67
Clarence Thomas Just Set Civil Rights Back 70 Years
(www.theroot.com)
Shouldn’t he have cancer by now?
The cynic in me is hoping a Loving vs. VA challenge gets to the Supreme Court because I know he's going to overturn it without a doubt... while the pragmatist really just hopes the whole Supreme Court goes on a five year vacation so our rights stop getting eroded.
this is what Joe Biden gives us
Oh, I didn't know Joe Biden packed the court with fashy theocrats. I thought it was Trump, and these fashy theocrats just waited until Trump lost to make Joe Biden look bad by undermining his governance.
tell any story you like. the story I know has Biden in DC for 50 years, even serving on the judiciary committee. I hold him at least partly responsible for Trump's election in 2016, and will blame him for in 2024, too. he laid the groundwork for fascism to flourish.
You're blaming Biden in particular for Thomas and Trump? He's not blameless for confirming Clarence. Though, of course, he is one of many responsible there and a conservative judge like Clarence was a forgone conclusion under the Bush 1 administration. And I can't imagine how you justify blaming Biden for Trump's first presidency. Because he didn't run for president in 2016? Because he was a part of the Obama administration that led to the Trump administration? Either way, his responsibility is so marginal as to be confusing to even consider him culpable.
There's plenty to be dissatisfied or angry about with Biden that are directly and primarily or solely his fault. So why are you singling him out for those two things that are barely his responsibility at all, if at all?
I can’t imagine how you justify blaming Biden for Trump’s first presidency
he spent 50 years shaping the political landscape. the rise of fascism didn't happen because donald trump ran for president. his run was made possible by the rising fascism.
It’s not even an issue for her.
But for you? I’m sure Biden also stubbed your toe.
some people don't know what is in their own interest.
And what, right now, is in our own interest?
I don't presume to know. I am only saying we can't assume anyone is actually acting in their own rational self interest since we know people so often do not. Anita Hill is no exception.
I'm sure I don't need to point out the irony here, right?
I do want to point out that if no one can be trusted to act in their own self-interest, who then should act on their behalf?
you don't seem to be very good at handling nuance, and i don't feel qualified to help you understand this.
So the sore-loser wannabe dictator is the answer? We are between a rock and a fascist place. I vote rock.
from my perspective it's two fascists. i'm not voting for either of them.
So young and naive. Unfortunately your opportunity to influence the process was in the primary.
you do t know anything about my identity, and I'm not naive at all: I know what fascism is. its capitulating to the military industrial complex and jailing or killing anyone who threatens the states power.
Well then I guess the choice in your mind is:
- dude not openly making public statements on how president's can do whatever and not go to jail. or
- dude actively and openly trying to do opposite of option 1
I know what my choice would be. If you are in a battle ground state please vote.
he's not trying to do the opposite, he's trying to keep himself in power.
load more comments
(1 replies)
And yet you accuse Anita Hill, someone you know nothing about, that she's voting against her own interests and didn't know what she wants.
The hypocrisy and stupidity is strong with this one.
I'm saying she may not know. it's not an accusation.
the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you fucking moron"
that's not what anyone here said
load more comments
(4 replies)
this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
67 points (97.2% liked)
politics
19107 readers
4033 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS