Trump is my favourite comedian of the year already (10 Viewers)

Forums New posts
clint van damme

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
dutchman said:
Broadly yes.

It's irrelevant anyway since such matters aren't decided by the President.
Click to expand...

He might not decide legislation but given he recently appealled for Floridians to buy more guns that sends out a pretty clear message.

Do you think that's a good message in a state that has so many gun deaths?

And how do you square that with his beliefs on abortion which I assume are pro life?
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Otis said:
It's going full on Handmaid's Tale over there. I don't think we are quite heading that way just yet in the UK.

Have you heard about this latest bill they are trying to pass over there? 😳 Forced Outing, where a school or teacher has to tell parents without their consent if they are using pronouns instead of he/she etc. It will be the same if some child declares themselves to be gay next.

BBC News - Janelle Monaé's sensuous new album fights back at anti-LGBTQ laws
www.bbc.co.uk

Janelle Monaé's sensuous new album fights back at anti-LGBTQ laws

The non-binary singer's hedonistic new album is a celebration of black, queer pleasure.
www.bbc.co.uk


About half way down the page.

Forced Outing? Both those words separately even conjure up a bit of Hitler Youth about them.
Click to expand...

To be honest if my kid starts showing signs of something that’s got lots of mental health comorbidities and is linked with off brand drug use and decreased life chances I’d like to know about it. Schools shouldn’t keep secrets from parents for kids IMO.

I’m not sure being gay is even close to the same thing TBH. Ones a medical condition the other a sexuality.
 
Otis

Otis

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
To be honest if my kid starts showing signs of something that’s got lots of mental health comorbidities and is linked with off brand drug use and decreased life chances I’d like to know about it. Schools shouldn’t keep secrets from parents for kids IMO.

I’m not sure being gay is even close to the same thing TBH. Ones a medical condition the other a sexuality.
Click to expand...
No, not the same thing. Just stating how America is going.

And "like to know about it" and being forced to report it, are two quite different things too
 
S

SBT

Well-Known Member
dutchman said:
Broadly yes.

It's irrelevant anyway since such matters aren't decided by the President.
Click to expand...
No, they’re decided by the Supreme Court (which is appointed by the president), by Congress (which the president can veto), and by state governors (which DeSantis currently is)

Other than that though…
 
dutchman

dutchman

Well-Known Member
SBT said:
No, they’re decided by the Supreme Court (which is appointed by the president)
Click to expand...
No it isn't. Individual judges can be nominated for the post by a president only when a vacancy becomes available (which is not very often) but then have to be approved by the senate. It's entirely possible for a president to serve a full term with a totally hostile supreme court.
 
S

SBT

Well-Known Member
dutchman said:
No it isn't. Individual judges can be nominated for the post by a president only when a vacancy becomes available (which is not very often) but then have to be approved by the senate. It's entirely possible for a president to serve a full term with a totally hostile supreme court.
Click to expand...
So not irrelevant then?
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
dutchman said:
No it isn't. Individual judges can be nominated for the post by a president only when a vacancy becomes available (which is not very often) but then have to be approved by the senate. It's entirely possible for a president to serve a full term with a totally hostile supreme court.
Click to expand...
And if the incumbent party is the same as the president's then chances are they'll wave them through.

Republicans, Mitch McConnell especially, see the control of the Supreme Court as vital. Hence why he blocked Obama's pick for the sorry excuse he was a 'lame duck' president coming to the end of his two terms yet with Trump he argued the complete opposite and that he should get the pick because he was president at the time.

Wouldn't surprise me if in future they'll be convincing ageing Justice's to resign when a favourable President is in charge so a younger Justice can be appointed and keep their influence for an extra 25-30 years+. Though technically Congress could expand the Supreme Court if it wanted to shift the power balance.

It's a ridiculous system that the President should have absolutely no say in whatsoever. Nominations should come from within the profession and should have set term limits of 4-5years. To get a lifetime position in such an important role is frankly ridiculous.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
dutchman said:
No it isn't. Individual judges can be nominated for the post by a president only when a vacancy becomes available (which is not very often) but then have to be approved by the senate. It's entirely possible for a president to serve a full term with a totally hostile supreme court.
Click to expand...
Like Biden is? When Ruth Baden Ginsberg died 38 days before Trump left office he took the unusual step of rushing her replacement through with someone who favours him. Trump had control of the Senate, only one voting Republican senator rebelled so she was appointed against tradition of an outgoing president leaving it for the incoming president. If you were being cynical you’d say Trump knew that he’d be facing the Supreme Court at some point so took the opportunity to break with tradition so he could attempt to stack the cards in his favour.
 
Paxman II

Paxman II

Well-Known Member
Wow, a lot of you are completely clueless on American policy, culture and it's constitution. I've lived and owned business's in the USA in southern states where things are a lot different to anything in the north or California. If some of you can't see what's going on and prefer to listen to the MSM for your information then I feel sorry for you. What is it they say? You need to live in a country to undertsand it.
I have a couple from the southern states in my hotel right now. His words to me were "if they come for my guns" I'll shout them first. He is a church goer. Just try and understand that.
 
