The First 100 days

Joe Fan said:
Imagine filling the entire federal judiciary with facsimiles of her had Hillary been allowed to win
Click to expand...

Diversity is a tricky thing. To simplify; if there is one correct answer to a legal question, then diversity would mean that any competent jurist, man, woman, white, black, latino, straight, gay, trans etc would reach that answer. In this instance, diversity would prove that it is not only white males who can rule correctly.

But diversity to the Left means that the answer is something else entirely. And that if you pick a LIBERAL woman, black, Latino, gay, trans etc demographic then their world-view takes precedence over the law.

Why? Because any law that does not favor them is considered to be unjust and thus qualifies for remediation by any means necessary including changing the law at the bench.
 
bystander said:
About the use of the word PERIOD? LOL
I don't think we argued about it. I'm just making the declaration here and now if I didn't before.
Click to expand...

Here was me trying to convince someone back in Sept 2016. I know I penned some like this earlier but I couldnt find them
Cruz Fails

"Doing anything in this election other than voting for Trump is effectively supporting Hillary in the White House. Once she is allowed to appoint her own SCOTUS Justices, she will not only be creating more problems than the ones you are thinking of now, but you will be allowing her to fundamentally change the USA.

* * *
There's plenty more, of course. Once she gains full control of the SCOTUS, she will be able to effectively bypass Congress on many things. This was a dream for FDR, he tried but failed. But with Scalia gone and his seat open, it could become reality for HRC. Together, they would become a type of Super Majority minimizing Congressional power and effectively rendering the Separation of Powers Clause meaningless. We have already seen Obama stab SOP repeatedly, but Hillary can take it to another level. How? By owning a majority on the SCOTUS.

We cannot let this happen. Voters like you could be the difference. The make-up of the SCOTUS, in my opinion, is the single biggest issue in this election. The effects of letting HRC have it may not be seen for a full decade, but by then it will be too late to do anything about it (ex, how many of FDR's programs were ever rolled back?). Now is the time to do that. It's now or never.

So hold your nose if you have to. But the choice now is binary. Either Hillary or Trump is going to be the next President. Doing anything other than voting for Trump is effectively working to elect Hillary Clinton and give her the Supreme Court."​
 
Joe Fan said:
Here was me trying to convince someone back in Sept 2016. I know I penned some like this earlier but I couldnt find them
Cruz Fails

"Doing anything in this election other than voting for Trump is effectively supporting Hillary in the White House. Once she is allowed to appoint her own SCOTUS Justices, she will not only be creating more problems than the ones you are thinking of now, but you will be allowing her to fundamentally change the USA.

* * *
There's plenty more, of course. Once she gains full control of the SCOTUS, she will be able to effectively bypass Congress on many things. This was a dream for FDR, he tried but failed. But with Scalia gone and his seat open, it could become reality for HRC. Together, they would become a type of Super Majority minimizing Congressional power and effectively rendering the Separation of Powers Clause meaningless. We have already seen Obama stab SOP repeatedly, but Hillary can take it to another level. How? By owning a majority on the SCOTUS.

We cannot let this happen. Voters like you could be the difference. The make-up of the SCOTUS, in my opinion, is the single biggest issue in this election. The effects of letting HRC have it may not be seen for a full decade, but by then it will be too late to do anything about it (ex, how many of FDR's programs were ever rolled back?). Now is the time to do that. It's now or never.

So hold your nose if you have to. But the choice now is binary. Either Hillary or Trump is going to be the next President. Doing anything other than voting for Trump is effectively working to elect Hillary Clinton and give her the Supreme Court."​
Click to expand...

I'm quite sure that I thought that back then.
 
Maybe she is right, maybe we should just let Russia and/or China handle that job instead. But we had better get the wall finished first.

 
It seems so obvious to me. The Courts can't change the law. Congress can. And the President can veto it.

But when you can't win the electoral college vote then you stack the census with illegal aliens when you know you can't repeal the electoral college requirement.

But when you can't legalize something in Congress because you don't have a majority or the President is not in your party then you use facts on the ground to be ruled upon by the courts thereby by-passing Congress and the President.
 
Joe Fan said:
John Roberts last seen hiding under his bed
ERYmqQ3WsAEU3zb.png
Click to expand...

