This is the Republican Party
- Thread starter astonmartin708
- Start date
The rampant crime in San Francisco? Why is this place one of the most expensive in the United States? Since 1980, more wealth has been created in Washington and the Valley than in any other small area in history. The list is endless. You know those liberal bastions.
Dinesh doesn't go talk about the crappy parts of Jacksonville or Miami, or Shreveport. He needs to go away. The guy is a felon and openly promotes BS conspiracy theories as a total grift to the dumbest parts of America. He knows better. It's sad how many people buy his and Fox News conspiracies. Even after all the Fox voting machine lawsuits, they still buy the grift.
San Francisco probably has lots of gay people. It is important to their voters, or these idiots think it is.
I wonder if no other parts of the debate focused on crime or homelessness. I am guessing there were. He should have had a full link. He didn't. He and his distributor are getting sued for defamation for his BS conspiracy movie 2000 Mules and is going to, hopefully, lose everything he owns.
It is kind of like this video yesterday with Fox.
Dinesh doesn't go talk about the crappy parts of Jacksonville or Miami, or Shreveport. He needs to go away. The guy is a felon and openly promotes BS conspiracy theories as a total grift to the dumbest parts of America. He knows better. It's sad how many people buy his and Fox News conspiracies. Even after all the Fox voting machine lawsuits, they still buy the grift.
San Francisco probably has lots of gay people. It is important to their voters, or these idiots think it is.
I wonder if no other parts of the debate focused on crime or homelessness. I am guessing there were. He should have had a full link. He didn't. He and his distributor are getting sued for defamation for his BS conspiracy movie 2000 Mules and is going to, hopefully, lose everything he owns.
It is kind of like this video yesterday with Fox.
Agree that the press is under playing and over playing the cognitive issues of the President.
Agree that’s probably because people click on it.
Agree that’s a problem because it’s obvious the man needs a Silver Alert about once a month. And half the time he’s cogent he’s cringe.
Agree that’s a problem we should all be discussing as a country and it’s not possible with the current media climate on both sides.
Agree that doesn’t really matter because minds seem to be made up on that point.
The public’s anger grows and the administrations efficacy shrinks the more they try to tell people not to believe their eyes. Fox running edited clips just frustrates the obvious and they need to cut it out.
Agree that’s probably because people click on it.
Agree that’s a problem because it’s obvious the man needs a Silver Alert about once a month. And half the time he’s cogent he’s cringe.
Agree that’s a problem we should all be discussing as a country and it’s not possible with the current media climate on both sides.
Agree that doesn’t really matter because minds seem to be made up on that point.
The public’s anger grows and the administrations efficacy shrinks the more they try to tell people not to believe their eyes. Fox running edited clips just frustrates the obvious and they need to cut it out.
If transgender issues were a point of disagreement between the two, then this might be legitimate, especially in a place with as much of a pride movement as SF. Maybe they both agree on what needs to be done about crime?
Probably not the case. The mayor is probably stupid. But it’s feasible.
With all the hom
Have no issues debating transgender issues. However, the question had zero to do with any policy positions. The question “Name 3 drag queens” has to be an all-time bizarre question for a mayoral debate in a major U.S. city. This is wacky California though.
Nancy Pelosi had more to do with the protest getting out of hand; by her own admission
“Protest” = “Riot”
“Out of Hand” = “A bit of lite Treason”
Good to know that when he is needed, in order to defend Democracy, that Trump is willing to turn a blind eye…. Regardless of the actions (or inactions) of any Democrat.
Not only did he ignite the treasonous activity, when it turned violent and disrupted the proceedings of Democracy, he was the quietest we have ever seen him.
Pelosi and the democrats threat to democracy; spying on opposition candidate, bogus 2 1/2 year Mueller investigation, 2 kangaroo court impeachment, Pelosi didn't ask for the NG, . .
Last edited:
This is exactly why I refuse to be part of either party. One side says it's all their fault, the other side says its all their fault....neither wants to take accountability. There is no crossing lines on any subject between the groups now...If you do then you are a traitor to the party. It's ridiculous. I hate the 2 party system.
You are full of it. You spout the trite party line on here every day. You are the worst on that. You spout fox news crap repetitively.
Last edited:
It's amazing to me that you don't even know who started the Mueller investigation::: an assistant attorney general appointed by Donald J. Trump.
7 Republicans voted against Trump in the Senate (the most by an opposing party against their own party) after he led his pitful attempt at Jan 6 insurrection. You don't like calling it because how could the law party you know not to support the law? Instead, they went all in on internet conspiracies, and Fox went all in to make a buck. They knowingly said he was full of trash behind closed doors, but they went on TV and pumped the mania because my pillow, silver coins and the other adverts pay the bills.
It would have been even more if we knew the full extent of what went on. We seem to learn more about how deep the plot to overturn votes is every week, as there are more indictments and charges.
It's amazing how easy it is to blow this stuff. With the trump people, it is always a few things:
1. Total ignorance. They don't understand history, for instance, how a special counsel was appointed. A special counsel that led to lots of investigations.
