Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

What is Wrong With the United State?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 273
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Then obviously they don't have the votes to override....again, working as designed...long before Trump.

Hardly the first government shutdown in U.S. history, and this one is only a partial as many other appropriations are completed.    Previously, Democrats shut down the government to cater to illegals.

It's not a Trump thing...he actually changed the political status quo by defeating 16 GOP pretenders and Hillary Clinton. Previous "functional" actions by the U.S. government actually led to a ci

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Yeah, Roberts is the weak link in the chain of social conservatism. 

None the less,  no enemies on the right.

 

Yeah, as someone who isn't socially conservative, I don't really care, but it would be fun to watch many of the left's sacred cows get slaughtered by social conservatives. Like you say, no enemies on the right.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Clarence Thomas' wife Ginni is the big right wing nutjob in the family, she's a died in the wool social conservative, so she might be the one who talks Clarence into stepping down so Trump can load up to go for a two fer.   Take one for the team, to go after Roe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Yeah, as someone who isn't socially conservative, I don't really care, but it would be fun to watch many of the left's sacred cows get slaughtered by social conservatives. Like you say, no enemies on the right.

Indeed,  I am attracted to powerful women, so I have no desire to keep mine barefoot in the kitchen, on the other hand, barefoot women in the kitchen does not bother me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention, the Baroness Thatcher was in fact a housewife, and a damn good one too. 

Breast feeding babies and sinking Argentine ships without quarter, what a war chief indeed.

Scourge of the Juntas from Moscow to Buenos Aires.

If the Democrats were to come back to classical liberalism, abandon "progressive" Marxism, with a Maggie Thatcher at the helm, they would stomp the Repulicans.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, limiting speech, federal gun control, and confiscation, will be their undoing.

Edited by Dougie93
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Democrats never will come back to "classical liberalism", you're right. That era is over pretty much. But don't forget, the Dems didn't really embrace classical liberalism in the 60s either. The party was split between the progressive and reactionary wings at that time. That's why I complain of polarization; there used to be differences, vast differences, within both parties. Now it's only between them.

Edited by JamesHackerMP
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Democrats have a very big hole to dig out of at the state level, having lost over 1,000 seats during the Obama administration.   The 2018 election results only helped to stop the bleeding.   

 

Quote

Over the past 25 years, Republicans have methodically consolidated power in state legislatures, taking both chambers in every Southern state, flipping long-Democratic Midwestern strongholds and claiming new territory like West Virginia. Heading into the midterm elections, they controlled two-thirds of all state legislative bodies.

Newly energized activists and donors on the left had hoped to begin rolling back that trend this year, and on Tuesday Democrats took a big step, netting about 250 state legislative seats. But their major victories all came in states Hillary Clinton won in 2016. Their road back to simple parity remains long:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/10/upshot/republicans-dominate-state-politics-but-democrats-made-a-dent.html

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dems next window of opportunity was Jimmy Cahtuh.  But he immediately went to war with his own congress and blew himself up.

Huge effect on the international order, America is still enforcing the Carter Doctrine now, having forgotten what the reason was in the first place.

Domestically tho, he went Malaise Speech and melted down.   Proof of what happens when you speak truth to the public. 

Ronnie Raygun happens, as they recoil into the nostalgia for the America that never was.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2019 at 2:13 PM, Dougie93 said:

Thing is, the Democrats have made a sworn enemy of Kavanaugh for life now, so that worked out by liberals hoisting themselves on their own petard.

But if ends 6-3 with the likes of Amy Barret setting a tone, then Roe v. Wade might actually be in peril, along with gay marriage and women in the combat arms, a whole slew of liberal sacred cows could be slaughtered in rapid succession, at 6-3.

Since you're so much better acquainted with civics than myself, Dougie, isn't there some sort of limits on one supreme court overturning a case from a previous court? (e.g., repealing the Roe v Wade decision)? It was explained to me and there's a latin term for it and I can't for the life of me remember it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, JamesHackerMP said:

Since you're so much better acquainted with civics than myself, Dougie, isn't there some sort of limits on one supreme court overturning a case from a previous court? (e.g., repealing the Roe v Wade decision)? It was explained to me and there's a latin term for it and I can't for the life of me remember it.

Well it’s double jeopardy.  Can’t be tried for the same crime twice.  Yes there are appeals but this already went to the highest court in the land. 

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

Since you're so much better acquainted with civics than myself, Dougie, isn't there some sort of limits on one supreme court overturning a case from a previous court? (e.g., repealing the Roe v Wade decision)? It was explained to me and there's a latin term for it and I can't for the life of me remember it.

 

If you mean "stare decisis", that only applies to lower courts.   The U.S. Supreme court can and has overruled it own previous decisions in several high profile cases, like Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) being overturned by Brown v. Board of Education (1954).

Roe v. Wade is now mostly obsolete because of technology and subsequent rulings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was suspended so I couldn't answer, but BC took care of it.    If stare decisis was paramount, you'd still have Dread Scott and Jim Crow on the books.

To the Christian Conservatives of America, abortion is genocidal mass murder of children exclusively.  So this is at the level of slavery for them in terms or moral imperative.

