• Just a heads up: On November 13th, we'll be performing some updates on the website. You might experience some unresponsive pages, though we’re hoping for minimal disruption. Thanks for your understanding!

Who Next?

JPickett said:
diaper joe is already calling on congress to over turn the court. who's attacking our democracy now? wonder if there will be hearings...
Click to expand...
You have the most elementary understanding of our country possible if you believe that Congress passing a law is "attacking our democracy."

That's LITERALLY what a democracy is! They teach it in like third grade.

Congress was invented to pass laws, the judicial branch is there to interpret them. The President has every right to lobby Americans to vote a certain way, it's the same thing as Trump telling people to vote Republican and he'd overturn Obamacare... it's the way it's supposed to be.
 
2lumpy said:
Yes, some of them have been professionals. I have many friends who are bureaucratic professional but they are as bias as I am when it comes to their opinions and how they frame what they to the “truth”, the problem is I don’t see and interpret the same “truth” the same way.

Most good people can not accept their own bias as being incorrect. And yes, I know full well I’m influence by my bias.
Click to expand...

We are all biased. Even those who hold centrist views are biased toward moderation. But facts are facts, and are immutable regardless of bias. Establishing the truth becomes especially problematic when we cannot agree upon the facts. The tragedy of January 6 is that the Trump campaign intentionally misled America as to the facts of the election, thereby denying America the unvarnished truth about the election.
 
It's easy to see the MAGATS don't want to talk about their failed insurrection. it started with the lies, then turned into a defensive posture, now it's change the subject. we couldn't possibly think less of you so don't even try.

Trump says the Roe decision will hurt republicans in the election and for once he's right. but not nearly as bad as it will hurt in 2024 when the people who are too dumb to foresee the detrimental aspects of taking away decades old rights. you're the dog who caught the car and now you'll pay the price. just be glad there are still free states GOP leaders republican bible thumpers can send their mistresses to for an aborting or you'd really be up chit creek.
 
wetmule said:
Regardless of what you think of orange-man. One thing is for sure, this is not an unbiased hearing. And not how every single congressional hearing has ever been conducted in the history of our country.
Every attorney/prosecutor on the planet would love to walk into a courtroom/hearing where: 1. zero evidence is allowed to counter their argument. 2. zero opportunity is allowed hear from opposing witnesses. 3. zero opportunity for their own witnesses to be subject to cross examination. Every attorney on the planet will win 100% of their cases if this show trial was the legal standard.
Click to expand...

This committee was convened because Republicans refused to permit an Independent Commission. An Independent Commission works for no party. It would have collected every shred of evidence, deposed every willing witness, and provided for cross examination. It seems odd that those who denied America full information now complain that they were denied the opportunity to speak.
 
2lumpy said:
No……. that is not what I said non what I intended to convey. Disappointed and worried……… yes.
Click to expand...

I agree that Trump was a fighter so long as his own nose was not at risk. He was adept at cajoling others into taking risks on his behalf. I cannot respect him for that. But I did agree with many of his policies, as with border security--we are on the same page there. But when he promulgates lies that divide this country in the effort to remain in power against the wishes of the American people, or to assuage his tender ego, then that is a serious problem. I have never heard you acknowledge this. It appears that you excuse his attack on democracy on the grounds that his policies work well for you.

I warned, before the election, that Trump had lost the support of too many Republicans to remain a viable candidate. I was told by many on this site that, although they despised the man, he was "merely" their President, not their pastor, and so they could excuse his lack of integrity. For me, there is nothing more critical in an elected leader than respect for those who put him in (or out) of office. Where do you stand on his Big Lie? Do you believe the evidence supports his claim that he won?
 
Togwotee said:
It's easy to see the MAGATS don't want to talk about their failed insurrection. it started with the lies, then turned into a defensive posture, now it's change the subject. we couldn't possibly think less of you so don't even try.

Trump says the Roe decision will hurt republicans in the election and for once he's right. but not nearly as bad as it will hurt in 2024 when the people who are too dumb to foresee the detrimental aspects of taking away decades old rights. you're the dog who caught the car and now you'll pay the price. just be glad there are still free states GOP leaders republican bible thumpers can send their mistresses to for an aborting or you'd really be up chit creek.
Click to expand...

Nope.

By Nov gas will be $7gal, inflation at 9%, and unemployment will be headed up as we wallow in a recession that heads into stagflation.

Its the economy stupid
 
bullskin said:
This committee was convened because Republicans refused to permit an Independent Commission. An Independent Commission works for no party. It would have collected every shred of evidence, deposed every willing witness, and provided for cross examination. It seems odd that those who denied America full information now complain that they were denied the opportunity to speak.
Click to expand...
Well buckskin I’ll say it…..,,.again. This isn’t the first, second, third, or four time, the anti Trump folks have accused Trump.

Like you, I suppose, I have watched more than a few of their accusations get wrung out, by some pretty powerful folks, some of which are on this, another accusation committee (or whatever they call themselves). I haven’t watched any of this one, I’m tired of watching these investigations, but I have read the conments of others ( some politicians from both Parties) and watched the reactions of the media and the American public. What I’ve seen and heard over the last 5 days is a lack of enthusiasm from the hopefuls. Some suggesting that there is no there, there. So, from my arm chair, I’m concluding this isn’t any more than another propaganda campaign. So…… if they can’t convict him of a crime…….. they will do what they have done the last dozen or more times……… that is……. keep up the chant to attempt to discredit him and blame others for their failure at a conviction.

That’s how I see it and after the last 6 plus years, I think I’m justified.

