1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

President Biden: The NEW one and only politics thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Jan 20, 2021.

Page 1888 of 8596
  1. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member


     
    Neutral Corner, Dec 3, 2021
    #22645
    OscarMadison likes this.
  2. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    They have to wait for the melodious honks, toots and whistles sounding out of Fatfuck's asshole before deciding what their platform will be.
     
    Starman, Dec 3, 2021
    #22646
    OscarMadison likes this.
  3. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    Why? They did not have one last time he ran for President (other than supporting Trump), why start now?
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2021
    Neutral Corner, Dec 3, 2021
    #22647
    OscarMadison likes this.
  4. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    Neutral Corner, Dec 3, 2021
    #22648
    OscarMadison likes this.
  5. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member



     
    Neutral Corner, Dec 3, 2021
    #22649
  6. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    dixiehack, Dec 3, 2021
    #22650
    Splendid Splinter, Pilot, wicked and 4 others like this.
  7. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    The Supreme Court has for almost all of its history acted as a superlegislative body ruling for capital over labor. Can't get more political than that, or as legislative as that, either. Congress and the state legislatures were hardly radical in the early 1910s, but they enacted the constitutional amendment authorizing the income tax all the same. Point is, Court actions breed reactions, and if the reaction to the current Court winds up being either mass defiance of its rulings as with Brown v. Board of Ed. or Congress and the Executive taking more direct control of its makeup and powers, such as expanding the Court and making it clear it's a political body subservient to elected officials, well, that's been its history, too.
     
    Michael_ Gee, Dec 3, 2021
    #22651
  8. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    You are framing the most basic of rights as something political. ... based on your own political leanings.

    When state governments started passing laws dictating labor conditions, for example, and some of those laws were struck down, it wasn't some politicized process in which Justice Scrooge McDuck was 'picking capital over labor' because he hated one side. It was always, "These are freely negotiated contracts between free entities, which the government should not be involved in." The fact that we got away from that and turned our courts into activist bodies -- what you favor -- was the actual politicalization.

    It was much cleaner, too, because whether you personally like it, we are a capitalistic economy that was founded with a primacy on property rights and people being free to make economic decisions for themselves. We have obviously gotten away from that in large part and turned ourselves into a nanny state. The court's role in that has been a bastardization of its purpose. And it has become messy, because when the court was doing the bidding for people like you -- creating the winners and losers you prefer -- you were happy. But change the makeup of the court and present the threat of them picking winners and losers you don't like, and suddenly you aren't on board. The problem is that you opened a barn door you can't close, and if you were on board with it in the past when it suited your objectives, you really forfeited the right to complain about it when the means you created start to lead to ends you don't like.
     
    The Big Ragu, Dec 3, 2021
    #22652
  9. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    A question: Is there a way for the GOP to fight fair and have values/positions you'd acknowledge, if not agree with? Is there any right of center position, on any issue, that you wouldn't deem fascist?
     
    Alma, Dec 3, 2021
    #22653
    Liut likes this.
  10. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    You might as well ask, "Is there anyone on this board --- past or present --- whose political views are opposite of yours, but whose arguments you respect and don't believe to be a troll (or just a miserable excuse for a human)?"
     
    BTExpress, Dec 3, 2021
    #22654
    Tarheel316 and Liut like this.
  11. Regan MacNeil

    Regan MacNeil Well-Known Member

    LOL.
     
    Regan MacNeil, Dec 3, 2021
    #22655
    Fred siegle likes this.
  12. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    My focus is the fight fair aspect. Fighting fair would have been giving Garland an up or down vote. They vote him down for reasons, I might grumble, but at least they’re on record and being honest.

    But don’t give everyone the “let the people decide” and don’t give the “it’s traditional to have 9 justices” when they’ve already hypocritically said they were fine with less.
     
    Baron Scicluna, Dec 3, 2021
    #22656
    Splendid Splinter, OscarMadison, Liut and 2 others like this.
Page 1888 of 8596
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page