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 Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Nov 12, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Wonkette had a post saying the most likely suspect was Peter King from Long Island. Made a good case.
     
  2. Just the facts ma am

    Just the facts ma am Well-Known Member

    They will be reducing your benefits so they can give rich people more money. Is that OK?
     
  3. Slacker

    Slacker Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
     
    Michael_ Gee likes this.
  4. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Starting to feel a little Bern here!

    “President Trump has no legal authority for broadening the war in Syria, If President Trump believes that expanding the war in Syria will bring stability to the region and protect American interests, he should come to Congress with his ideas."
     
  5. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    The Court, in a 9-0 verdict, struck down racial segregation in public schools. If you think that ruling was faulty, how could you not be a proponent of segregation? Where's the distinction? How would you thread that needle?
     
  6. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    How you arrive at the right decision is not always a trivial matter.
     
  7. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    Activist judges!!!
     
  8. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

  9. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    The court in Brown relied on some very flawed social science in reaching and justifying its decision. This was problematic for two reasons. One, we shouldn’t be basing Constitutional law on bad social science. And two, we shouldn’t be using social science, even good social science, to establish Constitutional law when there are more clearly Constitutional justifications at hand! The Warren court had the 14th Amendment at its disposal; the right decision was already in its grasp. Having eschewed the more obviously Constitutional pathways to the right decision, the Court set the stage for subsequent kerfuffles. That’s what could be meant by saying that Brown was “wrongly decided.”
     
  10. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

  11. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    I see our Shitty Opinion Retranslators are working overtime this week.
     
    Fred siegle likes this.
  12. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page