LawTalkers
Page 45 of 202 « First 354344 45 46475595145 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years! (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=885)

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-19-2022 05:31 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 532488)
Sorry all for the brief downtime! My credit card number changed and I forgot to update the host. All is clear, and I also renewed the domain for another three years. Hopefully that'll keep us up and running for awhile.

Also, my son was born two weeks ago today, and I've sort of been distracted.

:D

His pictures are all over my facebook and twitter if you follow such things.

I'm in love.
Thank you for keeping us around, let me know if I should send on something for the costs.

But in all cases, baby before imaginary friends.

Congrats again. It really warms my heart to sign on to FB and see the photos. If it makes me happy I can only imagine how happy it makes you.

Hank Chinaski 03-22-2022 09:14 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 532494)
Thank you for keeping us around, let me know if I should send on something for the costs.

But in all cases, baby before imaginary friends.

Congrats again. It really warms my heart to sign on to FB and see the photos. If it makes me happy I can only imagine how happy it makes you.
Does anyone else feel we should sue the site for the time we lost? Icky, a possible class action?

Of course then we would have to claim we have something in common with flower, which has to quell plaintiffs joining?

sebastian_dangerfield 03-23-2022 05:17 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 532488)
Sorry all for the brief downtime! My credit card number changed and I forgot to update the host. All is clear, and I also renewed the domain for another three years. Hopefully that'll keep us up and running for awhile.

Also, my son was born two weeks ago today, and I've sort of been distracted.

:D

His pictures are all over my facebook and twitter if you follow such things.

I'm in love.
Congratulations! That's awesome.

sebastian_dangerfield 03-23-2022 05:42 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Initially, I thought it was insane to attack Jackson as being soft on pedophiles. The only character indictment this could support is the suggestion she has a secret affinity for child molesters. Could any sane person really believe she (or for that matter almost anyone other person who could reach her level) is sympathetic to NAMBLA sorts?

Everybody blames Biden for starting this mess with Borking. But Bork really did suck, all the dicks, from here to the Rockies. He was a bought and paid for advocate playing judge who paved the way for our current monopoly-addled economy. Biden was right, even if he didn't know why, to Bork Bork. And smart people can look at that and say, decades on, thank god that happened.

But nothing is gained, and everything is lost, to allow Lindsey Graham to discuss his lack of faith with a SCOTUS nominee, to have Hawley and Cruz soil the chamber insinuating she's soft on kiddie porn aficionados. If these SCOTUS confirmation hearings are going to be what they apparently have become - spectacles where firebrands can score points with the primary voters back home by lobbing preposterous charges - they ought to remove the cameras from the room.

The behavior of the GOP in that chamber this week - the same people who bristled at Schumer's hit-job on Kavanaugh - was comical. And it'd be funny. Calling an eminently qualified person a pedophile coddler is excellent dark humor. Absurdist. Except that, I fear, it's effective, and received without hint of irony by the only audiences the Hawleys and Cruzes care about.

Get the cameras out of these hearings. This shit debases us on the global stage, to the extent that remains possible.

Hank Chinaski 03-23-2022 06:33 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 532497)
Initially, I thought it was insane to attack Jackson as being soft on pedophiles. The only character indictment this could support is the suggestion she has a secret affinity for child molesters. Could any sane person really believe she (or for that matter almost anyone other person who could reach her level) is sympathetic to NAMBLA sorts?

Everybody blames Biden for starting this mess with Borking. But Bork really did suck, all the dicks, from here to the Rockies. He was a bought and paid for advocate playing judge who paved the way for our current monopoly-addled economy. Biden was right, even if he didn't know why, to Bork Bork. And smart people can look at that and say, decades on, thank god that happened.

But nothing is gained, and everything is lost, to allow Lindsey Graham to discuss his lack of faith with a SCOTUS nominee, to have Hawley and Cruz soil the chamber insinuating she's soft on kiddie porn aficionados. If these SCOTUS confirmation hearings are going to be what they apparently have become - spectacles where firebrands can score points with the primary voters back home by lobbing preposterous charges - they ought to remove the cameras from the room.

The behavior of the GOP in that chamber this week - the same people who bristled at Schumer's hit-job on Kavanaugh - was comical. And it'd be funny. Calling an eminently qualified person a pedophile coddler is excellent dark humor. Absurdist. Except that, I fear, it's effective, and received without hint of irony by the only audiences the Hawleys and Cruzes care about.

Get the cameras out of these hearings. This shit debases us on the global stage, to the extent that remains possible.
the nature of the attacks is such that it destroys the credibility of The Court. No one respects the decisions as possibly being fair as they are written by people half of whom half the country think are jokes.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-23-2022 07:56 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 532498)
the nature of the attacks is such that it destroys the credibility of The Court. No one respects the decisions as possibly being fair as they are written by people half of whom half the country think are jokes.
The Republicans have already done that, it's just playing out slowly. It's taken them decades, but they packed the Court with ideologues, and the Court's legitimacy can't survive that.

