2022 SCOTUS rulings

Political discussions
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by JohnStOnge »

We're veering off topic but since the inflation thing was discussed I'll post this article from 2016:

https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-econo ... -inflation

A quote:
Across the board, we found almost no effect of government spending on inflation. For example, in our benchmark specification, we found that a 10 percent increase in government spending led to an 8 basis point decline in inflation. Moreover, the effect is not statistically different from zero.
I'm sure you can find something that takes the other view as, from what I've seen, there is disagreement about it.

Me, I am comfortable with thinking that if government spending has any effect on inflation it is minimal if it exists at all. That's because, as I am wont to do, I looked up data on the matter and analyzed it myself. It looked to me like there MAY be some lag effect whereby spending results in SOME tendency towards higher inflation 2 to 3 years later. But we're talking about spending in year 1 accounting for about 7% of the variation in inflation 2 years later and 8% of the variation in inflation 3 years later.

We're not having the high inflation we have now because of the COVID-19 spending packages. If the spending packages are a factor at all they are a minor one. That's not where most of the year over year difference in prices is coming from.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote:
kalm wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:11 am Low information voters will blame Biden. Biden deserves some of the blame because his Democratic establishment continues to not address working class issues.

This is what happens when economic center right Democrats continue to follow the Republican playbook. Two Santa Claus theory in full effect.
Inflation is govt caused, so you have to either blame Trump and the conks, or Biden amd the donks (and Putin lol).

Biden inherited 1.4% inflation. Then he proceed to ram through trillions and trillions in extra spending, bursting the inflation bubble. His so called Covid Relief bill extended the enhanced unemployment out to a year and a half, causing severe labor shortage and labor cost increases through the spring & summer of 21’. Also another round of stimulus which was like pouring gas on a fire (too much $$$ chasing too few goods).

Under Biden interest rates were kept at near zero for over a year.

Biden’s 2020 campaign declared a war on fossil fuel, and he carried that out on day 1, signing multiple anti fossil fuel EOs. And his admin has stonewalled on the permitting process.

And those are the 3 biggest drivers of inflation- spending, high oil prices, and low interest rates. And anyone with a lick of commom sense can see that Biden deserves the majority of the blame on all 3. Not Trump. Not Putin.
Or you can blame both of them.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote:Lol at all the teeth knashing by the left about how this is an activist court. SCOUTUS didn’t say abortion is outlawed. They didn’t say a woman can’t have an abortion. They just said there’s no constitutional right to one, thereby kicking the issue back to the states.

An activist court would have said not only is there no constitutional right to an abortion, but a life in thr womb is a life under the equal protection clause, therefore all abortion is outlawed. But they didnt do that.

Now both sides will have to make their arguements at the state level. A win for democracy and states’ rights..
Quoted for if the Republicans take Congress and the White House and then try to pass a nationwide ban.



Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
HI54UNI
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12387
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:39 pm
I am a fan of: Firing Mark Farley
A.K.A.: Bikinis for JSO
Location: The Panther State

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by HI54UNI »

JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:21 pm
AZGrizFan wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 8:09 pm

Yes. The party of voters who think men can menstruate, men can get pregnant, thinks children as young as 3 can “choose” their sexual identity and that we should be providing puberty blockers to aid them in their “transition, the party of voters that thinks COVID is a death sentence and masks work, thinks the civil war was fought in the 1960’s, thinks black people don’t have cell phones or internet, THOSE folks are going to fucking ACE an IQ test, I’m just positive of it. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :dunce: :dunce: :dunce:
It's the party of people who understand that, though there is a small chance of dying from COVID-19 in a single randomly selected case, it has a much higher mortality rate than something like seasonal influenza does and also a much higher hospitalization rate. They understand that the population impacts are significant. They understand that biological males do not menstruate and cannot get pregnant. As far as the gender identity stuff goes: Their outlook is consistent with the positions of the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and other major medical organizations. I've never heard of anybody who thinks the civil war was fought in the 1960s or thinks that black people don't have cell phones or internet. I suspect that comes from yet another instance of some conservative pundit or something taking something somebody said out of context.

