ADVERTISEMENT

This is the Democratic Party.

 
the party gave the media the theme "joy" and just like an edict from the Supreme Leader, they ran with it... its so funny when every mainstream media outlet tales a talking point and runs with it..
 
dnc convention. What you see is not what you get. Kick the tires, look under the hood.

the last time I heard so much BS I was buying a used car.
 
the party gave the media the theme "joy" and just like an edict from the Supreme Leader, they ran with it... its so funny when every mainstream media outlet tales a talking point and runs with it..
I’ll take joy over the darkness and ineptitude the opposition is offering any day.
 
The Democrats are making all these big claims that they are saving Democracy, and thus are the anointed. If they are 'saving' democracy, it is only by keeping Trump out of office, not because they are enabling these new policies. It's not the policies you are putting in, it's only the policies of Trump being halted, that democracy might be helped. So far, the policies that the democrats have proposed generally cause democracy harm, just less harm than those proposed by Trump. "Go with less harm', should be the motto of Democrats.
 
Last edited:
No doubt, another dire cause (highlighted by the dire consequence) of disrupted testosterone levels among entire populations of men.

It’s funny they mention it on MSNBC & CNN, I swear I’ve been banned for calling out Democrat men for being soft & low T.

https://www.openicpsr.org/openicpsr/project/155441/version/V1/view
A lot of this stuff really started to decline at an unprecedentedly high rate under Obama, though I’m certain that had more to do with someone not wanting to be made fun of/being called big Mike lmao speaking of your parents being suspicious of those who take more than they need what about y’all’s friends’ kids w call your own what about your half dozen multimillion dollar homes

Speaking of taking how bout those protests outside the DNC lmao speaking of taking lmao
 
"The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.".. Michelle Obama.

Whose pie is she talking about?.. She gets $1MM a speech and owns $40MM in houses in 3 different states plus DC
..
 
lots of accolades for the Walz. when will they let the public see the grandmother in Minnesota that he put in jail for opening her business during covid.
 
I so, don't want our nation's first female president to be Kamala. I will accept it, because she is better than Trump. But that honor should go to someone who the public can celebrate as a great president. That won't be Kamala. A little better than Trump is not a rousing cry for the first female president.
 
I so, don't want our nation's first female president to be Kamala. I will accept it, because she is better than Trump. But that honor should go to someone who the public can celebrate as a great president. That won't be Kamala. A little better than Trump is not a rousing cry for the first female president.
We need the American Margaret Thatcher..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gmoney4WW
I so, don't want our nation's first female president to be Kamala. I will accept it, because she is better than Trump. But that honor should go to someone who the public can celebrate as a great president. That won't be Kamala. A little better than Trump is not a rousing cry for the first female president.
In what world is she better than Trump? Even the American public, with its utter lack of morality, can make the proper choice between a real estate developer & a lady of the night.
 
We need the American Margaret Thatch

I so, don't want our nation's first female president to be Kamala. I will accept it, because she is better than Trump. But that honor should go to someone who the public can celebrate as a great president. That won't be Kamala. A little better than Trump is not a rousing cry for the first female president.
The press conference occurring right now with RFK Jr speaks so heavily to those that support the Democrat party & how far they have fallen from American values.
 
The press conference occurring right now with RFK Jr speaks so heavily to those that support the Democrat party & how far they have fallen from American values.
All RFK Jr adds to the voting poor are the dead Bear roadkill eater voters whose brains are probably worm infested like his. And maybe you.
 
If Tester can take Montana, Democrats will have the Senate, House and presidency after November 5th.
 
never in my lifetime did I think that Americans would embrace Communisim. I guess if package it right, it can sound good
GettyImages-1230476983.jpg
 
Zuck admits to succumbing to Administration pressure and censoring speech. The Federal Government censoring the speech of its citizens is something I thought I would never see in the U.S.

 
Last edited:
Zuck admits to succumbing to Administration pressure and censoring speech. The Federal Government censoring the speech of its citizens is something I thought I would never see in the U.S.

Facebook has been for a long time a cesspool of ridiculous speech, and there was much content showed about Covid that was dangerous to the public health. I'm not fully onboard with Brandenburg to the extent that speech which promotes certain action (or inaction) and materially endangers the health or wellbeing of others should deserve protection.

Its one of the few rulings from that era that I think the court flubbed.
 
Facebook has been for a long time a cesspool of ridiculous speech, and there was much content showed about Covid that was dangerous to the public health. I'm not fully onboard with Brandenburg to the extent that speech which promotes certain action (or inaction) and materially endangers the health or wellbeing of others should deserve protection.

