patrick.net

curious2 says

It is discussed, including on PatNet, so that is another lie from you. As candidate Trump said, Islam hates us. It is a totalitarian doctrine that commands the violent overthrow of our government, and hides behind the beard of a religion.

OK--point me to a discussion of declaring that Islam a=is not a religion. Perhaps I missed it.

Rin says

Did you flunk out of law school or something?

lol. I referenced the Establishment Clause earlier in my posts so obviously not. Perhaps you need a primer on reading comprehension.


Rin says

Excerpt: "The Establishment Clause is a limitation placed upon the United States Congress preventing it from passing legislation respecting an establishment of religion. The second half of the Establishment Clause inherently prohibits the government from preferring any one religion over another. While the Establishment Clause does prohibit Congress from preferring or elevating one religion over another, it does not prohibit the government's entry into the religious domain to make accommodations for religious observances and practices in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause. "

In other words, society needs to realize that Islam is in fact, a religion, derived from ancient Arabia, today, known as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Unless some anthropologist can prove this wrong, it stands as a fact.

No, your "in other words" is not at all a summation of the prior clause. If one declares that Islam is NOT a religion, clearly one is not preferring one religion over another. That should be obvious. That is the entire purpose behind declaring that it's not a religion.

Rin says

My point was that LeonDurham wanted the US govt to officially declare that "Islam not a recognized religion" when in fact, the US govt does not have that authority.

OK-that may be true, but what is the law that defines the requirements for an established religion that the US must recognize?

Rin says

Yes, which is why Leon's argument that this was racism was a Straw Man. So far, I'm yet to hear of Cambodian Buddhists immigrating to the US to blow up buses and shopping centers.

And that's why I would NEVER and did NEVER make such an argument. Please do not put words in my mouth (or post in this case).


#1--we're talking about religion, not race. Why in the world you would think I ever said anything about racism is beyond me.
#2--I've simply commented on the law

LeonDurham says

That is the entire purpose behind declaring that it's not a religion.

So an expert panel (pick any of the universities a/o think tanks of the globe) of anthropologists, historians, and political scientists are going to say that 'Islam is NOT a religion of the ppls of Arabia'? So who was the First Caliphate, Abu Bakr, aside from being a believer in the visions of the prophet Mohamed? If that's not a religion, which really is little more than an oversized cult, then what is?

Wasn't that essentially Paul of Tarsas's role, when he spread the stories of Jesus throughout the ethnic Greek majority Anatolia and the rest of the Roman Empire? And at least the first Caliphate knew Mohamed in person whereas Paul only saw Jesus in a vision, while he was having a nervous breakdown near Damascus.

This is basically the Ignatius Loyola technique of the middle ages ...

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ignatius_of_Loyola

Iggy said: "what I see as white is black, if the hierarchic Church defines it thus."

Sorry, that doesn't fly in the modern world. That's called denial.

Today, the definition is clear ... Islam is a religion but a religion of cultural [ see Arabic culture ] expansion & violence. Hence, not being Arabians, we (meaning the west) do not want their values and customs in our society.

So yes, the US govt can restrict immigration from Islamic majority countries, and domestically, toss Imams in jail for advocating violence on the local populations.

Rin says

So yes, the US govt can restrict immigration from Islamic majority countries, and domestically, toss Imams in jail for advocating violence on the local populations.

I agree with this. Unfortunately, Trump opened his big mouth and declared that he was going to ban Musliims, not ban people from certain countries. Therefore, even when the directive was written to ban people from certain countries, courts have ruled that his intention is clearly to ban Muslims, which they find to be unconstitutional.

Rin says

So an expert panel (pick any of the universities a/o think tanks of the globe) of anthropologists, historians, and political scientists are going to say that 'Islam is NOT a religion of the ppls of Arabia'? So who was the First Caliphate, Abu Bakr, aside from being a believer in the visions of the prophet Mohamed? If that's not a religion, which really is little more than an oversized cult, then what is?

Is that the standard for legally recognizing a religion? A panel of experts? I've not seen anything that sets a legal standard, so that's an honest question.

Travel Ban Upheld by highest Court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-travel-ban.html

LeonDurham says

Is that the standard for legally recognizing a religion? A panel of experts?

