I get your point, but outside of Portland, Eugene, & Bend (don't know enough about Salem, other than it is the state capitol and is halfway between the Equator and the North Pole) Oregon is pretty damn close to being militialand. Hell, draw a line north/south through Bend from the California line to the Columbia River, and everything east of that might as well be Idaho, with respect to geography, politics, and culturebeantownbubba wrote:OK, it's Oregon, where they've been known to take over state parks to protest something or other that nobody understood. But OTOH it ain't Idaho, aka militialand.
The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Moderators: Jonicont, mark lynn, Maluca3, Tequila Cowboy, BigTom, CooleyGirl, olwiggum
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
-
- Posts: 21751
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Yeah, I should have made a reference to Portland or something like that. But hopefully others, too, will get the point.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:I get your point, but outside of Portland, Eugene, & Bend (don't know enough about Salem, other than it is the state capitol and is halfway between the Equator and the North Pole) Oregon is pretty damn close to being militialand. Hell, draw a line north/south through Bend from the California line to the Columbia River, and everything east of that might as well be Idaho, with respect to geography, politics, and culturebeantownbubba wrote:OK, it's Oregon, where they've been known to take over state parks to protest something or other that nobody understood. But OTOH it ain't Idaho, aka militialand.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
- bovine knievel
- Posts: 9348
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:40 pm
- Location: Pollyanna doesn't live here.
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
It was a National refuge, Bubba. Just sayin.beantownbubba wrote:Yeah, I should have made a reference to Portland or something like that. But hopefully others, too, will get the point.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:I get your point, but outside of Portland, Eugene, & Bend (don't know enough about Salem, other than it is the state capitol and is halfway between the Equator and the North Pole) Oregon is pretty damn close to being militialand. Hell, draw a line north/south through Bend from the California line to the Columbia River, and everything east of that might as well be Idaho, with respect to geography, politics, and culturebeantownbubba wrote:OK, it's Oregon, where they've been known to take over state parks to protest something or other that nobody understood. But OTOH it ain't Idaho, aka militialand.
“Excited people get on daddy’s nerves.” - M. Cooley
- bovine knievel
- Posts: 9348
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:40 pm
- Location: Pollyanna doesn't live here.
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Speaking of Oregon militia, this is classic. For context it was during the occupation of the NWR.
“Excited people get on daddy’s nerves.” - M. Cooley
-
- Posts: 21751
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Damn, I could use a refuge, national or otherwise. How do I get me one of those?bovine knievel wrote:It was a National refuge, Bubba. Just sayin.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Well, first you gotta get good and mad. Then you gotta go and round up your militia...beantownbubba wrote:Damn, I could use a refuge, national or otherwise. How do I get me one of those?bovine knievel wrote:It was a National refuge, Bubba. Just sayin.
-
- Posts: 21751
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
OK, cool. But do I have to grow a beard? I hope I don't have to grow a beard. Beard's make me really itchy.scotto wrote:Well, first you gotta get good and mad. Then you gotta go and round up your militia...beantownbubba wrote:Damn, I could use a refuge, national or otherwise. How do I get me one of those?bovine knievel wrote:It was a National refuge, Bubba. Just sayin.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- blessedcurse
- Posts: 456
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:30 am
- Location: Between valley and peak, Nova Scotia
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Political cartoonist from Halifax - old high school classmate of mine. Hits the nail way more than he misseswhatwouldcooleydo? wrote:
Most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them. - Thoreau
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
This was almost perfect- there’s no way in hell Diaper Don would ask permissionblessedcurse wrote:Political cartoonist from Halifax - old high school classmate of mine. Hits the nail way more than he misseswhatwouldcooleydo? wrote:
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Choose carefully when casting the “Lavoy Finicum” of your domestic terrorist group, you gotta make that one countbeantownbubba wrote:OK, cool. But do I have to grow a beard? I hope I don't have to grow a beard. Beard's make me really itchy.scotto wrote:Well, first you gotta get good and mad. Then you gotta go and round up your militia...beantownbubba wrote:
Damn, I could use a refuge, national or otherwise. How do I get me one of those?