We'd face reality faster if so many Senators weren't geriatric, but you have Senators like mine (DiFi) whose deteriorating neurons play in a bygone fantasyland of bipartisan comity.

Hank Chinaski 03-23-2022 08:15 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 532499)
The Republicans have already done that, it's just playing out slowly. It's taken them decades, but they packed the Court with ideologues, and the Court's legitimacy can't survive that.

We'd face reality faster if so many Senators weren't geriatric, but you have Senators like mine (DiFi) whose deteriorating neurons play in a bygone fantasyland of bipartisan comity.
Who appointed Souter? He was the first time I felt that way. He was a shut in who lived with his mommy. They basically implied he might be a pedophile.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-24-2022 02:33 AM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 532500)
Who appointed Souter? He was the first time I felt that way. He was a shut in who lived with his mommy. They basically implied he might be a pedophile.
I'm not sure what you're referring to with the "first time I felt that way" but I would consider the Souter appointment (by Bush I) and subsequent confirmation (with 90 votes) one of the cases where the process worked pretty well.

Sure, he was formally opposed by a lot of key liberal constituencies, but when you get 90 votes in the Senate you know they didn't push opposition to him as a top priority. The reason it worked that time was Republicans didn't appoint a lunatic like Bork or someone like Kavanaugh who had pretty much been groomed by the Federalists from his days carrying Ken Starr's bag. Souter had a big political friend in Sununu, who was Bush's chief of Staff and the former Gov. of NH, but otherwise he really came from outside the world of DC. I don't remember grandstanding jackassery during his process, but I mostly remember the nomination as a foregone conclusion so not sure I paid that much attention.

I think Ty's point that we'd all be better off if the average age in the Senate were a few years younger (indeed, 30 years younger wouldn't be hard) may not be accurate. If you look at some of the "younger" Senators, like Cruz or Hawley, you get different flaws from the DiFis and Grassleys of the world. The Senate has always has geriatric basket cases, but they are just one of the motley crew we get, and swapping an old codger for a youthful asshat isn't necessarily going to help.

Adder 03-24-2022 10:30 AM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 532497)
Initially, I thought it was insane to attack Jackson as being soft on pedophiles. The only character indictment this could support is the suggestion she has a secret affinity for child molesters. Could any sane person really believe she (or for that matter almost anyone other person who could reach her level) is sympathetic to NAMBLA sorts?

Everybody blames Biden for starting this mess with Borking. But Bork really did suck, all the dicks, from here to the Rockies. He was a bought and paid for advocate playing judge who paved the way for our current monopoly-addled economy. Biden was right, even if he didn't know why, to Bork Bork. And smart people can look at that and say, decades on, thank god that happened.

But nothing is gained, and everything is lost, to allow Lindsey Graham to discuss his lack of faith with a SCOTUS nominee, to have Hawley and Cruz soil the chamber insinuating she's soft on kiddie porn aficionados. If these SCOTUS confirmation hearings are going to be what they apparently have become - spectacles where firebrands can score points with the primary voters back home by lobbing preposterous charges - they ought to remove the cameras from the room.

The behavior of the GOP in that chamber this week - the same people who bristled at Schumer's hit-job on Kavanaugh - was comical. And it'd be funny. Calling an eminently qualified person a pedophile coddler is excellent dark humor. Absurdist. Except that, I fear, it's effective, and received without hint of irony by the only audiences the Hawleys and Cruzes care about.

Get the cameras out of these hearings. This shit debases us on the global stage, to the extent that remains possible.
It's worse than that. It is Q-Anon type conspiracy stuff. They are using the same insinuations behind their Don't Say Gay bills too. Vile stuff.

Hank Chinaski 03-24-2022 12:31 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 532501)
I'm not sure what you're referring to with the "first time I felt that way" but I would consider the Souter appointment (by Bush I) and subsequent confirmation (with 90 votes) one of the cases where the process worked pretty well.

Sure, he was formally opposed by a lot of key liberal constituencies, but when you get 90 votes in the Senate you know they didn't push opposition to him as a top priority. The reason it worked that time was Republicans didn't appoint a lunatic like Bork or someone like Kavanaugh who had pretty much been groomed by the Federalists from his days carrying Ken Starr's bag. Souter had a big political friend in Sununu, who was Bush's chief of Staff and the former Gov. of NH, but otherwise he really came from outside the world of DC. I don't remember grandstanding jackassery during his process, but I mostly remember the nomination as a foregone conclusion so not sure I paid that much attention.