The IRS and the courts seem to determine what is a "legitimate" religion. The IRS determines tax exempt status (my opinion is this should be revoked for all religions) I would guess they have written criteria for this, but don't know. I remember years ago the Native American religion that used peyote as part of its, in my opinion, legit religious ceremony lost in court when trying to get a waiver from the law outlawing peyote's use and possession. I think there has subsequently been some accommodation. Clearly the law as it is interpreted favors established so called mainstream religions. Islam falls into that category whether you like it or not. Some countries such as Russia have "officially" recognized religions and they do not recognize others, they banned Jehovah's Witness a few years ago. I don't believe U.S. can do this due to the establishment clause.

I think that the republicans will lose a few seats in the House, but will not lose the majority. They should probably keep the majority in the Senate, as well. The economy has improved so much under Trump that people will vote their pocket books. The job gains under Obama were all part time jobs. There have been millions of full time jobs created under Trump and many part time jobs converted to full time (these are not fully reflected in the job numbers). It is not just a continuation of a trend, the full time jobs now being created mean a much better economy.

rdm says

LeonDurham says

Is that the standard for legally recognizing a religion? A panel of experts?

The IRS and the courts seem to determine what is a "legitimate" religion.

Which loops back to the main point, what is our judiciary system?... aside from being a panel of legally trained experts, albeit, over represented by places like Harvard or Yale Law Schools.

And yes, these judges will defer to the expert opinions of anthropologists, historians, and political scientists as to whether or not Islam is a religion or not. And since most would concur that it was a religion, then that pathway won't work.

Let's just hope that they reach out from beyond Harvard and Yale. That's too much Ivy league incest.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/gop-poised-midterm-wipeout-apos-130000367.html

Politics
GOP poised for midterm wipeout as 'blue wave' scenario gives Democrats a 12-point lead: NBC-WSJ poll

John Harwood,CNBC 11 hours ago

"The new NBC News-Wall Street Journal survey, taken six weeks before Americans head to the polls, shows Democrats leading Republicans by 52 percent to 40 percent for control of Congress.
If it holds, that 12 percentage point margin would suggest a "blue wave" large enough to switch control of not just the House but also the Senate."

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

lol

Republican Party Favorability highest in 7 years:

Republican favorability at 45%, Democrats at 44%
Democrats generally have had the upper hand in favorability ratings
Major gains for Republican Party within the party, including leaners
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Forty-five percent of Americans now have a favorable view of the Republican Party, a nine-point gain from last September's 36%. It is the party's most positive image since it registered 47% in January 2011, shortly after taking control of the House in the 2010 midterm elections. Forty-four percent give the Democratic Party a favorable rating.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/242906/republican-party-favorability-highest-seven-years.aspx

This thread will be fun to visit in Six weeks. I’m glad I got the first comment. On record in May for RED WAVE!

I am predicting repubs will hold the house in smaller numbers and increase senate. Lets see. Me thinks dems overplayed their hand with kavanaugh -next will be Hilalry ina dominatrix suite claiming Kavanugh stiffed her fee.

One race here in Va you may find interesting. The Virginia 2nd District seat would normally be a shoe-in for the ex Navy SEAL incumbent, but his campaign staff did a little fraud helping a primaried out Democrat collect signatures so she could run as an Independent. That would split the Democrat votes and help the incumbent win. If the incumbent loses, (not sure what the odds are) it will be as a reaction to this fraud. A court case threw out the collected signatures, so the Independent is not on the ballot.

Now I'm positive there won't be a blue wave.

Last week, I sued @realDonaldTrump & @senatemajldr to stop the unconstitutional Kavanaugh confirmation process. Today I filed a motion for a restraining order against Trump and McConnell to force immediate disclosure of the Kavanaugh record they’ve been working so hard to hide.

— Jeff Merkley (@JeffMerkley) October 3, 2018

The Democrats shot themselves in the foot REALLY badly. Their only hope to stop Kavanaugh's appointment, but at this point I don't think it matters.

Imagine, the Media no longer controls the narrative.

"Hit the Identity/Rape/Toxic White Male button again!"
"I can't"
"Why not?"
"It's jammed to the on position!"

The blue Squirt!

Holy crap, look at Cramer vs. Heitkamp. A nobody is beating the crap out of a well-known Senator, RCP average is 8.7 pts - some have him leading by double digits!

New prediction, more specific this time. The GOP will pick up 8-10 seats in the Senate and 15 in the House. This will establish a supermajority in Congress while several GOPe congressmen were either primaried out or retired, and all the new GOP congressmen will be Pro-MAGA!

Trump will have a mandate.
Leftist tears enough to fill Lake Michigan!

Glorious!

Quigley says

Leftist tears enough to fill Lake Michigan!

