softlynow

We’re seeing the consequences of societal liberality and run amok humanism breaking down the old order of things. Stupid people always existed in the same numbers. But they weren’t empowered the way pop culture does now. What was considered crude and undesirable has often become points of cultural pride. We stopped shaming morons. It should come as no surprise to us that they act and think shamelessly. Was the old way of creating social outcasts problematic? Absolutely. We just haven’t figured out a way to keep the benefits while fixing things for he less fortunate and those who make an occasional mistake.

fifm

You can say that about many types of economic activity these days. A completely unforeseeable result of the age of deregulation.

I'm totally against this. These guys comprise at least a third of my criminal defense clientele, and they're such pussies, as you say, that they always plead. Easy money. Shoot to maim, not kill, please.

Yes, yes, I remember. I had lasagna.

This thread is proof that Covid ain't getting a necessary job done. Need and ELE meteor.

Yes. This election matters. The country is sitting with it’s choice of the two wine goblets in front of it. One cup may hold crappy wine, but the other will poison and kill the republic, and we haven’t been building a tolerance to iocaine powder.

Thanks for quoting me to tell me you’re not interested in my opinion.

That certainly weighs in favor of the straight-forward interpretation holding. But court operations do not get widespread media coverage, and the court closings are probably a relief to more folks than they are a nuisance or outright detriment, at least for now. However, at least a couple of those justices are hoping for a political career beyond their time on the court, and don't want to be on the wrong side of Trumpists. My gut says they would rule in favor of the plain language of those sections, but it would be close.

I agree with your reading of 418. What is your level of confidence that our SC wouldn't find a new gubernatorial power, because GOP?

The folks who run governments by the mantra "never raise taxes" don't give a shit about the optics of any form of postnatal human suffering. Their options are find funds for their unemployment program, or fuck the needy. The latter leads to a primary fight next election. They don't fear Dem challengers yet.

Yep. For those of us forced to home school for the first time, liquor is an essential school supply.

You’re trying too hard. The governor “may control” shit if he chooses. Meaning he can create premises limitations, or he can choose to not create those limitations. So can a county judge, in his county. That’s all the power given in those sections. What you’re describing is the grant of a specific power, which simply isn’t there. Neither section gives either actor the right to say “I choose not to limit so he can’t limit either.” If there in no other code section out there authorizing gubernatorial override power, then it doesn’t exist. At least that’s how I read it after a few.

269 days to go.

So, tired of winning then? Remember that greatness requires sacrifice.

Big c or little, the bottom line is that conservatism as you would desire is attractive to far fewer people than we’ve been told. Most folks calling themselves conservative are social cons, rich greedy types or outright grifters. The George Will’s of the world are quite rare. There’s no right/center-right path to electoral viability for moderated liberalism except in coalition with liberals or with the deplorables. That has been the case for 150 years if not forever. Your place, philosophically speaking, is to pick your poison. Buckley knew this. That’s why he pushed for fusion of ideals that are naturally in tension with each other when he invited the fundies to his fusionist vision of the movement and into the mix at the NR. He chose appropriately for the time (from a success of the movement standpoint) but we’re living out the nightmare caused by his successors (now Never Trumpers) losing their grip on the movement to the grifters and the hateful “Christians.” Right-libertarians would do well to fully embrace a role as the voice of caution in coalition with the left/far-left. Outside of that coalition, they’ll likely be ignored by all.

I think that makes the ad’s point stronger, really. Ivanka is for sale ... cheap.

Nuts do their thing. Always. Those millions are always into some kooky shit. Most of the time, though, they're at least a bit more marginalized than the last few years. Without a standard-bearer with Dotard's reach and resources (including his foreign support) they'll go back to being a mostly benign curiosity. The key is getting to that point before immense irreversible structural changes occur.

“Another 9/11” to them means an attack on the financial sector. They could give a shit about 60 extra random deaths a day per state.

Roberts wants to cement the legacy of his Court as worst all-time, one-upping the Taney court’s protection of slavery by enabling the total destruction of democracy.

If by guillotines you mean memes, sure. There will be memes. Devastating memes. Memes as far as the eye can see. Oh, what memes! Either an election boots out Trumpism, or nothing does. And I’m not saying simply winning an election will be enough. If Trump maintains power past January, we’re probably fucked. His people will believe/go along with anything he says, and the rest aren’t prepared to do anything of consequence. Hell, some (Joe Rogan, b_t, anastasis) will justify their effective fellow travelling as usual. It may come down to the military and/or the secret service. The people are doing jack shit.

Switching comedies, I do believe Trump is doing a slightly better job than Ben Chang would do, but Annie's Boobs would do better than both.

This isn’t a revelation. What would qualify is why anyone with any sense still engages with the guy.

The guy who first said “may you live in interesting times” can go fuck himself.

For standing too close? Doubtful.