Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 5/1/2025 at 2:57 PM, Dahobbs said:

I don't think anyone disagrees that Supreme Court could come out with a totally different answer due to Calvinball. But that has nothing to do with legitimate legal analysis, so I'm unclear on what exactly you're scolding  @wildcat09 for. Y'all agree on the clear answer. Y'all agree that the Court could go another way just because. Where's the beef?

Because he accuses me of devil's advocacy for explaining how the argument goes.

To me, if you don't understand the problems and illegitimacies in the argument/decision and just criticize the decision, you're pissing in the wind.  

I mean, you're pissing in the wind either way, but it's a real megasquirt in a gale.

Posted

Great episode of On Point from Friday, covering the history and context of birthright citizenship and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." It's a 45-minute-long interview/conversation with Heather Cox Richardson (full transcript is found in the link below as well).

I'd say anyone who doubts the intent of the 14th Amendment as we've commonly interpreted (until recently) absolutely should find the time to listen. The historical context that she outlines is unambiguous and affirms that, yes, we have indeed been correct that the way we view it today is EXACTLY how it was intended, as written, in the 1860s.

https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2025/05/02/birthright-citizenship-trump-history-heather-cox-richardson

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted

Well, the Court may do away with nationwide injunctions to allow Trump’s patently unconstitutional directives and actions to go into effect - in this case an undoing of birthright citizenship. If a dem ever controls the White House, I bet they reverse course super quickly 

One of the last weapons we had against unconstitutional acts is likely going to be taken away. It’s fitting that Roberts will kill our constitutional order

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Well, the Court may do away with nationwide injunctions to allow Trump’s patently unconstitutional directives and actions to go into effect - in this case an undoing of birthright citizenship. If a dem ever controls the White House, I bet they reverse course super quickly 

One of the last weapons we had against unconstitutional acts is likely going to be taken away. It’s fitting that Roberts will kill our constitutional order*

* Unless that judge is Judge Kacsmaryk in Amarillo, in which case all of his rulings have full nation-wide effect for.....reasons.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
45 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Well, the Court may do away with nationwide injunctions to allow Trump’s patently unconstitutional directives and actions to go into effect - in this case an undoing of birthright citizenship. If a dem ever controls the White House, I bet they reverse course super quickly 

One of the last weapons we had against unconstitutional acts is likely going to be taken away. It’s fitting that Roberts will kill our constitutional order

 

Posted
Am I the only one who's finding it increasingly easier to get a hard-on for Amy Coney Barrett?

No. And it’s about time somebody finally said it.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Nivek said:


Why do you use the Nazi social media platform?

1) Because there’s more there

2) Because retreat is not attack

No offense,  but lefties need to stop withdrawing from spaces they disapprove of. It’s not just an expression of privilege and cultural snobbery, it’s also a recipe to lose often. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted
1 hour ago, South Austin said:

Am I the only one who's finding it increasingly easier to get a hard-on for Amy Coney Barrett?

Wear a rubber, dude. You know she's not having an abortion. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

1) Because there’s more there

2) Because retreat is not attack

No offense,  but lefties need to stop withdrawing from spaces they disapprove of. It’s not just an expression of privilege and cultural snobbery, it’s also a recipe to lose often. 

Withdrawing from twitter wasn't about disapproval. It was recognition that it wasn't an effective platform any longer (ignoring for this conversation that it's just a shitty user experience now). When Elon can program the algorithm to automatically disappear any liberal tweets that start getting too much attention, you gotta find a new battleground.

On the attack/retreat analogy, Washington pretty much won the American revolution by being very good at retreating. 

Posted
30 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

She's always been sneaky-hot. Don't let that or her relative decency (relative to Sam Alito) fool you into thinking she doesn't suck, though. 

That's a good thing, isn't it?  

Posted
53 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

lefties need to stop withdrawing from spaces they disapprove of.

This reads to me like you’re lecturing “you shouldn’t leave that bar bc some Nazis showed up.” Nah, man. I’m not saving humanity with my tweets. Elon can have his circle jerk and I can better manage my own social media diet. 

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

This reads to me like you’re lecturing “you shouldn’t leave that bar bc some Nazis showed up.” Nah, man. I’m not saving humanity with my tweets. Elon can have his circle jerk and I can better manage my own social media diet. 

No. Twitter is not a bar, and I am lecturing.
Even in its current state, twitter is the world’s most important and influential attention gathering platform, and attention is the currency of politics in 2025. We withdraw at our peril, for multiple reasons. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova


×
×
  • Create New...