Careful. Lake Michigan is the fullest I've seen it on the Chicago shoreline in my lifetime. Just drove by on Sunday to the last regular season cubs game. Shit, she was bulging. Wisconsin has gotten tons of rain this summer, which of course all goes out over the lake. No tears please, it's full.

Quigley says

The GOP will pick up 8-10 seats in the Senate and 15 in the House.

Not sure where you're drawing those conclusions from. Odds are good that the Repubs will pick up a couple seats in the Senate, but the House? Not quite.

The anger about the Kavanagh Kangaroo Kourt is real and will drive extra beatings than were already in store for the Democrats. Remember I predicted a red wave in May.
That red wave just got ten feet higher!

The Democrats just marginalized their party for a generation.

Official: Heitkamp is out of the Race for ND Senate. Vows to vote "No" on Kavanaugh.
https://twitter.com/AP/status/1047914985341558785

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Official: Heitkamp is out of the Race for ND Senate. Vows to vote "No" on Kavanaugh.
https://twitter.com/AP/status/1047914985341558785

Heitkamp has been trailing Cramer since like May. The Kavanaugh hearings may have moved the needle infinitesimally but she's been in an uphill battle for at least 2 months before Kavanaugh was even announced.

In all likelihood she knows she's toast and is just voting her conscience.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Official: Heitkamp is out of the Race for ND Senate. Vows to vote "No" on Kavanaugh.
https://twitter.com/AP/status/1047914985341558785

Just like that, ND got a GOP senator in November.

Democrats' 2018 "Better Deal" leaves a lot of room for improvement. It seems mainly about adding government programs.

For example, to address absurdly high medical costs, "Prescription drugs that meet a test for an unconscionable price increase will be subject to new investigative and enforcement action by a new “price gouging” enforcer." Nevermind the already absurdly high baseline, and the routine increases: only an "unconscionable" increase will trigger review. And forget about market competition. Repealing the Rx requirement and import restrictions, so that people can shop around and buy what they want from wherever they want, would reduce costs dramatically and quickly, but that is not part of the deal.

I don't see huge numbers of people rallying around creating new government departments. The game plan seems to be primarily TDS, opposing the President and all of his works. That didn't work in 2016, so it seems unlikely to do better in 2018 when he isn't even on the ballot.

I would love to be proven wrong about this, because I do think divided government produces better judicial appointments, and for that reason I would like to see Democrats regain the Senate. I just don't see it happening with the current "deal".

MockingbirdKiller says

She was screwed no matter how she voted. Vote 'yes' and lose her base. Lose her base, guaranteed to lose the election.

Vote 'no', she keeps her base but will probably lose the election anyway. Poll show that 50% of Likely Voters in ND support Kavanaugh.

True. Red State Democrats should really learn a lesson from Manchin (who will probably end up switching parties anyway).

curious2 says

I don't see huge numbers of people rallying around creating new government departments.

What else do Democrats offer besides more Government programs mired by corruption and inefficiency?

Only Progressive Activists, 8% of population, think Free Speech isn't an issue. Only Traditional Liberals (11%) and Progressive Activists (8%) think Hate Speech is more of an issue than Free Speech. Ignore the loud minority.



https://pjmedia.com/trending/80-percent-of-americans-oppose-political-correctness-study-finds/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/410575-poll-dems-lead-gop-by-13-points-on-generic-congressional-ballot

Democrats hold a 13-point lead over Republicans among likely voters on the generic congressional ballot

That same very biased CNN poll said that 50% of the same people thought the GOP would retain the majority in the House.

haha, that's great

LeonDurham says

Democrats hold a 13-point lead over Republicans among likely voters on the generic congressional ballot

Good. News like this usually lead to less turnout on the "winning" side.

DASKAA says

Good. News like this usually lead to less turnout on the "winning" side.

Maybe. Dems seem pretty energized this time around. Predicting turnout is very difficult, however, so you could be right.

LeonDurham says

https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/410575-poll-dems-lead-gop-by-13-points-on-generic-congressional-ballot

Democrats hold a 13-point lead over Republicans among likely voters on the generic congressional ballot

Oh also, HRC holds a 13 point advantage over Trump. https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/23/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-presidential-polls/index.html

"The ABC News poll was conducted October 20-22 and includes 874 likely voters. Its margin of error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points."

Ok, so for anyone paying attention. A 12 point lead w a 3.5 % margin of error should almost NEVER result in a Trump victory.

Tell us again about those reliable polls?