If they get their conviction and prove in a court of law that Trump is guilty, I’ll accept you contempt for my bias.
 
bullskin said:
I agree that Trump was a fighter so long as his own nose was not at risk. He was adept at cajoling others into taking risks on his behalf. I cannot respect him for that. But I did agree with many of his policies, as with border security--we are on the same page there. But when he promulgates lies that divide this country in the effort to remain in power against the wishes of the American people, or to assuage his tender ego, then that is a serious problem. I have never heard you acknowledge this. It appears that you excuse his attack on democracy on the grounds that his policies work well for you.

I warned, before the election, that Trump had lost the support of too many Republicans to remain a viable candidate. I was told by many on this site that, although they despised the man, he was "merely" their President, not their pastor, and so they could excuse his lack of integrity. For me, there is nothing more critical in an elected leader than respect for those who put him in (or out) of office. Where do you stand on his Big Lie? Do you believe the evidence supports his claim that he won?
Click to expand...
“Do you believe the evidence supports his claim that he won?”

What evidence?

The only evidence or lack of I accept is what comes out a court law.

But……… I will say this, something happened in this election that has made me very suspicious that enough irregularities took place to give me reason to believe the outcome could very well have been rigged. Like Trump, I believe there should have been an honest investigation before a transition took place. Our system may not provide for that but as divided as we have become it certainly looks as thought we’re going to have to change our processes to allow for that.

Do you agree that elections in the past have been rigged and the cheat was been put into office? There are a hell of a lot of Americans that do believe there have been, from both sides.
 
Biden just conspired to incite an insurrection today. He said “ protest must be peaceful peaceful peaceful “

My God!! He knows that’s insurrection!! There’s a whole comity telling him so right now!!!

We gotta get this guy locked up now right grizzly!!!
 
2lumpy said:
Well buckskin I’ll say it…..,,.again. This isn’t the first, second, third, or four time, the anti Trump folks have accused Trump.

Like you, I suppose, I have watched more than a few of their accusations get wrung out, by some pretty powerful folks, some of which are on this, another accusation committee (or whatever they call themselves). I haven’t watched any of this one, I’m tired of watching these investigations, but I have read the conments of others ( some politicians from both Parties) and watched the reactions of the media and the American public. What I’ve seen and heard over the last 5 days is a lack of enthusiasm from the hopefuls. Some suggesting that there is no there, there. So, from my arm chair, I’m concluding this isn’t any more than another propaganda campaign. So…… if they can’t convict him of a crime…….. they will do what they have done the last dozen or more times……… that is……. keep up the chant to attempt to discredit him and blame others for their failure at a conviction.

That’s how I see it and after the last 6 plus years, I think I’m justified.

If they get their conviction and prove in a court of law that Trump is guilty, I’ll accept you contempt for my bias.
Click to expand...

As I have said, we are all biased in one manner or other, so no contempt from me. As for the hearings, I do not believe that they will result in prosecution because that was not their function. Theirs is an inquiry, not a trial. The best the Committee can do is to reassure the American public that their electoral system did not fail, despite the claims made by the Trump campaign. And this is a very important step to take under the circumstances where so many were left in doubt.

And the DOJ could not be expected to make this point--its job is to punish and prevent criminal behavior, not chant for democracy on the sidelines like some cheerleader. The DOJ will tell us about the things that go wrong, not the things that go right. I believe that Giuliani and others will have charges brought against them, but it will be difficult to prove that their leader knowingly forced their hands. I think Trump was recklessly incompetent, incredibly gullible, a complete and total liar, or all of the above. But I doubt there will be a conviction on these grounds. In any event, I am putting the cart before the horse, because any basis for trial would have to originate with the DOJ, and they have kept professionally silent on this matter.

One thing for sure, if the Trump team ever hopes to recover, it will need to provide evidence to support its numerous claims of fraud. Without these, even a Republican-led inquiry can do little but attempt to play this off as just another effort to degrade Trump. But, of course, any failure to put the money where the mouth is will demonstrate that the Big Lie was exactly that. Bigly.

In the end, these hearings are the first step in putting Trump behind us--and Republicans are just as relieved as Democrats. Very few in the party were willing to stick to their guns when it came to pulling the rug out from under Trump. Just consider how quickly McCarthy and other changed their tune once it occurred to them that the Dems would do the necessary dirty work and prevent them from putting their necks out. I believe these hearings are exactly what DeSantis and other hopefuls have been waiting for, but without wanting to say much about it.
 
Last edited:
Respectfully disagree. The 1/06 group were attempting to get a conviction to guarantee Trump could never run again. That was the plan and that was the hope. They are still hopeful but if they fail they’ll use it as justification to discredit, like you are doing now.

Yep, the GOP RINOs don’t want Trump in office either. They are worse than cowards. Liz Chainy just called out for Democrats to vote for GOP candidates. What does that sound like to you if not, “elect RINOs!”

It’s the swamp buckskin…… it’s how they do things. Subvert the system. And you think cuz Trumps a knife fighter they are justified and it’s your backside Trump is trying to protect. No different than the nasty but loyal friend in your local bar that you only like when he’s saving your butt, and when he’s do, you want him GONE, cuz he’s nasty, filthy and he smells bad.

I understand the concept buckskin……. there’s nothing new under the sun, we’ve been down this road long before Donald Trump was ever born.
 
2lumpy said:
“Do you believe the evidence supports his claim that he won?”

What evidence?
Click to expand...

The ballots cast in the election, submitted by the states, and certified by Congress. That is the only "evidence" ever generated by a Presidential election. Are you expecting more?

2lumpy said:
The only evidence or lack of I accept is what comes out a court law.

But……… I will say this, something happened in this election that has made me very suspicious that enough irregularities took place to give me reason to believe the outcome could very well have been rigged.
Click to expand...

I sense some inconsistency here.

Tell me. What evidence of irregularities are you referring to?

