Jump to content

Foosters

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    5456
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Foosters

  1. 2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

    we had a strict conservative in scalia. i don't think we really know what gorsuch will do in the next ruling or 5 years from now. we always knew trump was getting 2-3 justices, because of scalia, and the general age of the justices.

    and i'm a weirdo, but i prefer a conservative supreme court. what i worry about is that pendulum swinging into a rubber stamp. i happen to hope that the justices on the surpreme court aren't overly activist, however, and i hope that decisions will continue to be balanced.

    a cynic is only a frustrated optimist, after all.

    So you have faith that Roberts will preserve Roe and progeny?  Bc they're gone otherwise.

  2. 23 minutes ago, scottsins said:

    I guess the 50th post of the thread would be a good place to actually discuss the analysis of the decision, specifically the free speech issue.  To me, that's easily the most compelling rationale for the majority opinion in this case.

     

    ETA:  Bolverk mentioned this with the political contributions remark.  That's what I was referring to WRT the 1st Amendment.

    Is every expenditure speech? Serious question.

  3. 4 minutes ago, seven said:

    I do not believe you should have to pay dues to a union you don't belong to, so I agree with this ruling. 

     

    As far as the existence of public sector unions, I support the right for workers to act in and advocate for their best interests. 

    And you agree that non-union members shouldn't be eligible to receive benefits negotiated by that union?

  4. 15 hours ago, Cacti said:

    No, they still won’t like us but since they are in no position to defend themselves from Russia, they will pretend to like us. Much like the basement-dwelling, college grad who doesn’t like his parents but can’t, or won’t, get out from under their protective umbrella.

    In any event, I think you’re overestimating our pre-Trump era respect. The Reputation Institutes Country Reptrak 2015 Survey, which ranks countries by how respected they are, placed the U.S. outside the top twenty. And in The Reputation Institute’s 2016 “World’s Most Reputable Countries” survey, the U.S. finished 28th, in between Poland and Argentina.

    Granted, our standing is now lower but don’t pretend we were an admired nation during the previous administration.

    That's a lot of words to say "yeah, you're right."

  5. 22 minutes ago, Cacti said:

     

    We may have written the rules for protection of intellectual property but China has flagrantly violated those rules, with little or repercussions. They don't respect us, and never have.

     

     

    As far as “Trump…making the United States less respected in the world” (with respect to the E.U.), just wait until Putin inevitably growls at his bordering, western neighbors. I suspect the E.U. will, at that time, once again feign respect for us. And bigly.

    Hilarious. Trump's campaign:

    "I will rebuild America's economic power and reestablish us on the global stage."

    "Foreign countries are mocking us and think we're weak. I will fix this.

     

    Reality:

    "Well, China was cheating so we just decided to quit."

    "Well yeah, we're now far less respected than ever, but just wait until Russia starts trying to fuck with Europe. Then they'll like us."   

    • Like 4
    • Haha 1


  6. I thought you cared about the poor? Only when it serves your purpose.
    Got to get rid of all of those "deplorables" - you know, poor and middle class Americans.
      Who digs the ditches?  Who buses the tables?  Willfully obtuse.
    So the policies are completely unsustainable for the lower and middle class requiring an illegal labor force?  Then you bitch and say no "American" would take those jobs.  So funny it's sad.  More homeless and more rich....get rid of the rest?
    Those same rich folks don't really care about health care, public schools or affordable housing as those issues will never be a reality for them or their children.


    Lol what?

    I never said it was a good thing that the poor cannot afford California. Just showing that you were either lying or mistaken.
  7. Quote

    A group of religious leaders was arrested in downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday morning while protesting a visit by Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions, who is scheduled to deliver a speech to a criminal justice organization in the afternoon.

    The rabbis, pastors and other faith leaders were among a group of about 150 demonstrators gathered outside the federal courthouse on Spring Street who were targeting Sessions because of his role in defending President Trump’s “zero tolerance” border policy that recently led to thousands of immigrant children and parents being detained and separated indefinitely.

    About two dozen people were arrested, authorities said.

    Sessions is scheduled to give a speech at the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation’s annual luncheon at the Millennium Biltmore Hotel on Tuesday afternoon, according to the Department of Justice.

     

    Dozens of demonstrators held hands about 8:30 a.m. and blocked Spring Street, chanting, “Kids belong at home! Not in cages!”

    Sandra Olewine, 51, a pastor at First United Methodist Church in Pasadena, was the first person arrested Tuesday morning. She had been seated in a line of people blocking the roadway. As she was led away in handcuffs, people cheered.

    “Sometimes you have to break the law,” Olewine said minutes earlier. “We are sitting down for the children.”

    As Los Angeles police officers prepared to arrest others, the group started praying. By 10:30 a.m., the street was cleared.

    Rabbi Jonathan Klein, who helped organize the protest, said it was spearheaded by an interfaith group. Demonstrating against Trump’s policies, he said, aligns directly with his faith.

    “We are building a just and sacred society,” Klein said. “My faith says I have no choice but to be here.”

    Klein said he felt the protest took on greater significance Tuesday morning after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld President Trump’s ban on foreign visitors and immigrants from six mostly Muslim-majority nations.

     

     

     

  8. 2 hours ago, Foosters said:

    A 5 second google search shows the Rothschild family emblem looking nothing like what you've posted. The only references to a Rothschild Red Emblem that looks like the above are on crazy-ass conspiracy websites. Do you have a link that supports this?

    So that's a "no" then? You're just going to spread fake shit and hide when called on it?

  9. 41 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

    I didn't post the article

    and because they are on the front lines of the political dissent trying to force their harmful politics on the rest of the country.  They like to pretend these real crisis (homeless, housing, terrible public schools, mass exodus of Americans) etcdon't exist in their utopia and couldn't possibly be caused by their political decisions.  Easier to just blame Trump.

    Yet again, you're wrong. Over a 10 year period, they lost one million residents to migration. They actually have a net gain in high earners and college grads. The poor are moving bc the cost of housing is high.  

  10. 1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

    I live in a city.  And know more than a few rich people.  They are overwhelmingly GOP.  Not everyone in urban areas are liberal.  And when it comes to the super rich, the split is pretty damn even across America.

    Yes we know. You're rich. You hang out with lots of rich friends. You have a really fancy ranch. You do all sorts of activities that rich people do.  We get it. You've been telling us for years.

    • Like 3
  11. 2 hours ago, Bill Clinton said:

    I'm not the one cheering on violence in the streets against political opponents. It's just hilarious that you think a bunch of starbucks hipsters are going to take on active and ex-military as well as active police. Have you ever been to a "license to carry" class? How many voted for Trump and old are those people?

    They don't watch fox news, nobody watches shitty MSM anymore.

    Although your black lives matter buddy in Dallas did take out 5 police officers, I don't think these goobers have the same discipline. 

    ebt-0903-antifa-701.jpg?w=1024&h=603

    I don't want to see any violence from the political entertainment on the tele vision programming. That's what the globalists want. Hugo calls 'em Russians. 

    russiarothschild.jpg

     

    Anyway, I suggest you read this book.

    https://www.amazon.com/When-Violence-Answer-Learning-Takes/dp/0316354643/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1530019612&sr=8-1&keywords=tim+larkin

     

     

    A 5 second google search shows the Rothschild family emblem looking nothing like what you've posted. The only references to a Rothschild Red Emblem that looks like the above are on crazy-ass conspiracy websites. Do you have a link that supports this?

  12. 2 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

    Okay, I'll play along.  List every racist thing I've ever done.  You can't because you don't know me from the man in the moon.  You've never met me.  You know nothing of my background.  You couldn't point me out of a police line up.  You know absolutely nothing about me other than I am a K-State fan.   And yet you think you can play Robbie Coltrane and develop some kind of deep psychological profile of me based solely on internet posts on what is primarily a college football fan board.