I think Ty's point that we'd all be better off if the average age in the Senate were a few years younger (indeed, 30 years younger wouldn't be hard) may not be accurate. If you look at some of the "younger" Senators, like Cruz or Hawley, you get different flaws from the DiFis and Grassleys of the world. The Senate has always has geriatric basket cases, but they are just one of the motley crew we get, and swapping an old codger for a youthful asshat isn't necessarily going to help.
I just remember he was painted as a shut in who lived with his mom and had no experience interacting with people, so how could he judge?

The senate was given massive power because it was expected it wouldn’t be full of craven people who don’t give a shot about the country.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-24-2022 01:04 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 532501)
I'm not sure what you're referring to with the "first time I felt that way" but I would consider the Souter appointment (by Bush I) and subsequent confirmation (with 90 votes) one of the cases where the process worked pretty well.

Sure, he was formally opposed by a lot of key liberal constituencies, but when you get 90 votes in the Senate you know they didn't push opposition to him as a top priority. The reason it worked that time was Republicans didn't appoint a lunatic like Bork or someone like Kavanaugh who had pretty much been groomed by the Federalists from his days carrying Ken Starr's bag. Souter had a big political friend in Sununu, who was Bush's chief of Staff and the former Gov. of NH, but otherwise he really came from outside the world of DC. I don't remember grandstanding jackassery during his process, but I mostly remember the nomination as a foregone conclusion so not sure I paid that much attention.

I think Ty's point that we'd all be better off if the average age in the Senate were a few years younger (indeed, 30 years younger wouldn't be hard) may not be accurate. If you look at some of the "younger" Senators, like Cruz or Hawley, you get different flaws from the DiFis and Grassleys of the world. The Senate has always has geriatric basket cases, but they are just one of the motley crew we get, and swapping an old codger for a youthful asshat isn't necessarily going to help.
A lot of conservatives were pissed off that Souter didn't give them the kind of rulings they wanted, and the lesson they took was that they needed to exert pressure on the nomination process to make sure they got the kind of judge they wanted. When another Bush tried to nominate another Souter, W. and Harriet Miers, conservatives revolted and prevented that from happening, and got Alito instead, and we all can see how that turned out.

LessinSF 03-24-2022 01:36 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 532500)
Who appointed Souter? He was the first time I felt that way. He was a shut in who lived with his mommy. They basically implied he might be a pedophile.
Abe Fortas.

sebastian_dangerfield 03-24-2022 01:50 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 532498)
the nature of the attacks is such that it destroys the credibility of The Court. No one respects the decisions as possibly being fair as they are written by people half of whom half the country think are jokes.
Really? I think it destroys the credibility of the Senate.

People who'd think less of Jackson because of the crazy shit thrown by Cruz and Hawley are idiots. What they think isn't going to be changed. And arguably, they're not worth trying to reach. If you think Jackson is a friend to pedophiles, you're in humanity's sphere of deviancy. You're a lost cause, a thing the absence of which would assist humanity. Your consciousness is gift undeserved and your being here, breathing our air and sharing our space, is a liability, a damage to the rest of us.

Got that off my chest...

The people I care about are the sane people who view these hearings and say, "My God. The fucking country is a laughingstock. The US is really, truly fucked." We need some semblance of respect to conduct ourselves on the world stage. Televising these hearings is an unforced error - an incentive for the likes of Cruz and Hawley. Audio only isn't a complete fix, but it gets them off TV, and that's something.

sebastian_dangerfield 03-24-2022 02:00 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 532499)
The Republicans have already done that, it's just playing out slowly. It's taken them decades, but they packed the Court with ideologues, and the Court's legitimacy can't survive that.

We'd face reality faster if so many Senators weren't geriatric, but you have Senators like mine (DiFi) whose deteriorating neurons play in a bygone fantasyland of bipartisan comity.
Mathematically, the Court isn't in that bad of condition. It just needs a fourth liberal judge and Roberts to play the swing vote.

As to quality/stridency of the ideologues, well, that's different. Alito is a crypto-fascist. Gorsuch seems fine, however. I know little about Kavanaugh, but he is technically qualified. I know nothing about Barrett, but her loony religious views render her unqualified IMO.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-24-2022 03:11 PM
Re: Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 532503)
I just remember he was painted as a shut in who lived with his mom and had no experience interacting with people, so how could he judge?

The senate was given massive power because it was expected it wouldn’t be full of craven people who don’t give a shot about the country.
Eh, yeah, he got some of that stuff, but I don't think it really played a role in the confirmation (though I admit I remember it only vaguely today). And I think he got that stuff his whole life, because he is a reticent swamp yankee who sticks to himself most of the time and never married. Yeah, you do that, people give you shit, usually behind your back.

My favorite Souter story though is about why he moved from his family's farmhouse to a new place, which is a pretty humble single story ranch nearby. He decided he needed a new place because the weight of his books was causing the floors to buckle and the books were more important than the house.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:09 PM.
Page 45 of 202 « First 354344 45 46475595145 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com