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
-
- Posts: 21751
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
I have occasionally speculated about threats to the future legitimacy of the Supreme Court, but after today’s red letter opinion release day it turns out that was a waste of time and effort. We’ve blown right by any question of the Court’s continuing legitimacy. As we used to say in law school, it’s a moot point.
To nobody’s surprise, the Court made two more major decisions on a 5-4 basis. One of them, the gerrymandering case, was such a mechanistic application of pre-existing positions that many leading news agencies saw fit to begin their coverage with a sentence along the lines of “Today the conservative majority of the Court ruled that…” IOW, even the same media that feels obligated to refer to sports stadiums and events by their major advertisers, can’t bring itself to pretend that the institution of the Supreme Court issued a decision. IMHO, issuing the gerrymandering decision on a 5-4 basis was a huge strategic error by the Court that will come back to haunt it. But in many ways the gerrymandering decision was the more justifiable of the two, at least if you squint really hard and turn your head sideways, but let's talk about the census case first.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court found that the Administration’s stated justifications for adding a citizenship question to the census form were lies told by yet another lying billionaire (that would be Ross, not Trump, but I understand your confusion) and that the real justification was impermissible as a basis for government action. Therefore the question must be struck from the form. However, and here’s the kicker, the Court essentially invited the Administration to come back with a better lie that the Court can accept with a straight face so that the Administration can get its question after all. Think about it, the Court reached a conclusion about events that already occurred at specific points in time. We, and the Court, already KNOW the Administration’s REAL motivation. It can’t go back and sit in a conference room and spitball lies until they come up with one they think they can sneak by the Court. Oh, wait. The Court just said that’s exactly what they should do. The Court INVITED the Administration to do so. Maybe it’s just me but I find this stuff to be right out of the twilight zone. There is no logic to what the Court did here.
I never had a serious question as to how the Court was going to decide the gerrymandering case and there is actually an anemic, very thin, virtually transparent fig leaf that provides the conservative majority with tiny amount cover. The Justices had 2 choices: They could find that gerrymandering is essentially a political maneuver or dispute between the 2 major parties and thus not amenable to the Court’s review. The “political matters” exception to Court jurisdiction ia actually a real thing that has real value. When applied appropriately. Or the Court could have taken the position that gerrymandering goes to the very heart of the voting process and the principle of “one person, one vote” which in turn is essential to the functioning of representative democracy. If one characterizes gerrymandering this way, it follows that it is too important, too precious and too fragile to leave to the rough and tumble political arena. The conservative majority chose the former path, IMHO wrongly, dangerously so. In effect, the conservative majority ruled that it doesn’t matter how you take power, consolidate power or exercise power; once you have it, it’s yours. Sounds like a call to revolution to me. Or maybe the justification for one. In any case it’s a pathetically wrong-headed decision that I predict will have unintended consequences for as long as it takes to be overturned or disregarded.
To nobody’s surprise, the Court made two more major decisions on a 5-4 basis. One of them, the gerrymandering case, was such a mechanistic application of pre-existing positions that many leading news agencies saw fit to begin their coverage with a sentence along the lines of “Today the conservative majority of the Court ruled that…” IOW, even the same media that feels obligated to refer to sports stadiums and events by their major advertisers, can’t bring itself to pretend that the institution of the Supreme Court issued a decision. IMHO, issuing the gerrymandering decision on a 5-4 basis was a huge strategic error by the Court that will come back to haunt it. But in many ways the gerrymandering decision was the more justifiable of the two, at least if you squint really hard and turn your head sideways, but let's talk about the census case first.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court found that the Administration’s stated justifications for adding a citizenship question to the census form were lies told by yet another lying billionaire (that would be Ross, not Trump, but I understand your confusion) and that the real justification was impermissible as a basis for government action. Therefore the question must be struck from the form. However, and here’s the kicker, the Court essentially invited the Administration to come back with a better lie that the Court can accept with a straight face so that the Administration can get its question after all. Think about it, the Court reached a conclusion about events that already occurred at specific points in time. We, and the Court, already KNOW the Administration’s REAL motivation. It can’t go back and sit in a conference room and spitball lies until they come up with one they think they can sneak by the Court. Oh, wait. The Court just said that’s exactly what they should do. The Court INVITED the Administration to do so. Maybe it’s just me but I find this stuff to be right out of the twilight zone. There is no logic to what the Court did here.