Its one of the few rulings from that era that I think the court flubbed.
They censored scientists who suggested the origin of Covid might have been a lab leak among others…but ok. Hard to believe the party of civil rights and free speech now support the federal governments censorship of its people. The parties have flipped in many ways. History is full of examples of governments who sought to silence dissenting views. Usually doesn’t turn out well for the people of said governments.
 
They censored scientists who suggested the origin of Covid might have been a lab leak among others…but ok. Hard to believe the party of civil rights and free speech now support the federal governments censorship of its people. The parties have flipped in many ways. History is full of examples of governments who sought to silence dissenting views. Usually doesn’t turn out well for the people of said governments.
The pressure to censor the covid discussion was bad.. but the pressure to censor legit news stories like Burisma is truly disturbing..
 
They censored scientists who suggested the origin of Covid might have been a lab leak among others…but ok. Hard to believe the party of civil rights and free speech now support the federal governments censorship of its people. The parties have flipped in many ways. History is full of examples of governments who sought to silence dissenting views. Usually doesn’t turn out well for the people of said governments.
I believe in the clear and present danger doctrine of Oliver Wendell Holmes (a Teddy Roosevelt appointee) and I view it, and the federal government’s responsibility to enforce it fairly liberally.

I know that that jurisprudence isn’t really in effect any more after brandenburg, but applying it to this situation, tens of thousands had already died from the covid pandemic… it represented a real tangible danger to the wellbeing Americans (including my family) and misinformation about it contributed to that danger.

I do concede that it was unfortunate that some true information may have been wrapped up in those censorships, but ultimately the ends justified the means in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
I believe in the clear and present danger doctrine of Oliver Wendell Holmes (a Teddy Roosevelt appointee) and I view it, and the federal government’s responsibility to enforce it fairly liberally.

I know that that jurisprudence isn’t really in effect any more after brandenburg, but applying it to this situation, tens of thousands had already died from the covid pandemic… it represented a real tangible danger to the wellbeing Americans (including my family) and misinformation about it contributed to that danger.

I do concede that it was unfortunate that some true information may have been wrapped up in those censorships, but ultimately the ends justified the means in my opinion.
Holmes was specifically speaking of times of war AND legislation enacted by Congress limiting speech during such times. The Clear and Present Danger Doctrine has also largely been supplanted except in military environments. Here we had no war and no restrictions enacted by Congress. The fact a President restricted speech without Congressional action makes this action even more chilling. History supports as much. The fact the Dem party now supports such broad censorship with zero Congressional oversight shows how far that party has transformed from its civil rights days. Disappointed your partisanship won’t allow you to see the dangers here.
 
Holmes was specifically speaking of times of war AND legislation enacted by Congress limiting speech during such times. The Clear and Present Danger Doctrine has also largely been supplanted except in military environments. Here we had no war and no restrictions enacted by Congress. The fact a President restricted speech without Congressional action makes this action even more chilling. History supports as much. The fact the Dem party now supports such broad censorship with zero Congressional oversight shows how far that party has transformed from its civil rights days. Disappointed your partisanship won’t allow you to see the dangers here.
I have long compared the pandemic to war time in terms of the needs of the nation for alignment and cooperation for the safety of the nation. The country has to rally to fight a common enemy in both instances….The fact that Congress couldn’t get their head out of their butts long enough to come to terms with that and that they allowed wide scale disinformation to repeatedly jeopardize public health shows how screwed up our government really is.

I don’t agree that the clear and present danger doctrine has wholly been supplanted. Even in Brandenburg the justices acknowledge the need to limit speech which will imminently cause harm. (They reference Holmes’ fire in a crowded theater analogy) The main difference being what is considered imminent, a definition which has narrowed and narrowed.

Again, I think I’m more open to what should be considered an imminent threat to safety than what the current government considers.

I do agree with Holmes in subsequent cases that things like proposing strike dates aren’t inherent threats to public safety and shouldn’t be regulated in the same way as disinformation about pandemics or inflammatory remarks that maliciously detriment public safety.
 
Last edited:
I have long compared the pandemic to war time in terms of the needs of the nation for alignment and cooperation for the safety of the nation. The fact that Congress couldn’t get their head out of their butts long enough to come to terms with that shows how screwed up our government really is.

I don’t agree that the clear and present danger doctrine has wholly been supplanted. Even in Brandenburg the justices acknowledge the need to limit speech which will imminently cause harm. (They reference Holmes’ fire in a crowded theater analogy) The main difference being what is considered imminent.

Again, I think I’m more open to what should be considered an imminent threat to safety than what the current government considers.