I believe there was an honest investigation. Trump's own Attorney General, the White House legal team (excluding Trump's private team of Giuliani and Powell), the Heads of the FBI and DHS--all agreed that there was no evidence to support the claim that Biden did not win. This conclusion has been entirely supported by American courts, demonstrating the pointlessness of chasing every "theory in search of evidence" that continues to come down the pike. If it made sense to postpone certification for one month until these charges had all be investigated then why not for another month to check out the next few, and so on? If we were to look back and observe actual mistakes, instances of fraud, etc that would have changed the outcome of the election, then I would agree that we should have waited, but this has not been the case. In fact, all of those accusations have died for lack of evidence. In the two months between November and January, law enforcement and the courts did their jobs. It was enough time to learn the truth.

As for past elections, I believe them all to have been correctly resolved, with the possible exception of the election of Rutherford B Hayes, and this only because cheaters in four states insisted on submitting multiple slates of electors. Now, that sounds vaguely familiar...
 
Last edited:
2lumpy said:
Respectfully disagree. The 1/06 group were attempting to get a conviction to guarantee Trump could never run again. That was the plan and that was the hope. They are still hopeful but if they fail they’ll use it as justification to discredit, like you are doing now.

Yep, the GOP RINOs don’t want Trump in office either. They are worse than cowards. Liz Chainy just called out for Democrats to vote for GOP candidates. What does that sound like to you if not, “elect RINOs!”

It’s the swamp buckskin…… it’s how they do things. Subvert the system. And you think cuz Trumps a knife fighter they are justified and it’s your backside Trump is trying to protect. No different than the nasty but loyal friend in your local bar that you only like when he’s saving your butt, and when he’s do, you want him GONE, cuz he’s nasty, filthy and he smells bad.

I understand the concept buckskin……. there’s nothing new under the sun, we’ve been down this road long before Donald Trump was ever born.
Click to expand...

How do you see a commission like this leading to conviction? There is no mechanism for conviction by Congress, and any information the committee receives is already privvy to the DOJ, if they have the skill to extract it.

As for Cheney and Kinzinger, I support them completely. With Trump, you either support him, or you do not-in which case he labels you the RINO (this, despite his weak credentials within the party). To hear him say it, he is the entire Republican Party. Not in my book.
 
Last edited:
Did you guys not hear me?!?!

Innnn-sirrrr-ructioooonnn in progress right now!!!

President said peacefully protest!!! That’s it! Democracy is full under attack! We know that! They’ve told us for over a year!!! My God it’s all over!! Where the hell is the DOJ? Why are they not mobilizing to storm the White House ??!!

This is it grizzly!!! Your worst fears happening all over again!!! Oh the humanity! Will we ever learn ???
 
bullskin said:
How do you see a commission like this leading to conviction? There is no mechanism for conviction by Congress, and any information the committee receives is already privvy to the DOJ, if they have the skill to extract it.

As for Cheney and Kinzinger, I support them completely. With Trump, you either support him, or you do not-in which case he labels you the RINO (this, despite his weak credentials within the party). To hear him say it, he is the entire Republican Party. Not in my book.
Click to expand...
I’ll say this, buckskin, from the movie script of The Hatfields and McCoys. Devil Anse Hatfield said to his wife, when he decided to end the the feud.

“Somebody has got to end this and it’s got to be me, because Randall can’t.”

Maybe we can justify another go at it another time. All the best for now.
 
Last edited:
Pickett , look up what insurrection means . report back.


Gas is expensive , this is the official RNC response to all things treason and Trump related since the big lie got broke in their azz. nobody cares to learn why gas is expensive , but at least it's not a lie. and for that we thank you.
 
Oh I know what insurrection means. Bill Marr told me. It’s when a president says “ peacefully protest” that’s basically like ordering the marines to kill everyone in congress. Come on man! You know that too
 
JPickett said:
Oh I know what insurrection means. Bill Marr told me. It’s when a president says “ peacefully protest” that’s basically like ordering the marines to kill everyone in congress. Come on man! You know that too
Click to expand...
No, you don't at all know what an insurrection is, just like you don't know the role of Congress.

I'm going to give you a hint. It's one thing to have a different opinion, it's quite another to so blatantly advertise your shortcomings while attacking the opinions of others. Lots of people here have differing views without the personal attacks, so give it a rest.

Things are not going well for you, you just don't know it. It's called the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

PS. It's Bill Maher, not Marr.
 
Ive ever been prouder to spell something wrong :LOL: Thank you for that!

Now aren’t you just sick about a president calling for peaceful protest! I mean, that’s what your worked up about already
 
JPickett said:
Ive ever been prouder to spell something wrong :LOL: Thank you for that!

Now aren’t you just sick about a president calling for peaceful protest! I mean, that’s what your worked up about already
Click to expand...
I think you mean "never" and "you're."

I'm going to ignore the other part of your post since I'm not sure if you're saying it in jest or if you really think it's true.
 
Peaceful protests are legal and protected by the constitution.

Stick to " gas is expensive "

From a political standpoint pizzing off the majority of voters won't be the home run you think it is. but you'll get the satisfaction of knowing you ruined girls lives or killed them and god will pat you on the back. so it's all good isn't it.
 
elkassassin said:
You've Really STIRRED Some SSHIT This Time Lumpy!

You're Working On a B&C Thread!:D
Click to expand...
I thought it was it was a legitimate question, if you don’t like Trump or Biden, who do you like. I think Tog and one other answered the question out of over 400 comments. Makes you wonder what goes on in peoples minds.

I think we’ve worn it out by now so maybe we need to ask a new question……. about the B&C.

I see a lot of folks say, “nets are for fish”.

So here’s a question. Are total inches more significant than symmetry?
 
grizzly said:
I think you mean "never" and "you're."

I'm going to ignore the other part of your post since I'm not sure if you're saying it in jest or if you really think it's true.
Click to expand...
No I fully believe that’s what you’RE up set about. It’s fall trump derangement syndrome and you got it bad. Pretty weak mind to let a guy you’ve never met give you a mental illness
 
grizzly said:
No, you don't at all know what an insurrection is, just like you don't know the role of Congress.

I'm going to give you a hint. It's one thing to have a different opinion, it's quite another to so blatantly advertise your shortcomings while attacking the opinions of others. Lots of people here have differing views without the personal attacks, so give it a rest.

Things are not going well for you, you just don't know it. It's called the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

PS. It's Bill Maher, not Marr.
Click to expand...


Bill Barr, but no one is perfect
 
hossblur said:
WOW.

Really?

When in doubt, shut down debate?

Man this subject has really got to you.
Click to expand...
When your guy is sooooo bad that defending him starts to even look ridiculous to yourself, you start saying this is all beneath me. Pretty classic leftist move
 
hossblur said:
WOW.

Really?

When in doubt, shut down debate?

Man this subject has really got to you.
Click to expand...
I'll reply in memes, just for you ?

calm-down-bro-chill-out.gif


You keep shoveling, but all it does is show you're the one who is worked up.

200.gif


There's very little in the world that could bother me less than what people who refuse to watch a political hearing think about the subject of the political hearing.

It's a weekend and I have no interest in spending it arguing with you about whether somebody else will charge another somebody else with a crime that one of us thinks isn't a crime to begin with.
 
hossblur said:
WOW.

Really?

When in doubt, shut down debate?

Man this subject has really got to you.
Click to expand...
PS. Keep debating, I never said I was shutting it down. I just don't care enough to waste any more time participating. You and Tog can duke it out. Or get Buzz back.
 
grizzly said:
PS. Keep debating, I never said I was shutting it down. I just don't care enough to waste any more time participating. You and Tog can duke it out. Or get Buzz back.
Click to expand...
I don’t care one way or another about most of this back and forth, but tagging founder in hopes he will lock it down is childish.
 
Togwotee said:
You thought nobody was going to rub your nose in your mess ?

Humiliation is all most of you are eligible for , but you deserve worse. Americans fought and died to protect what you supported stealing.
Click to expand...
Better than having Calamity Harris rubbed in your face.:eek: High inflation, soaring gas prices and an open border.
 
I couldn't care less if I get banned so whatever.

The supreme court amounts to nothing but politicians in black robes anymore. when they start overturning decisions they said they wouldn't that have been a constitutional right for 50 years they deserve to lose all respect.

For the first time we've gone backwards in a USSSC decision. here comes Torquemada and he doesn't care what the law has been or what the vast majority want.
 
grizzly said:
I'll reply in memes, just for you ?

View attachment 79595

You keep shoveling, but all it does is show you're the one who is worked up.

View attachment 79596

There's very little in the world that could bother me less than what people who refuse to watch a political hearing think about the subject of the political hearing.

It's a weekend and I have no interest in spending it arguing with you about whether somebody else will charge another somebody else with a crime that one of us thinks isn't a crime to begin with.
Click to expand...


I can say, without doubt, in all the years I've been in here, I've never asked @Founder to shut down a thread.

Ever.

Sorry my friend, but that's weak ass cheese.
 
Nobody Said You Were Getting Banned YLCIHBDO!



Togwotee said:
I couldn't care less if I get banned so whatever.

The supreme court amounts to nothing but politicians in black robes anymore. when they start overturning decisions they said they wouldn't that have been a constitutional right for 50 years they deserve to lose all respect.

For the first time we've gone backwards in a USSSC decision. here comes Torquemada and he doesn't care what the law has been or what the vast majority want.
Click to expand...
 
JB1975 said:
I don’t care one way or another about most of this back and forth, but tagging founder in hopes he will lock it down is childish.
Click to expand...
Not the point, he already posted on the sticky that he'd allow some politics as long as there was no name calling. I tagged @1989Cohunter too because he posted the other thread
 
hossblur said:
I can say, without doubt, in all the years I've been in here, I've never asked @Founder to shut down a thread.

Ever.

Sorry my friend, but that's weak ass cheese.
Click to expand...
My neither. What's "weak ass cheese" is implying somebody did something when they didn't.

I said it plain and clear. Keep going, try and change somebody's mind on the insurrection. Anybody's. It just won't be with me.
 
Togwotee said:
I couldn't care less if I get banned so whatever.

The supreme court amounts to nothing but politicians in black robes anymore. when they start overturning decisions they said they wouldn't that have been a constitutional right for 50 years they deserve to lose all respect.

For the first time we've gone backwards in a USSSC decision. here comes Torquemada and he doesn't care what the law has been or what the vast majority want.
Click to expand...
Yep, unfortunately you are right about the black robes. May have always been political.

Not the first time they’ve gone backwards either.

What’s constitutional and what’s not has been reverse before.

The vast majority can now decide, if that’s what you want, they just gave you that opportunity. As it should be. You are thrilled about this change then, right?
 
BuzzH said:
I don't make near what a congressman or senator make, I own 2 houses.

To be fair, only one outright, just shy of 1 million in equity combined.

Have another million invested in the market, even with the latest haircut.

Like I said, being a millionaire isn't what it used to be, I'll be headed to work Monday.

Actually I lied just then, I get Monday off paid, I'll be back to work Tuesday.
Click to expand...
If you weren’t so lazy, you would have double that.
 
grizzly said:
My neither. What's "weak ass cheese" is implying somebody did something when they didn't.

I said it plain and clear. Keep going, try and change somebody's mind on the insurrection. Anybody's. It just won't be with me.
Click to expand...

Man, even when we all saw the @Founder tag, you're trying to spin.

Sorry man, we all saw it.

WEAK
 
Togwotee said:
I couldn't care less if I get banned so whatever.

The supreme court amounts to nothing but politicians in black robes anymore. when they start overturning decisions they said they wouldn't that have been a constitutional right for 50 years they deserve to lose all respect.