Sick Boy

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
Paxman II said:
Wow, a lot of you are completely clueless on American policy, culture and it's constitution. I've lived and owned business's in the USA in southern states where things are a lot different to anything in the north or California. If some of you can't see what's going on and prefer to listen to the MSM for your information then I feel sorry for you. What is it they say? You need to live in a country to undertsand it.
I have a couple from the southern states in my hotel right now. His words to me were "if they come for my guns" I'll shout them first. He is a church goer. Just try and understand that.
Click to expand...
Fucking hell.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Paxman II said:
Wow, a lot of you are completely clueless on American policy, culture and it's constitution. I've lived and owned business's in the USA in southern states where things are a lot different to anything in the north or California. If some of you can't see what's going on and prefer to listen to the MSM for your information then I feel sorry for you. What is it they say? You need to live in a country to undertsand it.
I have a couple from the southern states in my hotel right now. His words to me were "if they come for my guns" I'll shout them first. He is a church goer. Just try and understand that.
Click to expand...
You're a genuine nutter!
 
clint van damme

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Paxman II said:
Wow, a lot of you are completely clueless on American policy, culture and it's constitution. I've lived and owned business's in the USA in southern states where things are a lot different to anything in the north or California. If some of you can't see what's going on and prefer to listen to the MSM for your information then I feel sorry for you. What is it they say? You need to live in a country to undertsand it.
I have a couple from the southern states in my hotel right now. His words to me were "if they come for my guns" I'll shout them first. He is a church goer. Just try and understand that.
Click to expand...


Clinton banned semi automatic weapons and gun deaths declined.
Did your hotel freind shoot anyone over it?
 
Paxman II

Paxman II

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
Yes it is.

Mass shootings declined for a decade and spiked almost immediately when the ban ended.
You're trying to defend the indefensible.
Click to expand...
Not true!
It did not ban all assult weapons. The debate on any effectiveness is still debated today. Too many loopholes in the bill. It was around the early 90's I beleive, when I was in Texas, so remember it well. Go research. It also lasted only 10 years. No such ban now.
 
clint van damme

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Paxman II said:
Not true!
It did not ban all assult weapons. The debate on any effectiveness is still debated today. Too many loopholes in the bill. It was around the early 90's I beleive, when I was in Texas, so remember it well. Go research. It also lasted only 10 years. No such ban now.
Click to expand...

Try reading my post again, I didn't say it was permanent, hence why I said mass shootings spiked again when the ban ended, (in 2004).
And the main point being, your crackpot, no doubt laughably claiming to be pro life friend didn't do shit when the bill was introduced.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Sick Boy said:
Yeah definitely but the likes of Fox and GB News are both part of the MSM, it just seems to be used to label something that disagrees with their views and as though there's some kind of conspiracy going on.
Click to expand...
It's such a lazy trope isn't it. Surprised he hasn't added woke to the clichés...
 
clint van damme

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Sick Boy said:
Yeah definitely but the likes of Fox and GB News are both part of the MSM, it just seems to be used to label something that disagrees with their views and as though there's some kind of conspiracy going on.
Click to expand...

Well GB News got away with an ofcom breach because they said it wasn't a news channel.

And fox made an incredible fuck up in a report the other day, I cant remember what it was but amateur didn't do it justice.

Tom Bower, (think it was him), was was funny on GB news the other day, eulogisig about Johnson when midway through his nonsense they broke to announce Johnson had resigned.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
clint van damme said:
Well GB News got away with an ofcom breach because they said it wasn't a news channel.

And fox made an incredible fuck up in a report the other day, I cant remember what it was but amateur didn't do it justice.

Tom Bower, (think it was him), was was funny on GB news the other day, eulogisig about Johnson when midway through his nonsense they broke to announce Johnson had resigned.
Click to expand...
His point being however that Fox is mainstream even if they probably shouldn't be licensed to be, so the MSM parrot is stuck out by clueless buffoons who don't actually b have an argument.

Even some of the dubious righties around here don't sink so low ;)
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Paxman II said:
Wow, a lot of you are completely clueless on American policy, culture and it's constitution. I've lived and owned business's in the USA in southern states where things are a lot different to anything in the north or California. If some of you can't see what's going on and prefer to listen to the MSM for your information then I feel sorry for you. What is it they say? You need to live in a country to undertsand it.
I have a couple from the southern states in my hotel right now. His words to me were "if they come for my guns" I'll shout them first. He is a church goer. Just try and understand that.
Click to expand...
And that last paragraph should tell you everything you need to know about how fucked up it is.

Someone who will claim they have some sort of moral high ground because of their faith would shoot someone for taking an object that can only be used to inflict pain and death. Just try and understand that.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Paxman II said:
Not true!
It did not ban all assult weapons. The debate on any effectiveness is still debated by Republicans and the gun lobby today. Too many loopholes in the bill. It was around the early 90's I beleive, when I was in Texas, so remember it well. Go research. It also lasted only 10 years. No such ban now.
Click to expand...
FFY
 
S

SBT

Well-Known Member
Paxman II said:
Wow, a lot of you are completely clueless on American policy, culture and it's constitution. I've lived and owned business's in the USA in southern states where things are a lot different to anything in the north or California. If some of you can't see what's going on and prefer to listen to the MSM for your information then I feel sorry for you. What is it they say? You need to live in a country to undertsand it.
I have a couple from the southern states in my hotel right now. His words to me were "if they come for my guns" I'll shout them first. He is a church goer. Just try and understand that.
Click to expand...
‘Southern states’
‘MSM’
‘Not California’
‘Church goer’

That’s armchair US politics bingo!

PS - hope your hotel guest didn’t try and shoot anyone
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)
Top