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...
Oxous said:
The proceedings are being recorded and livestreamed but I've only seen Sotomayor make a comment about how badly the reputation of the court would be affected if they dared overturn Roe. Either Supreme Court hearings really are just that boring or the pro-abortion side doesn't have much to say, I'd guess.
Click to expand...
they really are that boring. you get maybe one or two intresting questions from justices that reveal their position but other than that its like reading a dictionary.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: the fall of man, SCSI, spiritofamermaid and 4 others
SSF2T Old User said:
Left truck is appropriate for all the salt that would flow if Roe got overturned.
Click to expand...
Honka Honka Burning Love said:
On one hand I am not entirely for Roe v Wade to be overturned.

On the other...the Salt would be AMAZEBALLS.
Click to expand...
Gonna concur. Full overturning Roe v. Wade would be a very dangerous move electorally, which is why I don't expect that to happen. If these Trump-appointed judges really are political appointees, they would realize turning 60% of Americans against the Republican Party on a rather contentious issue is the last thing they'd want to do.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Livecorpse, Yamma Damma, Constellationzero and 3 others
Oxous said:
Gonna concur. Full overturning Roe v. Wade would be a very dangerous move electorally, which is why I don't expect that to happen. If these Trump-appointed judges really are political appointees, they would realize turning 60% of Americans against the Republican Party on a rather contentious issue is the last thing they'd want to do.
Click to expand...
I mean, in terms of "ideologically what I stand for" the SCOTUS overturning it, then writing the 10th Amendment in out in big bold letters and telling the states "YOU DUMB AUTISITIC FAGGOTS ARE THE ONES WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO DEAL WITH THIS SHIT DO YOUR JOB RETARDS." Is what I want, but I want the Scotus to do that on...almost everything really.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Confused Doggo, make_it_so, Rainbow Idiot and 15 others
Oxous said:
If these Trump-appointed judges really are political appointees, they would realize turning 60% of Americans against the Republican Party on a rather contentious issue is the last thing they'd want to do.
Click to expand...
But all the overturning of the verdict would mean is that it goes back to the states to decide. If you don't like not being able to kill your kid whenever you want, you can just move to a state that allows you to.

It's just mind-boggling to fathom that they would let such a stupid and half-assed verdict stand.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: the fall of man, Rustic Ruthenian, spiritofamermaid and 12 others
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Feels
Reactions: like_shutup_&_drive_scoob, spiritofamermaid, Ponderous Pillock and 9 others
It seems things are now getting more interesting, and going in Mississippi's favor.
Capture.PNG

Capture.PNG

Capture.PNG

Capture.PNG
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: the fall of man, GigaKike, 6thRanger and 45 others
Oxous said:
The proceedings are being recorded and livestreamed but I've only seen Sotomayor make a comment about how badly the reputation of the court would be affected if they dared overturn Roe. Either Supreme Court hearings really are just that boring or the pro-abortion side doesn't have much to say, I'd guess.
Click to expand...
Seemed goofy how one of the arguments they're going with is wrongly decided cases shouldn't necessarily be overturned. Sounds like Breyer was somewhat on board with that logic too.
2021-12-01 (1).png
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: 6thRanger, m1ddl3m4rch, SCSI and 9 others
mandatorylurk said:
View attachment 2765284

View attachment 2765285

View attachment 2765290

Mace trying to be the tough girl who carries the torch for the Cheney's in Congress, a woman who literally used Trump to get elected and "one of us" and then revealed herself to be a Kinzinger snake. She lied about her home being vandalized with grafitti (all on her sidewalk, and she has a Ring doorbell she never provided evidence with), uses the claim she was raped in high school to justify being for some abortion and also avoid real pressure, and voted to hold Bannon in contempt even though the 1/6 committee is illegal.

It's really easy to get things done when you're just willing to be part of the system and never stick your head out. Just look at those RINO talking points.
Click to expand...
Yeah, maybe, BUT she's pretty hot for a woman her age. Like an older Alexandra Daddario. I just don't have it in me to hate a woman with milkers like her.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Flexo and Vyse Inglebard
Sotomayor apparently brought up the idea that a fetus can't really feel pain when it doesn't have a brain, but could still look like it feels it due to natural recoil. Makes it look like a compromise is on her mind about just moving the point they're comfortable with abortion.

Miss: well the facts have changed like medical science
Sotomayor: like what? Miss: fetal pain before 24 weeks Sotomayor: this view would not survive Daubert standard, which is what we use for science. A small minority of scientists does not change everything.
Sotomayor: every state defines brain death as death. Though literature shows that brain dead people respond to stimuli. So I don't think a response by fetus that there is a sensation of pain or consciousness.
Click to expand...

The Daubert standard being a matter of the admissibility of expert witnesses. So basically scoffing at the notion of any medical scientist being allowed in to say that a fetus could feel pain because she figures even a corpse can look like it feels pain.

