US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:

During the 2020 presidential campaign, as entry-level staffers for Sanders repeatedly agitated over internal dynamics, despite having already formed a staff union, the senator issued a directive to his campaign leadership: “Stop hiring activists.” Instead, Sanders implored, according to multiple campaign sources, the campaign should focus on bringing on people interested first and foremost in doing the job they’re hired to do.
 
No.
This is because they broke tradition and picked a partisan. In the past, even reliable liberal justices had a consistent judicial philosophy and were picked because the philosophy would bring more liberal decisions. Sotomayor votes politically then tries to finangle logic to fit her decision.
I suspect Jackson will be the same.
She had one as a 2nd Circuit Judge that said for end user terms and conditions to be a valid contract, a person needs to have to opportunity to read the thing, so the button agreeing to online terms and conditions needs to be before the purchase or other button accepting service. That's literally the only decision she's written that I've read that hasn't been completely retarded.

Edit: There also was one patent case that she wrote on willful damages that wasn't completely exceptional, considering the fact that literally none of them are actually qualified to rule on patent cases.
 
Last edited:
R/christianity (prog christians and atheists) is coping and seething over it. Apparently christofascists won because they aren’t being discriminated against anymore.

The entryism'd Christianity Reddit is nice, but have you seen the freakout the California Teacher Cabal is having?

1655840476254.png
1655840429344.png

1655840530187.png

The Food Stamps argument is one I hadn't considered. Food Stamps are taxpayer funds but they don't get to direct you to a specific store or even specific items. You get to choose. They literally don't think you should have a choice to educate your children elsewehere, and if you do, you shouldn't get "their" taxpayer funds for it. Amusing.
 
Unfortunately this is what got us into this situation. Your enemies won't play by these rules. This kind of passive, occasionally reactive, posture has doomed conservatism in this country.

The reaction is supposed to be so severe that people don’t even think about trying the same bullshit twice. Hence why the cities with these shitty DAs have such high crime rates. If you’re not going to be prosecuted, why not just go crazy? If a man is jailed for shooting you when you break into his house, why not do it? You’ll still win, either you get away with the crime, or he’s going to be treated as a murderer.

The other side not playing by the rules is what made things fall apart. So now we’re probably going to see an overcompensation soon.

Don't speak for me, sinner.

You missed my point. Which is that we would be dealing with evil all the same, it is just those who wish to do harm would instead hide their actions behind the authority of the Church, as opposed to the authority of the Government. We would still be getting news of said evil, but the outfits would be different.
 
The entryism'd Christianity Reddit is nice, but have you seen the freakout the California Teacher Cabal is having?

View attachment 3411403
View attachment 3411400

View attachment 3411406

The Food Stamps argument is one I hadn't considered. Food Stamps are taxpayer funds but they don't get to direct you to a specific store or even specific items. You get to choose. They literally don't think you should have a choice to educate your children elsewehere, and if you do, you shouldn't get "their" taxpayer funds for it. Amusing.
Good decision by SCOTUS. USA has religous freedom. Get fucked you commie teachers.
 
The entryism'd Christianity Reddit is nice, but have you seen the freakout the California Teacher Cabal is having?

View attachment 3411403
View attachment 3411400

View attachment 3411406

The Food Stamps argument is one I hadn't considered. Food Stamps are taxpayer funds but they don't get to direct you to a specific store or even specific items. You get to choose. They literally don't think you should have a choice to educate your children elsewehere, and if you do, you shouldn't get "their" taxpayer funds for it. Amusing.

Aren't these vouchers meant to technically be a "refund" of whatever local taxes you paid that go to public schools? I thought the idea was that since your kids aren't going to public school, they return your tax money so you could fund your kids' tuition for a private school.
 
Aren't these vouchers meant to technically be a "refund" of whatever local taxes you paid that go to public schools? I thought the idea was that since your kids aren't going to public school, they return your tax money so you could fund your kids' tuition for a private school.
Basically, which is exactly why they're so angry. Not only are they losing control (Not specifically of kids, just in general), but they're also pretty assmad about the prospect of not getting the tax money they clearly think is owed to them. S'not like it was supposed to be for the parents collective good in the first place or anything, right?

The devils advocate side of this argument is that if everyone fucks off from public school, then of course it'll be underfunded and shitty - But it doesn't really hold up that public school can't work with their current revenues, but private schools work just fine off the vouchers.
 
Aren't these vouchers meant to technically be a "refund" of whatever local taxes you paid that go to public schools? I thought the idea was that since your kids aren't going to public school, they return your tax money so you could fund your kids' tuition for a private school.
Will people with no kids be allowed to choose which schools get their tax portion? If my friends and neighbors are sending their kids to a particular private school and get to choose for their tax dollars to support it, would I get to do the same?
 
You missed my point. Which is that we would be dealing with evil all the same, it is just those who wish to do harm would instead hide their actions behind the authority of the Church, as opposed to the authority of the Government. We would still be getting news of said evil, but the outfits would be different.
So the problem isn't the church per se, it's when the church has the power of a government.

(It's almost like Dante's De Monarchia was right, or something....)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back