I never had a serious question as to how the Court was going to decide the gerrymandering case and there is actually an anemic, very thin, virtually transparent fig leaf that provides the conservative majority with tiny amount cover. The Justices had 2 choices: They could find that gerrymandering is essentially a political maneuver or dispute between the 2 major parties and thus not amenable to the Court’s review. The “political matters” exception to Court jurisdiction ia actually a real thing that has real value. When applied appropriately. Or the Court could have taken the position that gerrymandering goes to the very heart of the voting process and the principle of “one person, one vote” which in turn is essential to the functioning of representative democracy. If one characterizes gerrymandering this way, it follows that it is too important, too precious and too fragile to leave to the rough and tumble political arena. The conservative majority chose the former path, IMHO wrongly, dangerously so. In effect, the conservative majority ruled that it doesn’t matter how you take power, consolidate power or exercise power; once you have it, it’s yours. Sounds like a call to revolution to me. Or maybe the justification for one. In any case it’s a pathetically wrong-headed decision that I predict will have unintended consequences for as long as it takes to be overturned or disregarded.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
After reading the NYT and WaPo pieces on this I was most interested in hearing your takes. Thanks for delivering.beantownbubba wrote:I have occasionally speculated about threats to the future legitimacy of the Supreme Court, but after today’s red letter opinion release day it turns out that was a waste of time and effort. We’ve blown right by any question of the Court’s continuing legitimacy. As we used to say in law school, it’s a moot point.
To nobody’s surprise, the Court made two more major decisions on a 5-4 basis. One of them, the gerrymandering case, was such a mechanistic application of pre-existing positions that many leading news agencies saw fit to begin their coverage with a sentence along the lines of “Today the conservative majority of the Court ruled that…” IOW, even the same media that feels obligated to refer to sports stadiums and events by their major advertisers, can’t bring itself to pretend that the institution of the Supreme Court issued a decision. IMHO, issuing the gerrymandering decision on a 5-4 basis was a huge strategic error by the Court that will come back to haunt it. But in many ways the gerrymandering decision was the more justifiable of the two, at least if you squint really hard and turn your head sideways, but let's talk about the census case first.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court found that the Administration’s stated justifications for adding a citizenship question to the census form were lies told by yet another lying billionaire (that would be Ross, not Trump, but I understand your confusion) and that the real justification was impermissible as a basis for government action. Therefore the question must be struck from the form. However, and here’s the kicker, the Court essentially invited the Administration to come back with a better lie that the Court can accept with a straight face so that the Administration can get its question after all. Think about it, the Court reached a conclusion about events that already occurred at specific points in time. We, and the Court, already KNOW the Administration’s REAL motivation. It can’t go back and sit in a conference room and spitball lies until they come up with one they think they can sneak by the Court. Oh, wait. The Court just said that’s exactly what they should do. The Court INVITED the Administration to do so. Maybe it’s just me but I find this stuff to be right out of the twilight zone. There is no logic to what the Court did here.