For the first time we've gone backwards in a USSSC decision. here comes Torquemada and he doesn't care what the law has been or what the vast majority want.
Click to expand...
Oh my God! Did I just find something I can agree with twat on?!?

Supreme court is a joke. Look no further then its latest appointee.only qualifications were skin color and sex. The latter the appointee couldn’t even define because she, er it, uh they Are not a biologist!! Guess it couldn’t rule on abortion then since them are not a doctor either.

Or the fact that RBG was a freaking sleeping skeleton on the bench the last decade. You’re right, lot of problems and the party you support wants to pack it with more. Might be hope for you yet
 
Tikka said:
Lmmfao…. “Help me please I’m getting my azz handed to me”…
Click to expand...
Watching people try and defend their opinions about Committee Hearings they haven't watched is exactly like watching the stoner in high school trying to give a book report when he was too lazy to read the book and only watched the movie. So many are trying to give an opinion on something they admittedly know nothing about.

There are a few people, like @JB1975 and @bullskin, who seem to have well-researched opinions, but so many are forced to merely distract and change the subject.

I disagree with @2lumpy on almost everything about politics, but I respect that he seems to have formed his own set of standards and is looking for people that represent those standards. He seems to have a compass that I can respect, even if it often points in a different direction than mine.

I still think MM is better without the politics, so if somebody wants to have a debate on the hearings and insurrection then I guess we can get on a phone call next week and debate it. Nobody's mind will be changed, but it will be far more beneficial than what's happened here the last few days.
 
grizzly said:
Watching people try and defend their opinions about Committee Hearings they haven't watched is exactly like watching the stoner in high school trying to give a book report when he was too lazy to read the book and only watched the movie. So many are trying to give an opinion on something they admittedly know nothing about.

There are a few people, like @JB1975 and @bullskin, who seem to have well-researched opinions, but so many are forced to merely distract and change the subject.

I disagree with @2lumpy on almost everything about politics, but I respect that he seems to have formed his own set of standards and is looking for people that represent those standards. He seems to have a compass that I can respect, even if it often points in a different direction than mine.

I still think MM is better without the politics, so if somebody wants to have a debate on the hearings and insurrection then I guess we can get on a phone call next week and debate it. Nobody's mind will be changed, but it will be far more beneficial than what's happened here the last few days.
Click to expand...


You've yet to post a single piece of actual evidence to back your points.

Not one.

We get you don't like Trump.

But, for the umpteenth time, where is the smoking gun?

I'll wait. Maybe episode 7?
 
hossblur said:
You've yet to post a single piece of actual evidence to back your points.

Not one.

We get you don't like Trump.

But, for the umpteenth time, where is the smoking gun?

I'll wait. Maybe episode 7?
Click to expand...
I already said I wasn't going to continue on the insurrection debate. If you want to talk on the phone then PM me your number and I'll call you next week. Hell, I'll come down and we can go to lunch, my treat.

As to the whole "tagged" stuff, that was never meant to get the thread shut down. It didn't even cross my mind. I feel like talking about somebody without them knowing about it is bush league. If I ever refer to anybody that I'm not already conversing with, I'll tag them so it's not like I'm talking about them behind their back.

To be clear, @Founder don't shut this thread down. People have done a good job at not making the attacks personal and clearly many people like this discussion.

Hopefully that clears up any confusion.
 
grizzly said:
Watching people try and defend their opinions about Committee Hearings they haven't watched is exactly like watching the stoner in high school trying to give a book report when he was too lazy to read the book and only watched the movie. So many are trying to give an opinion on something they admittedly know nothing about.

There are a few people, like @JB1975 and @bullskin, who seem to have well-researched opinions, but so many are forced to merely distract and change the subject.

I disagree with @2lumpy on almost everything about politics, but I respect that he seems to have formed his own set of standards and is looking for people that represent those standards. He seems to have a compass that I can respect, even if it often points in a different direction than mine.

I still think MM is better without the politics, so if somebody wants to have a debate on the hearings and insurrection then I guess we can get on a phone call next week and debate it. Nobody's mind will be changed, but it will be far more beneficial than what's happened here the last few days.
Click to expand...
Way to stay out of it :ROFLMAO:
 
Lumpy, give an example that compares to going backwards the way the court did yesterday.

And it's not done, talk of banning abortion in all states is gaining steam and Thomas says the court should revisit contraception and same sex cases. the GOP isn't going to rest until the church runs our lives. and neither will you.
 
Togwotee said:
Lumpy, give an example that compares to going backwards the way the court did yesterday.

And it's not done, talk of banning abortion in all states is gaining steam and Thomas says the court should revisit contraception and same sex cases. the GOP isn't going to rest until the church runs our lives. and neither will you.
Click to expand...


Once upon a time, there was a country where STATES agreed to link together on the condition that the federal government be secondary to the states government.

There isn't a snowballs chance Oregon will ban abortion. And that's their right, if the residents of that state want it that way.

Shocking as it may be, some (most) folks don't like Oregon's form of government. Just like they might not Utah's. But there ain't a gate at the border and folks are free to move.

I'm really enjoying all the "my body my choice" folks. Pretty believable after they spent 2 years jamming closures, masks, vaccine mandates down everyone throat.

As a side note, I can't help but notice, there is no talk about the insurrection at the Arizona capital last night. Imagine my surprise ?
 
Togwotee said:
Lumpy, give an example that compares to going backwards the way the court did yesterday.

And it's not done, talk of banning abortion in all states is gaining steam and Thomas says the court should revisit contraception and same sex cases. the GOP isn't going to rest until the church runs our lives. and neither will you.
Click to expand...
There be no point in giving an example because a comparison would be subjective and we would disagree on which “compares to going backwards the WAY the court did yesterday”. I was responding to your statement that “For the first time we've gone backwards in a USSSC decision.” I simply said, “not the first time they’ve gone backward”.

