OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
You almost had some insight here, but I suspect your intent was otherwise. The Court created and promulgated a national abortion standard when the Roe bench magically found the right to abortion in the Constitution (as noted above, you obviously disagreed with this decision since they had no business "making it legal"). All the recent decision did was recognize that Roe was made-up politics and struck it down as the judicial creation it was. They did not make abortion legal or illegal. They simply said that the Constitution does not address the issue and Roe was wrong to claim it did. Under our Constitution, it is an issue left to the States to decide. The feds are free to attempt to weigh in with a new statute or a Constitutional amendment.
Glad to see you agree with the current Court's actual ruling. Now, go tell Blaze that you are not one of "Most americans".
And then he goes and proves your point for you with this:
Because those indictments, guilty findings or convictions were all about collusion with russia, russia, russia, RIGHT????? The mere fact that you would bring up turkey neck shiffty and will ultimately support him when he wins the open senate seat next election says everything needed regarding you having any pretense at objectivity. You should want that lying sack of camel dung to retire and never be heard from again.
Looks like @blazers was right about this alt right court.
www.cbsnews.com
Supreme Court allows Biden administration to limit immigration arrests, ruling against states
The court found that Texas and Louisiana, the two states that brought the suit, lacked standing to challenge the administration's guidelines.
www.cbsnews.com
I'm assuming the politicians who were bashing the court on Twitter after the abortion ruling are sending out tweets praising the court after this decision. Surely they wouldn't ignore the decision that doesn't fit their narrative about the court.Looks like @blazers was right about this alt right court.
Supreme Court allows Biden administration to limit immigration arrests, ruling against states
The court found that Texas and Louisiana, the two states that brought the suit, lacked standing to challenge the administration's guidelines.
signature-gatherers? We are finally admitting that signature-gathering is a real thing? If that is a real thing, can we not conclude that there is a collective something called ballot harvesting that includes any and all manner of improperly submitting votes? If so, the only question left is who is better at getting away with it, and who is the amateur. I think your article helps answer that.More actual cases of election fraud - as usual they're republicans.
Colorado prosecutors charge 6 signature gatherers for unsuccessful Republican congressional candidate
The six are accused of submitting false signatures and signatures of dead voters for a 7th Congressional District candidate.coloradosun.com
Nah they're pissed about the ruling that keeps innocent people behind bars (earlier this week).
well, the title of the Mueller report is "Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election"... It found the russian interference was welcomed by the Trump campaign as it expected to benefit from such efforts - Some of the indictments were regarding obstruction, many regarding conspiracy. The entire truth never came out. Mueller's intent was to NOT charge a sitting pres. The report describes ten episodes where Trump may have obstructed justice while president and one before he was elected, and he was leaving the ball in the hands of Congress regarding whether Trump obstructed or not.
Mueller's reported addressed "conspiracy" or "coordination", not collusion. And he said specifically that his findings didn't deem "no collusion" AND that there is no such crime as "collusion". The obstruction and everyone pleading the 5th leaves remaining questions.
The intent of the June 16 meeting at the Trump Tower was to exchange "dirt" on the Clinton campaign. Clinton was discussed. Russians were invited to chat with Jr. That sounds like coordination to me, but there were a few gaps in evidence due to all the obstruction.
Last edited:
What about the ruling in favor of trans rights? Surely they were happy about that. Maybe all these rulings for things they like are just too much for them to keep up with.
I'm not aware of such a ruling. Could you elaborate, or would you prefer to continue with the mischaracterization?
I'm sure you didn't mean for this to be, but it sounds like you could be addressing me in your last paragraph. Please try to never let me be confused with @blazers. TIA, lol.
His paid mercenary army led by a crazy man has turned on him and is marching to Moscow brazenly occupying cities without resistance. Putin doesn’t have enough troops to fight Ukraine and the mercenaries. Basically a fight between two mafia bosses. Corruption coming home to roost.
Awesome. I'm enjoying watching Putin and Russia continuing to fall on their face. I'm guessing case studies on this war are already being written for military school.
Good thing we threw billions of our dollars at Ukraine to watch Russia self destruct like we all thought they would.
Part of the reason they are self destructing is because of those dollars.
the thing is, the antagonism is being driven by Putin. A lot of our problems with Russia will be solved with his demise. That being said, there would remain a lot of anti-Western enmity but not many willing to so blatantly act on it. And the country would still be controlled by a criminal oligarchy. But with Putin out of the way, Russia could become a tremendous ally over time. Trump was right to try to make that so.