The bottom line, though, is that people with graduate degrees have consistently voted by a substantial majority for Democrats and the margin has generally increased in recent years. During the 2020 election it was by 60% to 40% in the House Elections and by 62% to 37% in the Presidential election. That strongly suggests that if, we administered an IQ test and only allowed the top 15.87% to vote (the 1 standard deviation thing), the Republicans would be completely screwed.

The exit polls don't break the House races down by State. But the 2020 Republican candidate for President lost by an estimated 10 percentage points , 54% to 44%, among people with graduate degrees in TEXAS. He also lost by an estimated 8 percentage points, 53% to 45%, among people with graduate degrees in Florida.

We don't have direct measurement of IQ. But I'd be VERY confident that, if we only allowed those who scored at least 1 standard deviation above the mean on an IQ test to vote, the Republicans would become a non factor nationally. They might locally control a small minority of what are now deep red States. But they'd never win a Presidential election and they'd be small minorities in the House and Senate without enough people in the Senate to sustain a filibuster.
JSO's council of learned citizens running things

Image
If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism. Ronald Reagan, 1975.

Progressivism is cancer

All my posts are satire
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

UNI88 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 7:21 pm
BDKJMU wrote:Lol at all the teeth knashing by the left about how this is an activist court. SCOUTUS didn’t say abortion is outlawed. They didn’t say a woman can’t have an abortion. They just said there’s no constitutional right to one, thereby kicking the issue back to the states.

An activist court would have said not only is there no constitutional right to an abortion, but a life in thr womb is a life under the equal protection clause, therefore all abortion is outlawed. But they didnt do that.

Now both sides will have to make their arguements at the state level. A win for democracy and states’ rights..
Quoted for if the Republicans take Congress and the White House and then try to pass a nationwide ban.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Big difference between legislating through Congress, and legislating through the courts..
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 6:38 pm We're veering off topic but since the inflation thing was discussed I'll post this article from 2016:

https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-econo ... -inflation

A quote:
Across the board, we found almost no effect of government spending on inflation. For example, in our benchmark specification, we found that a 10 percent increase in government spending led to an 8 basis point decline in inflation. Moreover, the effect is not statistically different from zero.
I'm sure you can find something that takes the other view as, from what I've seen, there is disagreement about it.

Me, I am comfortable with thinking that if government spending has any effect on inflation it is minimal if it exists at all. That's because, as I am wont to do, I looked up data on the matter and analyzed it myself. It looked to me like there MAY be some lag effect whereby spending results in SOME tendency towards higher inflation 2 to 3 years later. But we're talking about spending in year 1 accounting for about 7% of the variation in inflation 2 years later and 8% of the variation in inflation 3 years later.

We're not having the high inflation we have now because of the COVID-19 spending packages. If the spending packages are a factor at all they are a minor one. That's not where most of the year over year difference in prices is coming from.
Why Printing Money Causes Inflation
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/797/ ... p%20prices.

Or how about this.
-Govt stopped printing $$$. ZERO spending. Besides the economy crashing, we would have massive deflation. Dollars would become rare..
OR
-Govt printed printed $$$ as fast as it could. Printed hundreds of trillions of $$$. Maybe a quadrillion. Gave every household 1 million $$$. Better yet, gave every indivdual 1 million $$ (would that be over a quadrillion?) Everyone would be rich, no one would have to work- well, not. Inflation would be hundreds or even thousands percent. If you were going to the store, paying cash, soon you’d soon have to bring a suitcase full..

The more of something there is, the less valuable it is. Not a hard concept. Bottom line, anyone with half a brain can see that govt spending (ie printing $$$) affects inflation..
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote:
UNI88 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 7:21 pm Quoted for if the Republicans take Congress and the White House and then try to pass a nationwide ban.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Big difference between legislating through Congress, and legislating through the courts..
Getting a head start on the mental gymnastics. Nice work BDKMaryLouRetton.