I agree, this is not over, have you not noticed, nothing is ever over, as long as humans interact, never has and never will. Pretty standard behavior you’re up against if you think that’s going to stop.

Ideology (church) has always run everything…… it has, it is, and it always will. Again, standard human behavior you’re up against. I know it’s rhetorical but give us an example, where ideology (church) hasn’t run human lives. It’s the nature of the “beast”, for those that believe there is no God/god/greater force than humans. Humans, by their biological/philosophy/physiological nature won’t live in anarchy and chaos. Sorry.

It’s okay Tog, for now, there will still be a lot of legal abortions, so cheer up and have a good weekend, they only come around ever five days, don’t waste it on some imaginary injustice. You wil get to vote on it if Oregon’s legislature hasn’t already got it’s law in place.
 
Last edited:
As I've said in the past, I'm not going to get into a debate on abortion. However, I think people need to be aware of what part of this ruling means to some of the Justices and people should really think of the implications and how this could be construed to apply in a way that is much more restrictive on people's freedoms and could therefore be very anti-small-government.

Basically, Roe v. Wade was overturned because the Court said that Due Process was wrongly applied to abortion rights as abortions aren't expressly written in the Constitution. Some of you may be nodding along in agreement. Justice Thomas expanded that argument to say the Court should revisit other cases where similar Due Process claims were applied to rights not expressly written in the Constitution.

One may want to consider whether a more strict reading of the Constitution should be understood in a way that rights not expressly forbidden in the Constitution are thereby granted or prohibited.

There's an argument to be made from a Libertarian perspective that if rights aren't prohibited by the Constitution, they should therefore be granted as a freedom we all have.

Justice Thomas' quote is below...

"We should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.

Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous' ... we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents."

Just so people know what Thomas is referring to:

Griswold is the case that said people have a right to use contraception without government approval.

Lawrence is the case that said adults have the right to have consensual sex without government approval.

Obergefell is the case that said people have the right to marry whom they want without government approval.

___________

Does anybody want to live in a state where they have to ask the government for permission to marry their spouse, have sex with their girlfriend, or use birth control to prevent unwanted pregnancies that they can't terminate after the fact just because a bunch of old guys in a room said so?

This isn't hyperbole, it's literally written in Justice Thomas' opinion.
 
You won't give an example because there isn't one. this is the first time a right has been given then taken away, and you're not going to stop here.

The church has never run everything it's just influenced it. the founding fathers went to great lengths to insure the church didn't have any power. the jesus freaks who brought this about are like the 9/11 jihadists. they're not in big numbers but they're organized and make long term plans .

In a minority rule nation as we are the minority can do things a true democracy cannot. a president who won by a minority vote can have a senate that represents the minority of the nation seat 3 justices in 4 years and other throw the will of the people. the founders did a great job but they couldn't imagine how the nation would add states and the population would congregate . so here we are being rules by a fanatic fundamentalist jihadists minority.

If abortion really would stay legal in free states I wouldn't give a FF what the handmaid's tale states did. but states rights only matter to social conservatives when it serves their agenda, when it doesn't the federal government has to get involved. your heroes have already said a national ban is the next step, so your claim those who wish to remain free can is not at all true you're not fooling anyone.
 
Togwotee said:
You won't give an example because there isn't one. this is the first time a right has been given then taken away, and you're not going to stop here.

The church has never run everything it's just influenced it. the founding fathers went to great lengths to insure the church didn't have any power. the jesus freaks who brought this about are like the 9/11 jihadists. they're not in big numbers but they're organized and make long term plans .

In a minority rule nation as we are the minority can do things a true democracy cannot. a president who won by a minority vote can have a senate that represents the minority of the nation seat 3 justices in 4 years and other throw the will of the people. the founders did a great job but they couldn't imagine how the nation would add states and the population would congregate . so here we are being rules by a fanatic fundamentalist jihadists minority.

If abortion really would stay legal in free states I wouldn't give a FF what the handmaid's tale states did. but states rights only matter to social conservatives when it serves their agenda, when it doesn't the federal government has to get involved. your heroes have already said a national ban is the next step, so your claim those who wish to remain free can is not at all true you're not fooling anyone.
Click to expand...
I didn’t come up with this quote but I does ring true, don’t you agree, that, “a man see’s what he wants to see, and disregards the rest.”
 
It's absolutely true, and why FAUX news stays in business.

It's also telling, " A man " sees.... when it comes to women men will tell them what they see. as in we'll decide if you have a forced pregnancy or not that's now our right not yours anymore..
 
Togwotee said:
It's absolutely true, and why FAUX news stays in business.

It's also telling, " A man " sees.... when it comes to women men will tell them what they see. as in we'll decide if you have a forced pregnancy or not that's now our right not yours anymore..
Click to expand...
Well I suppose “she, they, it” should have had responsible sex before it came to pregnancy then…
 
grizzly said:
As I've said in the past, I'm not going to get into a debate on abortion. However, I think people need to be aware of what part of this ruling means to some of the Justices and people should really think of the implications and how this could be construed to apply in a way that is much more restrictive on people's freedoms and could therefore be very anti-small-government.

Basically, Roe v. Wade was overturned because the Court said that Due Process was wrongly applied to abortion rights as abortions aren't expressly written in the Constitution. Some of you may be nodding along in agreement. Justice Thomas expanded that argument to say the Court should revisit other cases where similar Due Process claims were applied to rights not expressly written in the Constitution.

One may want to consider whether a more strict reading of the Constitution should be understood in a way that rights not expressly forbidden in the Constitution are thereby granted or prohibited.

There's an argument to be made from a Libertarian perspective that if rights aren't prohibited by the Constitution, they should therefore be granted as a freedom we all have.

Justice Thomas' quote is below...

"We should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.

Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous' ... we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents."