I do agree with Holmes in subsequent cases that things like proposing strike dates aren’t inherent threats to public safety and shouldn’t be regulated in the same way as disinformation about pandemics or inflammatory remarks that maliciously detriment public safety.
1). I said largely supplanted not wholly supplanted. Please quote me accurately.

2). Holmes never said anything about regulating pandemics. You can’t agree with him on things he never addressed.

Limiting speech based on Congressional action is a vital part of this discussion as is war. Both were intricate to Holmes’ decision. Again…the fact that one person is violating Americans first amendment rights even with speech which is factual is alarming. Please note there was also speech censored which had zero to do with the pandemic. History shows us the silencing of the people often starts in one area and spreads to others. Funny how things repeat themselves. The fact there are Dems supporting such a gross violation of our civil rights is even more alarming. Can we not place the precedent being set over partisanship?. Shall we go back to through history and discuss regimes which silenced the voices of dissenters ?
 
How scary is it that guys like Robert Reich make US economic policy?

That's funny, bluster doesn't count as economic policy. Since 1989, there have been 52 million new jobs created in these United States. 50 million have been created by three Democratic presidents, and 2 million have been created by three Republican presidents. At least for the last 3 and a half decades, Republicans have had the effect of carpet bombing the American economy, numbers are the meat on the bone.
 
That's funny, bluster doesn't count as economic policy. Since 1989, there have been 52 million new jobs created in these United States. 50 million have been created by three Democratic presidents, and 2 million have been created by three Republican presidents. At least for the last 3 and a half decades, Republicans have had the effect of carpet bombing the American economy, numbers are the meat on the bone.
Bluster huh. I would call it intentionally misleading at best to deflect blame for high food prices to companies like Kroger. I can’t imagine Reich doesn’t understand financial statements.
 
1). I said largely supplanted not wholly supplanted. Please quote me accurately.

2). Holmes never said anything about regulating pandemics. You can’t agree with him on things he never addressed.

Limiting speech based on Congressional action is a vital part of this discussion as is war. Both were intricate to Holmes’ decision. Again…the fact that one person is violating Americans first amendment rights even with speech which is factual is alarming. Please note there was also speech censored which had zero to do with the pandemic. History shows us the silencing of the people often starts in one area and spreads to others. Funny how things repeat themselves. The fact there are Dems supporting such a gross violation of our civil rights is even more alarming. Can we not place the precedent being set over partisanship?. Shall we go back to through history and discuss regimes which silenced the voices of dissenters ?
1) Apologies. Verbiage. We agree that such a standard is not currently adopted by the government though similar logic has been used in the past. I’m arguing that such logic should i

2) I am extending Holmes’ logic to a similar circumstance as the one he was ruling upon.

3) Just because Congress is incompetent doesn’t mean that the president should be as well.
 
Bluster huh. I would call it intentionally misleading at best to deflect blame for high food prices to companies like Kroger. I can’t imagine Reich doesn’t understand financial statements.
Kroger can buy out who they want, if they scoop up Albertson's fine. Reich bumped heads with deficit hawks in the first Clinton administration three decades ago, the hawks largely won, but the guy is sharp, Clinton couldn't afford most of his economic policy initiatives then.
 
Bluster huh. I would call it intentionally misleading at best to deflect blame for high food prices to companies like Kroger. I can’t imagine Reich doesn’t understand financial statements.
Well, even the community clarification lacks clarity. They correct his use of gross vs net profit, but only do so using data in 1 quarter when he was referencing behavior over 5 years.


Both things are misleading.

Apparently no one knows how to read a financial statement.
 
Bluster huh. I would call it intentionally misleading at best to deflect blame for high food prices to companies like Kroger. I can’t imagine Reich doesn’t understand financial statements.
Hey, where did he mention inflation on that post? Looked like a warning about consolidation, but if Kroger can make the margins work with Albertson's inventory, go for it boys.
 
Well, even the community clarification lacks clarity. They correct his use of gross vs net profit, but only do so using data in 1 quarter when he was referencing behavior over 5 years.


Both things are misleading.

Apparently no one knows how to read a financial statement.
Krogers net margins are a little less than 1.5% over the past 5 years and pretty much in line with historical averages. Gross margins are largely irrelevant as they typically don’t take into account operating expenses. Again, Reich is throwing irrelevant info out in hopes the uneducated will buy into it. Probably a pretty good bet.

 
Hey, where did he mention inflation on that post? Looked like a warning about consolidation, but if Kroger can make the margins work with Albertson's inventory, go for it boys.
He was clearly blaming price gouging and corporate greed for rising food prices. He hit all the key buzzwords. Yet he somehow omitted the most important number…:net margins. There is no factual evidence based on financials of either price gouging or corporate greed here.
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT