Inevitable You-Know-Who Thread

Getting back to the thread topic: A national association of federal judges has called an emergency meeting Tuesday to address growing concerns about the intervention of Justice Department officials and President Donald Trump in politically sensitive cases, the group’s president said Monday.

Philadelphia U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe, who heads the independent Federal Judges Association, said the group “could not wait” until its spring conference to weigh in on a deepening crisis that has enveloped the Justice Department and Attorney General William Barr.
The unusual concern voiced by the judges’ group comes in the wake of an equally unusual protest. More than 2,000 former Justice Department officials called on Barr to resign Sunday, claiming his handling of the Stone case “openly and repeatedly flouted” the principle of equal justice.

Fuck off.

Wake up.

The problem here is with the definition of “life”, and the unintended consequences of defining it too narrowly or too broadly.

For example, setting it at the point of egg fertilization does not factor in a myriad of other things that have to go right before that egg can grow. It also would outlaw in-vitro fertilization because that process develops sometimes dozens of fertilized eggs, only a handful of which are implanted with the rest discarded.

Too broad a definition, and you clearly overlap into the area of ending a life that, with medical advances, may otherwise survive.

I am not blind to the pro-life argument. I find, though, as Waldo very succinctly explained above, that pro-life legislators are often merely pro-birth. After that, the life is on its own. That’s ok if it’s a conscious choice by the parents[s), but when we as a society force women to give birth, we also need to step up and help the child far better than we do now.

If the pro-life movement wants to discuss provision for the child’s future healthcare, housing and education, I’m all ears. Unfortunately, that movement is on the same side of the political spectrum that is working on cutting the very things that a child needs.

Also, if we’re going to force women to have babies, we need to duct tape the baby-daddy to the baby the way we do the mother. Not just making them pay child support - because that’s too easy to shirk. No, they have to be present and help raise it. Once the baby’s old enough to be away from its mother, daddy gets it for equal time until age 18.

1 Like

What about when your wife has an ectopic pregnancy and the doctor says they have to terminate or both the fetus and your wife will die? You’re content to say “it was nice knowing you, honey”? How cavalier of you.

I woke up to you being an asshole a long time ago.

Also in other news, Bloomberg put out an ad taking shots at Bernie and the Sanders campaign has fired back.

So Bloomberg is going to turn his money cannons on his Democratic rivals for the nomination? Congrats on your second term Mr. Trump!

Come on, people have been going after Bloomberg all week, he had to fight back. He’s no more guilty of discord than they are.

I don’t really know all that much about Bloomberg, but I’ll give him this: he at least shows some competency in his ads. First, he goes after Trump, which seems like an obvious tactic, but hasn’t been done in most ads by other candidates. Also, the ad on the Bernie Bros is pretty effective.

Yeah, well, you know.

On the other hand, you’re a self-selecting member of a Mediterranean mind control cult, and some pederast in a silk robe has convinced you that ‘life begins at conception.’ Good thing he didn’t tell you that spermatozoa are life, too. Those funerals get hard to schedule.

1 Like

Bloomberg’s ads against Trump have been excellent. However, they should be considering he’s spent 10x the spending of the highest non-billionaire in the race (Bernie).

The problem with Bloomberg is that he’s a racist and misogynist with authoritarian tendencies who, if he wins, will inherit the decimated government left by Trump and have zero interest in putting it back together again.

We need to elect someone who believes in government by, for and of the people, so that they can rebuild our corrupted institutions and buttress “norms” with actual laws. Bloomberg ain’t that person.

Eh, there’s a big difference between being a racist and what’s come out on Bloomberg. When I heard that there was some off the record conversation on stop and frisk, I was expecting to hear some redneck talk. It wasn’t. When I read the quote on redlining, it didn’t lead me to conclude me to believe that he was at all saying that the borrowers caused the financial crisis. That was competitor spin. Bottom line, I’m far from convinced that he’s a racist.

As to your other points, I don’t believe “competence in building things” is a Bernie trait. His ability and intellect seem pretty suspect to me, even if his heart is in the right place. I get the criticism of Bloomberg, but he seems more competent than all but Warren, IMO. And after Trump, competence matters to me.

It’s always nice when chuck reminds us what a bigot he is

This is what always happens. I innocently point out what a led by the nose you are and then you call me a bigot.

It’s entertaining that in Anno Domini 2020 you still thrill to play this game. A white, upper middle class dude seeking asylum in victimhood.

Of course, given the options left on the board, that’s your only move.

There’s nothing “led by the nose” about my faith. I’m sure someone like you wouldn’t understand that.

And yes, when you mock someone’s religion, you are a bigot. At least own it. I’m not a “victim” here, just pointing out that you’re a vile piece of shit.

I told you not to debate it. The one female in the thread and she’s ignored. Hmm feels familiar.

5 Likes

You can tell it’s not a serious bill because they are going at it backwards by imposing vasectomies at age 50. If they really wanted to address pregnancy problems in Alabama, they would give the vasectomies at 18. And then when a man reached 50, he could get his vasectomy reversed. By that age there is much less chance of unwanted pregnancy, since most of his sisters and cousins will have already reached menopause. Roll Tide.

2 Likes

Let’s be honest here.

That stayed civil WAY longer than anyone could’ve expected it to.

2 Likes

I used to be agnostic about abortion, despite my deep Roman Catholic faith. That was until I saw the ultrasound of my oldest at six weeks in utero with the same chin that he has today at 24. I then became pro-life, whatever that means. I am willing to make exceptions for the life of the mother being in danger and rape, although they need to be tightly construed.

What we’re really discussing here is a decay in the moral fabric of our society. It used to be that divorce took years and required a determination of fault. Then we made it as easy as getting a divorce in Mexico. I’m still not sure that was a good idea. People don’t take “until death do us part” seriously any more. Today, with no-fault divorce, it’s more like “until something better comes along.”

1 Like

Marriage is a legal construct. That’s why the minister announces the union with the preface “…by the power vested in me by the State of Texas…”

If someone’s religious beliefs acts to hold them in a bad relationship, then that’s their choice. But making it more onerous to get a divorce is not helping anyone, especially women, who typically get the shitty end of the stick.

As a lawyer, you should appreciate the billable hours.

1 Like

True, but I’m not right often (if ever) so I liked pointing it out.

2 Likes