Just so people know what Thomas is referring to:

Griswold is the case that said people have a right to use contraception without government approval.

Lawrence is the case that said adults have the right to have consensual sex without government approval.

Obergefell is the case that said people have the right to marry whom they want without government approval.

___________

Does anybody want to live in a state where they have to ask the government for permission to marry their spouse, have sex with their girlfriend, or use birth control to prevent unwanted pregnancies that they can't terminate after the fact just because a bunch of old guys in a room said so?

This isn't hyperbole, it's literally written in Justice Thomas' opinion.
Click to expand...


There were 5 other justices. Feel free to now quote what they wrote on birth control, or freedom of movement to obtain abortions.

Further I have a marriage license, which is "permission" from the State to marry.

As for "old guys"

Casual observers of the Supreme Court who came to the Law School to hear Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg speak about Roe v. Wade likely expected a simple message from the longtime defender of reproductive and women’s rights: Roe was a good decision.

Those more acquainted with Ginsburg and her thoughtful, nuanced approach to difficult legal questions were not surprised, however, to hear her say just the opposite, that Roe was a faulty decision. For Ginsburg, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that affirmed a woman’s right to an abortion was too far-reaching and too sweeping, and it gave anti-abortion rights activists a very tangible target to rally against in the four decades since. - University of Chicago
 
Togwotee said:
You won't give an example because there isn't one. this is the first time a right has been given then taken away, and you're not going to stop here.

The church has never run everything it's just influenced it. the founding fathers went to great lengths to insure the church didn't have any power. the jesus freaks who brought this about are like the 9/11 jihadists. they're not in big numbers but they're organized and make long term plans .

In a minority rule nation as we are the minority can do things a true democracy cannot. a president who won by a minority vote can have a senate that represents the minority of the nation seat 3 justices in 4 years and other throw the will of the people. the founders did a great job but they couldn't imagine how the nation would add states and the population would congregate . so here we are being rules by a fanatic fundamentalist jihadists minority.

If abortion really would stay legal in free states I wouldn't give a FF what the handmaid's tale states did. but states rights only matter to social conservatives when it serves their agenda, when it doesn't the federal government has to get involved. your heroes have already said a national ban is the next step, so your claim those who wish to remain free can is not at all true you're not fooling anyone.
Click to expand...


And yours are threatening violence and revenge (Jane's Revenge)


Sure is good we caught those dudes in Idaho in a U-Haul. They might of started burning women's clinics
 
Togwotee said:
It's absolutely true, and why FAUX news stays in business.

It's also telling, " A man " sees.... when it comes to women men will tell them what they see. as in we'll decide if you have a forced pregnancy or not that's now our right not yours anymore..
Click to expand...


Cuz only dudes are pro life?

Honest truth is dudes like abortion as it gives them a way to bang as many chicks as they want with zero concern about responsibility.

Dudes that are pro "women's rights" either use it as a ploy to get in their pants, or do so to avoid consequences for poor choices.
 
This decision had NOTHING to do with abortion.....it WAS about the previous misunderstanding and abuse of the constitution....

It DOES NOT end or outlaw abortion...it throws it right back where it belongs...as a democratic decision to be made by the people of free states....
 
Togwotee said:
It's absolutely true, and why FAUX news stays in business.

It's also telling, " A man " sees.... when it comes to women men will tell them what they see. as in we'll decide if you have a forced pregnancy or not that's now our right not yours anymore..
Click to expand...
Respectfully Tog, I think your selling women way way short. They vote just like men. We don’t restrict women from voting so, it’s basically a 50/50 opportunity. They run for political offices, they win political offices, they pass laws the same as men. They make independent decisions .


You want Liz Cheney for President, no one is telling her or you that she can’t. Margaret Thatcher was a powerful and more than effective world leader, so are other women.

Don’t you think it’s about time you started seeing woman as independent and as powerful as men?

How about the women that support this Supreme Court decision? Do they get to make that choice. Does their vote have credence, or only those who disagree with this decision?

The fact that only women can give birth is the reason there is law that only keeps women from killing their child/fetus/rug rat/. (Call it any name you want too, a term for it doesn’t change what it is. Calling a rose a cloud, or a brick doesn’t change what it is.). It is not a contrived plan to restrict women, it’s a law to protect the child. Would you feel better if the law said, “neither men or women can have an abortion”? That way, both genders are having their freedom of choice restricted. It this yellow brick road environmental, hid and watch, that could very well happen.

There are laws that prevent men from doing things, that women can’t do. When men break those laws, they are punished. Who is saying men are having their freedom of choice denyed. Why? Because women can’t break those laws……. they don’t have a penis. Abortion laws would prevent men from aborting a child, if they produced eggs and a womb.

Give women the respect they deserve……… they are no more or less subservient to men than men are to women.

There are bullies in both genders.
 
So if only women could vote on it are you saying abortion would be outlawed ?

You can spin it until your jaw falls off but you cannot change it. this decision takes the rights away from millions of women and that's that. this is the biggest roll back in American rights since the constitution was signed. isn't superstition a wonderful thing, the Christian Taliban has gone full jihad on America.


This decision does throw it back to the states and that's fine, IF IT STOPPED THERE. it will not and you know it, a national ban is already in the works.
 
Togwotee said:
So if only women could vote on it are you saying abortion would be outlawed ?

You can spin it until your jaw falls off but you cannot change it. this decision takes the rights away from millions of women and that's that. this is the biggest roll back in American rights since the constitution was signed. isn't superstition a wonderful thing, the Christian Taliban has gone full jihad on America.


This decision does throw it back to the states and that's fine, IF IT STOPPED THERE. it will not and you know it, a national ban is already in the works.
Click to expand...
 
No that’s not what I’m saying.

