President Biden: The NEW one and only politics thread

Hers was a fumble, no doubt about it. Color me skeptical that it was deliberate.

Also ... in these discussions, I appreciate the attention paid to the statements of various states (and politicians thereof) as to the causes of the war. I do find it curious, however, that those of others of some prominence ... a Mr. Lincoln comes to mind ... aren't treated as similarly dispositive.

 

The basic abolitionist and Republican party position was that human chattel slavery is evil. Period. Half of the country embraced it and built their economy and industry on it, and were completely resistant to any attempt to limit slavery. When the debate starts that far apart it is difficult to find a way to a workable political compromise, because any compromise allows slavery to continue.

 

It was adopted in the Constitutional Convention because the South wanted the slave population counted to increase their population number, which would increase their proportion of delegates in the House of Representatives.

 

"Trump Insists He Didn't Bully His Way Into Home Alone 2 Cameo."

Actual headline about actual GOP frontrunner. WTF are we doing America?!?!? WTF?

 

Of course ... without it there would have been no constitution. But it neither appeared out of the blue, nor was it some effort by the free states to "call" the slave states on their hypocrisy (!!!).

 

Russian Lawmaker Found Dead at 46 After ‘Falling Out Window’
https://www.thedailybeast.com/russi...rov-found-dead-at-46-after-falling-out-window

 

The South were the ones claiming in one breath that slaves were people and in another breath claiming they were property. That’s where the hypocrisy lies.

 

Read the history ... and not Howard Zinn's.

 

oof

 

12 hours to keep from stepping that other high heel in shit, and she couldn't do it.

"I misspoke the other night."

It ain't that fucking hard. Our parents teach us to say we're sorry. Our politicians teach us it's suicide to do so.

 

Jay Sekulow lays out the arguments to keep Trump on the ballot in CO: ACLJ Appeals Colorado Ruling Banning President Trump From the Ballot to the U.S. Supreme Court on Behalf of the Colorado Republican Party | American Center for Law and Justice

Taking them one by one:

1. I can't believe even Trump's team would argue that the president is not an officer of the United States, so I'm going to assume that the argument is that the presidential oath says "preserve, protect and defend" instead of "support." That strikes me as a mighty thin hair to split.
2. The Constitution is not a self-executing authority? That's an interesting thought experiment. What keeps a 20-year-old from getting on the ballot? Or a foreign-born citizen, or a citizen of a foreign country? Are there actual federal laws that have been enacted, or are those restrictions not enforceable at the moment? I have no idea.
3. CO has a first amendment right to choose a candidate that is not eligible to be president? This is probably the strongest argument - SCOTUS might well find that there's no restriction on nominees, only on presidents.

A finding against Trump would seem to go a long way toward disqualifying him to be president, which is why I think SCOTUS will take the coward's way out and say it's a political decision and they can't get involved.