How Proud You Must Be of Crooked, Incompetent Biden

[Ford]

There is this misconception that there was a point in our history where there was no ruling elite. There has always been a ruling elite.

There most certainly was a point in our history during George Washington's days when there wasn't a ruling elite.

It's still early here, but this is without a doubt the dumbest thing I will read all day.

 

[Gospel]

Minus the errors in a detail here and there, we all agree that American politics are pay to win right?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

No one loves Pelosi for he enriching herself via her position. Some are impressed with how she has been one of the best Speakers of the House ever in her ability to control outcomes of votes. And Pelosi also didn't vote to overturn a fair election, unlike over half of the GOP in the House.

I could care less what kind of golden cow you think she is. She represents the perfect example of our elite not afraid to corrupt herslef in public daylight since she knows no one will touch her. Doing exactly what Marth Stewart could not do because she is our royalty.

Says the Trump supporter.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Minus the errors in a detail here and there, we all agree that American politics are pay to win right?

You mean free speech. Pay to play is "free speech" (SCOTUS). And let's forget the whole Call Bank thing each party has where the members of the House whore themselves over the phone.

 

[RVonse]

FIFY. The judges from one party are always leaning towards rights expansions, the judge from the other party (in the last 20 years) have leaned hard on providing more rights to businesses and fewer rights to people. Justices Kennedy and O'Connor, both appointed by a Republican were conservatives, but they veered towards rights expansions. That type of judge disappeared from the right-wing with the retirement of Justice Souter.

So both party's are fucked up. Did I say otherwise?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

FIFY. The judges from one party are always leaning towards rights expansions, the judge from the other party (in the last 20 years) have leaned hard on providing more rights to businesses and fewer rights to people. Justices Kennedy and O'Connor, both appointed by a Republican were conservatives, but they veered towards rights expansions. That type of judge disappeared from the right-wing with the retirement of Justice Souter.

So both party's are fucked up. Did I say otherwise?

Let me reemphasize my post, which clearly didn't seem to set in your mind properly.

The judges from one party (DEMOCRAT) are always leaning towards rights expansions.
The judge from the other party (REPUBLICANS) have leaned hard on providing more rights to businesses and fewer rights to people.

Since the retirement of Souter, all of the Republican nominees are very conservative to ultra conservative.

So no, nothing in that post implies both parties are messed up with regards to SCOTUS and how that impacts our lives and the political system.

 

[Patooka]

Ordinary people actually had better representation under the aristocracy and English Kings than under current US American democracy. The kings and aristocracy had the government by birthright and did not need to sell their souls to interest groups. Therefore, they were free to consider the little people’s interests and did so, as the continuation of the country depended on ordinary people willing to behave and to do service. When the king and aristocracy became too absorbed in their privileges and neglected the people, the French king and aristocracy at least were worried about their heads.

This is complete horseshit. At no point did European aristocracy gave a flying fuck about the people. In fact, once the guillotines started coming out, the reaction of every single royal family in Europe was to provide unconditional support to the French royal family. The British Empire even provided sanctuary and military aid to usurped nobility. You couldn't be more fucking wrong if you tried.

I understand you believe in noblesse oblige because of, well, the politicians you specifically worship. But that's your fantasy; reality is much different.

There most certainly was a point in our history during George Washington's days when there wasn't a ruling elite.

I've got to be honest, you never cease to amaze me with how wrong and idiotic some of your arguments are. The Electoral College exists because it was the attitude of your founding fathers that ordinary Americans can't be trusted with their vote. And whilst we are talking about Washington and his mates, they literally fucking owned other people. That's about as elitist as you can get. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

So both party's are fucked up. Did I say otherwise?

Saying both parties are fucked up is like saying Hitler showed how deeply antisemitism runs in Europe. Both statements are technically correct, whilst being as dishonest and bad faith as one can get. I'd love for you to show me examples of "both sides" participating in voter disenfranchisement or constantly repeating disproven claims about election fraud, but that's not going to happen.

Whilst we are on the topic of subverting democracy and not caring about the will of the people, do you still believe the 2020 election was stolen by Biden, RVonse?

 

[Oleg]

There most certainly was a point in our history during George Washington's days when there wasn't a ruling elite. Washington was asked to play a monarch role and he profusely refused.

Washington may have played Cincinnatus, but I gotta agree with the lefties here that there certainly was a colonial elite, and Washington was a member of it. Every society has an elite. It's part of being human.

 

[Oleg]

The judges from one party (DEMOCRAT) are always leaning towards rights expansions.

Well, the new justice appointed by a Dem argued that the 14th Amendment permits discrimination based on race; so there's that.

 

[Oleg]

I'd love for you to show me examples of "both sides" participating in voter disenfranchisement or constantly repeating disproven claims about election fraud

 

[Patooka]

I'd love for you to show me examples of "both sides" participating in voter disenfranchisement or constantly repeating disproven claims about election fraud

Seriously? Shitty sound bites taken out of context? Also, Republicans agreed unanimously that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Proven, in fact.

Incidentally, why are you silent about the voter disenfranchisement aspect of my question? I have full confidence in your ability in highlighting a Democrat representing the 145,614 district of bumfuck, somewhere doing something questionable and try to equivocate that to the plethora of GOP fuckery denying US citizens the chance to vote.

 

[Oleg]

Shitty sound bites taken out of context?

What context do you need? Seriously. Rest assured, if ever you think that your side is perfect and only the other side is bad, you're wrong. No party has a monopoly on bad.