I never had a serious question as to how the Court was going to decide the gerrymandering case and there is actually an anemic, very thin, virtually transparent fig leaf that provides the conservative majority with tiny amount cover. The Justices had 2 choices: They could find that gerrymandering is essentially a political maneuver or dispute between the 2 major parties and thus not amenable to the Court’s review. The “political matters” exception to Court jurisdiction ia actually a real thing that has real value. When applied appropriately. Or the Court could have taken the position that gerrymandering goes to the very heart of the voting process and the principle of “one person, one vote” which in turn is essential to the functioning of representative democracy. If one characterizes gerrymandering this way, it follows that it is too important, too precious and too fragile to leave to the rough and tumble political arena. The conservative majority chose the former path, IMHO wrongly, dangerously so. In effect, the conservative majority ruled that it doesn’t matter how you take power, consolidate power or exercise power; once you have it, it’s yours. Sounds like a call to revolution to me. Or maybe the justification for one. In any case it’s a pathetically wrong-headed decision that I predict will have unintended consequences for as long as it takes to be overturned or disregarded.
The long game was always the court(s) and those Federalist Society fucks now wear the championship belt they've been after for decades
In effect, the conservative majority ruled that it doesn’t matter how you take power, consolidate power or exercise power; once you have it, it’s yours. Sounds like a call to revolution to me. Or maybe the justification for one.
you nailed that!!!
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
I would truly rather deal with the Zombie Apocalypse than a US political revolution. I fucking KNOW where I'll end up in Undead US, and it ain't in someone's belly.
Now it's dark.
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
I think the census decision is a sound defeat for Trump, as they will not get it before SCOTUS again in time to get it on the census
And I knew when I woke up Rock N Roll would be here forever
-
- Posts: 21751
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Thanks.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:
After reading the NYT and WaPo pieces on this I was most interested in hearing your takes. Thanks for delivering.
In effect, the conservative majority ruled that it doesn’t matter how you take power, consolidate power or exercise power; once you have it, it’s yours. Sounds like a call to revolution to me. Or maybe the justification for one.
you nailed that!!!
The early word is that the Administration will try to get the Court to hear the case in September which will still allow them to meet their printing, etc deadlines. I have no idea what their likelihood of success will be on that or what the precedents are but I do know that the Court does sometimes hear important, time sensitive cases on an expedited basis. But that's usually (always to the extent of my knowledge) when the Court's already in session.Zip City wrote:I think the census decision is a sound defeat for Trump, as they will not get it before SCOTUS again in time to get it on the census
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
In big picture, does a loss on the Census matter even come close to the significance of the win on the gerrymandering issue?
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
I had heard that the deadline was August to get the question on the census. I'll hold further opinion until the facts are cleared upbeantownbubba wrote:Thanks.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:
After reading the NYT and WaPo pieces on this I was most interested in hearing your takes. Thanks for delivering.
In effect, the conservative majority ruled that it doesn’t matter how you take power, consolidate power or exercise power; once you have it, it’s yours. Sounds like a call to revolution to me. Or maybe the justification for one.
you nailed that!!!
The early word is that the Administration will try to get the Court to hear the case in September which will still allow them to meet their printing, etc deadlines. I have no idea what their likelihood of success will be on that or what the precedents are but I do know that the Court does sometimes hear important, time sensitive cases on an expedited basis. But that's usually (always to the extent of my knowledge) when the Court's already in session.Zip City wrote:I think the census decision is a sound defeat for Trump, as they will not get it before SCOTUS again in time to get it on the census
And I knew when I woke up Rock N Roll would be here forever
-
- Posts: 21751
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
The literal answer depends on what assumptions one makes and how one applies the math: The number of people undercounted, their geographic distribution, the impact of their presence on specific districts, etc. The bigger picture answer is no, the census loss (if it holds) will not have nearly the impact of the gerrymandering win for Republicans, unless the Court's gerrymandering decision motivates Democrats and others to take some serious and real steps towards winning state elections w/ the ultimate goal of passing state-wide ballot initiatives or constitutional amendments to reverse the effects of gerrymandering and presumably to prohibit or limit it in the future. I'm not betting on that outcome.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:In big picture, does a loss on the Census matter even come close to the significance of the win on the gerrymandering issue?