Shitting all over state's rights is ahitting all over state's rights regardless of who does it. Consistency is fun, you should try it some time.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk


Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7049
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by JoltinJoe »

JohnStOnge wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:30 am BTW, on the issue of a right to abortion not being enumerated in the Constitution. The 9th Amendment does say:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
So the fact that a right is not specifically enumerated does not necessarily mean it's not a right. Rights are not limited to those specifically described.

The reason I am on the pro life side is that the only objective criterion for the transition between non-existence and existence for a member of our species is conception. So I'm looking at the right to life. A member of our species has a right to continue their life.

If it weren't for that, to me, there would be ZERO doubt about a woman having the right to have control over her own body whether it is explicitly enumerated in the Constitution or not. I'm looking at it as a situation in which the right to live on the part of one individual outweighs the right of another individual to control their own body.

But, to me, the argument that something is not a right because it is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution is a non-starter. Not a good argument.
But the Ninth Amendment is not a bottomless cookie jar of non-enumerated rights. As the Court has said, the Ninth Amendment protects a very narrow class of rights, firmly entrenched and identifiable within the nation's traditions, and which existed within the common law at the time the constitution was ratified (marriage, parental rights, and other rights of that nature).
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7049
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by JoltinJoe »

Chevron deference on the chopping block for today.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

JoltinJoe wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:17 am
JohnStOnge wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:30 am BTW, on the issue of a right to abortion not being enumerated in the Constitution. The 9th Amendment does say:



So the fact that a right is not specifically enumerated does not necessarily mean it's not a right. Rights are not limited to those specifically described.

The reason I am on the pro life side is that the only objective criterion for the transition between non-existence and existence for a member of our species is conception. So I'm looking at the right to life. A member of our species has a right to continue their life.

If it weren't for that, to me, there would be ZERO doubt about a woman having the right to have control over her own body whether it is explicitly enumerated in the Constitution or not. I'm looking at it as a situation in which the right to live on the part of one individual outweighs the right of another individual to control their own body.

But, to me, the argument that something is not a right because it is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution is a non-starter. Not a good argument.
But the Ninth Amendment is not a bottomless cookie jar of non-enumerated rights. As the Court has said, the Ninth Amendment protects a very narrow class of rights, firmly entrenched and identifiable within the nation's traditions, and which existed within the common law at the time the constitution was ratified (marriage, parental rights, and other rights of that nature).
Wouldn’t autonomy over one’s body be included? It’s tough to move past the philosophical debate of when life begins.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by AZGrizFan »

UNI88 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:28 pm
BDKJMU wrote: Big difference between legislating through Congress, and legislating through the courts..
Getting a head start on the mental gymnastics. Nice work BDKMaryLouRetton.

Shitting all over state's rights is ahitting all over state's rights regardless of who does it. Consistency is fun, you should try it some time.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
I agree. If it’s truly a states rights issue (and it is), then fucking leave it to the states. Period.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

JoltinJoe wrote:
JohnStOnge wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:30 am BTW, on the issue of a right to abortion not being enumerated in the Constitution. The 9th Amendment does say:
So the fact that a right is not specifically enumerated does not necessarily mean it's not a right. Rights are not limited to those specifically described.

The reason I am on the pro life side is that the only objective criterion for the transition between non-existence and existence for a member of our species is conception. So I'm looking at the right to life. A member of our species has a right to continue their life.

If it weren't for that, to me, there would be ZERO doubt about a woman having the right to have control over her own body whether it is explicitly enumerated in the Constitution or not. I'm looking at it as a situation in which the right to live on the part of one individual outweighs the right of another individual to control their own body.

But, to me, the argument that something is not a right because it is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution is a non-starter. Not a good argument.
But the Ninth Amendment is not a bottomless cookie jar of non-enumerated rights. As the Court has said, the Ninth Amendment protects a very narrow class of rights, firmly entrenched and identifiable within the nation's traditions, and which existed within the common law at the time the constitution was ratified (marriage, parental rights, and other rights of that nature).
Should marriage be a right or simply a contract?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18038
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by GannonFan »

kalm wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:36 am The theocratic rulings march on…

“Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court said Monday that a Washington state school district violated the First Amendment rights of a high school football coach when he lost his job after praying at the 50-yard line after games.

