Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
24 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

We’re stuck where we are so I’ll choose to vote for someone who more generally will support individual rights against the government (especially via Supreme Court picks) than the other guy. So sue me. 

This is rich. 

Cruz doesn't generally support individual rights against the government.  He supports large corporate interests (particularly the NRA) over those of individual citizens.  If they coincidentally happen to align with an individual right rather than the government it's serendipity.

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, UTDD said:

Doubtful.  If you really glean deep into Supreme Court jurisprudence and the current justices, it is very doubtful Roberts will ever vote for a full reversal.  Even Kavanaugh might not go all the way believe it or not (on this specific issue only).  Now if Ginsburg dies before 2020...

Nobody gives a shit whether there's a full reversal or not. Koramatsu wasn't officially reversed until this year, and that was in an hilariously bullshit decision that actually reaffirmed the holding of Koramatsu that was so odious.

What matters is that the current court will never strike down a restriction on abortion, and most abortion clinics in the nation will be forced to close as a result.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You know, I USED to think that way.  But then I watched the GOP in action.  From what I can see, they support exactly ONE individual right: the right to keep and bear arms.  They aren't too hip on things like the 4th amendment, the right to travel freely, etc.  They pay lip-service to religious freedom under the first amendment, but that's disingenuous as shit: they support only ONE exercise of "religious freedom" -- the right to discriminate based on your faith.  Otherwise, they ain't so hip on it (see anyone daring to be muslim, wanting to build a mosque, or hell, even be a progressive Christian).

Voting for the GOP because you want to support a party that stands up for individual rights is like voting for sharks because you support veganism.

Guys, I said more generally supports.

I’m aware of terrible 4th amendment positions that have bipartisan support. 

Yes the second amendment is the big one. With the constantly expanding government influences in our lives, I think our right to defend ourselves is more important than ever. The last Dem presidential nominee, supported by Beto, opposed Heller decision. Pretty simple for me. 

18 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 Don't know how a woman can feel comfortable that "abortion isn't going anywhere", when a sitting U.S. Congressman posted this after the Kavanaugh confirmation. 

 

He’s a whack job.  This is like me posting a tweet from Ted Lieu. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Nobody gives a shit whether there's a full reversal or not. Koramatsu wasn't officially reversed until this year, and that was in an hilariously bullshit decision that actually reaffirmed the holding of Koramatsu that was so odious.

What matters is that the current court will never strike down a restriction on abortion, and most abortion clinics in the nation will be forced to close as a result.

Well, I will definitely respectfully disagree with the first sentence -- for some people that is literally life and death for them and even one abortion taking place in America is rage for them.  I don't agree with this at all, but I think there is a decent minority in the Republican party that feels this way and always will.  Koramatsu is a shameful case and I personally know many people impacted by that decision.

Maybe I'm just more optimistic about abortion clinics than you are, but I am not as worried about it, but to be fair certainly I'm no expert in the financing/health of abortion clinics.

Posted
2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Yes the second amendment is the big one. With the constantly expanding government influences in our lives, I think our right to defend ourselves is more important than ever.

If you are talking about defending yourself from the government, you are delusional. Assuming that they attack you, it will be with drones and Abrams tanks. Good luck with your AR15 and the like.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

He’s a whack job.  

How did that "whack job" become a sitting Congressman? Probably due to Republicans who didn't care he was a lunatic because "he votes in line with my interests most of the time."

Edited by Hank Kingsley
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Kilgorehorn said:

If you are talking about defending yourself from the government, you are delusional. Assuming that they attack you, it will be with drones and Abrams tanks. Good luck with your AR15 and the like.

As long as they don't have the laser from Real Genius I feel ok. 

  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Kilgorehorn said:

If you are talking about defending yourself from the government, you are delusional. Assuming that they attack you, it will be with drones and Abrams tanks. Good luck with your AR15 and the like.

This feels kind of like the argument who cares who’s listening to you, if you have nothing to hide. Nonsense. 

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Guys, I said more generally supports.

I’m aware of terrible 4th amendment positions that have bipartisan support. 

Yes the second amendment is the big one. With the constantly expanding government influences in our lives, I think our right to defend ourselves is more important than ever. The last Dem presidential nominee, supported by Beto, opposed Heller decision. Pretty simple for me. 

He’s a whack job.  This is like me posting a tweet from Ted Lieu. 

You really ought to study the history of Second Amendment jurisprudence, NRA's shift in policy and tactics, and the effect the NRA has had on public debate relating to it over the last 30 years.

Edited by DDD Dad
  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

You really ought to study the history of Second Amendment jurisprudence, NRA's shift in policy and tactics, and the effect it has had in public debate over the last 30 years.

Do you agree with the Heller decision? 

The most recent Supreme Court case affirmed the individual’s right. That’s a strong precedent and what is most relevant. 

Edited by GRHorn
Posted
3 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

You really ought to study the history of Second Amendment jurisprudence, NRA's shift in policy and tactics, and the effect the NRA has had on public debate relating to it over the last 30 years.

All of this.  It's been a fantastic money generation machine, costing only the blood of countless Americans.  

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Do you agree with the Heller decision? 

The most recent Supreme Court case affirmed the individual’s right. That’s a strong precedent and what is most relevant. 

I agree with Justice Stevens' dissent, which more closely follows the 200 years of precedent construing the Second Amendment as a collective right.

Understand that my background includes being a founding member of my law school's Federalist Society and generally more of an original constructionist in my Constitutional jurisprudence.  

Thread drift over.

  • Like 1
Posted

Being completely fair, I personally find Heller kind of comparable to Roe.  I am not 100% convinced that a pure originalist bent shows that either right was specifically geared as a right the specific ways the framers had written, but fully support both cases anyway. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

I agree with Justice Stevens' dissent, which more closely follows the 200 years of precedent construing the Second Amendment as a collective right.

