and get a real mans job. They’re everywhere. Let the women and children have their traditional roles

So it is OK to legislatively discriminate against some groups of population, if it helps mantra that D's are better than R's?

Me too. I don't vote for retards.

Tim Aurora says

I think if the Republicans win this , they will try to change the "Roe vs Wade" and then all hell may break lose.

Absolutely not. They will talk about changing it for next 10 years but will not do it - if it is changed, there will be one less thing to energize their base.

Tim Aurora says

I think if the Republicans win this , they will try to change the "Roe vs Wade" and then all hell may break lose.

What does it matter who wins tonight? SCOTUS could overturn or limit Roe v. Wade it if they want regardless. I don't understand this thought.

I voted anything but donk.