The opinion was 6-3 along conservative-liberal ideological lines.
"The Constitution and the best of our traditions counsel mutual respect and tolerance, not censorship and suppression, for religious and nonreligious views alike," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion.”

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/27/politics ... index.html
I wonder about this one. Where is the line, assuming there is one? If you don't like the school paid coach, while still in his job, kneeling and praying at the 50 yard line after a game, is there anything a person can do while employed by the school that has any religious connotation to it? Can a Christian teacher wear a crucifix as a necklace, can a Muslim teacher wear a head scarf, can a teacher make any reference to what they did on the weekend if it involves them going to a place of worship, can a teacher make a silent prayer over food before eating it, and so on? I think the Court is right on this case, you can't ban public expressions of faith just because someone is in the public space. I think in this case of the football coach, he was asked to specifically not include players in his private moment of prayer, and he followed that. I think that's reasonable. I find it harder to make a case to not allow the coach to pray in public at all, given all the other visible displays of faith than an individual can bring into the public space.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
tribe_pride
Level2
Level2
Posts: 1626
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:53 am
I am a fan of: W&M

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by tribe_pride »

JoltinJoe wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:23 am Chevron deference on the chopping block for today.
Tomorrow
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

UNI88 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:28 pm
BDKJMU wrote: Big difference between legislating through Congress, and legislating through the courts..
Getting a head start on the mental gymnastics. Nice work BDKMaryLouRetton.

Shitting all over state's rights is ahitting all over state's rights regardless of who does it. Consistency is fun, you should try it some time.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
I didn’t say I was for Congress making a national law, UNIReadingIsFundamentalandjumpingtoconclusions88..
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Winterborn »

UNI88 wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 7:07 am
JoltinJoe wrote:
But the Ninth Amendment is not a bottomless cookie jar of non-enumerated rights. As the Court has said, the Ninth Amendment protects a very narrow class of rights, firmly entrenched and identifiable within the nation's traditions, and which existed within the common law at the time the constitution was ratified (marriage, parental rights, and other rights of that nature).
Should marriage be a right or simply a contract?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
That is an interesting question and one I have pondered a bit making the rounds during tillage work.

My initial thoughts are that from a federal perspective, the government should not care who marries who. The rest is a legal contract (of estate planning, etc.) and all the Government needs to know is how to collect taxes. And if one removed the joint filing option and just had single (or heaven forbid simplify the tax code), that would be taken care of as well (not a tax person so very well could be wrong there).

If one wants it to be religious or show some signs of being a couple, that is a personal preference, not a government one.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Winterborn »

AZGrizFan wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 6:56 am
UNI88 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:28 pm Getting a head start on the mental gymnastics. Nice work BDKMaryLouRetton.

Shitting all over state's rights is ahitting all over state's rights regardless of who does it. Consistency is fun, you should try it some time.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
I agree. If it’s truly a states rights issue (and it is), then fucking leave it to the states. Period.
:nod:
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

Winterborn wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:29 am
AZGrizFan wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 6:56 am

I agree. If it’s truly a states rights issue (and it is), then fucking leave it to the states. Period.
:nod:
As I have said for years on here (along with a host of other issues)..
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:30 am
Winterborn wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:29 am
:nod:
As I have said for years on here (along with a host of other issues)..
So you will oppose a Congressional Republican effort to pass a nationwide ban?
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

UNI88 wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:00 am
BDKJMU wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:30 am
As I have said for years on here (along with a host of other issues)..
So you will oppose a Congressional Republican effort to pass a nationwide ban?
Yes. I’ve said numerous tumes on here over the years abortion is a states’ rights issue. Abortion before viability EASY CALL- states’ rights. But OTOH I don’t think its an outlandish arguement to say late term/partial birth abortion is taking of a viable life and therefore a violation of the due process clause. Much tougher call, but I’d still lean states’ rights on late term
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by houndawg »