2. Willful ignorance. So many don't want to read the facts about his circumstances. It is more fun to go to the parades and meetings and talk about how he is treated so badly.
3. Acquiescence. Mitch McConnell believes in the party over everything else. So, no matter how many times Trump does stuff that flies in the face of this country and conservatism or makes fun of his wife chow-chow, he is still all in.
4. Tired. He wears people down and doesn't think there are any consequences.
Infant deaths increased after Texas banned abortion in early pregnancy
Since Texas’ ban on abortion went into effect, infant deaths in the state increased by nearly 13%, according to a new analysis published on Monday in JAMA Pediatrics.
www.statnews.com
Since abortion ban,Texas fetal deaths are 6.5 times national average. https://www.statnews.com/2024/06/24...ama-pediatrics-study-increased-infant-deaths/
Homey, you are so fai
Do you think they care? They don't care about gun deaths for children. Why do you think they care about that? The friggin baptists are going in on being against IVF. The absurdity is unbelievable.Infant deaths increased after Texas banned abortion in early pregnancy
Since Texas’ ban on abortion went into effect, infant deaths in the state increased by nearly 13%, according to a new analysis published on Monday in JAMA Pediatrics.
Since abortion ban,Texas fetal deaths are 6.5 times national average. https://www.statnews.com/2024/06/24...ama-pediatrics-study-increased-infant-deaths/
Watch out if a kid wears a dress though! That is the end of society.
For once I agree with Mr. Walters. I do hope every teacher starts teaching about the bible and how it helped shape the country.....
In history class how it has been used as an crutch by morally corrupt conservative Americans for centuries, who wanted to control the freedoms of other Americans. They used its passages to argue that slavery was permissible, that women shouldn't vote, that homosexuality should be a crime etc... all while ignoring many of its more important principals like "Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house. Turn the other cheek, love thine enemy, love your neighbor as yourself....", and even the more minor ones like like don't wear mixed threads.
In literature I will teach how its many variants and translations have basterdized it and allowed people to shape the connotation of its translations to fit their agendas.
In art class I would teach both how the bible was used as an excuse to censor creativity, and how many artists were both patronized and persecuted by the church.
In science I would teach about simply how incorrect many passages are, and that many commandments were resultant from early societies adapting to scientific phenomena they didn't fully understand.
I would maliciously comply so hard with Mr. Walter's directive. If you want me to teach about a religious text in relation to its place in our society then I will, but I'm not going to pull any punches and if you try and stop me we're going all the way to the Supreme Court..... and if they try and stop me then we're going to the streets.
Last edited:
How many wars have been fought in the name of Rue Paul?
How many cities were sacked to defend a man’s belief he should be able to wear a wig?
When was the last time people were beheaded, tortured, or exiled for not believing Lady Gaga is the best instead of Beyoncé?
I agree, that as best we can, we should endeavor to make education apolitical, but let’s also not create a false equivalency.
Last edited:
Zero room for bibles or drag queens in schools. Zero wars over the Bible have been fought since the left started pushing drag queens as well. Regardless, we need to educate and drop the political crap in our schools.
Which part of the Bible???? Pretty sure there is a war going on right now in Israel related to differences in belief of that same base theology. Muslims just believe in some extra books, just like Christians, Mormons, etc… go figure it’s part of the book that they all share that we’re trying to put on the wall in schools.
Church goers have been a ‘woke’ movement for the past 2000+ years.
You are really stretching it to say they believe in the same book. They share some version of some of the same stories and some of the same people, real or mythological, but not the same book. That's like saying three different story tellers that gained their stories from all the storytellers in their culture,(from their oral history) share the same book because there are some people and stories that are similar. The battle between zion and the radical muslims does not share enough between them and Christianity to make that argument. I think that was a political argument on lawpoke's part, but I don't think you refuted it very well.
Last edited:
You stated it much better than I could have done. The conflicts in the Middle East have been ongoing for centuries. Whether it’s Shia versus Sunni or both versus Judaism. I wouldn’t consider any of those conflicts to be centered on the Bible. I actually believe Israel would like to exist and be left alone. I know that’s a hard pill for the Muslim countries in the region to swallow as many have radicals in control. Hopefully someday we can get back to moderates controlling that region but as of now that prospect looks like a distant pipe dream.
I didn't make too many edits, but they were important ones. The above version is better.
I said they believe in the same base theology. Meaning the foundations of their gods (origin stories, early acts of the dirty and his chosen people) are not only the same characters, but they quite often reference the same events. Moses is mentioned more than anyone else in the Quran.
The modern day war is not being fought purely over religious differences (far from it) but the religious differences color the millennia long conflict.
The fact that the believers on all sides tend to ignore the teachings about peace, justice, and moral righteousness in favor of the teachings regarding the superiority of their cause and the justification of defending that superiority through mindless violence is the main reason I think teaching any of their (foundational similar) religions in schools is bogus.
