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...
Gehenna said:
Addition: A bit of history on how Viability became the standard it was. Basically, a massive misread by the SCOTUS of the time. Viability was always a stop-gap, a delay of it becoming an issue because there was no real period to point to otherwise but it provided the necessary obfuscation to concoct the "Right to Privacy". The idea at the time by SCOTUS was that clearly the nation was trending towards being pro-abortion, so -obviously- it would never come to where the can was kicked to because the issue would become dead.

SCOTUS judges aren't political analysts. They instead reinvigorated the issue and actually managed to slowly bleed the support away from it until it's a dead heat tie of support -in general-. Thankfully, this quite possibly has taken another compromise verdict off the table. There is nothing to compromise with.
Click to expand...
I only recently learned that the viability standard was a last-minute addition. It was not argued by anyone who brought the case. They were going to set the limit at 15 weeks until one of the justices suggested viability would be better. The Mississippi law they're arguing over would have been the law of the land in 1973!

Between Roe and the Founders three-fifthsing the slavery issue, those are some all-time self-owns. Or just the entire series of precedents saying slavery couldn't expand into the new territories but could still exist in the South. Just dumb half-measures that shows how stupid the whole thing is.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Feels
Reactions: not william stenchever, LurkNoMore, Exterminatus and 6 others
Jeremiah the Bullfrog said:
A year into it, there haven’t been many games released exclusively for the PS5. I wonder if that is because the console hasn’t been widely adopted yet due to supply issues. Why release a game that will play exclusively on the PS5 that will just be ‘old’ when the consoles to play it are actually out there when you can just ‘remaster’ games you’re releasing for an older console and charge $15 more.
Click to expand...
Sony is also following the Sega/Microsoft playbooks in just releasing stuff across platforms also. Stuff are reduced to timed exlcusives and it seems they'll be doing this going forward.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Vyse Inglebard and argostug
Trianon said:
Between Roe and the Founders three-fifthsing the slavery issue, those are some all-time self-owns. Or just the entire series of precedents saying slavery couldn't expand into the new territories but could still exist in the South. Just dumb half-measures that shows how stupid the whole thing is.
Click to expand...
The Three-Fifths compromise was a political solution to a political problem, conjured up by politicians. They all knew what they were doing when they implemented it, and IIRC slave states were not happy with it because it meant they had proportionately less representation in the federal government than free states.

The viability standard was the Supreme Court overstepping their bounds and trying to stretch their remit while ruling on things they did not understand for political reasons.

Very different things.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Luck Skeleton, LurkNoMore, Zero Day Defense and 8 others
Puff said:
Is there proof? It would take a lot to shake me from my opinion he's just a character that takes the most insane read of the news he can and screams about it.
Highly entertaining.
Click to expand...
Alex seems genuine, just a guy that's been following the news so much that it makes him seem nuts.

Hell it was just a couple years ago there was the news about a feminist cult seeming to be controlling South Korea and its president, which is the kind of story you'd imagine a mental patient coming up with. There's so much insanity day in day out that it's a challenge to honestly talk about it without sounding unhinged.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Exigent Circumcisions, thyme's up, like_shutup_&_drive_scoob and 8 others
LaxerBRO said:
I thought that Clarence Thomas rarely speaks. I would venture, he spoke more in this case than in a couple years of him on the bench.
Click to expand...
The way I heard it was him and Scalia generally had the same questions so he let Scalia do the talking. When Scalia died he started talking more in oral arguments.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: like_shutup_&_drive_scoob, LurkNoMore, Clockwork_PurBle and 11 others
scr.png
 
  • Informative
  • Feels
Reactions: like_shutup_&_drive_scoob, silverstacks, LurkNoMore and 19 others
FAQnews Correspondent said:
Have at it. I'm amazed people just dropped the issue entirely actually.
Click to expand...
I don't see what you could possibly say apart from how impractical it is to implement & how shoddy it would be to implement as well. It's strange that the people in politics seem to operate entirely on a moral impetus & have no concern for technical limitations at all. I had this same feeling when California passed legislation to restrict power consumption for PC gaming, as in their power threshold mandates were entirely unrealistic. Politicians think they can magic technology into existence with a Harry Potter wand.

"Okay society, you get six years to make all cars electric. Who is this "impractical" person you speak of? I do not know this man, but he should be jailed for obstructing progress."
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: Sperghetti, Luck Skeleton, Exigent Circumcisions and 19 others
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid said:
I don't see what you could possibly say apart from how impractical it is to implement & how shoddy it would be to implement as well. It's strange that the people in politics seem to operate entirely on a moral impetus & have no concern for technical limitations at all. I had this same feeling when California passed legislation to restrict power consumption for PC gaming, as in their power threshold mandates were entirely unrealistic. Politicians think they can magic technology into existence with a Harry Potter wand.

"Okay society, you get six years to make all cars electric. Who is this "impractical" person you speak of? I do not know this man, but he should be jailed for obstructing progress."
Click to expand...
Politicians are the best argument for leaving legislation in the hands of the technocrats and unaccountable administrative state by constantly pulling shit like this.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Vyse Inglebard, MrJokerRager and ClackAlAcka
soy_king said:
And what exactly is wrong with a federal vaccine database if it's not coupled to mandatory firings for not getting the Vax or publicizing people's identities?

yes, this is a cart before the horse situation, but vaccine databases done properly are useful public health tools.
Click to expand...
Besides possible issues with privacy if you can't opt out of it, you know damn well it will be used for getting people fired/punished for not taking the vaxx. It's a government project passed during a time of crisis, and those are usually implemented so they can be immediately abused. If this project had been initiated, say, in the middle of Bush Jr.'s second term, without any ongoing pandemics or epidemics, I don't think anyone would have batted an eyelash.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: babadook, Marchesa of the Vast, not william stenchever and 47 others
Corn Flakes said:
Besides possible issues with privacy if you can't opt out of it, you know damn well it will be used for getting people fired/punished for not taking the vaxx. It's a government project passed during a time of crisis, and those are usually implemented so they can be immediately abused. If this project had been initiated, say, in the middle of Bush Jr.'s second term, without any ongoing pandemics or epidemics, I don't think anyone would have batted an eyelash.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this was my first assumption, that it's a trojan horse for a black list.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Luck Skeleton, thyme's up, LurkNoMore and 15 others
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Rome's rightful successor, Clockwork_PurBle, Francis York Morgan and 7 others
Corn Flakes said:
Besides possible issues with privacy if you can't opt out of it, you know damn well it will be used for getting people fired/punished for not taking the vaxx. It's a government project passed during a time of crisis, and those are usually implemented so they can be immediately abused. If this project had been initiated, say, in the middle of Bush Jr.'s second term, without any ongoing pandemics or epidemics, I don't think anyone would have batted an eyelash.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, I'm just saying bring generally against this sort of thing is silly, and I'm reluctant to make any firm statement because I probably won't read the bill.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: name68126988, (deleted member) and (deleted member)
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back