SDHornet wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 9:20 pm
houndawg wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 12:45 pm

:jack:


How many unwanted kids have you fostered?
Cry more, shitlib. :lol:
Is that a "none"? About what I figured. :coffee:

Nobody is crying today except traitor cunts, like yourself. :coffee:
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by houndawg »

BDKJMU wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 12:42 pm
UNI88 wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:00 am

So you will oppose a Congressional Republican effort to pass a nationwide ban?
Yes. I’ve said numerous tumes on here over the years abortion is a states’ rights issue. Abortion before viability EASY CALL- states’ rights. But OTOH I don’t think its an outlandish arguement to say late term/partial birth abortion is taking of a viable life and therefore a violation of the due process clause. Much tougher call, but I’d still lean states’ rights on late term
I'd roll with the individual rights - if you don't control your own body you're nothing but livestock and thats what this decision is really about. :coffee:
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by JohnStOnge »

HI54UNI wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 7:24 pm
JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:21 pm

It's the party of people who understand that, though there is a small chance of dying from COVID-19 in a single randomly selected case, it has a much higher mortality rate than something like seasonal influenza does and also a much higher hospitalization rate. They understand that the population impacts are significant. They understand that biological males do not menstruate and cannot get pregnant. As far as the gender identity stuff goes: Their outlook is consistent with the positions of the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and other major medical organizations. I've never heard of anybody who thinks the civil war was fought in the 1960s or thinks that black people don't have cell phones or internet. I suspect that comes from yet another instance of some conservative pundit or something taking something somebody said out of context.

The bottom line, though, is that people with graduate degrees have consistently voted by a substantial majority for Democrats and the margin has generally increased in recent years. During the 2020 election it was by 60% to 40% in the House Elections and by 62% to 37% in the Presidential election. That strongly suggests that if, we administered an IQ test and only allowed the top 15.87% to vote (the 1 standard deviation thing), the Republicans would be completely screwed.

The exit polls don't break the House races down by State. But the 2020 Republican candidate for President lost by an estimated 10 percentage points , 54% to 44%, among people with graduate degrees in TEXAS. He also lost by an estimated 8 percentage points, 53% to 45%, among people with graduate degrees in Florida.

We don't have direct measurement of IQ. But I'd be VERY confident that, if we only allowed those who scored at least 1 standard deviation above the mean on an IQ test to vote, the Republicans would become a non factor nationally. They might locally control a small minority of what are now deep red States. But they'd never win a Presidential election and they'd be small minorities in the House and Senate without enough people in the Senate to sustain a filibuster.
JSO's council of learned citizens running things

Image
Look, we've got a serious problem right now. We have a major political Party that is beholding to a core base of people who are completely separated from reality. They depend on overwhelming support among a group that is around 30% of the population and believes that a series of myths written between something like 4,000 and 1,800 years ago is the inerrant truth. it's the American Taliban.

I wouldn't pull the trigger. But we would indeed be better off if only people with IQ at least one standard deviation above the mean could vote.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

JohnStOnge wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:35 pm
HI54UNI wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 7:24 pm

JSO's council of learned citizens running things

Image
Look, we've got a serious problem right now. We have a major political Party that is beholding to a core base of people who are completely separated from reality. They depend on overwhelming support among a group that is around 30% of the population and believes that a series of myths written between something like 4,000 and 1,800 years ago is the inerrant truth. it's the American Taliban.

I wouldn't pull the trigger. But we would indeed be better off if only people with IQ at least one standard deviation above the mean could vote.
Wouldn’t that be racist, and eliminate a large chunk of the donks base? :coffee:
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
93henfan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 56357
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:03 pm
Location: Slower Delaware

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by 93henfan »

houndawg wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:13 pm
SDHornet wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 9:20 pm

Cry more, shitlib. :lol:
Is that a "none"? About what I figured. :coffee:

Nobody is crying today except traitor cunts, like yourself. :coffee:
Thanks, gentlemen. I just got the name for my next band: Shitlib and the Traitor Cunts. Woot!
Delaware Football: 1889-2012; 2022-
Post Reply