US Joe Biden News Megathread - The Other Biden Derangement Syndrome Thread (with a side order of Fauci Derangement Syndrome)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's pretend for one moment that he does die before the election, just for the funsies. What happens then? Will the nomination revert to option number 2, aka Bernie Sanders? Or will his running mate automatically replace him just the way Vice-President is supposted to step in after the Big Man in the White House chokes on a piece of matzo? Does he even have a running mate yet?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Billy Beer, Splinters RCVD, GenderCop and 22 others
Click to expand...
Corn Flakes said:
Wait, is that a legal move? I thought that in order to be a Supreme Court judge you had to be a judge to begin with. Wasn't Kamala a district attorney instead?
Click to expand...
Nope all you need is selection by the president and confirmation by Congress. If the president decides to nominate Joe the high school dropout meth dealer and congress agrees then boom he’s now a SC justice.

I advocate the nomination of Chris for SC Justice.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: make_it_so, 6thRanger, Yamma Damma and 9 others
Corn Flakes said:
Wait, is that a legal move? I thought that in order to be a Supreme Court judge you had to be a judge to begin with. Wasn't Kamala a district attorney instead?
Click to expand...
I don’t believe the Law REQUIRES a SCOTUS pick to have been a Fed Judge beforehand, but it’s a long-standing precedent. Kinda like serving 2 terms as POTUS and then leaving was a precedent dating back to the Washington Admin, but wasn’t codified in Law so when FDR wanted an Lifetime Presidency, there wasn’t an actual Law on the books to prevent it, (although after his death the Law WAS changed to prevent it in the future)
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: the fall of man, 6thRanger, Yamma Damma and 5 others
Lorne Armstrong said:
I don’t believe the Law REQUIRES a SCOTUS pick to have been a Fed Judge beforehand, but it’s a long-standing precedent. Kinda like serving 2 terms as POTUS and then leaving was a precedent dating back to the Washington Admin, but wasn’t codified in Law so when FDR wanted an Lifetime Presidency, there wasn’t an actual Law on the books to prevent it, (although after his death the Law WAS changed to prevent it in the future)
Click to expand...
You don't have to be a judge (Kagan for example was only solicitor general), but its entirely unheard of for a district attorney to become a Justice on the Supreme Court
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: the fall of man, Yamma Damma, spiritofamermaid and 3 others
FAQnews Correspondent said:
why they want this bitch so bad
Click to expand...
It’s about “wins”. The Dems are hyper-focused on never losing, on never being “owned” and always “owning” their opposition. They’ll chase after a win and cheat to win even when “winning” is the worst thing for them. Case in point is 2020. All they had to do is let Trump have his win and all this COVID shit would be stuck to him. They along with their allies in the GOP would have continued to obstruct him, and at the end of his term there’d be no one on Trump’s “side” to run who wouldn’t be slimed same as him. Dems would have had 4 more years to create another “Chosen One” candidate. Taking the L in 2020 would have benefitted the Dems in so many ways but they just couldn’t do it. Now they own COVID and everything that comes with it. Now their constituents no longer accept their claims that they can’t deliver anything because of those Dang Dirty Republicans because they hold the White House, the House, and the Senate.

So Joe is deeply unpopular amongst the Plebs because half the country views him as illegitimate, (same as half the country viewed Trump as illegitimate due to all the Russia bullshit), but unlike Trump, 3/4 of the folks in his own party dislike him because they don’t think he can deliver. He’s an old, white, cishet, career Fed politician. He’s the very embodiment of what the Wokists hate, so it’s REEEEEEEEEEEEELY hard for them to carry his water for him.

Anyway, Kamala is deeply unpopular as well for some of the same reasons as Joe and some different ones too. They’d like to get rid of her as VP but they can’t. She’d have to resign. Her resigning would be viewed by Harris as well as the Dems constituency as a “Loss” because Harris wouldn’t be going back to her Senate seat. She’d basically be out of The Game. She’s never going to leave voluntarily because she knows that Joe could drop dead at any moment and then she’s President.