     

      What truth am I not understanding?  People are breaking the law by trying to enter the country illegally and the President is enforcing the law.  An action that as head of the executive branch he has every right, arguably even duty to do.  Don't like the law?  Write your congressman.  Congress drafts legislation, not presidents.  It doesn't matter what the skin color is of the people trying to enter the country illegally.  What matters is their actions, namely trying to enter the country illegally.  I would feel this way if Mexico was on the southern border of the United States.   I would feel this way if France was on the southern border of the United States.  I would feel this way if Japan was on the southern border of the United States or any other country was on the southern border of the United States.  It's not who the people are that matters to me.  It is what they are doing. 

     

    If you don't want your kids taken away from you in this country don't break this country's laws.  If you are trying to enter this country illegally and you don't want any kids you have with you taken away from then don't enter this country illegally.  What's the phrase that gets posted on this site at least once a week?  Don't start no shit there won't be no shit.  If you don't want to be arrested for shoplifting, don't steal shit.  If you don't want to be ticketed for speeding, drive the speed limit.  If you don't want to be arrested for murder, don't kill anyone.  If you don't want to be arrested for illegally entering a country, don't enter the country illegally.  If I decided to sneak into France through a non port of entry and was apprehended by French law enforcement I would expect my ass to be either put in jail or kicked back across the Atlantic where I came from.  This is policy for the vast majority of the countries in the world.  Donald Trump is not going through attics looking for Latin American Anne Franks.  No Hispanic-Americans here legally are being herded into box cars.  Your "truth" does not exist.

    You realize the vast majority of "illegal immigrants" traveled here by plane and overstayed their visas, right? Why then are you only concerned with the brown ones who cross by foot? Also, you're lying, again. This administration is refusing asylum claims and lumping everyone in as "illegal entries."

    • Like 1
  13. 24 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:
    UNRAH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT – CALIFORNIA
    CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION
    CIVIL CODE PART 2. PERSONAL RIGHTS [43 – 53.7]
     51.7.  
    (a) All persons within the jurisdiction of this state have the right to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of political affiliation, or on account of any characteristic listed or defined in subdivision (b) or (e) of Section 51, or position in a labor dispute, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of those characteristics. The identification in this subdivision of particular bases of discrimination is illustrative rather than restrictive.

    So now you are in favor of hate crime legislation?

  14. 3 hours ago, ScottishHorn said:

    Comparing the holocaust to those being held crossing the border illegally...another psycho...you know, I hear that there are enough jobs out there to get millennials to move out of their parents basements...you should do the same.

    Is it your belief that the children are committing a crime?

  15. I think a better comparison for those looking for one would be Ted Nugent, who publicly stated that the Democratic nominee for president should be hanged, and threatened to kill Obama multiple times.  He was invited to the White House.

    • Like 1
  16. I'm not even sure why this is being debated as we have an entire swath of the country living in a different reality.  The stuff I'm seeing on the internet from the Trump fans would be fascinating if it weren't so disturbing.  People so conditioned to distrust the media that they believe this entire crisis - from the children being separated, to the cages, to the audio of the children crying - is fake. One massive media conspiracy concocted out of thin air to mislead the public and take down their leader.  We are so far gone.  

    • Like 3
  17. 1 hour ago, SDG said:

    It’s right there in the tweet.  The key word is “between” as in between ports of entry. You can’t legally seek asylum between ports of entry you must seek it “at” a port of entry.  Crossing any border between ports is illegal and at that point you become a criminal and not an asylum seeker.  We are not prosecuting asylum seekers and any narrative that’s says we are is false.  The optics here is so bad the left doesn’t need to spread false narratives to win.   

    This is not true. 

  18. 17 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

    Talking tough about immigration bought him something politically, he’s just following through on it in a way that a lot of people, myself included, think is too harsh. I’m just laughing at all the outrage people are flinging around about this when this has been happening.  Same thing when people talk about bombing civilians in Yemen or the first amendment and journalism being under attack. This shit has been going on before Trump.  Im supposed to think that the majority of people on the left now have principles and have always cared?  GTFOH. 

    That you find the notion that roughly half of all persons who are left of center are incapable of having principles says quite a lot about where we stand.

×
×
  • Create New...