Understand that my background includes being a founding member of my law school's Federalist Society and generally more of an original constructionist in my Constitutional jurisprudence.  

Thread drift over.

That’s great. Interesting to hear you have a strong background in it. Obviously if smart people, such as SC justices, can disagree on such matters so can anonymous internet posters. As far as I stand, I’m glad it came down the way it did. And I’d like it to remain the same for as long as possible.

Posted

OK I lied.  One last comment on the Second Amendment, and a link for those wishing to understand my original comment about the shift in jurisprudence and influence of the NRA.

Once again, the NY Times "The Daily" podcast did a superb job of explaining in layman's terms.

Here's a link to a short video by their Supreme Court reporter on collective versus personal rights and their application to the Second Amendment.

Posted
1 hour ago, DDD Dad said:

Anyone going to the Beto event at the Lizard Lounge this evening?  I'll be there with DDD Mom and some others.

Pics of Mom with triple D’s Please.

  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, scottsins said:

Pics of Mom with triple D’s Please.

Think Greek letters and the fact that all 3 of my kids went to UT.

Also, your buddy Texanbychoice has met Mrs. DDD and has a weird crush on DDD.

Posted
Just now, DDD Dad said:

Think Greek letters and the fact that all 3 of my kids went to UT.

Also, your buddy Texanbychoice has met Mrs. DDD and has a weird crush on DDD.

Pics of Tri-Delt Mom please? I’m not even asking the daughters, because I’m not an asshole.

  • Like 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Austin morning radio has been harping on the olds to get out and vote, and not be complacent.  Scaring them by insisting that the millenials are going to vote en masse, and take away their medicare and health care choices.

You know what's really, really, really funny about that contention?

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Think Greek letters and the fact that all 3 of my kids went to UT.

Also, your buddy Texanbychoice has met Mrs. DDD and has a weird crush on DDD.

Well, she did look great on the tennis court that day.  

 

Didn't know Beto was in town.  What time does the shindig get going?

  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Mack Tripper said:

Cruz released that he raised $12 million for Q3. Beto hasn't released his yet. 

Between ActBlue and his end of deadline $6mm bomb, I think he's going to be at $18-20mm

Posted
2 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Well, she did look great on the tennis court that day.  

 

Didn't know Beto was in town.  What time does the shindig get going?

You are very kind, sir.  Have some rep.

He's at the Lizard Lounge.  Event starts at 6.  I'm heading over there in about 10 minutes since it's only 6 blocks from my office.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, horncyclist said:
11 minutes ago, Js1 said:
Between ActBlue and his end of deadline $6mm bomb, I think he's going to be at $18-20mm

I think it'll be even more. Probably $30 million.

I'm going with eleventy billion.

but really whatever the amount ends up being, it'll be more than Cruz raised.

Posted
43 minutes ago, ERhine said:

 


October 15 deadline

 

My guess is Beto is waiting because he knows when he announces he brought in 25 million or more it will trigger a new flood of Republican PAC money.

Posted
19 minutes ago, RayDog said:

My guess is Beto is waiting because he knows when he announces he brought in 25 million or more it will trigger a new flood of Republican PAC money.

good, let them waste their money on a canadian

Posted
3 hours ago, Chrispy said:

They’ve built Beto into this deity and sound more like Branch Davidians every single day. 

Already going with that strategy?  It's like the playbook never changes.

Posted
2 hours ago, GRHorn said:

That’s great. Interesting to hear you have a strong background in it. Obviously if smart people, such as SC justices, can disagree on such matters so can anonymous internet posters. As far as I stand, I’m glad it came down the way it did. And I’d like it to remain the same for as long as possible.

This is a good time to note that Scalia said reasonable restrictions can still be placed on guns in light of the Heller ruling.

  • Like 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:


Tetsuo. Saw it on campus back in the day. Good catch.

Ha, its has been a long long time.  somehow the drill dick killing got me laid.

Posted

central austin neighborhood Mexican restaurant tonight...

table next to us was a young couple talking Beto and Cruz, we could hear almost every word. 

she thinks Trump is doing a 'great job' but Cruz is a 'sleazy used car salesman' (her words) and she's voting Beto.

he thinks Trump is a 'dumbass' but Beto is a socialist, he's voting Cruz.

wut?

*mind blown*

Posted
6 minutes ago, mchookem said:

central austin neighborhood Mexican restaurant tonight...

table next to us was a young couple talking Beto and Cruz, we could hear almost every word. 

she thinks Trump is doing a 'great job' but Cruz is a 'sleazy used car salesman' (her words) and she's voting Beto.

he thinks Trump is a 'dumbass' but Beto is a socialist, he's voting Cruz.

wut?

*mind blown*

Why is that weird? At least they are thinking for themselves and are happy in each others companionship to have a civil argument.

  • Like 1
Posted

we actually commented on that, at least they were having a conversation. and we didn't yell at them, either 😁

still, you have to admit the positions are interesting 🤔

  • Like 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

They sound stupid, that’ll be $9.95


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

central austin tex mex, deduct points for "neighborhood", call it $14.

Posted
Quote

Congress is rife with rich people, but O'Rourke had a 2015 net worth of about $9 million, ranking 51st out of 435 House members, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. That's more than double the $3.8 million worth of his Republican opponent, Sen. Ted Cruz, who ranked 41st of 100 senators. O'Rourke and his family live in a hilltop, Hacienda-style, 4,700 square-foot home in El Paso, while Cruz, his wife and daughters have a well-appointed condo in an elegant corner of Houston.

 

https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/despite-everyman-image-o-rourke-is-even-wealthier-than-cruz/1513345907

 

 



×
×
  • Create New...