I don’t see this happening for all the reasons listed above but IF they want to go ahead with it they’d have about a year to get it through before the GOP takes the Senate back with enough numbers to block a Kamala SCOTUS pic even with a few defectors. There’s no vacancy on the Court right now, right? So you’d need a Justice to die or retire sometime pretty soon and the Dems would need a united front in the Senate. No defecting Dems, total Party-line vote plus at least 1 GOP defector unless they want a tie with Harris voting herself in as the tiebreaker which would look absolutely horrible. My opinion is this is fantasyland bullshit like the trillion dollar coin or Michelle Obama running.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: deeplyhigh, 6thRanger, spiritofamermaid and 10 others
Spasticus Autisticus said:
The battle lines of the culture war have shifted so much that the positions of even 15 years ago don’t cleanly map to those of Current Year. The Christian Right is defeated and irrelevant. Censorship is now overwhelmingly the domain of the Left who now controls the media, and the Left of today isn’t the Left of the 1990s and 2000s. The terms of the culture war have changed so fast that it’s created living fossils such as Dawkins. Forget about trying to guess where Carlin would be today, his death year of 2008 is practically an eon ago.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Towards the end of his life, Carlin was drifting away from being a leftist and more into being a bitter edgy nihilist. The "American Dream" bit from 2005 is eerily prescient and would get you in hot water if you did it today.

The same special that had that bit also had a bit where he correctly debunked the fedora atheist talking point of "If we had no religion, there'd be no war", so it's pretty obvious that by the mid-2000's, the guy was becoming a proto-doomer.

Personally, I don't think George Carlin would ever go woke but he'd definitely wind up in the same "living fossil" category that Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher are in.

Howard Stern went full woke partly to stay relevant and also due to his hatred of Joe Rogan, who's pretty much surpassed him in every conceivable way.

Now, Bill Hicks on the other hand would never go full woke at all. If any dead comedian from back in they day would be "based" in this iteration of the culture wars, it'd be him.

While Bill Hicks was an atheist who rightfully hated the fundies and neocons of the Reagan and Bush Sr. regimes, there's a lot of other things that point to him not going woke or becoming a Maher-esque living relic.

For one thing, he despised Bill Clinton with a burning passion and rightfully pointed out how large companies controlled both parties even back then. Hicks also condemned the actions of the ATF at Waco and Ruby Ridge, which got him flak from leftists even back then.

If Bill Hicks were alive today in Current Year, he'd be like Sam Hyde on PCP.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Chief Areola, make_it_so, Rome's rightful successor and 25 others
Screamer said:
Don't forget that it seemed to suggest Tilly will be trooning out this season.

It is interesting how they mishandle the optimistic future aspect of Trek. If they really were wanting to project a better future with this stuff, they'd just have trans, non-binary and whatever else without bringing notice to it. Instead of projecting it all still has a personal struggle to deal with 1000 years in the future.

Where Tilly will have to seek the wisdom of a wise gay man to get the courage to become non-binary. To which no character will give a shit about. So why the personal struggle? Is that implying issues with trans / non-binary peoples mental states? That it isn't just how society treats them? Doesn't that go against the current day woke narrative on this stuff?

To me, it suggests that part of the identity is the actual struggle.

It's all kind of odd. Having a non-binary character literally be a "they" as they're two people. Where there's now awkwardness when they are referred as "they." Is it both characters or the singular?

Then of course one of those is a trans man. So it's the non-binary and the trans dating. Yet it's all in the non-binaries head.

A trans man who isn't masculine at all. Perfecting their new male body by getting rid of a mole. When we're watching it in 4k seeing how bad their lumpy facial skin is under the make-up. Also juxtaposed with a masculine real man in the scene which highlights just how non-masculine the trans person is. Why not get a proper male body?

The way the scene is set up, literally everyone watching would be noticing and thinking this stuff.

It's actually a complete shit show how they're handling this stuff they seem intent on including in the show.
Click to expand...

pwnest injun said:
Carlin was anti-establishment and said some things in his final interviews that were pretty prescient. I don't feel like looking it up right now, but he wasn't a toady.

In related news, you may think that Louie CK is a born cuck liberal or whatever, but I caught his most recent set a little bit ago, and there were jokes about crossing state lines and pot shots about how he thinks black women are ugly and look like monkeys. There are some people who really really hate being told what they can and can't say and if you try it, then you're their enemy.
Click to expand...

Drag-on Knight 91873 said:
So he really is Rad Thibodeaux in real life.

I dunno about Carlin given that Howard Stern went full shitlib. CK has already been cancelled, so what does it matter if he says nigger now?
Click to expand...

Lards and Lasses said:
George Carlin's comedy would have been beaten with the same cancel culture stick we've seen in years before and people like to think that he would have been stubborn enough to stand up to them and, while not actually be a conservative, end up on the same side of the cancel culture war as themselves. I hold the same optimistic opinions of Christopher Hitchens. We could derail this thread so hard talking about this, but I will say if Christopher Hitchens was alive and he had swung the way of sanity, he would have been at his peak in all this shit. Heck, there are a few notable liberals condemning it to this day despite not labeling themselves conservatives (see joe rogan). It's very wishful thinking and it's very possible it would have gone the other way with them towing the line like everyone else, but you can't fault people for thinking the best of the deceased.