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
And he was fired for thisblessedcurse wrote:Political cartoonist from Halifax - old high school classmate of mine. Hits the nail way more than he misseswhatwouldcooleydo? wrote:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/cana ... n-n1025071
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
-
- Posts: 21751
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Truewhatwouldcooleydo? wrote:And he was fired
Not so clear. Totally outrageous if true.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:for this
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
The plot thickensbeantownbubba wrote:Truewhatwouldcooleydo? wrote:And he was fired
Not so clear. Totally outrageous if true.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:for this
https://mashable.com/article/michael-de ... p-cartoon/
Two days after de Adder lost his contract, the president of the Association of Canadian Cartoonists released a statement on Facebook that speculated de Adder was let go to mollify J.K. Irving. The Canadian billionaire (listed at the fourth richest person in Canada) owns both the Brunswick News and J.D. Irving, Limited, a conglomerate with numerous international trade interests.
Tyrell also claimed that while Irving’s papers had never published de Adder’ Trump cartoons (including the piece in question) the amount of attention de Adder received for this particular cartoon put a target on his back. “Trade has been an issue since Trump took office, trade that affects the Irvings directly," Tyrell wrote, adding, “not to mention a host of other issues. And the President himself is an unknown quantity who punishes those who appear to oppose him.”
Tyrell connected Irving’s dual ownership of Brunswick News and J.D. Irving, Limited and placed the blame for de Adder’ situation on the billionaire's shoulders, noting that “whether the powers that be in America would make the connection between de Adder's cartoon and Brunswick News Inc doesn't matter. It seems that the Irving's [sic] don't want to take that chance. So they cut all ties.
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
While I've been saying this shit for years, thank you Kaepernick. For some reason people don't understand that is the flag that flew over a nation where slavery was legal.
and the rest as they say is uh er uh, well somebodies history somewhere?
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Swamp wrote:thank you Kaepernick.
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
- tinnitus photography
- Posts: 7251
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
this guy grows a spine now? fuck him.
-
- Posts: 21751
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Questionable. He lobbed a few easy criticisms from behind the protection of a book. I don't give him full credit for a spine for that. Besides, his position in the world is still the guy who ran away from doing anything about Trump when he had the chance and knew he should and still won't do anything even though he might be able to. Nope. I'd say he's maybe grown a little tadpole tail. And having already said elsewhere exactly what you said, I'll repeat myself here: Fuck Paul Ryan.tinnitus photography wrote:this guy grows a spine now? fuck him.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Not even if I had your dick and Clams' ass was pushing.beantownbubba wrote:Questionable. He lobbed a few easy criticisms from behind the protection of a book. I don't give him full credit for a spine for that. Besides, his position in the world is still the guy who ran away from doing anything about Trump when he had the chance and knew he should and still won't do anything even though he might be able to. Nope. I'd say he's maybe grown a little tadpole tail. And having already said elsewhere exactly what you said, I'll repeat myself here: Fuck Paul Ryan.tinnitus photography wrote:this guy grows a spine now? fuck him.
Now it's dark.
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
i think biden may be transgender hilary. running him would be a colossal mistake. the donald has already moved from salivating to outright drooling.
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Flea wrote:Not even if I had your dick and Clams' ass was pushing.beantownbubba wrote:Questionable. He lobbed a few easy criticisms from behind the protection of a book. I don't give him full credit for a spine for that. Besides, his position in the world is still the guy who ran away from doing anything about Trump when he had the chance and knew he should and still won't do anything even though he might be able to. Nope. I'd say he's maybe grown a little tadpole tail. And having already said elsewhere exactly what you said, I'll repeat myself here: Fuck Paul Ryan.tinnitus photography wrote:this guy grows a spine now? fuck him.
Everyone needs a friend, everyone needs a fuck