The Democrat party has lost its mind...

Post Reply New Topic

That is no the point...I don't really want anyone deported, I am not saying I would support that. The point is if they are going to deport everyone from south of the border who is not documented...why not undocumented Russian immigrants? Trumps wife is a Russian immigrant why isn't she in a camp based on the 'no tolerance' policy? And her cute jacket about how she doesn't give a f*ck.

John, you're basically a single issue voter, and you take quite an extreme position on that issue. I don't necessarily mean that in a bad way, even though I disagree with your stance, but surely you understand that most people accept that bombing chemical weapon production facilities following a chemical weapon attack is morally justified?

To say "well the Democrats don't share my one view, therefore they're getting worse" is rather simplistic.

Give me neoconservativism over Assad sympathy any day.


Then why did Clinton win decisively among the working class? In those earning under $50,000 a year, [url=https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/groups-voted-2016/polling suggests[/url] Clinton won 53-41. Trump won amongst the middle class, and they roughly tied among the rich.

I think it's highly probable that Russian interference swung Michigan. I also think it's well within the realms of possibility that they swung Wisconsin, Pennsylvannia, Florida, and even North Carolina, but I don't know exactly how many messages the average person needs to receive to change their vote.

Comey, and the ridiculous email narrative, were probably bigger factors than the Russian interference. But we shouldn't underestimate the impact that Russians deliberately spreading fake news on social media had upon the election.

John, you're basically a single issue voter, and you take quite an extreme position on that issue. I don't necessarily mean that in a bad way, even though I disagree with your stance, but surely you understand that most people accept that bombing chemical weapon production facilities following a chemical weapon attack is morally justified?

To say "well the Democrats don't share my one view, therefore they're getting worse" is rather simplistic.

Give me neoconservativism over Assad sympathy any day.


Then why did Clinton win decisively among the working class? In those earning under $50,000 a year, [url=https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/groups-voted-2016/polling suggests[/url] Clinton won 53-41. Trump won amongst the middle class, and they roughly tied among the rich.

I think it's highly probable that Russian interference swung Michigan. I also think it's well within the realms of possibility that they swung Wisconsin, Pennsylvannia, Florida, and even North Carolina, but I don't know exactly how many messages the average person needs to receive to change their vote.

Comey, and the ridiculous email narrative, were probably bigger factors than the Russian interference. But we shouldn't underestimate the impact that Russians deliberately spreading fake news on social media had upon the election.

Ironic that its the "Democrats" who can't deal with democracy eh!

Two cheeks of the same backside.

Maybe so.

I think it's highly probable that Russian interference swung Michigan. I also think it's well within the realms of possibility that they swung Wisconsin, Pennsylvannia, Florida, and even North Carolina, but I don't know exactly how many messages the average person needs to receive to change their vote.

Comey, and the ridiculous email narrative, were probably bigger factors than the Russian interference. But we shouldn't underestimate the impact that Russians deliberately spreading fake news on social media had upon the election.

Anger, denial, bargaining, depression and acceptance: These were the supposed five stages of grief, according to Elizabeth Kubler-Ross. Judging from the grief-addled worldview of the American left-liberal in the wake of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement, Kubler-Ross forgot one: self-destructive lunacy.

How else can one account for the way they’re floating radical ideas about the Supreme Court whose implementation would only cement their own powerlessness for a generation or more?

The idea that’s simultaneously the most popular and the most insane is increasing the size of the Supreme Court. The court, said scholars from the Harvard Law School to click-bait morons at two-bit Web sites, should be grown to 15 justices.

This is also known as “packing the court,” a term derived from a near-constitutional crisis in 1937 when an angry FDR went a long way down the road to trying to implement it when he felt the sitting Supremes were derailing his agenda unfairly.

Students of American history ever since have been taught the perils of executive-branch overreach through the “packing the court” moment. FDR’s determination to rid himself of one of the key checks and balances on his power provided exactly the example history needed for the continued strength of those checks and balances.

Right now liberals are terrified at the prospect of President Trump arrogating fascist-like powers to himself. So why would liberals therefore start arguing for the president to get more Supreme Court picks?

Follow my logic for a minute. Liberals say the court should be bigger. McConnell and Trump say, hmmm — why not? Let’s do it now!

If Republicans aren’t wiped out in November and even improve their position in the Senate a little, what is there to keep McConnell from moving a bill forward to enlarge the court? After all, it’s a Democratic idea! It’s the liberal desideratum!

Yes, I know liberals are dreaming of a day when Robert Mueller descends from the heavens and smites Trump with a thunderbolt that magically removes him from office. But if that were to happen, Mike Pence would be president. The dynamic wouldn’t exactly alter itself.

Why do they want Trump or Pence to reconstruct American law through a larger Supreme Court with an 11-4 conservative composition using Mitch McConnell as their bludgeon?

Truth is, I don’t think McConnell would do this. His career suggests he doesn’t believe in radical constitutional restructuring in this manner. But liberals think McConnell will do anything to advance his own and his party’s power. And yet they’re proposing his empowerment in the grandest possible fashion.

It’s psychotic.

All in all, the liberal freakout makes no sense. If Ruth Bader Ginsburg had announced her retirement, that would be one thing. This is not that thing. Though Kennedy has been heterodox on hot-button social issues like abortion and gay marriage, he’s mostly been a vote for the conservative side of the court in his 30 years there.

Thus his retirement won’t represent a fundamental rebalancing of the court’s ideology, since the court is already basically 5-4 on the right-hand side.

No matter. Kennedy did vote with the liberals three times in 30 years when it counted — on abortion and gay marriage — and so it would make sense they’d mourn his loss. Only that’s not what they did.

Mostly they condemned him for retiring at 81 rather than sticking it out to see if a president they liked would be elected in 2020 and would replace him with someone they also liked.

They might have considered instead whether Ginsburg should have retired in 2014, the year she turned 81, and thereby given Barack Obama a chance to fill her seat with someone who could serve for decades longer rather than stay on the court into her mid-80s — since it has become actuarially more likely she will be replaced by none other than Trump.

But if you’re a liberal you don’t talk smack about the awesome RGB, do you?

That is no the point...I don't really want anyone deported, I am not saying I would support that. The point is if they are going to deport everyone from south of the border who is not documented...why not undocumented Russian immigrants? Trumps wife is a Russian immigrant why isn't she in a camp based on the 'no tolerance' policy? And her cute jacket about how she doesn't give a f*ck.