Last edited:
It's all dependent on who takes Putin's place. Hopefully after all of this, the Russian people will realize that someone like Putin would be a bad choice.
Wow! Trump and Hillary seem to have begun to appreciate each others help in their aspirations. Maybe he'll even choose her for his wingman.
Wait, what? Are you suggesting Trump tried to topple Putin while he was in office? After all the bending over Trump did for four years? Yeah, right.
Last edited:
Ally;
noun,plural al·lies.
- a person, group, or nation that is associated with another or others for some common cause or purpose:
What Trump tried to do was to build a relationship with Russia, and Putin happened to be the top dog. You may have stupidly forgotten that Putin did not invade Ukraine when Trump was President. That's what happens when you try too hard to act as if you have a handle on even the simpler notions, you just end up looking even more moronic.
Putin was not exactly a good guy at that time but he was not the threat to regional peace and our bankroll that your boy Biden unleashed on us.
Putin is a KGB holdover with a stubborn mindset of Russian hegemony over former territories to its west. Making him hedge with a desire for better relations with us was the result of strong, crafty leadership that we now sorely miss. Too bad the dems went out of their way to demonize and ostracize Russia for the sake of winning an election and falsely smearing the opposition.
Putin won't be there forever, but since the dems screwed the pooch, we now must bide our time until the next leader takes over; and that new leader will almost certainly be more amenable to working with us instead of against us...assuming the dems don't fvck that up too.
So which is it, Boy Blunder? Today you're saying Trump and Putin were allies but yesterday you said Trump tried to oust Putin. You're very confused.
I even provided you with a definition of 'ally' to give your illiterate ass a clue. I didn't say Trump tried to 'oust Putin'. That's just the typically stupid shit that comes out of your lying piehole when you try too hard to catch someone who's smarter than you in a miscue. You just end up looking more like the dork that you are.
I said,
Even after explaining it to you, you persist with the embarrassing stupidity. Instead of lying and being an idiot in general, wouldn't you be better off watching your back door for the homeless guys who've been fulfilling your woman's sexual needs?
Nice edit. Actually, what you wrote was:
" . . . with Putin out of the way, Russia could become a tremendous ally over time. Trump was right to try to make that so."
You're so scatterbrained you can't even tell a good lie.
He didn't edit anything and gave you the necessary passage accurately. He was pointing out the structure of his sentence in that the thing Trump was right to try was to make Russia an ally, not your misreading that trump tried to get Putin out of the way. That reference refers to the earlier posts and discussions of Putin currently being in trouble and that he may get "replaced" so to speak.
I might be wrong, but I don't think there could be a bigger hot dog than Putin in the wings or even one to match him..
Last edited:
lol thanks, he knows that of course. It's just Heels Noir doing the only thing he does well, which is to make an ass of himself by trying too hard to find fault with something or someone. I haven't mentioned it in quite a while, but the dude (?) is less secure than the gay porn sites he visits.
Sing it loud, blue! It's the same ol' singsong with you. First you make an idiotic comment and I question you on it. Then you lie about what you wrote in the first place, and then you typically resort to making more idiotic comments about my so-called "insecurity."
Anyway, I find it completely ironic when you say I'm making an ass of myself but I guess, as usual, you're simply projecting.
I'm sure someone will yell "but the constitution", but eventually this type of stuff leads to backlash
I think it already has. Look no further than the 2022 election results. A year ago the radicals were celebrating the ruling to overturn Roe v Wade and then six months later they were licking their wounds after getting pummeled on election day.
Just ask @gunslingerdick.
nope. You actually are making an ass of yourself for questioning something I said that you purposely misconstrued so that you could question it. That's your tiresome, infantile M.O. Mr. Try-Too-Hard.
Ho hum.
The proof is in your persistence in continuing to argue your distorted questioning even after you were provided clarity.
Now go ahead and come back with 'oh yeah, well your clarity was clear as mud'.
You are too tediously predictable. You are a bore.
those who follow the Constitution are radicals? No one here is surprised that you would say that, liberal pinko.
"No one here . . ."? What makes you think you're qualified to speak on behalf of anyone else here? You have enough trouble articulating your own spastic thoughts, you stupid invalid.
Similar threads