I'll leave it at that.
Click to expand...
Honselty it depends. When it comes to the topic of deceased (both right and leff leaning) Celebrities and rather they would still have the same political views during modern day. Hard to say I feel John Wayne who was a starch conservative back in Old Hollywood would a be a Trump supporter only because his daughter and his family surpporting Trump implying he would have done the same. Other than that maybe Charles Bronson form what I hear about him he would have probably been one too. But that's it there I don't know what alot of the old school Hollywood conservatives would have stand on today

Would Walt Dinsey be a Trumper. I'd don't know to be honset? I know he hated communism alot so he would have hated the squad and he would have hated current Disney but that's more of lack of spirit than politics to be fair.

I mean Geroge C. Scott described himself as a moderate Republican but would that be Arnold Schwarzenegger moderate or Trump moderate in today's world?

Than you have Nancy Stantra saying her father wouldn't have surpported Trump. Is that true? Who knows!!

I mean Kirk Douglas stayed a bitter liberal until the very end. Would all his old liberal friends have done the same?

It's really hard to put the deceased in current political boxes for current day because so much have change.
HTTP Error 404 said:
View attachment 2759646

Twitter giving up on hiding the civil war?

View attachment 2759648
View attachment 2759651

The plan? Try and put Harris in SCOTUS to free up the VP slot in 2024.

View attachment 2759653
archive.ph

With Kamala Harris looking unelectable, the Democrats are considering…

archived 28 Nov 2021 15:16:35 UTC
archive.ph archive.ph

Hey @Gehenna, what's your take on "Lets put the woman known for illegally jailing black people for free slave labor on the SCOTUS" going over?
Click to expand...
I wonder who be their better VP replacement?
Syaoran Li said:
Pretty much. Towards the end of his life, Carlin was drifting away from being a leftist and more into being a bitter edgy nihilist. The "American Dream" bit from 2005 is eerily prescient and would get you in hot water if you did it today.

The same special that had that bit also had a bit where he correctly debunked the fedora atheist talking point of "If we had no religion, there'd be no war", so it's pretty obvious that by the mid-2000's, the guy was becoming a proto-doomer.

Personally, I don't think George Carlin would ever go woke but he'd definitely wind up in the same "living fossil" category that Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher are in.

Howard Stern went full woke partly to stay relevant and also due to his hatred of Joe Rogan, who's pretty much surpassed him in every conceivable way.

Now, Bill Hicks on the other hand would never go full woke at all. If any dead comedian from back in they day would be "based" in this iteration of the culture wars, it'd be him.

While Bill Hicks was an atheist who rightfully hated the fundies and neocons of the Reagan and Bush Sr. regimes, there's a lot of other things that point to him not going woke or becoming a Maher-esque living relic.

For one thing, he despised Bill Clinton with a burning passion and rightfully pointed out how large companies controlled both parties even back then. Hicks also condemned the actions of the ATF at Waco and Ruby Ridge, which got him flak from leftists even back then.

If Bill Hicks were alive today in Current Year, he'd be like Sam Hyde on PCP.
Click to expand...
Honselty it's funny how Mahar and Dawkins are considered fossils when back in the day they were considered peak liberalism.

Honselty I do love how Stern is jealous of Rogan. And he should because Rogan been able to criticized wokness and not let his left leaning views consume him on that
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Rome's rightful successor, 6thRanger, spiritofamermaid and 3 others
1638195710846.png

1638197563926.png

@Null Red alert
www.cnbc.com

Twitter CTO Parag Agrawal will replace Jack Dorsey as CEO

Jack Dorsey was serving as both the CEO of Twitter and Square, his digital payments company.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: LurkNoMore, like_shutup_&_drive_scoob, Zig Zag and 29 others
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Culinary Hindenburg, the fall of man, LurkNoMore and 39 others
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: like_shutup_&_drive_scoob, Yamma Damma, spiritofamermaid and 18 others
Terrifik said:
View attachment 2759805
View attachment 2759830
@Null Red alert
www.cnbc.com

Twitter CTO Parag Agrawal will replace Jack Dorsey as CEO

Jack Dorsey was serving as both the CEO of Twitter and Square, his digital payments company.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
Click to expand...
"Here's what you need to know about the new Twitter CEO, Adam Hitler"

Seriously Dorsey is a piece of shit but he was a lazy piece of shit.

If his replacement is super ambitious (which is likely, it's a CEO position) expect shit on Twitter to get WAY worse (yes, it's possible)
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Yamma Damma, MarvinTheParanoidAndroid, spiritofamermaid and 9 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back