The arc of American history is that such things shall not stand, when the abolitionists get their way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2019 at 6:36 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

If you mean "stare decisis", that only applies to lower courts.   The U.S. Supreme court can and has overruled it own previous decisions in several high profile cases, like Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) being overturned by Brown v. Board of Education (1954).

Roe v. Wade is now mostly obsolete because of technology and subsequent rulings.

That's it! stare decisis...I couldn't think of that.

yeah, but the two decisions you mentioned were 58 years apart. That's what I was talking about, some amount of time passing before a SC reverses a previous SC judgment---does the Supreme Court regularly overrule itself more quickly than that? (i.e., with less time having passed)  Or does it usually take a while? (as in the two cases you mentioned being separated by 58 years)

Edited by JamesHackerMP
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2019 at 12:37 PM, Zeitgeist said:

Well it’s double jeopardy.  Can’t be tried for the same crime twice.  Yes there are appeals but this already went to the highest court in the land. 

Double jeopardy is a prohibition against an individual being tried twice for the same crime (twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, I think is the specific wording.) What I asked them, was about a SC overturning a previous SC's judgment/precedent/whatever; not a criminal trial.

Edited by JamesHackerMP
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, JamesHackerMP said:

yeah, but the two decisions you mentioned were 58 years apart. That's what I was talking about, some amount of time passing before a SC reverses a previous SC judgment---does the Supreme Court regularly overrule itself more quickly than that? (i.e., with less time having passed)  Or does it usually take a while? (as in the two cases you mentioned being separated by 58 years)

 

It usually does take a while, if only because of the pace of changes to societal norms and cases with standing, but not always.   This wiki list has durations as short as one year, and many far less than 58 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, JamesHackerMP said:

Double jeopardy is a prohibition against an individual being tried twice for the same crime (twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, I think is the specific wording.) What I asked them, was about a SC overturning a previous SC's judgment/precedent/whatever; not a criminal trial.

But abortion was a crime until R v W.  In cases of the SC changing its decision, it happened because new cases involving new adversaries brought new decisions that set new precedents.  Essentially the new precedents made the old ones obsolete.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

But abortion was a crime until R v W.  In cases of the SC changing its decision, it happened because new cases involving new adversaries brought new decisions that set new precedents.  Essentially the new precedents made the old ones obsolete.  

Yeah, but we still aren't talking about double jeopardy, we're talking about the SC overturning judgments it previously made. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

It usually does take a while, if only because of the pace of changes to societal norms and cases with standing, but not always.   This wiki list has durations as short as one year, and many far less than 58 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions

Interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2019 at 2:42 PM, Dougie93 said:

Not to mention, the Baroness Thatcher was in fact a housewife, and a damn good one too. 

Breast feeding babies and sinking Argentine ships without quarter, what a war chief indeed.

Scourge of the Juntas from Moscow to Buenos Aires.

If the Democrats were to come back to classical liberalism, abandon "progressive" Marxism, with a Maggie Thatcher at the helm, they would stomp the Repulicans.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, limiting speech, federal gun control, and confiscation, will be their undoing.

Sprinkled in with the references to Thatcher's mammory glands are some references that refer to classic Liberalism. If you are referring to such persons as Bentham you would know that would never fly in the US. Bentham's postulations would never match the individual rights most Americans believe are birth rights although in fact illusions in their state which has them believe they are individuals in law while in fact managing them as mindless sheep. All countries fuel the illusion of freedom to be able to control their populations including those of us in the Queen's nanny state as you would refer to it here in United Empire Loyalist Dominion of Canada where we strongly believe in gun control and medicare.

The very symbol of the crown as head of state is in fact simply a Freudian symbol for a large breast that all members of the family must suck.

Using your analogy Queen Elizabeth is one large and well chewed upon breast.

Then again you never met Golda Maier or took a sauna with her.

That said what ails the US the topic of this thread is not Democrats or Republicans, those are meaningless words lending to the illusion of choice in political debate when there is none, its the lack of vision and leadership. The US education system does not cultivate leaders let alone visionaries. That was terminated with the downfall of Nixon the final fatal blow to any US collective innocence. Vietnam and Nixon ended any remaining sense of unity, idealism or concept of justice for Americans.

Since Nixon its been a series of weak, compromised, shallow leaders the most popular one  being a B actor having served his entire 8 years  in office with Alzheimer's  disease and his wife whispering in his ear to sit up and not dribble upstairs or downstairs...and people found that charming.

We have across the West a lack of leaders coming out of our education system. We have no shortage of followers, number crunchers, financial clerks.

Its only a matter of time until Alexa the Amazon portal to Satan  is elected US President

People want simple, easy to understand responses from a robot. 

Circus clowns like Trudeau and Trump are going the way of Ronald MacDonald-they are passe. A clown today is associated with child molesters or politicians nothing else, and so it will be replaced since being either is anti-social and causes  great harm to all of society. Both molest. 

Robots will be running Canada within years. Alexa, how much tax should be charge on carbon?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I haven't read any of the answers or the OP's description but I'm taking a wild guess and say that everyone has said everything?

 

If so, this is a good reason to destroy the United States of America and give me Maine?

 

And by the way, no, I am not trolling..... I am serious, I am dead serious about everything that I am saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...