By comparison, a drag queen is rather inoccuous, especially if you’re not telling children they need to become drag queens, but instead that they should refrain from hating people they are confused by or who they view as strange / different.
Meanwhile…. The Supreme Court rules that officials should be allowed to take bribes, that it’s effectively illegal to be homeless, and that the justice system should have more say in how public industries are regulated than career professionals who actually understand the fields they’re working in.
And they wonder why the public opinion of the court is declining to historic lows….
And they wonder why the public opinion of the court is declining to historic lows….
I agree with your main point. It's not like they included/excluded a few books like you said, and the rest was all the same.(implied) Some of the base stories are similar. The Catholics and Russian Orthodox have been going at each other over one word. There are so many differences in those three texts, it's not even funny. There is no one book within a book you can point to, and say they are all fighting over the Bible. That is the argument you were proposing to combat Lawpoke's statement about no fighting since they started these recent arguments over the bible and drag queens. Your argument about whether there is a war between Zion and Muslim Gazans being fought over the Bible is not the hill to die on. Quit while you are ahead, stretch armstrong.
That's ridiculous, the supreme court is basing their decision off of the NIL now? They just ratified corruption.
1). Cities should have the legal authority to remove homeless encampments in areas which they don’t approve. In that regard I agree with the decision. Cities need to provide sufficient shelters as a prerequisite. That portion I disagreed.
2). Chevron needed to be overturned. Placed far too much power on the Executive branch to legislate. An Executive branch who has seen its power grow exponentially over the last few decades. If they’re ambiguities in certain laws let Congress address them or the courts interpret them. Preferably the former. Anything which throws the power pendulum back toward Congress has my approval. If Trump is elected I think some of you might come over to my side here.
A) I agree that cities should have the legal authority to move homeless encampments, I don’t agree that civil or criminal penalties should be enforceable for being homeless, which was essentially the question at hand. Bad decision with overreaching precedent.
B) Chevron did not need to be overturned. Neither Congress, nor the courts actually understand (or should be expected to understand) the full impacts of the regulations they are opining on. In the case of Congress they tend to listen to what the person donating the most money is telling them..,. And when it comes to regulations that is a case of the Fox guarding the henhouse which will lead to corruption and poorly regulated industries which have far reaching impacts on our society. Every decision will be made on what can make the corporation (or business entity) the most money which will inevitably harm common citizens.
Terrible, terrible, terrible decision.
Regardless of what happens for this election, conservatives sure are creating a lot of ammunition against themselves for future elections. If I were a Dem running in 8 years, I would make the overturning of ridiculous conservative judicial precedent a primary campaign plank (not just fighting for roe), and I think you would lose in a landslide.
Last edited:
A). We pretty much agree on this except without some sort of penalty the effort of move homeless would be problematic as they will simply return to the areas they chose.
B). Disagree of Chevron. The power grab we’ve seen in the Executive branch over the last 20 years needs to be reversed. One person defacto legislating is bad policy. This decision is a start.
B). Disagree of Chevron. The power grab we’ve seen in the Executive branch over the last 20 years needs to be reversed. One person defacto legislating is bad policy. This decision is a start.
What sort of penalty would you ask.
Jail? They would probably welcome that.
Fines? Where would they get the money from. and what would the penalty be for not paying it? Jail?
You could take away their belongings, if anyone would approve of that, but they have likely had that happen to them time, after time. They would just start over, finding what they find, or gets given to them.
I don't know what you could do to them, when they don't have anything of any value to them. Whether that's belongings or freedom. We shouldn't and won't torture them, or take away food &/or water. Those would be the only penalties that would have any affect, I would think.
I agree on executive overreach in most cases. This one is not it. And if you have a problem with people who have no money trying to exist somewhere you don’t want, you have a problem with capitalism, not with civil precedent.
The fix for homelessness is not to burden people who are already destitute, nor to turn them into wage slaves, nor to push them onto your neighbors.
The dichotomy and blatant hypocrisy of the conservative wing of this country astounds me. On the one hand you have people trying to communicate Jesus’ teachings in schools on the other you have those same people defending policies that subjugate the meek and poor.
I must have missed the part in Sunday school where Christ drove a bulldozer through the leper colony and handed out tickets to appear in front of the Pharisees for being a public nuisance.
Last edited:
I have no problem with people with no money existing somewhere. I have a problem with cities having no say where they place their encampments. You don’t have a right to throw up tents anywhere you please. Cities have a vested interest in keeping homeless encampments out of certain areas and should be able to do the same. There is nothing in my ten years on this board which should give anyone the idea that I don’t sympathize with the poor. I’ve always been an advocate of job training programs and other measures to help lift the poor out of their inner city hell holes.
Gmoney….I have no idea about enforcement. I do know there has to be a mechanism to prevent the homeless from throwing up encampments in certain areas. Not sure what that looks like but I do believe it’s necessary.
You assume that homelessness is a result of not having a job / enough training for a job. I would be willing to bet that it’s much more complex than just employment.