Back in 2018, Roberts defended the federal judiciary in response to a Trump tweet. He said there is no such thing as “Obama judges.”
Top Mueller prosecutor: John Roberts might respond to Trump attack on liberal Supreme Court justices
 
Joe Fan said:
Seems unusually mature for the year 2020

Click to expand...


I think the Village People can take this stand, because most of their fans (meaning people who would actually buy their stuff or go to a concert - not just people who do the YMCA motions at ballgames) are older. Accordingly, they're not hypersensitive ******* who can't handle a band they listen to not hating every politician they hate. That isn't the case for the no-talent hacks of modern pop music. That's why Taylor Swift now has to pretend she's woke. Her fans will freak out if she doesn't.
 
Despite all this time, it is still amazing how the media lets these liars completely flip their positions without a single question

Here is Chuckles earlier this month, Trump was doing too much. Now, not doing enough

ER3I64tXYAAXLTX.jpg
 
That isn't the case for the no-talent hacks of modern pop music. That's why Taylor Swift now has to pretend she's woke. Her fans will freak out if she doesn't.
Click to expand...

That makes sense for pop music, since the whole industry manufactures stardom out of whole cloth. It wasn't true for Taylor early on, but it wouldn't surprise me if today her songs are written for her out of the pop music song factory. It is literally 2-3 50-60 year olds. Then there is the marketing and psychological analysis which determines what the "star" needs to say or wear.

That is why I have always been a fan of punk music, classic rock, and rural Mississippi bluesmen. They just make music they like and their friends like. It is rebellious and counter-cultural. Pop music tries to fit in culture, which is now "woke".
 
To change the subject a bit, an article putting the China tariffs in their proper light. We get pronouncements of victory with no real improvement for trade or for China's behavior. In the meantime, this is one more example of the government picking winners and losers in the economy.

Don't Forget About the Trade War | Christopher P. Casey

Maybe Trump "wins" in the end. That would be great, but I don't see it so far.
 
Monahorns said:
T...That is why I have always been a fan of punk music, classic rock, and rural Mississippi bluesmen. They just make music they like and their friends like. It is rebellious and counter-cultural. Pop music tries to fit in culture, which is now "woke".
Click to expand...

Even punks today are fake. How is that even possible?
 
Yeah. I agree. But there are bands out there that do their own thing. I consider them punk rock by ethic, early on that was called post-punk. Punk rock itself became a formula in the 80s with its own set of rules.

Also, much of the music I listened to is 70s, 80s, and very early 90s. After that there are a few bands I like but not many.
 
mchammer said:
Not surprising assuming their pay is higher than their normal jobs.
Click to expand...

I think compact discs and digital music changed all of their income models. Used to be that recordings were where the money was, which meant labels got an often too high of a % of their income/royalties. Then along came file sharing and they all freaked out. But eventually the older groups with established followings realized that what had happened was that their business model had changed. The age of digital music meant they could bypass their labels and make as much or more from performance revenue.

It's still tough on new acts, but the established bands with loyal fans do just fine. And it doesnt seem to matter how old they are (or what they look like). I think this is where the Village People are. So I choose to believe their response to Trump using their music was organic, internal and honest. I dont think they needed a PR person or attorney to write that for them.
 
University of Michigan cons sentiment survey --

Consumer sentiment climbed to 101.0 in February, up from 99.8 last month. Highest since March 2018.
8% in the survey mentioned the coronavirus however that rose to 20% in the final days of the month​
 
Monahorns said:
To change the subject a bit, an article putting the China tariffs in their proper light. We get pronouncements of victory with no real improvement for trade or for China's behavior. In the meantime, this is one more example of the government picking winners and losers in the economy.

Don't Forget About the Trade War | Christopher P. Casey

Maybe Trump "wins" in the end. That would be great, but I don't see it so far.
Click to expand...
The US decoupling from China is the “win”. It will be a decade long effort.
 
Maybe. And that is the point I always come back to.

The harm from the trade war is real and now.

The up side of the trade war is always theory and future.

Don't get me wrong it COULD end up being an improvement. Geographically diversified supply chains are more resilient.

The other part of this is that manufacturers were starting to move out anyway because of rising labor rates. The movement is around South East Asia to the Indian Ocean region. Then eventually Africa will be integrated into the global supply chain. Some African nations will have to improve their political stability first though.
 
I hope this is real this time.

Bringing the troops home would be a huge bragging point if he can do it before November. It's something Obama said he would do and didn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top