I’m saying half the population are are men, give or take. ( there are a few million more women)

Both genders get to vote, so now that the adult population can vote on making abortion legal, or not, it not male dominating women. Prior to this SCourt decision, it was 9 unelected judges deciding for 360 million.

I don’t know a national ban is in the works, it will depend on how the State’s voters vote, and which people they put into office.

As long a Thomas is on the SCourt I doubt you’ll see that court support a national ban. I’ve been wrong before but I’ll wage, they won’t, in the next 10 to 15 years. Who the hell would guess beyond that.

My jaw is not what it once was, but, have faith, mine is closer to falling off than yours.
 
No one "makes" you become a mommy by denying you an abortion. That die has already been cast.

I am not opposed to abortion, but neither do I sympathize with the suggestion that those denied are somehow victims of a hateful system.
 
Last edited:
Togwotee said:
So if only women could vote on it are you saying abortion would be outlawed ?

You can spin it until your jaw falls off but you cannot change it. this decision takes the rights away from millions of women and that's that. this is the biggest roll back in American rights since the constitution was signed. isn't superstition a wonderful thing, the Christian Taliban has gone full jihad on America.


This decision does throw it back to the states and that's fine, IF IT STOPPED THERE. it will not and you know it, a national ban is already in the works.
Click to expand...


Huh.

There was about 60 million humans deprived of the RIGHT of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness when Roe was enacted. So I guess it depends which side of the forceps your on in complaining about rights.

To your other point, YES, if only the women in my state voted on abortion, I'm pretty sure it would be voted down.

You leftists have some dumbass idea that people of a sex or race are monoliths.

There are plenty of women who oppose abortion. Mexicans who oppose illegal immigration, etc, etc.

The Christians, MUSLIMS, JEWS, and oppose abortion, sorry to ruin your anti Christian BS.
 
Togwotee said:
So if only women could vote on it are you saying abortion would be outlawed ?

You can spin it until your jaw falls off but you cannot change it. this decision takes the rights away from millions of women and that's that. this is the biggest roll back in American rights since the constitution was signed. isn't superstition a wonderful thing, the Christian Taliban has gone full jihad on America.


This decision does throw it back to the states and that's fine, IF IT STOPPED THERE. it will not and you know it, a national ban is already in the works.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about a national ban.
 
hossblur said:
Y wife and I after 7 years and 4 surgeries were blessed enough to get 1 egg take via IVF.

I can draw a chalk line on I- 15 we're we were when the call came saying we had a heartbeat.

Bet your Azz, I know when life begins.


Like my wife says. CHOICE begins when you CHOSE if the panties come off.
Click to expand...
You married well hossblur....very well
 
Togwotee said:
Lumpy, give an example that compares to going backwards the way the court did yesterday.

And it's not done, talk of banning abortion in all states is gaining steam and Thomas says the court should revisit contraception and same sex cases. the GOP isn't going to rest until the church runs our lives. and neither will you.
Click to expand...

constitution.congress.gov

Table of Supreme Court Decisions Overruled by Subsequent Decisions | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

A table of Supreme Court decisions in which the Court overturned a prior ruling. The table contains only cases where the Court explicitly stated that it is overruling a prior decision or issued a decision that is the functional equivalent of an express overruling.
constitution.congress.gov constitution.congress.gov
 
hossblur said:
Y wife and I after 7 years and 4 surgeries were blessed enough to get 1 egg take via IVF.

I can draw a chalk line on I- 15 we're we were when the call came saying we had a heartbeat.

Bet your Azz, I know when life begins.


Like my wife says. CHOICE begins when you CHOSE if the panties come off.
Click to expand...
Happy you and your wife were able to conceive.

I still firmly believe it should be the woman’s choice and in some instances the parents should be able to make that choice together if they are in fact, together. Every situation is unique and should be treated that way. Giving a woman the choice is the only way that works.
Just my opinion.
 
LivingTheDream said:
constitution.congress.gov

Table of Supreme Court Decisions Overruled by Subsequent Decisions | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

A table of Supreme Court decisions in which the Court overturned a prior ruling. The table contains only cases where the Court explicitly stated that it is overruling a prior decision or issued a decision that is the functional equivalent of an express overruling.
constitution.congress.gov constitution.congress.gov
Click to expand...
That’s an interesting list but…….. it will never satisfy Tog…….. given time to review each case, he’ll argue it’s not the same…….. because the specifics of each case is different for this abortion case. He didn’t say but he will say now, that he wasn’t talking about the SCourt reversing a previous SCourt’s decision.

That’s why I never gave him any examples…… a “human”see’s what it wants to see and disregards the rest.
 
That HHLB will Argue With Himself!



2lumpy said:
That’s an interesting list but…….. it will never satisfy Tog…….. given time to review each case, he’ll argue it’s not the same…….. because the specifics of each case is different for this abortion case. He didn’t say but he will say now, that he wasn’t talking about the SCourt reversing a previous SCourt’s decision.

That’s why I never gave him any examples…… a “human”see’s what it wants to see and disregards the rest.
Click to expand...
 
JB1975 said:
Happy you and your wife were able to conceive.

I still firmly believe it should be the woman’s choice and in some instances the parents should be able to make that choice together if they are in fact, together. Every situation is unique and should be treated that way. Giving a woman the choice is the only way that works.
Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
and that is exactly what will continue to happen....
 

Similar threads

Stubaby
Hunting/Fishing/camping stuff
Replies
1
Views
261
maddog58
M

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

919.jpeg
A 4x5
2017-11-10 11.05.11.jpg
IMG_0177.jpeg
IMG_5456.jpg
B39ADFC8-3B78-4C8D-8A75-F1CA8AC1CA74.jpeg
7316EA95-F9E4-401D-B3AE-D6DD1AC56862.jpeg
IMG_5468.jpg
2022-10-01 15.48.58.jpg
Big Texas Muley
Success
IMG_4307.jpg
Back
Top Bottom