 

[Patooka]

Shitty sound bites taken out of context?

What context do you need? Seriously. Rest assured, if ever you think that your side is perfect and only the other side is bad, you're wrong. No party has a monopoly on bad.

Agreed. I also believe tax evasion and murder are both illegal. One is clearly and significantly worse than the other.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Shitty sound bites taken out of context?

What context do you need? Seriously. Rest assured, if ever you think that your side is perfect and only the other side is bad, you're wrong. No party has a monopoly on bad.

Agreed. I also believe tax evasion and murder are both illegal. One is clearly and significantly worse than the other.

Which is why Trump should just go to prison but not get the death penalty.

 

[Gospel]

I'd love for you to show me examples of "both sides" participating in voter disenfranchisement or constantly repeating disproven claims about election fraud

Some clips may be out of context but definitely not all of them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Shitty sound bites taken out of context?

What context do you need? Seriously. Rest assured, if ever you think that your side is perfect and only the other side is bad, you're wrong. No party has a monopoly on bad.

Yeah, but only one party had a President that incited a riot at the US Capitol.

 

[blastula]

Some clips may be out of context but definitely not all of them.

They're all within context enough, but almost all of them are irrelevant.

None of the Dem votes against certification were RIGHT AFTER a violent mob overran the Capitol to overturn a valid election result. The Dem votes against were understood by all to be just symbolic protest votes (imo childish of them), while the GOP votes against were intended to help overturn the election.

Also, calling Trump illegitimate because of Russian interference is not the same as saying Biden lost because of voter fraud. Russian interference is a fact. 2020 voter fraud is not.

Saying the 2000 election was stolen is defensible to a point considering the SCOTUS hacky interference and the vote counting and ballot problems in FL. Depending on the recount standard used, a recount would have given Gore the win.

The complaints about voter suppression are all still valid. These are the most irrelevant clips.

The closest to relevancy are the Dem complaints over the 2004 election as to OH vote counting, since that was never really well founded.

IOW, it's just a common L for "Oleg."

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Some clips may be out of context but definitely not all of them.

They're all within context enough, but almost all of them are irrelevant.

None of the Dem votes against certification were RIGHT AFTER a violent mob overran the Capitol to overturn a valid election result. The Dem votes against were understood by all to be just symbolic protest votes (imo childish of them), while the GOP votes against were intended to help overturn the election.

Also, calling Trump illegitimate because of Russian interference is not the same as saying Biden lost because of voter fraud. Russian interference is a fact. 2020 voter fraud is not.

Saying the 2000 election was stolen is defensible to a point considering the SCOTUS hacky interference and the vote counting and ballot problems in FL. Depending on the recount standard used, a recount would have given Gore the win.

The complaints about voter suppression are all still valid. These are the most irrelevant clips.

The closest to relevancy are the Dem complaints over the 2004 election as to OH vote counting, since that was never really well founded.


IOW, it's just a common L for "Oleg."

I believe the recount was suspicious because the counties needed to handle the brunt of the expense. A subsequent law change made the cost for requesting a recount lay more on the petitioners. Ohio was weird in 2004 as late Cuyahoga County ballots didn't seem to impact W's lead. But the amount of county based info and precinct info we have today in live stream is much deeper than we had in 2004.

2000 was an election that was won in the courts, and it centered on the W camp pre-empting the counting of votes early on. It was ugly. SCOTUS's involvement was unprecedented.

2004 was also our first (my first?) WTF election. After all, W had crappy polling, Iraq falling apart, no way he could win. Zogby said so. And then he pretty much repeats 2000 but with slightly better margins.

2016 was just flat out depressing. We know Russia influenced the elections with targeted ads and media postings, but the US elected Donald Trump. Which was one thing I could go to sleep knowing... going to work at 3 or 4 AM and classified soils because I knew I wasn't getting any sleep. Trump shouldn't have been allowed to be President. Even witnesses on election night seemed to indicate Trump didn't want to win either. There was slight hope for an Electoral College miracle, because that was like the only reason they existed to stop that shit from happening. But that didn't happen.

2020 is the biggest electoral fuck job since 1876. It failed, but the Trump team tried to steal the election in several states. And there was a majority of House Republicans ready to rubber stamp it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

.

There are two words worse than inflation, stagflation and deflation. And as the paper notes, this isn't the only inflation, it only was part of the inflation.

What's wrong with deflation? What's wrong with prices getting progressively lower? What was wrong when vcr's and computer's became much cheaper and more affordable? What's wrong with Moores law of faster and better processing at lower cost of production.

Deflation is not bad despite what the fed or other egg heads will try to tell you.

Deflation: It makes leaving your money idle a productive investment. This seriously harms investment and thus hurts the economy. Your lack of understanding the complexity doesn't make it go away.

 

[Jarhyn]

.

There are two words worse than inflation, stagflation and deflation. And as the paper notes, this isn't the only inflation, it only was part of the inflation.

What's wrong with deflation? What's wrong with prices getting progressively lower? What was wrong when vcr's and computer's became much cheaper and more affordable? What's wrong with Moores law of faster and better processing at lower cost of production.

Deflation is not bad despite what the fed or other egg heads will try to tell you.

Deflation: It makes leaving your money idle a productive investment. This seriously harms investment and thus hurts the economy. Your lack of understanding the complexity doesn't make it go away.

"The haves having more for having had more isn't bad" is the refrain from someone who already 'has' theirs, or is getting theirs from those who have.

I can only hope that they get what is coming to them...