This isn’t about what is or isn’t “truly important”.
This is about watching society - civilization as a whole, even - changing before us in real time.
Change can be hard.
WuWei
186
It hasn’t changed a lick.
Not it’s really not.
It’s still just petty tyrants trying to lord over those they disagree with.
Look at this thread. It’s only one side trying to impose their desires over the other.
This whole thing started because those that disagree with the petty tyrants are ready to tell them not to let the door hit them on their way out.
Hence why no one tried to talk California out of leaving. It’s just unfortunate that they didn’t, would have saved a lot of trouble.
1 Like
That’s politics, isn’t it?
It’s just as much my country as it is yours - same for everyone else who disagrees with you.
Plenty of posters here - likely you as well - have spent the last 4 years shouting down liberals, mocking them for losing in 2016, and chanting “lock [him/her/them] up” at every rally for fantasy crimes they’ve imagined.
Yes, it is such a shame that other Americans dare to disagree with you. They should all just leave.
California goes and so does all that red state welfare they get from California.
That’s politics, isn’t it?
No… that’s the left. One side wants to be left alone.
It’s just as much my country as it is yours - same for everyone else who disagrees with you.
Plenty of posters here - likely you as well - have spent the last 4 years shouting down liberals, mocking them for losing in 2016, and chanting “lock [him/her/them] up” at every rally for fantasy crimes they’ve imagined.
Clinton should have been. Her crimes weren’t imagined.
The rest of that rally chanting crap is just that…crap, and makes the right look retarded.
Yes, it is such a shame that other Americans dare to disagree with you. They should all just leave.
It’s getting to the point where that will be the only peaceful option. I hope one side or the other mans up and takes that option.
By Felicia. I get nothing from “you” that I can’t live without.
2 Likes
I’m not going to go into the specifics of why you’re wrong, in terms of Clinton’s “crimes”. But thank you for at least acknowledging that people on the right can be childish too.
What’s stopping you from getting on a plane?
I’m sure you could live without your phone, tablets and/or computers.
But it’s not about what could be done.
Red Staters don’t need vegetables or fruit.
They’ve got cows, corn, and… well, thats about it. But they have a lot of it. Especially corn - not the sort you can really eat, but corn nevertheless.
1 Like
Where does California get its water?
Just curious…
2 Likes
most of it is ground water . the amount that comes from red states is a small percentage.
The ACA passed the Senate with 60 votes. The proper way to pass legislation back in the day. I don’t know what games you are talking about.
Sensible Chuckle
Court Packing is not the proper way to respond to your opponents. But these must be the new Nationalist Conservatives GOP that put their people above all else. And ■■■■ the other guy, he should have won.
Smyrna
200
The only reason to do it is for “one sided” political interests and regarding the SCOTUS…all of us should be united in this institution being as apolitical as possible for the good of the “whole”.
1 Like
komobu
201
I think it will cause “Judge Shopping” at the supreme level.
Roberts is the new Kennedy. So it is really only now a 5-4 majority. There’s been much conjecture that Clarence Thomas wants to retire, so there is a likely a chance for a new pick possibly soon.
1 Like
No reason he can’t. The Republicans have demonstrated the only thing that matters is who is in power and if it fits an agenda. I think if there had been consistency on the part of Republicans, there would be at least some sliver of an argument against it. Instead, through “legal” means, the Republicans got 3 SC justices (assuming ACB is confirmed) rather than 2 during Trump’s term. Two would have been pretty darn good for one term. That’s as many as Obama, GW or Clinton got in two full terms. This will turn a moderately conservative SC to a dominant conservative SC. A SC which does not match the views of the population as a whole.
So, people can argue “should” or “shouldn’t” all day long. The only thing that matters is if it can be done. It can, it is fully within the powers of Congress and it matches recent political moves on the other side of the aisle.
1 Like
Exactly the point. You can’t open a can of worms and then say, “He opened that can, so I opened this can”
The Supreme Court, historically, has always been conservative in this country’s history, save the Warren Court. If they become a dam on the other two branches, they will find their powers diluted with additional justices. And it will be their own fault.
1 Like