Barrett: If we eliminate right to abortion, do we eliminate other substantive due process rights
Miss: No, they don't have the same problems as the abortion standards
Sotomayor: I am not sure how your answer makes any sense. Obergefell etc all relied on substantive due process. And you are saying there is no SDP in the constitution. I think you are dissimulating when you say any decision would not affect those other decisions.
Sotomayor: When life begins has been debated since the beginning of time, so you when you say that abortion is taking a life, that is a religious view.
Soto: are there secular people who think life begins at conception
Click to expand...
A: Of course. It is not tied to a religious view. If so, it would run into its religious jurisprudence
Click to expand...
So it sounds like Sotomayor is seriously arguing that we have no way of telling if anyone is alive or dead so we can't really know if we're hurting or killing anyone. At the same time, there are arguments being made about how people have rights that aren't in the constitution so abortion not being in the constitution doesn't mean we should do away with it.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: not william stenchever, 6thRanger, Dracula's Spirit Animal and 12 others

Dem senator warns Supreme Court of 'revolution' if Roe v. Wade is overturned​

(archive)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., issued a warning to the Supreme Court days before oral arguments in a potential landmark abortion case, claiming that a "revolution" will take place if the high court overturns existing precedent.

During a virtual event Monday featuring New Hampshire's entire House and Senate delegation, WMUR reporter Adam Sexton had asked if public debate over abortion had "muted" due to many people in the U.S. only knowing life post-Roe v. Wade. Shaheen asserted that nothing would be muted about the reaction to a possible overturning of that decision.

"I hope the Supreme Court is listening to the people of the United States because – to go back to Adam Sexton’s question – I think if you want to see a revolution go ahead, outlaw Roe v. Wade and see what the response is of the public, particularly young people," Shaheen said toward the end of the event. "Because I think that will not be acceptable to young women or young men."

The Supreme Court's current makeup – a 6-3 majority of justices appointed by Republicans – has led to speculation that they might overturn Roe v. Wade, which recognized a right to get an abortion before a fetus is viable, generally about 23 or 24 weeks into pregnancy. Wednesday's case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, centers on a Mississippi law that clearly challenges Roe by banning abortion after 15 weeks.

"I’ve lived the consequences of the pre-Roe era – I had friends in college who were forced to seek dangerous back alley abortions because women across the country were denied access to critical family planning services. We cannot allow Republican lawmakers to turn back the clock on women’s reproductive health and rights, which is precisely what the Mississippi case seeks to do. It is time to sound the alarm," Shaheen said in a separate statement. "Roe v. Wade isn’t just a decision that impacts women, their health and their financial security – it also impacts generations of families."

Shaheen's warning was reminiscent of a comment made by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer during an abortion rights rally in June 2020. Speaking as the court heard arguments in a different case dealing with restrictions on who can provide abortions, Schumer gave a warning to conservative justices that bordered on threatening.

"I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price!" Schumer yelled. "You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."

Those remarks prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to rebuke the Democratic leader later that day.

"Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous," Roberts said in a statement. "All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter."

Shaheen's colleague, Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., also appeared at the event. She called the Mississippi law "a direct attack on decades of precedent," and said "the Supreme Court should not put government in front of women's most personal, difficult, and complicated health care decisions."
ree.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: C@astrophica, m1ddl3m4rch, spiritofamermaid and 16 others
Zig Zag said:
This is something that I will always be baffled by. I lived in NYC for the first >20 years of my life, and while I could rant about how the MTA is completely fucking awful in every aspect for days on end, I still think that it's rather impressive that the largest and oldest public transportation system in the entire world even runs at all, much less 24 hours a day (sort of) 365 days a year (kind of). I also will never stop touting the fact that you could get from the tip of Long Island to the border of Yonkers for $2.50 as long as you don't mind switching lines and going from bus to train to bus for the entire day that you'd be riding. I didn't own a car for many years and saved a ton of money and lost some pounds by walking and using public transpo everywhere. Moving to FL and finding out that the bus system is absolute garbage and doesn't run on Sundays or late at night was a big shock. Don't get me wrong, I love owning my car and the freedom it provides, but it is more expensive than relying on public transport.

It just makes no sense to me that anyone trying to push a Green agenda focuses only on eliminating those naughty internal combustion engines without offering any solutions in the form of better public transportation systems for towns and cities with populations over a certain level. Obviously having a robust 24 hour bus system in Buttfuck Nowhere, Nebraska is nonsensical, but for a decent-sized city here in FL it's weird that the options are so crappy. It ties into the nuclear (power) option which was brought up by another poster and how it's always dismissed when it's the Greenest of all. Just strange that the obvious solutions are always ignored or even argued against. I wonder if Mayor Pete Bootyjudge will ever give a reasonable answer to some of these problems. HAHA jk, I know it's not even on his radar.
Click to expand...
most blue cities on the west coast have crappy crappy crappy bus systems but the lunatics who live in them will tell you how great they are just because they exist. the no/limited service on weekends and at night drives me fucking insane. who works at night and on the weekend? POOR PEOPLE. WHY ARE YOU MAKING THEM DRIVE.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: 6thRanger, bbfx, SCSI and 11 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back